piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:54:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:54:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:53:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:54:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:53:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:53:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
FTA (2017-11-23 03:33:32+00:00): Hi Lance, I noticed you added some interesting places in New Mexico that do not necessarily match what is on the ground (at least from older satellite imagery). Did you mean to add this car wash and motorcycle shop? Furthermore, it looks like there may have been some incorrect address data added. Let me know if that was a mistake and I'm happy to help out.

Best,
Ethan aka FTA
user_6110846 (2017-10-18 04:47:59+00:00): Когда вы создаете обьекты в Украине - украинский язык должен быть не только в name:uk но и в теге namе .  А то я давно заметил что вы путаетесь в границах . Используемая вами схема применяется в Крыму и России. Упорное применение такой схемы говорит о картографической украинофобии.
user_6110846 (2017-10-18 04:49:55+00:00): И зачем английский заменен на русский? Вместо того чтоб быть добавлен?.
Maturi0n (2017-10-18 07:38:20+00:00): Английский язык-иностранный язык для всех жителей Украины. Енакиево-русскоязычный город. Ладно, да, украиноязычное название должно быть в теге "name". 
Но..., я добавил украинское название к объекту, который раньше не имел украинского названия. как это украинофобия?
user_6110846 (2017-10-18 13:45:09+00:00): я имею ввиду - что вам надо наносить украинский язык в тег name и name: uk  .Вам же ж известно название на украинском языке. Зачем наносить на русском , если вы сами заметили после вас идет массовая украинизация. Тем более когда я просматривал ваши правки то заметил Вас уже просили когда то сразу наносить на украинском языке.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:54:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
kreuzschnabel (2018-03-23 16:53:49+00:00): Welchen Sinn sollen Abbiegebeschränkungen wie http://osm.org/relation/7563521 haben? Die verbietet allen Radfahrern das Abbiegen auf den Radweg!
kreuzschnabel (2018-03-23 17:27:34+00:00): Auch https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7562509 halte ich für fragwürdig – auf https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=52.16388112000001&lng=9.478221100000042&z=17&pKey=Vh8jMaGn50ofi27W_QcdDQ&focus=photo&x=0.4324239135521526&y=0.519974049001082&zoom=0 vermag ich kein Wendeverbotsschild zu erkennen.
Galbinus (2018-03-23 17:38:45+00:00): Ich finde die Abbiegebeschränkungen auch merkwürdig. Habe ich die tatsächlich dort eingetragen? Ebenso das Kehrtwendeverbot? Sollte man jedenfalls umbedingt beides korrigieren, vor allem die Abbiegebeschränkungen.
kreuzschnabel (2018-03-23 17:44:13+00:00): Die kommen, sei es mit Absicht oder nicht, definitiv aus deinem Änderungssatz: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7563521/history ist Version 1, davor gab’s die Relation also nicht. 
Sollte iD solche TR ohne Wissen des users anlegen, muss das schleunigst blockiert werden, daher wäre es praktisch, wenn du dich ganz schnell erinnern könntest, ob du das bewusst gemacht hast :) Kann ich mir bei einem so altgedienten Mapperkollegen einklich gar nicht vorstellen.
Galbinus (2018-03-23 18:03:55+00:00): Bewusst habe ich das bestimmt nicht gemacht. Interessant finde ich, dass das eine  Relation darstellt, denn solche Relationen sind in iD nicht vorgesehen. Man kann Abbiegebeschränkungen über Relationen nicht anlegen sonden ausschließlich dadurch, dass man den Kreuzungspunkt anklickt dann auf einem links erscheinenden Vorschaubild die einzelnen auf diesen Kreuzungspunkt zulaufenden Wege anklickt und die dann erscheinenden Abbiegesymbole durch anklicken ändert. Was dann daraus wird, macht iD automatisch und schon lange besteht der Verdacht, dass bei Änderungen irgendwelche Fehler entstehen... das hatten wir ja schon einmal im Zuge der B1 bei Horn-Bad Meinberg. Das Schlimme: Es sind Fehler, die ich per iD kaum nachvollziehn bzw. sehen kann.
Galbinus (2018-03-23 18:05:30+00:00): Ich traue mich daher gar nicht, den Fehler, den ich im iD auf Deinen Hinweis hin zwar sehe, mit iD zu korrigieren, da ich nicht weiß, ob mir erstens der iD das richtig anzeigt, zweitens nicht, ob iD das dann korrekt korrigiert, wenn ich was ändere.
Nakaner-repair (2017-09-19 20:53:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 52192970 where the changeset comment is: Revert mechanical edit which of ele=* tags. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct for the rules.
Nakaner (2017-09-10 21:14:46+00:00): Hi nyuriks,

this changeset and the preceeding and following changesets look very much like a mechanical edit. When was this edit discussed on the Talk mailing list or the Talk-de mailing list/the German OSM Forum? Where can I find the documentation? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Nakaner/nyuriks does not exists but it should.

