piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
hadw (2016-02-12 10:54:07+00:00): Using an unacceptable source won't delay when the change goes live, which is immediately, for the database, within minutes for the standard rendering, and an unknown amount of time for third party renderings and third party navigation applications.

However, using a source that breaches copyright puts you at risk of having the change completely removed.  Google maps is a competing product.  It is a specific breach of the terms of use of both Google Maps and Google Street View to use them as the basis of other maps.

In choosing to use OpenStreetmap, you have to be aware that it is reliant on voluntary effort so the quality of mapping  will vary greatly from place to place.  You also need to understand that it can only use information that has very liberal copyright licences, so the fact that another source obviously contradicts only gives a hint that someone needs to actually go there and check for themselves.

On the other hand, in the western world the level of detail and accuracy tends to be surpass that in any of the more commercial maps, when taken as a whole.

It actually looks like it was only marked as one way five days ago, so whatever you are using updated within five days last time.  Whilst it might update on a cycle, and you might have been lucky that it was near the end of the cycle, it at least suggest that the change will reach the tool you are using within a week.

Note, that I was going to comment about the reference to Google, even before I saw the changeset discussion.

In this case, in http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53632 you say that you got the information from your employee.  That would have been sufficient to claim local knowledge as the source.
escada (2016-02-12 15:23:21+00:00): In addition to what hadw wrote, when you make a change based on local knowledge, it is sufficient to say "local knowledge". There is no need to refer other mappers to Google, Bing, Apple, etc. for verification. A good mapper knows which sources (e.g. survey, Mapillary) can be consulted to verify a change.
marczoutendijk (2016-02-11 19:12:55+00:00): Ik heb je zojuist een welkomst-mail gestuurd via je OSM gebruikerspagina.
Het is een beetje onduidelijk wat je hier hebt proberen te veranderen. Wat bedoel je met "voorbeeld"? Kun je dat nog toelichten?
maraf24 (2016-02-15 10:47:22+00:00): Jesteś tego pewien? Dane są z jastkow.e-mapa.net
Jeśli to błąd, zgłoszę to im.
KubasOSM (2016-02-15 11:07:43+00:00): Tak jestem na 100% pewien. Zgłaszałem już ten problem do jastkow.e-mapa.net. Na razie nie mam żadnej odpowiedzi.
user_5359 (2016-02-12 19:27:11+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Eine kleine Anmerkung: Bitte keine Trivialnamen an die Objekte schreiben. Das können die Programme auf viel besser, wenn Bedarf besteht. Nochmals auch mit メールボックス, wenn die Karte ein Japaner benötigt.

Bitte liest Dir mal die Seite http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dpost_box durch und ergänze die Informationen (besonders collection_times, nach dem die Post die Sonntagsleerung reduzieren will). Was dort noch nicht steht ist der Schlüssel check_date, wann man diese Informationen erfasst oder validiert hat.
jinalfoflia (2016-02-12 06:33:34+00:00): @Sergio Roberto

You should not be using Google/yahoo as a source of information for addition of any data on OSM. Look in here for more information - http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#Why_don.27t_you_just_use_Google_Maps.2Fwhoever_for_your_data.3F

Also there is some excellent documentation about OSM can be found here - http://learnosm.org/
wille (2016-02-13 20:00:54+00:00): oi, Sergio

tudo bem?

Nós não temos autorização para utilizar imagens do google ou mapas do yahoo como fonte para editar no OpenStreetMap. Apenas podemos utilizar dados livres que não ponham o OSM em risco jurídico. Temos imagens de satélite disponibilizadas pelo Bing e pela Mapbox para mapear e acredito que estas sejam suficientes para grande parte do que precisamos.

Atenciosamente,
Wille
BCNorwich (2016-03-10 08:28:59+00:00): Hi, You have now duplicated the way alongside the river. There is now the original public footpath over which bicycles are allowed. Plus your new cycleway which you have not tagged for foot use. For a considerable length these two ways are on top of each other. Makes a real mess of routing!

