piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-17 11:37:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103098788 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious edits in the USA by a mapper trying to evade a block - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4931 .
stephankn (2021-06-30 07:10:28+00:00): do not imaginary stream way 929463884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-25 22:51:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103594144 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  The most recent edits are still somewhat problematical.
Becky Candy (2021-05-03 10:02:56+00:00): Please remember to square the buildings by selecting the buildings and pressing the key Q,thank you for mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102762860
stephankn (2021-06-30 06:48:58+00:00): way 929464723 is no stream
DressyPear4 (2021-08-11 08:51:22+00:00): Olá, edificações devem ser adicionadas de maneira individual
SherbetS (2021-04-21 23:56:25+00:00): Hello,
Please use the tag man_made=mast + tower:type=communication for communication masts next time.
stephankn (2021-06-30 07:11:34+00:00): do not add imagery stream all over the place way 929471022
Becky Candy (2021-05-11 08:55:56+00:00): Please remember to square the buildings by selecting the buildings and pressing the key Q, thank you for mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102763572
user_5359 (2021-04-12 03:02:47+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/38605849/history: I know the key key isn't setup by you, but is the value="Glover Gate" the name of the street? 
By the way is the max speed value signed? I assume the value is better "15 mp/h".
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 04:05:31+00:00): Hi Peggywu,
i have fixed the alignment of dragged node on residential highway way 35463545
Kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103026132.
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102763590
stephankn (2021-06-30 06:58:44+00:00): do not add imaginary, unconnected streams way 929471581
Puxan (2021-04-12 10:31:39+00:00): Bienvenido a OpenStreetMap.     
Por favor, usa las imágenes de fondo de Bing como indican las instrucciones del proyecto. 
No olvides escuadrar los edificios.       
Muy bien, sigue mapeando.     
Joaquim

Te recomiendo ver los tutoriales de https://learnosm.org

(automatic translation)

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Please use the Bing background images as directed by the project instructions.
Don't forget to square the buildings.
Alright, keep mapping.
Joaquim

I recommend you see the tutorials at https://learnosm.org
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102763672
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 03:57:32+00:00): Hi Jenny Tan LH,
I have fixed the alignment as building polygon overlapping with primary way at node 8633890114
Kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103025828.
Thank you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102763745
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 03:50:46+00:00): Hi hungr,
i have fixed the alignment of dragged node on residential road node 8633933864
Kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103025545.
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102763829
Becky Candy (2021-05-04 08:14:34+00:00): Please remember to square the building by selecting the building and pressing the key Q, thank you for mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102764015
Becky Candy (2021-05-04 08:09:52+00:00): Please remember to square the buildings by selecting the buildings and pressing the key Q, thank you for mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102764047
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:54:40+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:55:03+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 12:58:13+00:00): Hi linyiling,
i have removed floating motorway in farmfieds way 929478634,Kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103061651
Thank you .
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102764504
SherbetS (2021-06-24 02:25:48+00:00): Hello,
I am writing on this changeset to ask why you have removed all the tiger:reviewed tags on the roads in Smith County, Mississippi, even on roads that may not be valid and were otherwise unedited. Automated edits are discouraged, and this one seems to fall under that category.
ELadner (2021-06-24 14:05:32+00:00): tiger:reviewed are largely irrelevant as tagging goes.  90% of smith county is done with the remainder in progress, so in another couple of week, this will be consistent.

note that this was NOT an automated edit.
ELadner (2021-06-24 14:22:36+00:00): From wiki for tiger:reviewed:

"For various reasons, mappers did not follow this procedure consistently enough for the key to mean much on a large scale, though some mappers continue to use the key to track their personal reviewing progress locally."
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-02 15:41:18+00:00): Hello!

You used
sport=soccer_8
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/192797329/history

Have you maybe meant
sport=soccer
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?
5m4u9 (2024-02-02 19:29:19+00:00): Hi, I wanted to specify that the pitch is for playing soccer with 8 players per team. Now looking at the wiki, there is tag sport=five-a-side, maybe it could be sport=eight-a-side?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-19 18:03:41+00:00): not a great expert, but it seems to be more readable

asking on forum also may make sense if you want more opinions
ash_win (2021-04-16 12:53:08+00:00): Hi rollshu,
I have fixed the alignment as building polygon overlapping with residential road
way 842524180,kindly check with 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103061039.
Thank you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102764957
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 03:40:16+00:00): Hi 賴思廷,
i found dragged node of secondary road and it was already fixed by the Misha Boiarkin
node 2526130388 kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102999211.
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102765109
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:56:49+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Glassman (2021-04-12 16:42:09+00:00): I noticed you tagged a lot of roads as access=private. Local governments typically describe roads that are not maintained by local governments as a private road. In OSM a private road is one that has a sign that says keep out or something similar. By tagging them as private routing engines likely won't be able to route right to the address. 

