piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:18:25+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351555
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:27:28+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351674
toyotagps (2022-08-16 12:37:49+00:00): Здравствуйте. Почему вы повысили класс дорог и нарушили связанность дорожного графа? Это ошибка?
Миронова (2022-08-24 05:56:09+00:00): Здравствуйте. Данная дорога не отображается в системе ФКУ "Росдормониторинга", для внесение данных дорог. не ошибка
toyotagps (2022-08-24 06:06:00+00:00): Здравствуйте. Есть общие правила. Если Ваша система, не корректно работает с публичными данными, то нужно подправить систему, а не данные. Либо обернуть эти дороги в отношение и там прописать теги под "себя".  Все некорректные изменения и исправил.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:40:07+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351873
user_11609320 (2022-08-01 02:35:42+00:00): Department of defense vehicles only.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-05 12:01:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 135738831 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7111
toyotagps (2022-08-16 12:39:13+00:00): Здравствуйте. Почему вы повысили класс дорог и нарушили связанность дорожного графа? Как-то странно, что track стал резко secondary
Миронова (2022-08-24 05:59:41+00:00): Здравствуйте. Данная дорога не отображается в системе ФКУ "Росдормониторинга", для внесение данных дорог.
toyotagps (2022-08-24 06:05:40+00:00): Здравствуйте. Есть общие правила. Если Ваша система, не корректно работает с публичными данными, то нужно подправить систему, а не данные. Либо обернуть эти дороги в отношение и там прописать теги под "себя".  Все некорректные изменения и исправил.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:51:25+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153352044
Frans S (2022-08-26 10:50:54+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but  your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
C: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124323381
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:59:35+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153352125
gurglypipe (2022-08-01 09:55:02+00:00): Hi. Please try and keep the geographical size of your changesets to something a bit smaller than the whole of England in future. Almost all of your changes here are in the south-east, apart from Isel Hall — that could have been a separate changeset.

Large changeset areas are hard for other contributors to check, and end up notifying a lot of people. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks!
gurglypipe (2022-08-01 09:55:22+00:00): (For anyone reviewing this changeset: I’ve checked that the changes in the north-west are OK. I have not checked the south-east.)
gscholz (2022-08-02 05:14:50+00:00): Hi praeteritum,
may I propose to cleanup the reverted changes first before you upload them again? This changeset here has created several errors in the OSM database, like overlapping and intersecting riverbanks:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-84.10152&lat=10.84770&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this? As you use JOSM, you can just use its internal validator before uploading:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator

Guido
gscholz (2022-08-09 05:49:49+00:00): Hi praeteritum, 
this error still exits, can I get your feedback here?
Guido
gscholz (2022-08-11 06:28:13+00:00): Hi praeteritum, 
due to missing feedback, I have fixed this error now myself by reverting your changeset.
Kind regards
Guido
Talkless (2025-03-15 18:13:31+00:00): Labas,

Osmose pyksta:

"leisure=picnic_table together with tourism=picnic_site. A picnic site rarely consists of only one single picnic table"

(https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9856790105#map=19/55.676992/25.278004)

turbo rodo 21 tokį žymėjimą:

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/20pC

Čia turbūt masiniu būdu įkeltos poilsiavietės?

Manai osmose teisingai "pyksta" ar tavo žymėjimas 
"teisingesnis"?
Snaiperis (2025-03-15 19:37:57+00:00): Laba,
buvo kelta pagal https://vmu.lt/visuomenei/ skelbiamą žemėlapį (anksčiau nuoroda buvo kažkokia kitokia). Kadangi ženklas atokvėpio vieta, tai picnic_site. Jei nuotraukose matosi tik vienas stalas( pvz. https://utility.arcgis.com/usrsvcs/servers/3e10a9d121ea40479b1541ae8d72dc8a/rest/services/rekreaciniai_objektai_v2/FeatureServer/5/463/attachments/2070 ) , tai pridėta picnic_table. Matau, miškų urėdijos žemėlapis atsinaujinęs. Kad ir ankstesnis "89 kvartalo atokvėpio vieta pakeistas" į "Ravo balos atokvėpio vieta", taip pat yra naujų ir dingusių taškų. Jei šios žymos kartu neteisingos, tai reiktų palikti vieną, nežinau į ką dėti akcentą - atokvėpio vietą ar stalą... O gal palikti kaip yra, nes Osmose nurodytas pranešimas irgi nėra griežtas nesuderinamumas, o tik "... rearly ...", nors pas mus taip ir yra.
Talkless (2025-03-16 08:48:51+00:00): "Jei šios žymos kartu neteisingos, tai reiktų palikti vieną, nežinau į ką dėti akcentą - atokvėpio vietą ar stalą... "

Na stalas places.openmap.lt nesimatys. Gal palikti tik picnic_site, nes vis dėl to tai "oficialus valstybinis taškas", ir gal description'e pridėt pastabą, kad realiai ten tik stalas?

