piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
hadw (2015-12-30 13:58:27+00:00): According to http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Pakistan I think this should actually be highway=unclassified

Unfortunately, that page doesn't have any guidelines on language, but I would then argue that the default policy applies, which is that you map in the language that actually appears on signs.

Where you get a lot of mapping in English, in Asia, it is generally either because the mapping has been done by non-native mappers, or because it has been done by people in an intellectual elite that is familiar with English.  OSM should be for all the people.
neuhausr (2016-01-08 22:35:48+00:00): Hi, this edit seems more like advertising than entering actual verifiable data: 1) it doesn't include OSM tags for what "Web Design in Minneapolis" supposedly is (office? shop?), 2) this node is in what looks like an apartment building, 3) a similar node with same phone # was entered recently in this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/35981007, which also seems to be in a residential building, 4) the overly long description (and "keywords" in the other changeset) are not standard OSM practice. I suggest you see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice for some tips on this, and make some modifications to your nodes.
orgoj (2015-12-30 07:41:12+00:00): Tišnov - nová silnice na Předklášteříjednosmerky a zakaz vjezdu motorovych vozidel
mapper999 (2015-12-30 09:18:31+00:00): Hallo wegavision,

ich glaube du hast an einigen Stellen Zeichen 274 (zulässige Höchstgeschwindigkeit) mit Zeichen 278 (Ende der zulässigen Höchstgeschwindigkeit) verwechselt.
Beispiele:
- http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3918054054
- http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3079204310

Viele Grüße
mapper999
user_5359 (2015-12-30 10:57:55+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Kann ich die die EInstiegsseite http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a empfehlen, damit Du die Art des Geschäftes, Webseite etc nachtragen kannst. Bei Problemen kannst Du Dich gerne melden.
zimba (2015-12-31 17:35:38+00:00): "oneway=no" ist immer impliziert, wenn nicht extra "oneway=yes" getaggt ist, deshalb muss "...=no" eigentlich nie gesetzt werden.

Passen die strassen an der stelle jetzt, und wir koennen http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/453469 zumachen?
GerdP (2015-12-31 08:02:25+00:00): Hi there!
I found the tag highway=project which is only used here. Why didn't you use proposed or construction ?
user_5359 (2015-12-30 12:26:59+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Ein kleiner Hinweis zu Deiner Änderung: Ein Aussichtspunkt ist etwas anderes als eine Infotafel siehe auch http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a . Willst Du es ändern oder soll ich aktiv werden?
Supaplex (2016-02-07 09:31:16+00:00): 您好：

歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
下面是台灣社群相關的網站，可以加入彼此切磋切磋！

台灣OpenStreetMap網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw

敬祝畫圖愉快！
nesol (2016-01-02 11:14:51+00:00): Beim Edit sind 2 Wege (nodes) deplatziert worden. Die Albertistraße und ein Fußweg vom Altersheim haben nun einen falschen Verlauf. Bei einem weiteren Edit wurde die Maximilianstraße in Mitleidenschaft gezogen.
Bitte um Korrektur.
FxMa (2016-01-02 16:40:54+00:00): Danke
luschi (2016-01-03 15:48:06+00:00): hallo,
du hast in diesem Änderungssatz sicherlich aus versehen den Zebrastreifen(http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1517805057) um einige 100m nach Norden verschoben.
Bitte setze ihn wieder an die richtige Stelle.
Danke
eastender (2016-01-12 20:12:20+00:00): I have noticed this name reversion in OSM from Canary Wharf to Wood Wharf. It’s true that this site is known locally as Wood Wharf and that Canary Wharf Group (CWG) has a web site that refers to that name. However, it seems to me that CWG is quietly dropping the name Wood Wharf in favour of the site becoming an extension to the existing Canary Wharf estate. For example, CWG refers to the site as being “formerly known as Wood Wharf” on its web site here:

