piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
TheSwavu (2021-10-19 10:13:19+00:00): Have a look at the map on p.7 of that report, it shows which parts are actually protected areas. The rest of it is various land holdings that don't have a protection status. It appears that there will be another National Park and IPA shortly https://www.wilderness.org.au/work/great-western-woodlands
Emilius123 (2021-10-07 12:45:13+00:00): digga die haten nicht mal gestimmt, antimate
jimkats (2021-10-11 21:29:23+00:00): Διαφωνώ με την συγχώνευση του πάρκινγκ και της πλατείας, γιατί τα περιπλέκει χωρίς λόγο +  έκταση της πλατείας ακριβώς όσο το πάρκινγκ.
jimkats (2021-10-11 21:30:10+00:00): Η πλατεία δεν είναι σε έκταση όσο το πάρκινγκ εννοώ, εκτίνεται μέχρι τα σπίτια η πλατεία, ενώ το πάρκινγκ ξεκινά πιο πριν στον δρόμο.
CobyJacela (2021-10-07 07:52:02+00:00): Forgot to add the description in the hashtags:
"Added, adjusted and squared buildings; Separated two buildings glued together by two nodes; #hotdqi2021
Emilius123 (2024-04-14 16:25:21+00:00): Wann kommen neue Changesets? @eliasqweer
Frans S (2021-10-07 10:38:50+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
We welcome you as a new mapper.

Please pay attention on these points. 
You combined multible buildings. Please map them 1 by 1.
Map accurate and square each building.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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/112202544
trigpoint (2022-12-20 12:59:21+00:00): Again what is the source of this edit? Surely to determine where bikes are allowed you would need to either survey the signs or use mapillary or streetside?
For example if bikes were prohibited on https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=59568a4b-9ba1-46b6-a696-9edf6113d567&cp=53.226286~-4.26019&lvl=19&dir=97.05397&pi=0.60837555&style=x&mo=z.0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027 then there would be a sign here https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=59568a4b-9ba1-46b6-a696-9edf6113d567&cp=53.226286~-4.26019&lvl=19&dir=97.05397&pi=0.60837555&style=x&mo=z.0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

Cheers Phil
emvee (2021-10-16 17:08:43+00:00): Hi,

Welcome as OSM editor!

I had look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28703110#map=19/50.63775/5.57796 but adding there bicycle=no makes no sense to me because:
1) there is cycleway=lane
2) the connecting ways also have cycleway=lane and no bicycle=no

On the other 3 roads I also doubt if adding access=no/bicycle=no/foot=no, motor_vehicle=yes is correct, is there a sign indicating this? If not these tags do not belong there.

Greetings,

Martin.
Frans S (2021-10-11 15:23:27+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points:
Square each building with the Q key.

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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/112203675
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-10-07 13:20:50+00:00): Hallo steview_de und willkommen bei OSM!

highway=path ist für einen Trampelpfad genau richtig. Man kann noch informal=yes hinzufügen, wenn es sich um einen nicht offiziellen Weg handelt. Wenn man im Onlineeditor ID nach "Trampelpfad" sucht und das auswählt, dann macht das ID auch automatisch.

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
Frans S (2021-10-07 10:50:01+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 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/112203958
Supaplex (2021-10-10 09:35:14+00:00): 請問一下，你更動的高速公路速限部分，是已經取消速限，還是原先的速限有更動?如果是後者，希望能填上新的速限資訊
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112204123
Shaun das Schaf (2021-10-07 09:07:22+00:00): Hallo Albert, willkommen bei OSM!

Um einen Privatweg zu kennzeichnen, gibt es andere Möglichkeiten als eine Löschung.

In OSM wird abgebildet, was in der Realität vorhanden ist. Da dieser Weg ja real vorhanden ist, wird er auch gemappt und eine Löschung wäre falsch.

Dass es sich bei dem Weg um einen Privatweg handelt, kann dann durch einen zusätzlichen Tag angegeben, in diesem Fall "access=private".

Dadurch wird erreicht, dass keiner mehr von einer Navigationssoftware über diesen Weg geführt wird. Außerdem wird der Weg dann zwar auf der Karte dargestellt, jedoch deutlich verblasst, sodass ersichtlich wird, dass es sich um einen Privatweg handelt.

Ist der Weg überhaupt von beiden Seiten als Privatweg gekennzeichnet? Ansonsten kann man ja niemandem vorwerfen, wenn 
er den Weg entlangläuft.