Jei kas norės, galės stalą ir dar kokią šiukšlinę įmapinti kaip atskirus papildomus node'us, realiai ten nuėjus ir nuėmus GPS koordinates.

Šiaip nesu 100% tikras, gal reik temą talk-lt užklaust?

"nes Osmose nurodytas pranešimas irgi nėra griežtas"

Tiesa, bet tiesiog gaunas "noisas" žiūrint į osmozę.
Snaiperis (2025-03-16 23:50:15+00:00): Neesu tikras dėl atsakymų į šiuos klausimus, manau, talk-lt galima užvesti diskusiją.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-05 12:01:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 135738831 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7111
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-09 20:26:35+00:00): You added some man_made=drinking fountain

I am writing to you as I also tried using this tag, discovered some problems with it (and other drinking water point tagging), and want to improve situation. I started from recommending to not use this tag as it has some problems and is a trap (partially due to English being confusing). Discussion takes place on tagging mailing list, and it is best to comment there ( see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_mailing_list for some hints how to join ).

See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2022-October/thread.html#65730 for the thread

Currently no one opposed and I plan to describe it as deprecated at OSM Wiki.

If you think that it is a bad idea for some reason - let me know (for example, full scale deprecation proposal could be done)

The man_made=drinking fountain is for example at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9923657350/history
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-05 12:02:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 135738831 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7111
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-05 12:01:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 135738831 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7111
stlmapper74 (2022-08-01 22:16:27+00:00): Maxar's alignment is quite a bit off. I would suggest using NAIP if you're looking for newer imagery.
CloCkWeRX (2022-08-16 11:21:04+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1082798744 - completely circular cricket pitch does not agree with imagery or on the ground survey.

Similar issues have been introduced with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1082798746
Warin61 (2022-08-17 08:24:36+00:00): Using a circle is a simplification, the AFL pitch should be much larger. Using the AFL boundaries as the cricket boundary is incorrect. 

Rules? - thus for cricket
A circular cricket field is considered as the perfect field but generally a cricket pitch is slightly oval. Its diameter varies between 137m and 150m. The ICC Test Match Standard Playing Conditions (October 2014) Law 19.1 defines the playing area as a minimum of 137.16m from boundary to boundary square of the pitch, with the shorter of the two square boundaries a minimum of 59.43m. The straight boundary at both ends of the pitch is a minimum of 64m. Distances are measured from the centre of the pitch.  All boundaries are marked by a rope or similar object as per the ICC rules
CloCkWeRX (2022-08-18 14:10:34+00:00): What you have put as source: bing *does not show this at all*.

The only sources I can find that show anything like this are:
* ERSI - different geometry
* Google maps, which also shows different geometry.

What's on the ground?
It's literally a giant mud puddle as several hundred children right now are busy stampeding all over this LARPING rugby or AFL. Is this temporary, or permanent? Who knows.
How do I know this? I'm physically in that area on a regular basis.

If you don't have ground survey; or imagery, adding something because of what "the standard approach is" while not actually verifying it not the right way to go about this.

You've on at least three occasions wandered into an area of the map and done edits based on "rules".
You've been abrasive about it while you are at it.

It's not appreciated, and it's not improving quality.
Warin61 (2022-08-19 08:00:21+00:00): Looking on bing I can see the cricket wear from wicket to wicket .. thus there is evidence of a cricket pitch. 

AFL is a winter game - so it is 'on the ground' now. AFL is a very large pitch usually taking all of the space available. 
Cricket is a summer game so it is not 'on the ground now'. Cricket is a smaller pitch than AFL and when the sports cohabit the same area it is usually for the cricket pitch to be moved from time to time so as to  spread the wear on the surface. Thus I expect the cricket playing area will change over time, and eventually return to some previous location. If you want the map to be a match for what is there now .. fine .. but expect the cricket area to be moved over time .. The map is a representation of what to find there. There will not be many fussed over this movement of the playing area. 