Please refrain from uploading further changesets of this mechanical edit before this mechanical edit is discussed.

Best regards

Michael
nyuriks (2017-09-10 22:08:42+00:00): Hi Michael, my apologies if it appeared mechanical - I have reviewed every replacement value. I was simply converting "124m" -> "124" per wiki description of the "ele" field and JOSM's autofix suggestion. 
 I also reviewed the number of ele tags as pure numbers vs those with "m" symbol - looked like a small percentage.  I will be happy to create a page on the wiki - what content should it have? Thanks for your vigilance! :)
nyuriks (2017-09-10 22:19:11+00:00): P.S. btw, "ele" was a short departure from my main activity at the moment - fixing all the Wikipedia & Wikidata tags.   I am using a mechanical approach with that (I posted and written about it a while ago), after which I use the SPARQL service to find any incorrectly labeled objects. This allows substantial improvement to the quality of OSM data.  Please take a look at all the quality control queries available in the examples at http://88.99.164.208/wikidata/  (or see the link above)
Nakaner (2017-09-19 21:43:57+00:00): Hi nyuriks,

no part of Bavaria is lower than 10 m above sea level. If you review objects you are modifying systematically, please review them properly and check if people used ele=* instead of height=*. Unfortunately, you did not so as this changeset proves.

Best regards

Michael
nyuriks (2017-09-19 21:56:33+00:00): @Nakaner, this is a very valid point - there is clearly a mistake in this edit - basically propagating previous mistake.  But this does not warrant undoing significant manual time I spent validating it.  Now that the value is cleaned up, it would be significantly easier for queries to spot these cases - by simply querying for anything with ele < elevation of Bavaria. On top of my mistake, that query would catch all other broken cases where people did not include units, making it appear correct. But with your revert, I won't be able to do this as easily using automated QA - I would simply miss cases like this.  I was, or at least tried to, follow the rules for automated edits. If I broke the rule, please explain which one, so I wouldn't do it again. Thanks!
Nakaner (2017-09-20 15:10:43+00:00): The broken rules were linked in one of the previous comments. To say it short: lack of discussion.
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 14:58:22+00:00): Hello mojitopt, at http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523457583 it should be `construction` instead of `vonstruction`, right?
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 15:27:07+00:00): Hello AlfaQuarto. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523460498 it should be `bicycle` instead of `bicy`, right? #newkey #typo
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 15:05:23+00:00): Hello SK53. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523464013 it should be `name` instead of `nsme`, right?
Hjart (2017-09-11 07:43:45+00:00): Velkommen til vores projekt og tak for dit bidrag.
Bemærk dog at du kun har lavet en linie, som ikke har nogen "type", dvs vores render kan ikke vide hvad den skal forestille at være.
ltd5 (2017-09-11 14:58:17+00:00): Det er første gang jeg prøver dette. Der er en grusvej på strækningen, som ikke er på OSM kort, som jeg har markeret, men det er så ikke korrekt, kan jeg forstå? Hvordan får jeg godkendt "linie" eller lignende, så det bliver registreret?
Hjart (2017-09-11 15:02:12+00:00): Der skal ikke godkendes noget. Du redigerer den bare yderligere og giver den giver så en type (ved hjælp af mulighederne i boksen til venstre). Gennemgå eventuelt editorens tutorial.
Hjart (2017-09-11 15:35:03+00:00): Bemærk at den linie der er i vores database nu, er god nok, men da den ikke har nogen tags, bliver den ikke vist på vores kort som vej eller andet.
ltd5 (2017-09-11 20:02:03+00:00): Jeg fik valgt mulighederne i menuen til venstre og "gem" øverst oppe. Den skriver ikke gemt i OSM. Der går måske lidt tid før der sker noget?
Og for iøvrigt tak for dit svar. Det er godt at få lidt starthjælp. Jeg er tit ude på mtb ture og har altid gps'en med, måske man kan finde spor ude i marken.
ltd5 (2017-09-12 08:49:19+00:00): Så er den nye spor oprettet :-)
Hjart (2017-09-12 08:53:14+00:00): Ændringer går "live" lige så snart de er gemt i databasen og derefter går der typisk et par minutter før de også vises på kortet.
Hjart (2017-09-12 10:05:45+00:00): Vi sætter iøvrigt pris på at der uploades gps spor (og gerne flere fra de samme strækninger) fra primært skov-veje & stier og nykonstruerede veje og stier.
Hvis du har et action kamera på cyklen er https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mapillary også godt
Nakaner (2017-10-02 20:29:44+00:00): Hallo sakudo,

in diesem Änderungssatz hast du zahlreiche Waldwege zwischen Speck, Boeck und Krienke vom restlichen Wegenetz getrennt, weil sie durch Sperren versperrt seien.