http://group.canarywharf.com/portfolio/new-phase

I suspect that it will soon be appropriate to tag the construction site with Wood Wharf as an old name and, if it needs a name before the individual areas are developed, it will be best to simply use the name of Canary Wharf.
peregrination (2016-01-13 14:05:48+00:00): very interesting, I didn't know that. The site didn't have a name when I added it, but I guess what we will have to rename it soon.
numide (2015-12-30 20:20:04+00:00): la source est bing ou survey pas toi, tu es vraiment narcissique
Real Shadowman (2015-12-30 14:05:51+00:00): This road has an alternative so it is not likely that this road will be reconstructed  and therefor I deleted it (see next post).
user_1974520 (2015-12-30 17:48:15+00:00): Sei del luogo e quindi sai che non c'é la costruzione o lo hai visto su bing?
Benvenuto/a
Civitas2260 (2015-12-30 19:01:47+00:00): Ciao Andrea,
Sono un volontario della Fondazione Campo e conosco bene il posto; vicino alla chiesa non c'è l'edificio che c'era sulla mappa.
Di fronte all'ingresso, spostato un po' a sinistra guardando la chiesa c'è un cipresso molto alto che metterò. Appena posso vado su con un GPS Garmin e mi segno le coordinate di diverse case fra cui il castello che non vedo in mappa.
Un saluto Eugenio.
user_1974520 (2015-12-30 19:21:27+00:00): Ciao Eugenio, benvenuto su OpenStreetMap.
Perfetto, verificherò come mai c'era quella costruzione che nella realtá non c'è. Dato che ci sei potresti annotare vie e numeri civici.
Ti consiglio di leggere la guida introduttiva a OpenStreetMap
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Contribute_map_data
Iscriviti pure alla nostra mailing list, per ogni dubbio, domanda sapremo darti una risposta.
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it
a presto Andrea Lattmann
Civitas2260 (2015-12-31 15:47:29+00:00): Ok Andrea, grazie dei consigli.
Annotare le vie sarà dura essendo un borgo quasi disabitato del 1100.. comunque farò il possibile, ciao !
GerdP (2015-12-31 08:27:17+00:00): Hi there!
I wonder why you map the turning_circle twice. I think the way
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388696465
is obsolete and the tag should not be used on ways. What did you try to map?
MMN-o (2016-01-12 23:39:28+00:00): Hello GerdP, I meant to map the turning circle (it is the oval shaped area, clearly separated from the surrounding paths).

The reason I mapped the turning circle twice was purely for rendering, which I thought was a good idea at the time but am not at all convinced of anymore (rendering should adapt to mapping rather than the other way around of course!).

I'm curious what you mean with the tag being obsolete? Perhaps you meant redundant? Then perhaps, but I'd rather remove the single node version.

I know the wiki says not to use highway=turning_circle on an area, but in this case I would argue it is appropriate.
MMN-o (2016-01-12 23:40:05+00:00): Clearly separated on-site (or on bird's-view imagery), I mean.
GerdP (2016-01-13 05:32:41+00:00): Thanks for getting back on this. I wrote the way is obsolete, obsolete means can be removed. The node with highway=turning_circle implies that there is an area like this. Why do you think that this turning_circle is special?
MMN-o (2016-01-18 13:17:23+00:00): Mostly it is that the turning circle actually has that specific area. And I would preferrably remove the single-node one.

The fences along the side go along the edge of the turning circle and the footways/paths visibly end on the edge of the turning circle. It works sort of like a load/unload area for the nearby building "Klossen" etc.

Am I crazy for thinking the one with area=yes should be the one mapped? :)

Having the single node removed would also mean removing the ways that go inside the area of course, since the turning circle is available for anyone going by foot or coming with a delivery vehicle etc.
GerdP (2016-01-18 14:06:34+00:00): If the area is for walking I suggest to use highway=footway(or maybe pedestrian) + area=yes. I would not remove the other ways then.
dvdhoven (2016-01-09 20:47:34+00:00): Je moet niet wegen en fietspaden weghalen, die er nog gewoon zijn. De Havenstraat ligt er nog gewoon, dus geen geschiedvervalsing plegen door hem voortijdig weg te halen.
Vrijdag 8 januari 2016 heb ik er nog overheen gefietst.
Ook dat voetpad wat je ingetekend hebt, klopt niet. Het is nog steeds een voetpad.
Langs de IJssel is voetgangersgebied.
De Havenstraat kan ook nog steeds door fietsers worden gebruikt. Bij het tijdelijke parkeerterrein bij het Koelhuis is een doorsteek, die fietsers kunnen gebruiken.
Ik heb de Havenstraat + fietspaden ingetekend.
dvdhoven (2016-01-09 20:48:29+00:00): Ik bedoelde het voetpad aan de kant van het waterwerk, dat is nog steeds fietspad
eggie (2018-11-24 07:50:37+00:00): Opnieuw Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Senihtu (2026-01-19 06:26:47+00:00): weiterer Kleinkram für Ortskundige:
An Friedrich-List-Straße gibt es keine stop_position
An den Platformnodes der Ostschule steht (seit 10 Jahren) line=810.
kann das weg?
Jacek Placek (2015-12-30 15:36:36+00:00): Czesc, drobne pytanie, czemu kasujesz lasy z numeracją odziałów?
radmar (2015-12-30 16:49:12+00:00): Dzień Dobry.
Dlaczego kasujesz oznaczenia oddziałów leśnych?
Jeśli nawet gdzieś lasy po imporcie się zdublowały, to należy zostawiać informację o oddziałach leśnych, a nie je usuwać.
Na pewno nie było to zjawisko tak powszechne, jak to wynika z Twoich zmian!