Take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:sport%3Dcricket in particular SK53 comment..
CloCkWeRX (2022-09-06 10:05:36+00:00): > Looking on bing I can see the cricket wear

Bollocks. You can see a pitch. Making up a boundry based on rules which is *not* visible does not pass muster.

> Cricket is a summer game so it is not 'on the ground now'. 

Again, if its not on the ground AND its not visible in imagery, as a remote mapper, what guarantees do you have that anyone will make a perfectly circular pitch?

I'm aware that mapping is an approximation. Coast lines, rivers, etc for example; good luck. Photogammetry, that's an art.

But this approach - modeling things that don't exist; in a way that they will be extremely unlikely to ever exist, based on "rules" - is not helpful.

Combine this with your pattern of remote mapping in an area - again, based on what a validator says are the "rules"; deleting contibutions, and abrasive commentary... well that's not helping the local map consumers or contributors either.
Warin61 (2022-09-09 11:20:10+00:00): If you care to look back at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246072179/history you will see the cricket pitch was mapped  to the Australian rules football area... The Australian Rules Football were not mapped .. so the past mapper ignored the football ... but tagged cricket. 

Then look at the 'park' mapped within the school .. that was removed and the football and cricket mapped, both of these missing, in the 'Front Oval' area. I not that I missed mapping the long jumps... 

All of these exist. Perhaps not the the precision you desire.. but some of them were not mapped at all, the single cricket pitch was mapped to the football .. and the football missing... I think that this is an improvement over what was there before; being

2 AFL pitches
3 cricket pitched - 1 being a change of boundaries
more detail mapping of tennis pitches
new mapping of cricket nets
new mapping of a basketball court... 

remove of 'park' within the school grounds .. look like an attempt to map a grassed area.
CloCkWeRX (2022-09-11 06:20:55+00:00): > Perhaps not the the precision you desire

Uh. There's "someone did an approximation" but there's also "despite imagery, mapped geometry that has not existed".
Your edits are well into the latter territory.

> I think that this is an improvement

How can you make that judgement call?
You aren't local/surveying on the ground.
You aren't looking at imagery either.
You aren't a student or some other individual with greater access than the general public.

By any standard measure, you are ignoring what is observable and provable for... opinion; based on abstraction?

I probably wouldn't care if you were taking a collaborative approach and engaged with the local mappers in a constructive manner.
This is not that. Again, this is not the first time either.
Warin61 (2022-09-11 07:45:33+00:00): Observable from imagery:
Cricket is played here, the wear between the wickets is clear. 

I and others in the past have mapped the rectangular wear into OSM. Most of us now recognise that this in not a good representation and it is a better representation to place a circle centred on the wear. 
Cricket is not only local to this area, taking a 'local' approach to mapping cricket I don't think would be helpfull,
Do you have a solution - other than 'don't map it'?
CloCkWeRX (2022-10-03 12:55:40+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map

"When in doubt, also consider the "on the ground rule": map the world as it can be observed by someone physically there."

"Do not delete data unless you know (or have very strong reason to believe) that it is incorrect."

This is pretty simple guidance.

Reverting these edits is my solution, and you reflecting on the above mapping practices in my advice.

Put a single point if you feel strongly the pitch exists from imagery. It doesn't at the moment from survey. It might again. It doesn't right now.
CloCkWeRX (2023-03-29 14:36:09+00:00): It's been all of summer.
Not once did anything like what you mapped get marked out on the ground.

I'm removing this fantasy edit. I suggest you refrain from similar mapping - either survey it, use imagery, or put it in as a single point.
Warin61 (2023-03-30 02:58:27+00:00): The cricket is evident in present OSM accessible imagery. Previous mappers have entered it into OSM. 