Is that path a shared use (foot and cycle) path? Would you like me to correct it for you.
BCNorwich (2016-03-10 08:32:22+00:00): Hi, You have now duplicated the way alongside the river. There is now the original public footpath over which bicycles are allowed. Plus your new cycleway which you have not tagged for foot use. For a considerable length these two ways are on top of each other. Makes a real mess of routing!

Is that path a shared use (foot and cycle) path? Would you like me to correct it for you.
Nakaner (2016-09-28 18:08:23+00:00): Hallo nailuj,

du hast in diesem (und ggf. anderen Änderungssätzen) einen unterirdischen Bunker eingetragen. Leider hast du beim Hochladen weder einen Änderungssatzkommentar eingegeben noch Angaben zu deinen Quellen gemacht. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments

Ich möchte dich daher darum bitten, uns deine Quellen für diese Eintragung offen zu legen. Da der Bunker nicht zugänglich ist, kann leider kein Mapper die Daten selbst überprüfen. Einer der OSM-Grundsätze ist jedoch die Überprüfbarkeit der Daten (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:%C3%9Cberpr%C3%BCfbarkeit). Da diese hier unter den aktuellen Umständen nicht gegeben ist, bin ich besonders kritisch – deutlich kritischer, als ich es sonst schon bin.

Übrigens, deine Änderung wird im Forum diskutiert. http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=55904

Viele Grüße

Michael
Peda (2016-04-24 10:50:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
Peda (2016-04-24 10:50:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
dbaron (2016-06-23 17:00:42+00:00): This changeset readded a ramp that was demolished last year (and which had been removed from OSM after its demolition) -- the bay bridge offramp branching to the corner of Fremont and Folsom, way 397267324.  I've removed it again, since it no longer exists.
ediyes (2016-06-24 04:12:18+00:00): Hi dbaron!

Thanks for fixed it.
user_5359 (2016-02-11 20:56:56+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Danke für die Ergänzung des OSM-Datenbestandes. Bitte beachte, dass in OSM die Objekte vorrangig beschrieben werden und erst dann benannt werden. Als Einstiegsseite für die Frage „Wie bezeichne ich was?" empfehle ich die Seite http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a . 
Solltest Du für eine Webseite eine Karte mit Markierung benötigen, ist es übrigens nicht nötig dafür diesen Eintrag in die Datenbank zu schreiben. Näheres findest Du sicherlich im erwähnten Wiki.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-01-31 21:11:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45697904 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some Google Earth usage
Peda (2016-04-24 10:49:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 38830605 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets of user Дмитрий-Одесса due to vandalism: duplicated nodes, removal of nodes,... (See http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=588679#p588679 or contact the DWG)
Peilscheibe (2016-02-11 22:11:30+00:00): Aus welchem Grund werden hier etablierte tags wie railway=subway_entrance gelöscht?
MENTZ_TU (2016-02-12 08:14:05+00:00): Ups.. Das hätte nicht passieren dürfen. Wurde wieder korrigiert. Danke für den Hinweis.
Peilscheibe (2016-02-12 12:09:01+00:00): OK, danke
marczoutendijk (2016-02-11 19:18:04+00:00): Hallo,
Ik heb je zojuist een welkomstmail gestuurd via je OSM gebruikerspagina.
De toevoeging die je hebt gedaan wordt niet zichtbaar op de kaart omdat je niet hebt aangegeven wat voor bedrijf daar is gevestigd. 
Zie bv. deze lijst:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office
Lees vooral ook de mail die ik je stuurde en de bijhorende links.
plamen (2016-02-12 22:51:54+00:00): Not correct. Reverted.
streckenkundler (2016-02-11 18:07:03+00:00): Hallo,

kannst du den auch die nebenstehende Meldung auflösen?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/490214

fragt Sven
Mike Baggaley (2016-02-19 14:51:53+00:00): HI, is way 42801550 and adjoining ways still the B6295? If so, this should be a secondary highway. If not, B6295 needs to be in old_ref rather than ref.