Ich war letzte Woche vor Ort und habe mir aufgrund von ungerechtfertigter Löschungen von Seiten der Nationalparkverwaltung die Gegend mal näher angesehen. Zu den Hintergründen siehe https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=646416#p646416

Die Waldwege sind zwar mit hölzernen Sperren versehen, aber die Wege sind laut Beschilderung für "das Befahren mit Kraftfahrzeugen durch Unbefugte" gesperrt. Das Begehen zu Fuß und das Befahren mit Fahrrädern ist weiterhin erlaubt. Zudem sind die Sperren in vielen Fällen eigentlich nur eine ungewöhnliche Bauform von barrier=swing_gate. Wenn sie auf der Rückseite einen metallenen Griff haben, kann man sie leicht anheben und dann wie eine zur Seite schwingende Schranke öffnen.

Ich würde deine Änderungen, die diese Wege und ihre Unverbundenheit betreffen, zurücksetzen.

Viele Grüße

Michael
sakudo (2017-10-02 20:47:22+00:00): Vor Ort sah das nicht als realistisch begehbare / befahrbare Option aus, da alles überwuchert ist / am Überwuchern ist.

Ist das Begehen zu Fuß denn überhaupt da erlaubt, ich meine, das Fehlen eines expliziten Verbotes vor Ort heißt ja noch lange nicht, dass es nicht verboten (wg. Nationalpark) ist, zumal es ja abgesperrt ist...

Aber egal, mir scheint das hier eher eine akademische Diskussion zu sein.... Unverbundenheit ist zumindest praktisch, da das Routing dann nicht mehr verrückt spielt.
Nakaner (2017-10-03 12:22:25+00:00): Ich weiß nicht, was du als "begehbar/befahrbar" ansiehst, aber ich habe heute Nacht meine Bilder zu Mapillary hochgeladen. https://www.mapillary.com/app?focus=photo&pKey=AqL6y5rk77QPGBZWfXAUpA

Die Schranken lassen sich auch öffnen, siehe https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=hDiDZDOgq2Im2zMSodYesQ&lat=53.39376066666665&lng=12.859281527777739&z=17

Die Beschilderung verbietet nur das Befahren mit Kraftfahrzeugen, nicht das Betreten. Es handelt sich um Wege und nur das Verlassen derselbigen ist verboten. Selbst in der Kernzone sind die Beschilderungen sinngemäß identisch, siehe https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=odomU9zeScSWV-iH3E2eTQ&

Auch am Eingang steht nichts Abweichendes. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=kU-cNQ7EpcxCP9IcQFs-Rg
sakudo (2017-10-03 19:19:16+00:00): Okay, dann sollte access richtig gesetzt werden. - Ob das zugelassene (Fuß-)Wege sind, müsstest Du dann auch in Erfahrung bringen, denn das Fehlen eines Verbotes vor Ort (an der Schranke) heißt ja noch nicht, dass diese überwuchernden Schneisen ("ex-Wege") immer noch Wege sind.
carciofo (2017-10-25 16:45:08+00:00): Hi, the boundaries for Comuna 13 were added. I've deleted your node as it is now represented in a boundary relation. Thanks.
eggie (2017-09-12 11:02:36+00:00): PB met welkom gestuurd. Dit is wel een er groot gebied waar je edits in staan. 
Persoonlijke notes zijn niet gewenst. 
Die zullen verwijderd worden.
Lees je svp goed in.. zie welkomstmail.
eggie (2017-09-12 11:13:41+00:00): De naam Mevr. C verwijderd. Mocht je nog meer persoonlijke notes hebben aangebracht gelieve te verwijderen. Graag reactie.
74523978 (2017-09-12 23:14:45+00:00): 2e privacy-gevoelige naam-tag van woning verwijderd.
muralito (2017-09-11 13:02:00+00:00): Hola. ¿Como estas relevando la superficie de las rutas?
muralito (2017-09-11 13:02:37+00:00): Hello. What are you using to survey road surfaces?
nurdafur (2017-09-12 00:00:57+00:00): Hola! Respondio en Ingles. Es mas facil para mi.
There are some apps with renderings that show different surfaces of roads different. This is useful for cyclists like me in order to plan the route. On paved roads you can cycle faster than on cobblestones or sand. So it is easier to estimate what distance you can do in a day.
muralito (2017-09-12 11:39:33+00:00): Thanks for your response. I understand that. I asked because I'm almost sure that some of the road surfaces you add were the old status of the road (road that were unpaved but now are paved, so it seems like a mistake -on my perception or on your survey- or as based on old imagery).  The imagery is old and very old in some areas, 

