piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Matt McCutchen (2022-06-20 12:06:14+00:00): Survey date is 2022-04-04.  (I am rushing and forgetting minor things...)
highflyer74 (2022-06-23 16:44:44+00:00): Hi there!

Just a quick note: the license plate key you added is not use anywhere across the globe and in addition does contain spaces which basically makes it invalid.

Could you rework this to reflect more common tags?

You can find a selection of keys containing "plate" here https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=plate#keys. Maybe that's a good starting point.

All the best!
LockOnGuy (2022-06-23 16:52:36+00:00): Hi highflyer74,     
Thank you for your comment! About the invalid spaces I fixed that the other day in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122705244   
And about the tag I saw it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Item:Q8539    
And you can see it here too:   
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/license_plate_code    
So what's your suggestion to improve things if things needs improvements?    
Regards.
highflyer74 (2022-06-23 17:00:03+00:00): Hi and thanks for the quick reply!

You almost made it. The only thing missing are the underscores. What you are looking for is "license_plate_code". Currently there are spaces between the words (at least as far as I can see).
LockOnGuy (2022-06-23 17:03:03+00:00): Oh yes, spaces, I will fix it today in few hours when I be on my laptop. you can fix it before me if you want! :D    
Thanks again and keep up the good work my friend!
Lejun (2022-06-21 08:05:48+00:00): Globalement ok, j’ai tout de même corrigé quelques détails de syntaxe :

– ; comme séparateur ;
– syntaxe des horaires d’ouverture ;
– mise en forme du numéro de téléphone.
PT-53 (2022-06-20 16:39:23+00:00): Hallo  Reinhard12,
source=typo verstehe ich nicht.
Welches QS-Tool hat meinen Fehler angezeigt?
Fragende Grüße
Reinhard12 (2022-06-20 20:36:23+00:00): Hallo PT-53,
stimmt, source=typo passt nicht so gut; aber ich fand es besser, als das Feld leer zu lassen.
Den typo habe ich gefunden mittels
http://osm.janmichel.eu/taginfo/newkeys.htm
Gruß
Reinhard
BCNorwich (2022-06-20 16:36:27+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You've not quite got this right. There is already a node tagged proposed:barrier=bollard if this is in the correct place then the tag should be amended to barrier=bollard which be a restriction to the highway. It should also be tagged with the positive access allowed past the bollard foot=yes for example. Your new bollard being only a named node has no meaning in OSM, it's not a highway restriction.

For Raglan Street, if the status remains as a residential highway with no restriction to public access then it's not a permissive road and the two permissive tags should be removed.

Need any help please just ask.
Regards Bernard.
user_5359 (2022-06-22 07:42:11+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Short question about your entry: You have entered a key with a hashtag. Is this really description of the object (what is the meaning?) or "only" a label for your action?
aixbrick (2022-06-20 15:51:52+00:00): Hallo,
bitte https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix nutzen, da die gelöschten Gebäude auf allen Luftbildern und in ALKIS noch sichtbar sind. Die Chance ist hoch, dass ein anderer Mapper sie wieder einträgt.
Umgesetzt mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122630115.
Gruß
flobot (2022-06-20 17:18:38+00:00): Danke, alles klar.
Ualik (2022-06-20 13:06:19+00:00): i messed up forest. sorry. i will try to fix it now.
literan (2022-06-20 19:51:21+00:00): мне кажется, это некорректная правка. "мин-ва культуры" это часть названия.

см. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Названия#Имя_-_это_название_и_только
solenoid jam (2022-06-20 20:45:43+00:00): Аббревиатура ГИВЦ, а не ГИВЦМК.
https://givc.ru/o-givc/history-givc/
+
На табличке написано примерно так: МИНИСТЕРСТВО КУЛЬТУРЫ РФ
Главный информационно-вычислительный центр
literan (2022-06-20 21:02:59+00:00): а здесь так https://givc.ru/o-givc/requisites/

(к слову и о том, кто является оператором)
solenoid jam (2022-06-21 07:23:10+00:00): Отлично
osmviborg (2022-06-20 13:59:57+00:00): Hej. Undlad venligst at røre ved adresse punkterne.
Opspin (2022-06-21 11:36:29+00:00): Hej OSMViborg, det beklager jeg, jeg var ikke klar over hvordan de virkede, og jeg tænkte det gav mest mening at lægge dem der hvor indgangene rent faktisk er. Jeg er før blevet ledt til bagsiden af en bygning når jeg skal et nyt sted hen.
antonr (2022-06-21 21:23:43+00:00): Hej Opspin,

jeg kan lide din ide om at placere addressepunkter ved/på indgange! Din ide svarer, så vidt jeg kan se, nogenlunde til hvad myndighederne forsøger (se fx afsnit 10.2 i [1]), og også til hvad OSM gør i nogle andre lande (fx [2]). Manuelle tilrettelser er dog umiddelbart i modstrid med med gængs praksis i dansk OSM: Som osmviborg antyder har vi automatisk import af de officielle punkter, med de fordele og ulemper det medfører. Mere i [3, 4], hvor der også er information om hvordan man rapporterer fejl til det officielle addresseregister som er kilden til import.