Can I get you to remove the access=private tag? You could add an operator= tag to describe who maintains the road. 

If these road have no trespassing signs then yes they should be tagged as access=no.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102765200
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 03:34:46+00:00): Hi kimiyeh,
i have fixed the alignment of floating segment and changed classification from residential to service way 929484405 kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103024989.
Thank you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102765497
ravali_78 (2021-04-16 03:21:30+00:00): Hi maning,
i have fixed the alignment , as building polygons overlapping with residential road
way 929486455 kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103024515
Thank you
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102765757
andrewwiseman (2021-08-27 17:27:20+00:00): When mapping please use the q on your keyboard to make the corners 90 degrees - buildings are almost always rectangular or squares, not trapezoids
Kovoschiz (2021-04-12 05:44:28+00:00): Please don't upload personal or test objects. This is vandalism.
user_5359 (2021-04-12 04:54:04+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please save your work before you change the area.
stoerte (2021-04-12 17:11:46+00:00): would you please be so kind not to upload edits which extends over two whole continents? thank you! c:
ravali_78 (2021-04-15 10:50:07+00:00): Hi Peggywu,
i have fixed the overlapping way of residential way 823768742,kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102988070
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102766458
ravali_78 (2021-04-15 10:40:51+00:00): Hi maning,
i have fixed the alignment,as building polygon crossing with residential highway way 929498374 kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102987461
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102768013
SomeoneElse (2021-04-27 21:05:16+00:00): Hello,
I don't think that the residential road at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8620310498 can be correct.  It seems to run straight through a wall that's visible on the imagery.  Is there some sort of gate, or was it drawn from an GPX track that is a bit offset, or is the imagery out of date perhaps?
Best Regards,
Andy
Glassman (2021-04-12 16:46:19+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102768434
ScottWalkerAU (2021-04-12 11:22:34+00:00): Hi, use addr:housenumber instead of "name=Num 6". Similarly for surrounding houses.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102768872
ScottWalkerAU (2021-04-13 07:21:40+00:00): I have fixed this.
tonyf1 (2021-10-26 07:19:49+00:00): see  Changeset #112979062
Horza (2021-06-19 17:02:10+00:00): Thanks for the contribution, but please use Q to square your buildings
Timmy_Tesseract (2021-04-16 15:21:20+00:00): It is clearly visible on aerial imagery that there are no fords at node 8620445559 and 8620445558 and that the lower parts of the stream that you added takes a very different course than what you mapped. Also I have on the ground knowledge that there is no bridge at way 929514995. Please don't add non-existent things to OSM.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-26 21:51:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103662279 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  The most recent edits of this user (unlikely secondary roads) are still problematic.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-26 21:51:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103662279 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  The most recent edits of this user (unlikely secondary roads) are still problematic.
user_5359 (2021-04-12 14:41:49+00:00): Hello! Xou added a bigger number of unknown tags in this change set. Please explain the source of this information and the meaning of the keys. Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/929518213, this way isn't part of your boundary relation.
adlid (2021-04-13 14:17:21+00:00): Hi,

Once again, could you please look at aligning the imagery prior to these edits? Bing has a significant offset over London. You can now use the 'OSMUK Cadastral Parcels' overlay to get an idea of the offset.

Also, a large number of these 'fences' are actually hedges or otherwise.


Google translate to your specified edit locale (ru):

Еще раз, не могли бы вы взглянуть на выравнивание изображений перед этими правками? Bing имеет значительное преимущество перед Лондоном. Теперь вы можете использовать наложение «Кадастровые участки OSMUK», чтобы получить представление о смещении.

Кроме того, большое количество этих «заборов» на самом деле представляют собой живую изгородь или что-то еще.
user_5359 (2021-04-12 15:02:20+00:00): Hello! You modified five streets which have the tag number=2893. 
https://www.osm.org/way/929518496,
https://www.osm.org/way/929565772,
https://www.osm.org/way/929518498,
https://www.osm.org/way/929518497,
https://www.osm.org/way/929518493

What ist the local community interpretation (could it be the same meaning of ref)?
ChapmansPeak (2021-04-12 19:42:20+00:00): Hi user_5359, thanks for reaching out. I am not sure what that specific tag means though I see you’ve already reached out to the user that initially added them in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60655899. My best guess is that they came from INEGI which they cited in that changeset. Hopefully that user responds to your comment. Best of luck!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-26 21:51:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103662279 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  The most recent edits of this user (unlikely secondary roads) are still problematic.
NieWnen (2021-04-12 16:18:41+00:00): Należałoby przenieść urząd w nowe miejsce i usunąć pozostałe tagi z budynku świadczące o urzędzie takie jak: email, fax, godziny otwarcia, telefon, strona.