Ich werde den Weg nachher wiederherstellen und die korrekte Beschränkung hinzufügen, dann sollten alle Seiten zufrieden sein.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
Shaun das Schaf (2021-10-07 14:43:24+00:00): Der Weg ist nur an Privatweg eingezeichnet und wird auf der Karte auch entsprechend dargestellt.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:30:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:00:11+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Your mapping quality is fair. No need to ask for a review at future mappings. Only when you feel it might be necessary.
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/112205159
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:30:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Patrick1977Bln (2021-10-22 22:06:42+00:00): disused:railway=rail 
NOT
disused:railway=disused

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:railway

I have corrected it.
eikosm (2021-10-23 09:03:17+00:00): Thanks!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Pink Duck (2021-10-07 10:39:02+00:00): Isn't the SW one more a highway=path foot=yes surface=asphalt kind of thing, not a formal paved route?
Sam_White (2021-10-07 11:58:24+00:00): It's a brick weave path from Dereham Road to the front door of the Cherry Tree. I have connected it to the existing path across Norwich Road, which some mappers might not agree with?
Pink Duck (2021-10-07 12:02:36+00:00): I suggest surface=brick_weave then, but find it surprising if you understood my reference to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/990768300
Pink Duck (2021-10-07 12:04:09+00:00): Typo in earlier post of mine, meant SE one.
Sam_White (2021-10-07 12:57:21+00:00): The SE path is a 'desire path', a shortcut people have been using but very well trodden from the road into the car park. Surface is dirt. Please feel free to correct the tags to something more appropriate.
Patchanka (2021-10-07 15:26:50+00:00): bonjour et bienvenue
merci d'avoir ajouté la recyclerie.
Quelques infos ici : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à faire d'autres mises à jour et à poser des questions si besoin.
bonne journée
maraf24 (2022-01-15 15:20:41+00:00): Skąd pochodzi informacja, że ta droga istnieje? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/990797890
G_P_J (2022-01-15 19:15:50+00:00): Bardzo dziwna zmiana. Nie wygląda na moją, bo nie używam takiego zestawu znaczników dla nowych dróg. Wygląda na przypisanie mojego autorstwa przez kolejne zmiany przylegających dróg. Zmieniłem na "proposed", poprawiłem nazwę ulicy Perłowej, choć nie znalazłem źródła tych nazw (Perłowa, Bursztynowa), poprawiłem dojazd do nieruchomości na północnym wschodzie. Mam nadzieję, że teraz jest ok.
maraf24 (2022-01-15 20:11:42+00:00): Perłowa jest ok, to nowo nadana nazwa.
kartonage (2021-10-08 10:13:40+00:00): Why did you remove the building here?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Lee Carré (2021-10-09 12:13:08+00:00): Smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
iWowik (2021-12-06 04:59:25+00:00): Why do you spam me?
wireguy (2021-11-16 22:07:01+00:00): Hi Pard, the giant relation on this has a broken ring.   Maybe it's time to chop it up into separate smaller simple ways.  What do you think?
pardthemonster (2021-11-16 22:20:43+00:00): What part is broken?
wireguy (2021-11-16 23:00:23+00:00): duplicate ways: 979538610 and 979538611 

repeat same role: 967236752 and 979538611
pardthemonster (2021-11-16 23:56:28+00:00): I see what you mean, I removed the duplicate way and think this resolved the other issue.  What tool are you using to find this?
wireguy (2021-11-17 01:58:10+00:00): It's partly fixed.
967236752  is in the relation twice, and it is a subset of 967234649 which is also in the relation.

found using https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/
but also using josm's validator.
pardthemonster (2021-11-17 02:17:30+00:00): I was not aware of that tool, good to know!  If you have some ideas in mind to optimize these relations, feel free.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
booktiger (2021-10-09 09:12:30+00:00): 您好，我是這四個居住用地的添加者。向您解釋一下這四塊地是怎麼回事。
在北京，每個規劃地塊在規劃和自然委員會的資料內均擁有唯一專屬編號，不是軍隊番號。軍事用地在規劃內會標註為特殊用地，有單獨的顏色，不可能被標註為商業或居住用地。這四塊地全部位於大興新城0102街區，所以規劃編號為DX00-0102-6010到6026，前綴完全一樣，而且預期不久後就會被改掉，我就沒寫完整的編號。具體的名稱需要等到後續房地產商公佈或者建築物建成後才會補充，因此暫時以編號標註。
該地塊的規劃編號來自大興區政府規劃公示：
http://www.bjdx.gov.cn/bjsdxqrmzf/zmhd/wsgssx/gtgs/645815/index.html
上面這張圖是草案公示，在下面這個網站給出了正式版規劃：
https://www.sohu.com/a/440125283_159833
該地塊已於今年五月被三家房地產公司競拍：
https://ggzyfw.beijing.gov.cn/jyxxzpgjggs/20210508/1646480.html
建議您將這四個地塊恢復為原來的狀態。
user_14250389 (2021-10-09 11:56:21+00:00): 原来是这样！抱歉，是我不了解了，大陆的政府讯息我不是很懂要怎么检索，感谢阁下提供情报，我马上修正。
不过亦建议阁下在source中标注来源地址。
若有不得体之处还请斧正。
user_14250389 (2021-10-09 11:59:51+00:00): 我已於新的變更集中修正
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112298211
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:31:40+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 
a few remarks. Don't overlap buildings. (top right)
Clear irrigular white spots are also buildings. (sun reflects on tinned corrigated rooftops)
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/112208799
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
kaciorx (2022-12-03 12:40:37+00:00): Jakie jest źródło tego adresu? Mamy teraz duplikat, a nie udało mi się znaleźć nigdzie informacji żeby to móc potwierdzić
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:28:25+00:00): Hey. Just on top in the middle you missed a building. Bestregards. No hard feelings,
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112209235
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:26:21+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
About your comments. 1 building is difficult to say. I agree that you tag it as under construction.
The building to the right  is correct mapped.
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/112209425
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
eggie (2021-10-07 12:12:16+00:00): Welkom bij OSM,