Hvis et addressepunkt er decideret vildledende er det mit indtryk at man kan rette manuelt og blokere den automatiske opdatering midlertidigt med autoaws=ignore-metoden beskrevet på [4,5]. En note=... vil nok være passende i det tilfælde.

Mvh
antonr

[1] https://sdfe.dk/media/2919918/samlet-vejledning-i-adressereglerne-240420_endelig_version_1_0_1.pdf
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1521863177
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Da:Adresser
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AutoAWS
[5] https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/autoAWS
literan (2022-06-20 19:54:19+00:00): дом Стахеевых это не общеупотребительное название (как и все эти "Доходный дом унтер-офицерши Макакиной"). Когда-то он так назывался, и в реестре наследия так числится, но это не common name.
solenoid jam (2022-06-20 21:02:20+00:00): Вот пример
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5969167

Я думаю что это название известно многим локалам не только в контексте изучения истории, потому что там расположена муз школа, и посетители могут его называть домом/усадьбой Стахеева. Какое то название у него должно быть общеупотребимое.
Достоверно не знаю, но что то мне подсказывает, что на name оно тянет.
solenoid jam (2022-06-20 21:02:36+00:00): ...с натяжкой )
literan (2022-06-21 20:30:16+00:00): дом Пашкова-то все знают, так и называют.

а это здание называют Домом детей железнодорожников, я о нем только так и слышал.
mcliquid (2022-06-26 10:47:14+00:00): Hello Thierry, you have mixed up some turn-restrictions here. I have tried to fix this for you again. Please read the wiki again carefully before you try something like this again.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:restriction
Leo Slager (2022-06-20 21:42:05+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2022-06-20 21:48:09+00:00): Dag Sander,
Wellicht ben je al een ervaren mapper.
Als je in een eerste changeset zoiets ingewikkelds als een attractiepark gaat wijzigen met de editor iD , dan kan er veel fout gaan.
Dat lijkt hier niet het geval.
Het attractiepark Slagharen staat al prominent op de kaart.
Een relatie met name=Slagharen voegt daar weinig aan toe en is zelfs overbodig te noemen.
Wellicht is het beter om die relatie weer te verwijderen.
Kijk je daar nog even naar ?
sander2401d (2022-06-21 07:57:56+00:00): ik zie wat je bedoelt en heb dat weer terug gezet,
Strubbl (2022-06-28 18:18:38+00:00): bitte keine Grundstückszufahrten löschen und auch nicht die stop_positions für den Bus. Lösche einfach keine Daten, wenn du nicht weißt, wozu sie gut sind
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122624718
Lejun (2022-06-21 07:20:33+00:00): Merci de la contrib’ ! Même si ça paraît redondant, il faut penser à ajouter que la rue n’est pas à sens unique pour les cyclistes (oneway:bicycle=no) en plus de l’attribut que tu as mis[1]. Je te laisse corriger ça ?