Cheers,
Mike
AndreasTUHU (2016-02-16 08:59:05+00:00): Szia!
Szerintem az Icebar-on maradhatna az amenity=bar címke is, a tourism=gallery önmagában félrevezető lehet.
András
City-busz (2016-02-16 14:46:53+00:00): Szia!
Oké, végül is maradhat a bar is, visszatettem.
AndreasTUHU (2016-02-16 21:00:00+00:00): Ok, köszönöm!
plamen (2016-02-13 06:36:14+00:00): reverted
GinaroZ (2016-05-10 21:38:07+00:00): Hi, why did you change some of these roads from primary to secondary and vice-versa?
edspeth (2016-05-10 21:40:18+00:00): I corrected incorrect classifications. 

The visual effect of incorrect classifications made a mess of the roads in Hexham.
GinaroZ (2016-05-12 23:01:12+00:00): Which roads had incorrect classifications? A roads should be primary (or trunk) and B roads should be secondary. 
You shouldn't change roads just so they look better on the map - that is "tagging for the renderer": http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
plamen (2016-02-13 06:30:41+00:00): reverted
ndm (2016-02-11 19:58:15+00:00): Seems to be a duplicate -- the building is already present with the company name.
streckenkundler (2016-10-29 14:15:28+00:00): Bitte in OSM keine ungelegten Eier und Luftschlösser des Bundesverkehrswegeplanes eintragen. Vgl. auch Forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=615112#p615112

Dieser angedachte Verlauf sollte wieder entfernt werden. Solche Dinge kann man erst eintragen, wenn Planfeststellungsbeschluß da ist, Geld da ist und angefangen wird, zu bauen. Fall eine Visualisierung dieser Ideen nötig sein sollte, bitte umap ( http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/de/ ) o.ä. verwenden.

Sven
Hjart (2016-02-11 20:17:28+00:00): Jeg ville umiddelbart have gættet på at man må cykle på disse stier?
streinger (2016-02-11 18:43:27+00:00): на советскую ограничения не нужны, там и так тег pedestrian
Bruno_Remy (2016-02-14 22:07:37+00:00): Bonjour, 
Merci pour ces contributions de nouvelles rues dans le secteur!
Est-ce que l'extrémité Est de la rue de Berry fait une jonction avec la Route Lallemand? Ou bien faut-il passer par la rue Jogues? Merci !
user_5359 (2016-02-11 19:05:03+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please connect new streets with existing streets.
naoliv (2016-07-17 00:08:17+00:00): bas, em vários postos de combustível você está adicionando a bandeira/marca do posto no nome.
Isso não é correto.
Procure deixar a bandeira/marca na tag "brand"
Nesse exemplo, o nome do posto ficaria apenas "Morini" (ou talvez "Posto Morini") com "brand=Shell"
baspng (2016-07-22 19:23:45+00:00): naoliv,
Eu estava, sim, adicionando a bandeira ao nome do posto, quando existente. Meu propósito era o de que o usuário pudesse identificá-la de imediato. Vou adotar o critério do OSM e corrigir os postos que incluí. Lembro-me de muitos deles. Desculpe-me pela demora em responder e obrigado pela observação.

baspng
naoliv (2016-07-22 19:29:43+00:00): Sem problemas.
Eu dei uma boa verificada nos postos de SP e MG, mas deve ter passado algum despercebido.
A marca/bandeira ainda não é exibida no mapa padrão, mas há um pedido para isso já: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1874
Frank_D (2016-02-11 17:45:03+00:00): #hotosm-project-1369 #MapGive #piuramapathon Source=WorldView-3, DigitalGlobe, NextView, 24 Nov 2015
JOEL311087 (2016-02-11 17:45:46+00:00): #hotosm-project-1369 #MapGive #piuramapathon Source=WorldView-3, DigitalGlobe, NextView, 24 Nov 2015
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-01-31 21:11:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45697904 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some Google Earth usage
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-01-31 21:11:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45697904 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some Google Earth usage
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-01-31 21:11:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 45697904 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some Google Earth usage
Nakaner (2016-02-21 10:46:15+00:00): Ich habe mir stellvertretend mal diesen Änderungssatz geschnappt, der Kommentar gilt aber auch für viele andere Änderungssätze von dir.