Probeer als het kan alleen de adresnodes te gebruiken om bedrijven op bij te taggen. Dus niet op de gebouwomtrek.
Verder niet naar de daken kijken. Luchtfoto's zijn schuin genomen.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-10-07 12:35:39+00:00): Bernard.. Het adres en de bedrijfsinfo heb ik van de gebouwomtrek verwijderd en het gebouw hersteld.
Nooit naar de daken kijken. Daar staat niet het gebouw. 
Stel dat het een wolkenkrabber was en de foto was schuingenomen.  Waar staat dan het gebouw?
Waar je het dak ziet? 
MVG
eggie
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:21:29+00:00): Thank you for mapping.
You corrected bad mappings from another mapper. Good. !
Just check as well the accuracy of the mappings. The previous mapper was not that accurate at all and is under our attention.
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/112210016
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Frans S (2021-10-07 12:16:07+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 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/112210506
Carto'Cité (2022-01-13 18:13:19+00:00): Bonjour Mr Lojnat,
Merci pour tes contributions sur les aménagements cyclables. Je me permets une curiosité concernant cette rue https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/13798531
J'ai vu que tu l'avais passée à 30 et en DSC. Est-ce qu'il s'agit d'une zone 30 ? si c'est le cas il faudrait ajouter quelques informations zone:maxspeed=FR:30 et source:maxspeed=FR:zone30. Autre curiosité : est-ce que tu l'as mise en DSC parce qu'elle est en zone 30 ?
Je comprendrais que tu n'es pas les réponses à toutes ces questions :D
N'hésite pas si tu as des questions ou des remarques également de ton côté.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
eggie (2021-10-07 12:29:20+00:00): Dag Bernard,
De naam van het gebouw toevoegen is uiteraard wel correct.
MVG
eggie
literan (2021-10-10 20:59:53+00:00): там именно калитка, зачем вы на тег ворот исправили?

не надо так делать, пожалуйста
vfjj (2021-10-22 17:22:42+00:00): Калитка и ворота
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2021-11-25 18:50:56+00:00): Nu har oprettet bar igen. Jeg cyklede forbi her til aften og den er der altså.
alessandrocarmeli (2021-10-07 20:59:34+00:00): durante l'upload delle modifiche le linee 17/ hanno causato varii problemi. Provvedero la loro risoluzione entro il 08/10/2021
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
mueschel (2021-10-09 18:08:53+00:00): Please don't use the OSM database for tests of your software. Please use the testing API for this purpose.

I reverted this and your previous changesets.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
woodpeck (2021-10-10 11:39:31+00:00): Dear komoot employee, please indicate what kind of written proof you have received in this matter and forward it to the OSMF data working group quoting Ticket#2021101010000074. Thank you.
SomeoneElse (2021-10-10 11:49:20+00:00): I've removed the note here because someone has just written to the DWG suggesting that public access is NOT tolerated.
DP24PH (2021-10-07 11:53:52+00:00): NOTICE: Due to the wide scope of the bus route recalibration, this changeset boundary may extend to NCR and the entire Bicol Region. Your kind understanding is highly appreciated, and thank you very much.


DP24
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-10-08 12:31:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 112262975 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some spam.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5363 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5364 .
Dawid2849 (2021-10-07 11:53:09+00:00): Dzięki, ale naprawdę nie musisz tego robić. Głupio mi, że "wykorzystuję" innych do mapowania w moim mieście, zamiast sam to zrobić...
Dawid2849 (2021-10-07 11:57:15+00:00): Bo tu już więcej zrobili inni niż ja...
Mordechai23 (2021-10-07 11:59:17+00:00): a jakoś tak byłem już tu widokiem to dodalem
gscholz (2021-10-31 07:28:44+00:00): Hi _lbd,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relations of "Quemú Quemú", "Loteo" and "Santa Teresita":

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-63.56555&lat=-36.05925&zoom=14

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=112213260

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido