piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:56:37+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
eggie (2022-09-15 12:09:50+00:00): Dag Caseman  name=persluchtcompressoren is niet correct volgens de conventie binnen OSM.
name=  voor geografische namen of bv eigennamen bedrijven ed. 
Gebruik description=... 
Groet
eggie
Caseman-nl (2022-09-15 13:11:16+00:00): Ok bedankt is duidelijk.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-06 13:49:58+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/963909403/history - note that surface=footway is not useful as there can be surface=paving_stones footway surface=asphalt footways and even surface=gravel footways and so on
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
Frans S (2022-09-15 14:26:44+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).

E: Nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.




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/126218090
mavl (2023-04-25 09:02:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
vsahith (2022-09-15 11:02:48+00:00): Hi , edit made based on driver feedback.
Thanks,
vsahith.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:49:30+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
mavl (2023-04-25 09:09:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:02:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
◪ Jarv (2022-09-18 13:41:19+00:00): I've seen you have been adding no bicycle & horse tags to public footpaths. Whilst there may not be a right to use these modes of transport on these ways, it should not be marked as "no" unless there are signs that say there is no cycling or horse riding. Also on this change set on way 126219338, this is legally a public highway, so all modes of transport are legally allowed to use it, from bicycles to lorries, although it may be unsuitable for larger vehicles to due useable width & surface. But on way 126219338 you added no tags for bicycles are horses which is totally wrong as they are allowed here.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126219338
◪ Jarv (2022-09-18 13:41:24+00:00): I've seen you have been adding no bicycle & horse tags to public footpaths. Whilst there may not be a right to use these modes of transport on these ways, it should not be marked as "no" unless there are signs that say there is no cycling or horse riding. Also on this change set on way 126219338, this is legally a public highway, so all modes of transport are legally allowed to use it, from bicycles to lorries, although it may be unsuitable for larger vehicles to due useable width & surface. But on way 126219338 you added no tags for bicycles are horses which is totally wrong as they are allowed here.
◪ Jarv (2022-09-18 13:41:31+00:00): I've seen you have been adding no bicycle & horse tags to public footpaths. Whilst there may not be a right to use these modes of transport on these ways, it should not be marked as "no" unless there are signs that say there is no cycling or horse riding. Also on this change set on way 126219338, this is legally a public highway, so all modes of transport are legally allowed to use it, from bicycles to lorries, although it may be unsuitable for larger vehicles to due useable width & surface. But on way 126219338 you added no tags for bicycles are horses which is totally wrong as they are allowed here.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126219338
wajcgac (2022-09-18 17:40:22+00:00): Hi Thomas, thank you for your message. I shall remove the no bicycle/horse tags from ways 698260605 and 411663825 leading to South Farm from the north. I'm not sure why I did this originally as I usually keep clear of tagging Footpaths that are also aligned with farm tracks etc. On that note if this is a public highway would this be better labelled as a 'minor/unclassified road' as opposed to the current 'track/Land-Access Road'?
Regards
Paul
wajcgac (2022-09-18 20:14:27+00:00): Hi Thomas,
I'd like to explain my reasoning for the use of the bicycle=no and horse =no tags. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom
Quote from the above
The most common countryside right of way is the public footpath, where access is restricted to pedestrians and their "usual accompaniments"
https://www.oss.org.uk/frequently-asked-questions-rights-of-way/
Quote from above 'Public footpaths are normally open only to walkers'. 
Reading the above articles I am of the belief that there is no need for specific signage alongside a PROW footpath stating 'No Cycling' as this is already implied by its status as a PROW footpath. 
There is also a paragraph specifically relating to the process to follow to gain access for cyclists to public footpaths. There are some good points that the article makes regarding the issues with this and again this shows that the default position is, no cycling on a PROW footpath.
As a keen cyclist who has explored much of Lincolnshire on and off road I use various mapping sites/apps related to cycling. These sites use OSM for their route planning, this can create problems when setting the routing to 'cycling' as it's often the case that you can be routed down a PROW footpath where you do not have the 'Right of Way' to be there. In addition to this they are very often wholly unsuitable to be ridden on any bicycle whether it be a road or mountain bike. I'm sure you'd agree that this isn't helpful to cyclists or in fact walkers.
This is why I have been gradually looking at the PROW footpaths mapped in my area and adding the bicycle=no and horse=no tags (something which I see other mappers have used)
On other occasions I have also changed 'Path' to 'Footpath' on a PROW footpath (again this is used by other mappers) which by default excludes this route from my cycle mapping/app sites as long as there are no explicit Bicycle=Yes tags.
I'd be interested to know your thoughts on this.
Regards
Paul
adiatmad (2022-09-15 13:13:51+00:00): Hello sreerajkodakkad.
Hope you are doing well.
This edit is great (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1086573031). It can be improved by providing the real name instead (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions) and providing more readable changeset comment (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments).