Ich musst in Gronau (Leine) leider deine Versuche, einzelne Fahrspuren einzutragen, rückgängig machen. In OSM werden Fahrstreifen nur dann als eigenständige Ways erfasst, wenn sie baulich getrennt sind, d.h. ein Wechsel auf den anderen Fahrstreifen durch eine Barriere verhindert wird. Als bauliche Trennung gelten in OSM Grünstreifen, Leitplanken, Mauern o.ä. Bordsteine gelten bei Radwegen nicht als bauliche Trennung.

Wenn zwei Spuren nicht baulich getrennt sind, muss man mit turn:lanes=*, turn:lanes:forward=* und turn:lanes:backward=* arbeiten. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:turn:lanes

Wenn sich eine aufgespaltet Fahrbahn vereinigt, ist meist eine Abbiegebeschränkung nötig, die das Wenden verbietet. Selbiges gilt auch für Kreuzungen mit Bypässen.

Schau dir mal als Vorbild den Knoten B 240/B 3 westlich Gronau (Leine) an.
malenki (2016-02-22 04:04:49+00:00): Hallo Nakaner,

die von dir in diesem Changeset gelöschte "Eimer Landstraße" habe ich in einer früheren Version wiederhergestellt.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/397324506/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396610536/history

Wäre nett, wenn du bei zukünftigen Reverts drauf achtest, korrekte Daten nicht zu löschen.
rab (2016-03-21 20:07:26+00:00): Please connect this roads
nlehuby (2016-03-21 20:48:38+00:00): I've connected most roads but feel free to improve, I'm not used to do this.
Superadlen (2016-06-21 04:04:48+00:00): MERCI
ElliottPlack (2016-02-11 22:09:00+00:00): Thanks for the help on my notes
jaakkoh (2016-02-11 22:48:30+00:00): No problem. The notes are just such a wonderful tool, allowing new ways of collaborating/ working together. So, thank You for the notes! :)
Tomas Straupis (2016-02-12 09:17:57+00:00): In Lithuania there is an ORT10LT imagery available. This imagery is precisely positioned so it is much better to use it when drawing new objects. Bing imagery is badly misaligned.
Zmianowy (2016-02-27 13:01:35+00:00): ortofotomapa=ORT10LT
surveyor54 (2016-02-11 22:34:24+00:00): Was bedeutet "nach Nutzer-Kommentar", das verstehe ich nicht ganz.
user_5359 (2016-02-13 17:20:15+00:00): gemeint ist die Note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/500334
NikFehl (2016-02-13 21:02:32+00:00): sry. werde es das nächste Mal verlinken.
surveyor54 (2016-02-14 14:21:59+00:00): Danke für das Feedback :)
SomeoneElse (2016-03-18 23:41:03+00:00): In what sense is "natural=water, water=river" more "legitimate" than "waterway=riverbank"?
They're both on common use, so renderers and data consumers need to deal with both if they're going to process all features.
Having features flip-flop between one form of tagging and another just confuses everyone :)
http://osm.mapki.com/history/way.php?id=363217019
TFTD (2016-02-12 12:18:06+00:00): Bist du dir sicher, dass das MaxSpeed hier stimmt:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/397349363/
Das Signal wäre dann auch Falsch:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4001427438