It maybe better to tag is as "was:leisure=pitch was:sport=cricket" to stop others from re-entering the data.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-05-05 12:03:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 135738831 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some MAPS.ME personal markers.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7111
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:07:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
mueschel (2022-08-18 18:03:18+00:00): Please make sure you use the correct spelling of keys. I found many
motor_cycle
motocycle
motor_car
and similar keys added by Apple employees.
ManzalaLake (2022-08-19 20:02:17+00:00): Hi mueschel, thank you for the message and for fixing this motorcycle key. I will review these tags in my recent edits for accuracy. Appreciated it and Happy mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:34:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:21:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:10:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:46:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
LockOnGuy (2022-08-01 04:48:22+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 124316966, 124316788, 124316705, 124315963, 124315807, 124315739, 124311262, 124311217, 124310630, 124310209, 124310122, 124309383, 124308903, 124308140, 124307050, 124306517, 124305774, 124305165, 124303404, 124302601
user_12523467 (2022-08-01 05:01:14+00:00): good job
Nawfal85 (2022-08-01 17:54:58+00:00): Thank you! Keep up the good work!
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:40:08+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351873
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:36:47+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351828
JoeG (2022-08-04 09:26:41+00:00): Please don't delete trees and replace them with tree rows.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:18:26+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351555
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:51:26+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153352044
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:27:29+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351674
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:36:48+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351828
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:22:00+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351609
toyotagps (2022-08-16 12:43:14+00:00): Здравствуйте. Почему вы повысили класс дорог и нарушили связанность дорожного графа? Как-то странно, что track стал резко secondary
Миронова (2022-08-24 05:57:20+00:00): Здравствуйте. Данная дорога не отображается в системе ФКУ "Росдормониторинга", для внесение данных дорог.
toyotagps (2022-08-24 06:04:49+00:00): Здравствуйте. Есть общие правила. Если Ваша система, не корректно работает с публичными данными, то нужно подправить систему, а не данные. Либо обернуть эти дороги в отношение и там прописать теги под "себя".  Все некорректные изменения и исправил.
redd (2022-08-24 20:45:37+00:00): Thanks!
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:51:27+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153352044
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:44:59+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351946
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:45:00+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351946
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:59:36+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153352125
Warin61 (2022-08-02 01:43:54+00:00): Hi,

When you add an Ozie beach .. add the tag surface=sand. In other parts of the world they tag 'beaches' with stone, mud, rock ... not something we'd call a beach.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:40:09+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351873
voiden (2022-08-01 08:52:32+00:00): hi, may I ask what this description means? thanks
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124327122
ratrun (2022-08-01 08:58:15+00:00): See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing
watmildon (2023-03-04 22:35:12+00:00): Hello! Looks like a lot of great mapping here. I just wanted to let you know that my understanding is that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1082812806/history#map=19/32.27293/-110.97341 should be tagged as landuse=residential and residential=trailer_park. My impression is tourism=caravan_site is more for temporary RV and trailer camper sites. 

Anyhow, I've updated it but figured I'd give you a heads up. 

Happy mapping!
MxxCon (2022-08-03 05:34:37+00:00): Hello.
This information is already properly tagged on the relevant building way. Therefore, it is inappropriate to create another node with the same information since it goes against https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element guideline. As such this edit is going to be reverted in full.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124327680
Soshal Distan Singh (2022-08-01 13:56:51+00:00): Добрый день.

1) Вы удалили тег "wheelchair" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:wheelchair), но на вашем же сайте указано: "Для маломобильных групп населения на отделении организован специальный вход, оборудован туалет".

2) Вы сменили значение тега "social_facility" с "outreach" на "group_home", но group_home предполагает проживание, а у вас на сайте такого не указано, только досуг. Соответственно, outreach вам подходит больше: "учреждение без проживания, занимающееся предоставлением социальных услуг на бесплатной основе, например ... организация досуга": https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:social_facility

3) Вы сменили значение тега "social_facility:for" с "senior" на "community". Не нашёл в OSM Wiki "community": https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social%20facility:for?uselang=en
Но это не показатель. В любом случае, уже из названия учреждения следует, что оно специализируется на гражданах пожилого возраста, т.е. "senior".
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-28 17:26:50+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9923849047/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
nonameforme (2025-05-12 09:43:42+00:00): Привет. Тестировал приложение Every Door Android, возможно оно так добавило. Поправил)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 06:44:13+00:00): yes, it is https://github.com/Zverik/every_door/issues/880
osmviborg (2022-08-01 07:32:17+00:00): Hej. Der må være et skilt der viser hvem der må dreje til højre. Der er en bussluse længere ned ad vejen.
osmviborg (2022-08-01 07:51:49+00:00): Højresving er kun tilladt for tung trafik.
meinertt (2022-08-01 08:38:35+00:00): Hej. Korrekt højresving kun tilladt for tung trafik. Jeg kender ikke en måde i OSM at dette kan oprettes, men at oprette højresving forbudt vil være mere korrekt under antagelse af at de fleste brugere ikke kører lastbil.
Sheila Job (2022-08-03 18:20:46+00:00): Hi holubekp, i notice that in the second changeset: 124328620, there are buildings sharing nodes and unsquared builds..
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124328620