Na podstawie jakich źródeł dodajesz drogi leśne? Nie zgadzają się one z ortomapą.
John Coe (2015-12-30 15:43:19+00:00): Village at the Peaks now open.
OSM_GEO_Validator (2025-09-14 15:03:31+00:00): Hi Buddy,

Do you have any source to support access=destination on Cunningham Street? as i didn't find any clue / update in news or Street-level imagery?

The access tag and the unfinished bus route links on Eden Street and Cunningham Street prevented me from updating this area in accordance with Esri World Imagery and Mapillary.

Could you please review and update as per reality? as I was under the impression that you possess some local knowledge regarding that area, reference. - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165928652

#osmethiopia - Could someone from the Ethiopian community please take a look?

------------------------------------------

Hola, amigo,

¿Tienes alguna fuente que respalde la opción "access=destination" en la calle Cunningham? No encontré ninguna pista ni actualización en las noticias ni en las imágenes de la calle.

La etiqueta de acceso y los enlaces de rutas de autobús sin terminar en Eden Street y Cunningham Street me impidieron actualizar esta área según Esri World Imagery y Mapillary.

¿Podrías revisar y actualizar la información según la realidad? Me da la impresión de que tienes algún conocimiento local sobre esa zona. Referencia: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165928652


#osmethiopia – ¿Podría alguien de la comunidad etíope echar un vistazo?
cadsauxk (2016-01-02 03:28:57+00:00): Olá, de onde você tira os nomes que você insere? Obrigado.
Volker Fröhlich (2017-10-10 15:24:17+00:00): Woher stammt der Name "Drei Bäume Berg"? Woher stammt der Gipfel überhaupt? Siehe http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1161838
Georges62 (2016-03-09 08:44:53+00:00): en cours mp 9/3/2016
letihu (2016-01-07 11:02:58+00:00): Hier sind wahrscheinlich 2 gleiche Datensätze hochgeladen worden. 627 doppelte Punkte sind hier durch doppelte Häuser entstanden.
letihu (2016-01-07 11:19:29+00:00): Hier in diesem Datensatz sind es 320 Punkte ohne tags
atpl_pilot (2016-01-09 09:11:14+00:00): Danke, leider ist mir der Computer mehrmals beim Upload eingefroren. Vermutlich ist das der Grund, warum es zu dem Fehler kam. Ich gehe noch einmal die alten Changsets-Gebiete von mir durch und kontrolliere das mit dem JOSM-Validator.
letihu (2016-01-09 11:05:46+00:00): Den Teil habe ich fertig ;-)
Den anderen Bereich hast du ja schon gefixt.
ich benutze Keep Right für die Fehlersuche. Hab ich in Josm mit eingebunden. 
Den Josm-Validator kenne ich noch nicht.
maning (2016-02-02 18:01:49+00:00): What does "Dog CommoNation" mean?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388732573/history
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-12 03:51:56+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/196934054/history has source:maxspeed = practical that was added in this edit
Can you explain meaning of source:maxspeed=practical ?