Und man könnte hier auch noch die 120 für die Gegenrichtung ergänzen, oder?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3998381515
user_5359 (2016-02-12 17:42:45+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please note this is a production database not a playground. I have revert all your changes, because they have no information, the changes comment isn't understandable and i can't identify any object on the arial images for your lines.
tunnelbauer (2018-04-03 12:11:54+00:00): Warum werden im KH-Bereich die Straßen mit "access=private" getagged? Das ist absolut falsch - ich darf mich auf diesen Straßen ganz normal bewegen (nur vielleicht nicht mit dem Auto).
user_1470980 (2018-04-03 20:29:54+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, habe mich vertippt.
Kannst du den korrekten Wert nachtragen, gefühlt zum fünften mal lotst mich nun meinem Auto durch die Krankenhaus einfahrt. .
user_1470980 (2018-04-03 20:46:54+00:00): Ach ja, es fällt mir wieder ein. Fußgänger und Fahrradfahrer müssen dort nicht durch den Schranken. Es führt ein normaler geteilter Fuß und Fahrradweg am Portier vorbei.
Aber vielleicht hast Du zur Vermeidung von Fehlroutung noch eine bessere Idee.
Grüße Johann
chillly (2016-02-11 22:10:40+00:00): Welcome to OSM.

We only seek ground truth, that is what is really there on the ground. We leave politics elsewhere.

If the path really called horse field? Is that the name of the field? Is this an informal name or is this on a name plate somewhere? The name used in OSM is usually displayed somewhere on the path.

If you want to outline the field you can draw the field by tracing from the aerial imagery.
user_5359 (2016-02-12 17:45:09+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please take a short look on your college.
utack (2017-06-26 23:01:31+00:00): Hi,  
Would you be so kind and have a look at  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1043998  
It does not directly affect this changeset, but seems like you know the way in question  
Thank you!
user_5359 (2016-02-12 17:43:23+00:00): Please see the comment  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37156155
user_5359 (2016-02-12 17:43:48+00:00): Please see the comment  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37156155
gormur (2016-07-07 16:48:27+00:00): Most, if not all, of these houses are not closed ways. They have duplicated nodes in one of the corners. Import gone wrong? Or did you draw them by hand?
wille (2016-02-13 19:46:34+00:00): oi, chrmorais

tudo bem?

Não havia necessidade de apagar os prédios da escola. É legal ter os prédios e todos os outros elementos que compõem a escola mapeados. Vou restaurar.
chrmorais (2016-02-16 13:45:18+00:00): Sim, concordo com você. Mas os elementos devem manter a relação com o polígono do terreno, senão fica complicado usar os dados para qualquer análise com ferramentas gis mais complexas. Estou realizando a primeira etapa do mapeamento de todas as escolas públicas do Distrito Federal. E vou segui o padrão estabelecido pelo Exército Brasileiro para o segmento Educação. Então esta primeira etapa é para mapear o polígono do terreno da escola. Nas etapas posteriores faremos o mapeamento dos elementos internos de cada escola. Prédios , salas de aula, laboratórios, quadras de esporte e etc...
chrmorais (2016-02-16 14:09:38+00:00): De agora em diante não vou mais apagar os prédios. Vou concluir o trabalho de mapeamento das escolas, desenhando o polígono do terreno, adicionando o nome e o código do inep em conformidade com os dados publicados no site da SEDF. E vou continuar meus estudos em um banco de dados privado para mapear a infraestrutura da educação no Distrito Federal conforme a metodologia proposta pelo Exército Brasileiro. Um abraço.
wille (2016-02-16 15:36:17+00:00): Ótimo! Dessa forma a secretaria de educação pode até saber quantos prédios e quadras existem dentro das escolas!

abraço,
chrmorais (2016-02-16 16:53:20+00:00): Olá Wille, eu trabalho na SEDF e estou mapeando os dados das escolas voluntariamente. A meu ver, sob o aspecto de Geoprocessamento, se uma quadra de esportes não estiver associada ao polígono de uma escola específica não há como se fazer uma consulta buscando as escolas que possuem quadra de esportes. Ou se a quadra de esportes é coberta ou descoberta.
chrmorais (2016-02-16 16:54:27+00:00): Neste caso a qualidade da informação é muito importante, mais que a quantidade.
wille (2016-02-16 20:00:11+00:00): Sim, o polígono da escola é uma informação super importante! Parabéns pelo trabalho que você vem realizando! 