Druga niewskazana zmiana to dodanie innemu budynkowi nazwy "Przedszkole" nie jest zbyt poprawne.
Jeśli tam jest jakieś przedszkole to należy to odpowiednio oznaczyć
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dkindergarten
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:building%3Dkindergarten
+ słowo "Przedszkole" nie jest wymagane, a sama nazwa.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102771298
BCNorwich (2021-04-18 07:20:30+00:00): Duplicated highway removed.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-26 21:51:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103662279 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  The most recent edits of this user (unlikely secondary roads) are still problematic.
BAK365 (2021-04-12 17:38:15+00:00): Hallo, ich habe bicycle=no und horse=no vom Weg aufs Vrenelisgärtli wieder entfernt (in CS 102819548). Verboten ist das nicht, aber trotzdem nicht zu empfehlen ;).
Grüsse, BAK365
wgITos (2021-04-13 10:28:20+00:00): Bezüglich der Pferde bin ich mir unsicher und wollte diese Änderung eigentlich wieder rausnehmen. Für Fahrräder gilt aber in der Schweiz auf allen Berg- und Wanderwegen ein Fahrverbot, ausser die Strecke sei speziell für MTBs freigegeben. Art 43 Strassenverkehrsgesetz: " Wege, die sich für den Verkehr mit Motorfahrzeugen oder Fahrrädern nicht eignen oder offensichtlich nicht dafür bestimmt sind, wie Fuss- und Wanderwege, dürfen mit solchen Fahrzeugen nicht befahren werden".
BAK365 (2021-04-13 13:27:21+00:00): Es gibt in der Schweiz auf Wanderwegen kein generelles Fahrverbot für Velos. Das fällt in die Kompetenz der Kantone. Jeder Kanton wendet Art. 43 Abs. 1 SVG anders an, es gibt also 26 verschiedene kantonale Regelungen.

Der Kanton Glarus kennt kein Veloverbot auf Wanderwegen. Ein bewusster politischer Entscheid, es gilt "Share The Trail - Toleranz und Rücksicht" [1]. Bicycle=no gilt nur dort, wo es vor Ort durch ein Verbotsschild signalisiert ist.

Ich glaube Appenzell Innerrhoden hat eine Verbotsregelung, Details kenne ich aber keine.

[1] https://glarnerland.ch/de/sommer/bike-e-bike.html
wgITos (2021-04-13 14:14:43+00:00): Bundesrecht steht über kantonalem Recht. Das Schweizerische Strassenverkehrsrecht gilt landesweit. Der Vollzug liegt aber bei den Kantonen und da wird Art 43, Abs 1 unterschiedlich straff geahndet. Das ändert aber nichts daran, dass das Befahren von Wanderwegen grundsätzlich landesweit verboten ist. 

Im Kanton Glarus ahndet die Polizei solche Vergehen anscheinend nur in Ausnahmefällen.  Bringe ich aber als Privatkläger einen Verstoss gegen Art 43 SVG zur Anklage, so muss der über den Bergweg gefahrene Velofahrer damit rechnen verurteilt zu werden.
user_5359 (2021-04-18 07:16:38+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Short question about your entry: You have entered a named object with a hashtag. Is this really the name of the object or "only" a label for your action?
Don't forgot to add the key highway for the street.
SColchester (2021-04-12 17:29:08+00:00): Please take care mapping these buildings, make sure to zoom right in and click once on each corner. At the end square the corners by pressing 'q' on your keyboard. I've fixed or removed the buildings which were badly mapped. Many thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102771919
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:19:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:19:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:19:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
jbelien (2021-04-12 05:52:06+00:00): See https://bx1.be/categories/news/latomium-a-desormais-place-a-nom/
Pakuhi_Ahi (2021-04-30 23:13:57+00:00): Здравствуйте DartVedrov,

Я заметила, что вы добавили:  `access=no` и `motor_vehicle=no` здесь. Эти теги подразумевают, что широкая общественность не может получить доступ к этому мосту, как описано в этой вики-странице OSM  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access.  Я подозреваю, что этот мост очень популярен среди населения, будучи частью международных маршрутов AH70 и E 40. Просмотрев ваш комментарий переменного набора вы упомянули “Платный проезд” в качестве причины для добавления этих тегов.  Однако тег `toll=yes` который уже присутствовал на этом мосту, используется для указания "сбор должен быть оплачен общим движением для использования дороги", как описано здесь https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toll. Я считаю, что это шоссе уже было правильно помечено, поэтому мне любопытно, почему вы добавили теги ограничивающего доступа?

Спасибо и счастливого картирования - Pakuhi Ahi
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
ravali_78 (2021-04-15 09:43:23+00:00): Hi kanaliou,
i found crossing ways on residential and it was already fixed by Breithorn way 929530961 kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102775972.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102773427
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:19:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
ravali_78 (2021-04-15 09:23:21+00:00): Hi liuma,
i found dragged node 259745544 , it was overlapping with teritiary road and it was already fixed by yvonnechen_m kindly check with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102848631.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102773597
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:19:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-18 23:18:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103156698 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.