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:cycleway%3Dopposite_lane
VicoTours (2022-06-23 16:43:16+00:00): C'est fait !
Piskvor (2022-06-20 14:21:37+00:00): Good catch, thanks :)
nichu42 (2022-06-21 15:27:20+00:00): Danke für die Korrektur. Ich habe versucht, die verschiedenen Wege zu einer Relation zusammenzufügen, die in Wikidata referenziert werden kann. Kannst du mir sagen, wie man es richtig macht?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2024-06-03 23:57:08+00:00): essas vias ja existem? caso nao deveriam ser marcadas como construction e nao como residential.
Marcus André (2024-06-10 14:55:33+00:00): Olá.
Sim, as vias existem, possuem meio-fio, postes e já existem imóveis construídos e outros em construção. Ainda não são pavimentadas, mas são ruas existentes.
abakus_uploader (2022-06-20 22:30:59+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
AndySchulte (2022-07-12 05:36:39+00:00): Hallo andwill, bei deinen Hausnummern tagging hast du einige Nummern doppelt gesetzt, z.B. die Nr. 59. Die gibt es nun insgesamt 4x! Gibt es dafür einen besonderen Grund?
Gruß
Andy
andwil (2022-07-12 18:49:07+00:00): Hoppla, da habe ich beim copy-pasten der Wohnblocks wohl vergessen, die Hausnummern anzupassen. Soweit ich sehe, hast du das schon wieder in Ordnung gebracht!? Sorry + danke für den Hinweis!
george1201 (2022-06-20 22:06:34+00:00): Ich habe das eine Frage zu Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5063497:
Wenn surface=paving_stones, muss man dann noch eintragen cycleway:surface=paving_stones und footway:surface=paving_stones? Der erste Eintrag impliziert doch, dass die Oberflächeneigenschaft für alle Benutzer dieses Weges gilt. Eine separate Zuweisung für Fußgänger oder Radfahrer wäre doch nur dann notwendig, wenn die Eigenschaften für diese Benutzer anders wären. Oder irre ich da?
Scout Jens (2022-06-21 06:17:57+00:00): Ich sehe das auch so. Das wäre hier nicht notwendig gewesen.
george1201 (2022-06-21 07:04:14+00:00): Ich hätte mir die History des Weges anschauen sollen. Dort findet man die Erklärung. Die Eintrage kamen von @Mayonezo in v20 und v21 und kamen über StreetComplete rein. Weil Fuss- und Radweg als getrennt markiert sind, wurde wohl für beide die Frage nach der Oberfläche (AddCyclewayPartSurface) gestellt.
Somit kam es zu den redundanten Einträgen. Also eher ein "Fehler" von StreetComplete. Oder freundlicher formuliert: das könnte man optimieren (muss man aber nicht).
Tilia_J (2022-06-20 18:12:59+00:00): Wat ligt er voor gedachte ten grondslag aan het toevoegen van het kenmerk "bestemmingsverkeer"?

Dit wordt altijd als onderbord aangegeven bij een verbodsbord. Bijna zonder uitzondering geldt dit niet voor voetgangers.

En die inrit voor de parkeerplaats lijkt niet goed gepositioneerd.
Reisinformatiegroep (2022-06-21 06:49:39+00:00): Wij hebben klachten gekregen van omwonenden dat de looproutes die wij geven in de 9292 app via het bedrijventerrein niet mag, vandaar de aanpassing.
Ik zal de inrit voor de parkeerplaats verbeteren
Tilia_J (2022-06-21 18:55:21+00:00): Naar blijkt is dit een particulier bedrijventerrein, dan is de enige correcte oplossing "access=private".
rarad74 (2022-06-20 19:14:40+00:00): Hi. Please first in Romanian, because you are here in Romania. And you can put HU as seccond localisation ( language) for names. Thank you.
grozsa11 (2022-06-20 22:03:20+00:00): Thank you for your attention. I changed this, and I will try to nameing well with the "name:hu=" in the future.
Waaslander (2022-06-20 14:22:01+00:00): *Riemeersstraat
maraf24 (2022-10-11 18:21:25+00:00): Illegal railway crossing is not railway crossing.
InsertUser (2022-06-26 23:00:00+00:00): This also seems to have edited a state in Mexico, was that deliberate?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122627235
dreygraph (2022-06-26 23:56:32+00:00): No, that was not. How can I correct that?
Trevor_1 (2022-06-27 22:49:38+00:00): I fixed it, but please try to be more careful in the future.
canfe (2022-06-22 07:59:05+00:00): Le aiuole in mezzo ai parcheggi sono davvero flowerbed o son solo grass??
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122627727
bches89 (2022-06-23 02:37:57+00:00): Intersections like this should be mapped with lane attributes instead of individual turn lanes unless physical boundaries exist. Also, the use of highway=motorway in the case would be incorrect. You could use primary link or secondary link where appropriate in the future.
Leo Slager (2022-06-20 21:08:38+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
SHARCRASH (2022-06-20 15:14:03+00:00): Bonjour! Vous voudriez bien éviter d'utiliser toujours le même un descriptif aussi général, svp. Sur ce changeset vous n'avez modifié aucun landuse, uniquement des highways... Une contribution sur OSM implique toujours une amélioration donc donner "améliorations diverses" est inutile.
pitscheplatsch (2022-07-29 17:10:06+00:00): Hi UNGSC-cronoser,

I am curious, is this some kind of data import or what's the source of your mapping? Thanks.