Aqui em Brasília, nós sempre reunimos colaboradores do OSM para conversar sobre mapas e mapear algum local. Você tem disponibilidade para participar de um encontro? Geralmente realizamos em algum sábado a tarde.
Piskvor (2016-04-25 07:46:07+00:00): Ahoj, tahle louka je taky "psí"? Podle mapy ÚMČ P10 to tak nevypadá: http://vpp10.cz/vp-kolem-nas/informace-pro-majitele-psu/mista-pro-volne-pobihani-psu.aspx
R3gi (2016-04-25 12:04:36+00:00): Ahoj, této travnaté ploše se v okolí říká „Psí louka“, je to místní název. Lidé ji často používají pro venčení psů, byť tedy podle té mapy není přímo určena pro volné pobíhání psů.
Alecs01 (2016-02-15 20:15:06+00:00): bei dettagli!
amkval (2016-02-11 22:44:08+00:00): Added some unmarked locations.
SomeoneElse (2016-02-12 01:38:15+00:00): Looking at the history http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=21662002 , quite a few previous mappers seem convinced that Shepherd's Bush is (in OSM terms) a suburb rather than a town.  I'm not a local and therefore don't have a particular view on it, but at the very least I'd suggest mentioning the change on the talk-gb mailing list explain the reasoning behind it. If you can build a concensus behind the change, it's less likely to get changed back later by someone who doesn't agree with it.
Cheers,
Andy (just trying to help, honest!).
smeòrach (2016-02-15 02:19:55+00:00): hiya
I made Shepherd's Bush a town as it is listed as a major Activity Centre on the London plan, but I recognise it's not some kind of universal authority. If someone disagrees it's no problem with me, I'm not a local either. Just wanted the London towns/suburbs to make more sense on the map!
SomeoneElse (2016-02-15 13:39:05+00:00): I have no idea what "a major Activity Centre on the London plan" means.

There's a discussion ongoing on the talk-gb list right now https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2016-February/018433.html - maybe explain there what changed and why?
user_242798 (2016-06-24 07:22:33+00:00): Ringdijk: NOT {highway=service} > [highway=unclassified] (reverted to history, highway continuity, "geen gladheidsbestrijding" does NOT imply service);
Reverted by: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/40252611
keithonearth (2018-10-07 02:51:09+00:00): I've added a note on one of the things added by this edit, a seafood shop. It seems a very unlikely location for  a retail establishment. 

Here's the note, requesting more info:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1552659
Nakaner (2016-02-21 11:03:34+00:00): Wenn du Radwege als baulich getrennte Radwege einträgst, musst du eventuell an der Straße vorhandene cycleway=lane/track entfernen. Sonst denken Datennutzer, dort wären zwei Radwege! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/397376567/history https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174754124/history
Nakaner (2016-02-21 11:04:19+00:00): Bitte auch hier beachten, dass highway=cycleway foot=no (d.h. Fußgänger verboten impliziert)!
gabro00 (2018-08-14 20:07:04+00:00): Ahol lehet használj ortofotót. Ebben a módosításcsomagban is találtam (nem az első) olyan pontokat, amik jó helyen voltak, de Bing képanyag alapján módosítottad helytelen pozícióba.
下り専門 (2016-02-12 12:41:37+00:00): 削除したという記録もちゃんと残るので安心してノードを消してしまってください。
下り専門 (2016-02-12 12:45:13+00:00): 文字列に不要な空白が入っているようです。検索ヒットしなくなってしまいます。
BioDranik (2016-04-20 11:03:07+00:00): Hey, this is a test comment to a changeset from @deathbaba
Martin Borsje (2016-02-13 16:05:57+00:00): Beste Werner,

Dank voor je eerste edit.

Je hebt echter een klein foutje gemaakt.

Ten eerste was het terrein al van een naam voorzien en te tweede kun je de eigenschappen van het het gebouw of aan het gebouw zelf koppelen of aan de adresnode.

Kijk ook eens op de OSM wiki.

Zoe ook:
https://www.dropbox.com/s/f2tzcnu2qr9i75c/noordik.PNG?dl=1

In geval van vragen kun je je ook tot het Nederlandstalige OSM-foum wenden.