Happy mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:35:55+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 16:08:01+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 16:42:27+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 16:56:55+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 16:30:23+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
eggie (2022-09-15 11:59:56+00:00): Spitze...   aber gewiss es ist hier ein footway und nicht ein highway=path?

Guck mal nach den anderen  Strassen. Auch highway=path. 
Grüss
eggie
eggie (2022-09-15 12:01:30+00:00): An other hint. Please comment you edits in German or English.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
user_2066394 (2022-09-15 14:48:17+00:00): Intuitiv relativ unwahrscheinlich, dass  für Prien noch kein place-Knoten vorhanden ist :-)

Liegt seit 2012 hier:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1683463458
Frans S (2022-10-03 12:30:26+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks 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 next points:
* Most buildings are strict rectangular. Please square them after you drawn it, and still selected, with the Q key. 
* Please avoid that nodes of buildings link to other buildings or roads.



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 !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126221685
user_2066394 (2022-09-15 15:01:05+00:00): hier analog, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126227477
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-11-01 14:00:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 174063813, 174063778, 174063039, 174063675, 174063839, 174063864, 174063733, 174063852, 174063722, 174063049, 174063081, 174063378, 174063746, 174063119, 174063802, 174063878 where the changeset comment is: Following a DWG complaint, reverting a dubious import.  See e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1311170850 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18848
kwiatek_123 (2022-09-15 14:43:01+00:00): Cześć!
Poprawiłem numer telefonu dodając numer kierunkowy na początku oraz spacje w odpowiednich miejscach. 
Dodatkowo dodałem protokół do website zgodnie z rfc2818 sekcja 2.4
MichalMaranello (2022-09-15 16:29:12+00:00): Super. Dziękuje
mavl (2023-04-25 09:10:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
VictorIE (2022-09-17 08:30:20+00:00): Hi,

This is showing up as a near junction: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10026852440
LateNightTone (2022-09-18 09:27:48+00:00): Yes, it appears to be disconnected from the tertiary road according to the drive-by video source, but it's unclear. I inserted a "fixme" tag in the adjacent demolished highway.
Frans S (2022-09-22 15:05:35+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126222089
mavl (2023-04-25 09:09:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
emo_sami (2022-09-18 09:36:43+00:00): Hello omarselim;
Please be aware you added some streets floating and didn't connect with any roads and the classification for these streets is unsuitable Could you check it and fix it, please?
Examples
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1094761526
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1094761515
Regards
emo_sami
mavl (2023-04-25 09:06:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
tux67 (2022-09-16 11:43:02+00:00): Hi, hier hattest du access=no gesetzt. Heiß nichts  und niemand darf da fahren. Ich nehme an ein Fehler? Ich hab' das mal gefixed und einen Teil der Radwege - so wie bei mapillary ersichtlich auf den in DE gebräuchlichen Standard gesetzt: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dcycleway#Deutschland
access tags würde ich nur dann setzten, wenn etwas wirklich Vor Ort per Schild verboten wird, da die Wegtypen ohnehin access defaults haben. Also ein motor_vehicle=no auf einen Radweg ist nicht notwendig.
tux67 (2022-09-16 11:44:10+00:00): Sorry - ging um diesen Pfad: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304530355/history
krb100 (2022-09-16 11:59:42+00:00): Super, danke! Ich behebe mal die anderen auch mal fix
mavl (2023-04-25 09:11:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
Peter Muret (2024-09-17 22:24:54+00:00): Hallo Sushifresser, 
das ist eher ein Wegkreuz als ein Denkmal,
lg Peter
user_5359 (2022-09-20 06:10:42+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/relation/14583995. What is the meaning of the foreign tags
SETTLEMENT = 35011
SETTL_NAME = Ballinasloe
Could the keys ref and ref:name be a possible replacement?
Aleksandar Matejevic (2022-09-20 06:20:44+00:00): Hello, these are attributes from the original Settlements Ungeneralised - OSi National Statistical Boundaries - 2015 and it is left intentionally so we can do a future join if a new dataset becomes available. This is done in the same manner as it was done for "Experimental import of Irish places and POIs from GNS Dataset" but it can easily be changed to some other OSM tag. If it does not bring a lot of issues I would like to leave it as is until all polygons are added and the community reviews them.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-18 03:56:05+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10026882143/history has shop = سوق_الكهربا that was added in this edit
shop=سوق_الكهربا ? What is the meaning of that shop value? What kind of services or products are sold here? Is anything from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_for_key_%22shop%22 fitting? Maybe new value needs to be invented? Maybe this data is wrong and there is no shop here? Maybe it is not a shop but something else?
mavl (2023-04-25 09:11:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:07:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
habi (2022-09-15 12:45:42+00:00): Äh, natürlich als 'Eglise St-Amand'...
danieldegroot2 (2022-09-15 15:24:20+00:00): Is this space currently vacant?