My question should have been: Are you surveying on site or using the public aerial imagery to set the surface?
nurdafur (2017-09-12 11:47:18+00:00): I survey while cycling. I do not always notes. So you are right, sometimes I might have accidentaly got the wrong surface. But I hope some other mappers will change my mistakes like I change mistakes of others. Only like this the map will become better
Rosly (2017-09-12 11:11:38+00:00): Witam,
Po co przesunąłeś nody w okolicy Krakowa?!?
Skrzywiłeś drogę i chodnik.
Rosly (2017-09-12 11:12:12+00:00): Zmiana niskiej jakości. 
Proszę rozdzielaj zmiany na sety jeśli dotyczą różnych lokalizacji!
Rosly (2017-09-12 18:38:51+00:00): Brak odpowiedzi od Autora zmian. Wandalizm poprawiony w changeset 51982500 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51982500
maraf24 (2017-09-12 21:20:16+00:00): O, widzę że mamy tu specjalistę od OSM.
To ile wg Ciebie należy czekać na odpowiedź? Chcesz poznać w tej sprawie stanowisko DWG?
maraf24 (2017-09-12 21:27:11+00:00): Uważaj również na słowa. Wandalizm to celowe i świadome psucie danych. Niegrzeczne jest zarzucanie go komuś bez czekania na odpowiedź z jego strony.
Tutaj był zwykły błąd z mojej strony, rzadko, ale się zdarza.
W takiej sytuacji wystarczy mnie o tym poinformować, zawsze sam i niezwłocznie takie sprawy załatwiam.
BCNorwich (2017-09-11 06:00:48+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap.
The footpath you added does not look quite right. A lit public highway (footway) would not normally go through a building terminating at its front wall. 
Is there a passageway through the building, if so it needs to be added? 
Does the highway carry on to join High Road as you state in your changeset comment, if so it needs extending?
Or is there a walkway of some sort going through the building which is not a public way, in which case the footway would stop at the front and back of the building, and usually the front way would not be marked speciffically as it would be part of the High Road sidewalk?
If you need help with any correction please just ask.
Regards Bernard
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 15:31:41+00:00): Hallo berjk. Bei http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4726673502 meinst du sicherlich `addr:country=DE` anstatt `addr:de=DE`, oder? #newkey #typo
berjk (2017-09-11 20:08:23+00:00): Stimmt. Schon geändert. Wie hast du den Fehler so schnell gefunden?
Gruß Jürgen
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-12 04:02:58+00:00): Da gibt es eine Liste: http://osm.mueschelsoft.de/taginfo/newkeys.htm
Irma IRM-ED (2021-07-26 00:58:51+00:00): Hi roman87,
Believe what you are doing is right. However, digitizing your path https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/523494630 is it according to the road classification?
What do you think about the classification of residential roads?
Thanks and happy mapping!

Chào roman87!
Hãy tin rằng những gì bạn đang làm là đúng. Tuy nhiên, việc số hóa đường đi của bạn https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/523494630 có phải theo phân loại đường không?
Bạn nghĩ gì về việc phân loại đường dân sinh?


Cảm ơn và chúc bạn lập bản đồ vui vẻ!
michalfabik (2017-09-11 06:03:59+00:00): Pozdrav, zatražio si pregled svojih promjena (review_requested=yes). Izgleda ok, ali bih te zamolio da koristiš neki konkretniji opis onoga što si radio. "Izmjene" ništa ne znači jer svako uređivanje karte je po definiciji izmjena.
Batoo (2017-09-13 14:20:37+00:00): Hvala na sugestiji..
Eric JF Kleijssen (2017-09-10 22:07:47+00:00): sorry forgot to delete the example hashtags
Eric JF Kleijssen (2017-09-10 22:08:28+00:00): this area I know, has floodings multiple times a year
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 15:19:09+00:00): Hello VictorIE. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4454170327 you have introduced some new (undocumented) keys (`googleplus`, `soundcloud`, etc.), which has a smell of SEO. So be careful with that ;-) #newkey
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 16:06:02+00:00): or move it all to the `contact`-namespace (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact)
VictorIE (2017-09-11 19:31:20+00:00): Both methods seem to be in use, e.g. with Facebook: 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:facebook