Best,
Pascal
Leo Slager (2022-06-20 21:13:12+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Leo Slager (2022-06-20 21:29:07+00:00): Dag Jan,
Dubbele vermeldingen van postcode en straatnaam zijn natuurlijk niet nodig.
ik pas het even aan.
Verder vul ik de gegevens van de praktijk aan.
nevw (2022-06-23 12:51:04+00:00): Hi
There is an edit error here that needs correcting http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=152.96897&lat=-27.62454&zoom=18
Please ignore if you have already corrected it
nevw (2022-06-25 01:07:11+00:00): Fixed by simplifying
wojtekasd (2022-06-21 07:16:05+00:00): W tej miejscowości nie ma nazw ulic
abakus_uploader (2022-06-20 22:30:58+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-09-15 15:32:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 126228183, 126229776, 126229784 where the changeset comment is: Reverting edits; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6330 ; subsequent actions by that user suggest this data is likely fantasy.
hanchao (2022-06-21 02:39:09+00:00): 在线路中添加停车点(stop)和站台(platform)时，需要按行驶方向排序。
示例：停车点1、站台1、停车点2、站台2...停车点n、站台n、地铁线1、地铁线2...地铁线n
hanchao (2022-06-21 02:40:16+00:00): 这是你编译后检查工具报的错
https://cdn.organicmaps.app/subway/china.html
vasony (2022-06-21 12:36:52+00:00): igen az, de amíg a táblán Bogdánfy Ödön van, addig az osm-en is ennek van helye.
AtomcsiKK (2022-06-21 12:43:25+00:00): A táblán is Bogdánfy utca van.
vasony (2022-06-21 12:47:26+00:00): Melyik részén? 
Az 5/a-nál biztosan Bogdánfy Ödön volt még nemrég.
AtomcsiKK (2022-06-21 12:59:24+00:00): A Varga László út, illetve az Irinyi József utca kereszteződésénél lévő táblán van így. Valóban, az 5/a-nál úgy van írva, de attól, hogy a táblán téves megnevezés szerepel, nem kell a térképre is azt feltüntetni.
vasony (2022-06-21 13:06:21+00:00): Alapvetően most, hogy van olyan tábla amin jól is van, így itt nincs vita, mert igazad van.

Egyébként viszont az osm alapelve, az 
"on the groud rule". Viszont legközelebb a házszámokat is javítsd át az utcaneveket, mert így felemás volt
woodpeck_repair (2023-12-14 09:33:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 145103843 where the changeset comment is: revert von edits einer Sockenpuppe des gesperrten beautifulplaces, s. https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15368
LudovicG (2025-09-26 15:03:45+00:00): Bonjour
En fait, dans la balise ref, on attend le code formaté A9A9A9 qui identifie la post_box (et pas les départements gérés par la fente de gauche).
Avez-vous la possibilité d'aller sur place récupérer cette référence ?
wille (2022-07-19 19:49:23+00:00): Hi Steven! Welcome to OSM! Remember to ortogonalize the buildings you draw. You can press the Q key to do it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122630110
NKA (2022-06-20 18:10:19+00:00): Please use Norway Orthophotos as bacground imagery. All other sat images have large offsets.
SomeoneElse (2022-06-20 16:05:49+00:00): "from https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1juh" is what it should say.  The new route is https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1jui , north of the canal
slightly_obsessive (2022-06-20 17:42:54+00:00): Eh, I tried to change the comment, but I did not work.
slightly_obsessive (2022-06-20 17:43:31+00:00): It should have been "Add a bunch of POI on Bakhtrioni Street".
user_5359 (2022-06-22 11:07:32+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/9141670917. What is the meaning of the tag 38 = 34?
user_12531033 (2022-06-22 12:09:32+00:00): sorry for the mistake, the JOSM editor replace ref to 38, the tag is ref = 34 for the switch's number
Syl (2022-06-27 22:09:29+00:00): Bonsoir, j'ai a nouveau enlevé les types "restaurant" et "toilettes" à l'intérieur de l'école vu qu'ils sont par définition prévu pour des toilettes et restaurants publics. J'ai également enlevé l'adresse des bâtiments, elle est déjà présente et n'a pas besoin d'être répétées : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3051834203
rbijnen (2022-09-07 21:40:37+00:00): Links to source pdf is broken, but is archived at https://archief11.archiefweb.eu/archives/archiefweb/20220607083937/https://www.enschede.nl/sites/default/files/SIO64893-Herinrichting-Noordelijke-Singels-Nieuwe-Situatie.pdf
rskedgell (2022-06-25 22:38:19+00:00): The cycle lanes which you added to Chobham Road (w10818748) no longer exist, as examination of Bing aerial imagery and Mapillary clearly show.