Sidenote: the opening hours are still present on the node.
eggie (2022-09-18 13:17:39+00:00): Lorentz Lyceum toegevoegd aan adresnode.. landuse=education op terrein.
MVG
eggie
Rubenke (2022-09-18 14:35:47+00:00): Helemaal top! (y)
LockOnGuy (2022-09-15 13:13:58+00:00): Hello,    
May I know please why did you change the "ref" from 60 to 65?    
as of my local knowledge we know this street by the number 60 only, did it change to 65? this is so weird. please confirm your source and if it's reliable.
LockOnGuy (2022-09-15 13:21:51+00:00): Also, can you please add back the name:ar that you removed for this street in changeset 63292043? it is when you deleted 82 name:ar names and 52 loc_name:ar in that changeset.
ڕاستی (2022-09-29 14:47:59+00:00): سڵاو
لەسەری ئەوەی کە ref 65 نییە بووەتە 60. ئەوەیان لەسەر تەختەی ناونیشانەکانی سەر شەقامی کوردستان نووسراوە و دەتوانیت بۆ خۆت بچی پشتڕاستی بکەیەوە. هەر بۆ زانیاریت ئەو تەختانەی ناونیشان کە هەڵواسراون و لە دیوار بەستراون لایەنی میری بە خۆی پێیان هەڵدەستێت، کە ئەوەش بەڵگە نەویستە.
LockOnGuy (2022-09-29 14:54:05+00:00): Please provide a source as I never heard of this change.         
Also restore name:ar that you deleted for this road in changeset 63292043
ivanbranco (2022-09-19 15:06:48+00:00): Ciao Pasquale,

come già consigliato qua: https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/125725641

"If you still want to add addresses with the "House" button of Every Door app you'll have to indicate every time that this is an address and not a building. To do so, after entering the housenumber press "More" at the bottom of the form, then press "Building" > "...", then press "<empty>"."

Traduzione automatica di Deepl: 
"Se si desidera aggiungere indirizzi con il pulsante "Casa" dell'applicazione Every Door, è necessario indicare ogni volta che si tratta di un indirizzo e non di un edificio. Per farlo, dopo aver inserito il numero civico, premete "Altro" in fondo al modulo, quindi premete "Edificio" > "...", quindi premete "<vuoto>"."

Ho rimosso io molti dei valori, rimane il problema che molti di questi hanno solo il numero civico senza la strada (addr:street). Buon mapping.
PasqualeD (2022-09-19 15:10:04+00:00): Grazie mille! Buon mapping anche a te!
mavl (2023-04-25 09:01:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:01:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
LockOnGuy (2022-09-15 13:06:50+00:00): Hello,           
on NODE: 6587805185           
NODE: 7391496217           
and NODE: 8508591781           
you changed the name for these hotels from English to Kurdish, but by doing this you removed the English name entirely, please if you change the name to local name, put the english name in name:en
marc__marc (2026-02-12 08:07:25+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/143709212/history/3
es-tu certain qu'il y a encore un poele en 2022 ? car sur https://www.refuges.info/point/3392 quelqu'un signalait en 2019 qu'il avait été démonté
il y a d'ailleurs une incohérence dans les tags à ce sujet avec stove=no
Cordialement,
Marc