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact:facebook
literan (2017-09-11 13:02:56+00:00): По ссылке - передвижной пункт. Передвижные объекты мы не мапим, откатываю
DemoLogin (2019-10-21 09:55:13+00:00): Что значит УАТ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523509994/history#map=18/59.87655/29.09407
GerdP (2017-09-11 09:45:10+00:00): Hi!
Please review typo highway=bridge
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523510273
Did you mean man_made=bridge ?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dbridge
stefanct (2021-05-12 08:04:22+00:00): Was ist die Quelle für den Namen "Wasserversorgungsanlage"? Wenn das kein Name ist, sondern eine Beschreibung, dann ist es falsch, den name-Tag zu verwenden.
grin (2021-05-12 19:51:39+00:00): This is not an easy question after 3 years. Since I do not speak German that well I am pretty sure that there was a building with some sign or plaque, hence the "name", however if you can tag it properly (I guess you understand way better what a WVA. shall be tagged) then please do and feel free to remove the name after tagging. Just do not make information loss. Thanks!
stefanct (2021-05-13 02:51:21+00:00): Oh, sorry, I didn't check your language. The problem is that there is no common and suitable main tag for water works (Wasserversorgungsanlage literally means "water supply facility" and is certainly not the name of that building). The question is then what exactly it is. Most probably it is a man_made=spring_box but could also be a man_made=water_well if it houses a pump, a part of a man_made=reservoir_covered or just a man_made=monitoring_station. I could not find any information on the water works of Kirchdorf or Erpfendorf online so I only see one was to deal with it: removing the name key and adding a note or fixme key with a short summary of this thread mentioning the plague. Would that be fine with you?
grin (2021-05-26 13:29:29+00:00): I _think_ I remember this object: this was a stonewalled small building up a steep hill, heavily obstructed by vegetation and it had some plaque or sign telling that it's a water-releated something and a welded-shut (or maybe padlocked) metal door. I would guess it's either a disused station or something connecting to the Lärchenhof area, but I am not really familiar with the mountainous Austrian infrastructure. I'd guess it's probably a water_well and put the name in the note=* key. That'd be fine. 
...in fact, I found the photo:
https://big.grin.hu/DFTR9/p1370048.jpg
What can you make out of this? ;-)
stefanct (2021-05-26 13:58:24+00:00): Nice! So I was right, it is a reservoir ("Hochbehälter" == elevated reservoir, typical name for these things) named Pamerötz storing 322m³ of water, with an elevation of 765.7m above the (Adriatic) sea, built 1994/1995.

So I would suggest:
name=Hochbehälter Pamerötz,
ele=765.7,
man_made=reservoir_covered,
capacity=322,
content=drinking_water

Not sure about the correct operator, probably "Gemeinde Kirchdorf in Tirol", and maybe an access=private (but I'd say that's kind of implied).
I'll let you have the honor ;)
stefanct (2021-05-26 13:59:17+00:00): (oh, and start_date=1995)
grin (2021-05-26 17:02:03+00:00): Updated it, danke sehr!
Harald Hartmann (2017-09-11 15:42:33+00:00): Hello Pavel239. At http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2393978660 you add a leading whitespace at `motorcar`. #newkey #typo
Carlos Brys (2017-09-11 13:49:51+00:00): Hola
En esta edición se están dibujando los lotes como "casa".
Lo que corresponde es dibujar el rectángulo del techo y no el lote completo.
El editor dispone de una herramienta para encuadrar el polígono para que no tenga formas irregulares.
Neri Tisocco (2017-09-11 14:31:13+00:00): Hola Carlos, gracias por tus consejos. Estas ediciones las he hecho por un proyecto personal, cuando termine las eliminaré o corregiré.
Carlos Brys (2017-09-11 15:01:31+00:00): Te recuerdo que OpenStreetMap es  un proyecto donde se mapea la realidad, y lo que se publica pretende reflejar lo más fielmente no que existe,
Para trabajar en proyectos personales que no alteren la calidad de mapa, se sugiere usar uMap (http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/es/) donde se pueden crear mapas particulares usando como base OSM
Neri Tisocco (2017-09-11 15:20:36+00:00): Lo sé, gracias.
DaveF (2017-09-11 17:57:02+00:00): Hi Welcome to OSM.
To check is this actually a park?
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/523515101

Last I rode past it was an area of scrub land with no discernible public access.

Also, joining polygons to road centre lines is discouraged as it can lead to confusion. Fore example is this gate across the path or an access to the scrub?

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5096529743#map=19/51.44263/-2.10451

Notice how this residential area is set back from Pewsham Way
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1748615293#map=19/51.45187/-2.11190