The TfLCID data is now several years old and needs careful conflation wit existing OSM data, not an undiscussed import which overwrites mapping by contributors who have actually surveyed the infrastructure and checked the imagery.

https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/rskedgell?lat=51.549139944722&lng=-0.0030227655555556&z=17&pKey=176240357710782&focus=photo

#DWG
AyushS183 (2022-06-27 13:45:24+00:00): Thank you for your observation. I have use this site to verify the edit, https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/tflcid:type=cycle_lane_track/#18.97/51.5492408/-0.0022789/0/10 and even this https://bikedata.cyclestreets.net/tflcid:type=cycle_lane_track/#18.97/51.5492408/-0.0022789/0/10. As you can see there are small bike lanes present in that area, the edit seems valid. Hope this clears it. 

Thank you
SomeoneElse (2022-06-27 14:11:14+00:00): @AyushS183 Just to make it absolutely clear - the suggestion above is that the data on that site is _incorrect_.  Can you perhaps go to the street in person and verify the correct situation?
AyushS183 (2022-06-27 14:15:59+00:00): I'm sorry I pasted wrong link. https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/rskedgell?lat=51.54914052&lng=-0.00303487&z=17&pKey=301767491466593&focus=photo&x=0.48716956476524376&y=0.3736900150339237&zoom=0 this is the right on. Hope this clarifies otherwise I'll try to verify in person.
rskedgell (2022-06-27 14:42:29+00:00): @AyushS183 The problem is that the tool you have used to "verify" the import shows that (advisory) cycle lanes *were* present on this segment of Chobham Road in October 2017, when TfL's surveyors checked assets RWG154882 and RWG155596.

Even the most cursory examination of Bing aerial imagery (date uncertain, but certainly more recent than 2017) shows that the footways/sidewalks have been widened and have cycle pictograms indicating that they are shared cycle tracks.

There is also Mapillary imagery from February 2020 available, as pointed out in my original comment.

Mapping historic "low quality" cycle infrastructure like advisory lanes, when it has been replaced with "better" infrastructure with physical separation, is somewhat unhelpful to users wishing to use OSM maps or data to plan cycle routes.

In the light of recent legislative changes regarding the enforcement of parking and moving traffic contraventions in mandatory cycle lanes (cycleway:lane=exclusive), not importing the type of lane from TfLCID may also be a questionable choice.
rskedgell (2022-06-27 15:14:22+00:00): @AyushS183 there are two sets of Mapillary images on that section of street. The link you posted is to imagery from 2015!

Please could you confirm whether or not your edits are part of the TfLCID conflation done on behalf of TfL by Sweco UK Limited?
AyushS183 (2022-06-27 16:13:10+00:00): Yes, this is part of that effort. This feedback is really helpful. We have been mindful about validating using this data source due to the potential for it to be outdated, however I agree its clearly not appropriate in this instance.
SomeoneElse (2022-06-27 16:30:31+00:00): @AyushS183 Please do ensure that you follow https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines - inclduing making sure that a project page is set up and your profile (and the profiles of any other mappers taking part in this project) link to it.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-06-30 14:02:56+00:00): Note that this import utterly ignored feedback. See for example https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2022-June/006879.html
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-06-30 14:04:19+00:00): @SomeoneElse Is DWG planning to revert edits done as part of that import?
SomeoneElse (2022-06-30 14:20:14+00:00): @Mateusz I've replied to the original talk-gb thread at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2022-June/029093.html and suggested that either the mapper here or their supervisor engage there.

We (the DWG) will take advice from people familiar with the areas 
affected to decide whether a revert of the data imported so far is the 
best way forward.
redd (2022-10-03 13:48:35+00:00): Hi Seandebasti,
vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag! Man könnte den Trinkwasserbrunnen bezüglich der Farbe auch mit der Eigenschaft "colour=blue" versehen, falls dieser tatsächlich blau ist?
Grüsse,
redd
AmanBD (2022-07-13 12:33:48+00:00): This is a regional highway which should be classified as primary. For more information, see the official government map here: https://www.rhd.gov.bd/RHDMaps_new/Maps/Roads/919.jpg
AmanBD (2022-07-13 12:48:42+00:00): For more details, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_Tagging_Standard_for_Bangladesh
hebolz (2022-07-13 18:29:12+00:00): @AmanBD Thank you for this information. I mapped this as part of HOT project #12820 with the objective of closing gaps in the main road network. The final classification can only be done by people like you with local knowledge.