Is it mistagged maxspeed:practical= - realistic estimate of possible speed, lower than legal speed limit? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed:practical
woodpeck (2022-01-30 21:13:35+00:00): Dear StijnRR, a long time ago you added the relations "Tienbundersbos Blauwe rechthoek" and "Tienbundersbos Gele bol" in this changeset. Now the DWG has a complaint from a landowner saying that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/339199641 - which is part of both these relations - is "unofficial" and "on their property" and they would like to have it removed from OSM. Can you verify if that path is really part of the signposted hiking relations (in which case the land owner would have to take it up with the organisation who defines the hiking routes), or if this was perhaps included by mistake?
StijnRR (2022-01-31 19:00:15+00:00): Google Streetview tells that at least in januari 2021 the path still existed and was part of those waymarked hiking routes. I can't find any information on the internet that the routes had to be changed. The path is not an official footpath though, so it's not impossible that the (new) landowner revoked the permission for that path on his property. But I don't live that nearby that I can go and take a quick look.
StijnRR (2022-01-31 19:02:09+00:00): And are you sure it's about that path, because on the other side of the Tienbundersweg, another path has been closed and removed recently from OSM. If people are using an older version on their GPS or so, it might still be there.
woodpeck (2022-01-31 19:02:19+00:00): Thank you. Do you know which organisation is responsible for the signposted routes? Maybe I could contact them and ask if the routes have changed.
woodpeck (2022-01-31 19:06:06+00:00): Yes, I have seen the other removed path which looked like a shortcut but the land owner has sent a screenshot and specifically circled *this* path.
StijnRR (2022-01-31 19:23:27+00:00): Natuurpunt is a big organisation, but this is the local branch: https://www.facebook.com/NatuurpuntTieltWinge/
PlaneMad (2016-02-10 10:08:19+00:00): Nice edits here! Have made some improvements in the area like adding the sector names as neighborhoods based on the addresses you added. Can you verify if they are correct?
PlaneMad (2016-02-10 10:28:30+00:00): If you are interested to know how the highway tagging scheme in OSM works, check out http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India:Tags/Highway
pavanvijjapu (2016-02-12 13:52:44+00:00): Sector 5 and 8 are correct. Sector 4 is actually sector 3
pavanvijjapu (2016-02-14 05:41:15+00:00): I studied the guidelines of Highway tagging, I have a doubt in this regard, the guidelines state that NH should not be used to refer highways within the city, so does it mean that the NH 16 beside Sector 4 MVP should be renamed?
PlaneMad (2016-02-16 19:04:51+00:00): Usually NH's would bypass the city, but looks like in Vizags case this is correct. Or have they made a bypass? in which case the trunk route should be rerouted through that.
pavanvijjapu (2016-02-21 15:59:16+00:00): There is bypass but not a prominent one. Its a two lane road and not termed as national highway for now though there are plans to make it a six lane road. For now I suppose its better to leave it as mentioned.
kreuzschnabel (2017-11-29 07:21:49+00:00): Nach http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/291975 nehme ich mal an, dass „Romantische Straße“ nicht der Name des Waldwegs ist. Entfernt. Der Wanderweg ist schon als Routenrelation erfasst.
whb (2017-11-30 00:41:35+00:00): Der Hinweis ist ein Jahr älter als der Weg von cepesko:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53337694/history
kreuzschnabel (2017-11-30 07:06:48+00:00): Stimmt, der Name kam schon in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/26520146 dazu.
joost schouppe (2016-06-24 15:09:08+00:00): Een beetje een gekke naam die je aan dit gebied hebt gegeven, of heet het echt zo?
Jakka (2016-06-24 15:25:29+00:00): Om te vermijden dat men via luchtbeelden dit anders gaat intekenen. Wordt industiegebied. KMO zonz Bramier naam nog niet 100%
joost schouppe (2016-06-27 06:48:40+00:00): ik zou dan toch eerder voor landuse=construction + name=Bramier gaan (eventueel + fixme=controleer naam) kiezen
aceman444 (2020-06-07 15:14:24+00:00): Dobry den, prosim neposuvajte budovy so source=kapor2, ktore su importovane z katastra a su vacsinou umiestnene spravne. Neviem preco sa Vam v roku 2015 javilo podla Bingu, ze budovy treba posunut. Ale dnes je je aj podla Bingu aj inych presnejsich snimok vidiet, ze posun nebol potrebny. Vsetko teda musim opravit.
FishDoctor (2020-06-07 18:58:06+00:00): Dobry den. Je to 4 roky stary changeset a s OSM som vtedy nejako zacinal, takze Vam uz na otazku, preco som to posunul neodpoviem. Mozno bol Bing posunuty, mozno som ho nemal zarovnany. Neviem. Dnes som uz mudrejsi a mame presnejsie a aktualnejsie podklady. A aj system prace s nimi mam uz davno iny, takze verim, ze teraz uz taketo kiksy nebudu. Pozri napr. Rinzle a Krasnany. Za tie stare posuny sorry.
aceman444 (2020-06-11 18:56:30+00:00): Dobre, dakujem :)
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-12-30 22:57:01+00:00): Co to za reverty?
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-12-30 22:57:41+00:00): Innymi słowy, proszę o wyjaśnienie.
daviesp12 (2015-12-31 01:50:56+00:00): Nie wolno mi uzywać WMS (z geoportal.pl)
BeKri (2015-12-31 17:52:16+00:00): Hallo rumenAA,
Du bist sicher, daß das Strassenstück
Fürstenrieder Straße 263 (mit Nummer) heißt ? Ich bin mir sicher, das nicht
Die 	Pählstraße 6a ist tatsächlich Teil der Hausnummer 14 ?
Gruß und guten Rutsch
derBeKri
rumenAA (2016-01-01 16:58:19+00:00): Hallo BeKri,

ich arbeite in der Fürstenrieder Str. 263.

Schöne Grüße
BeKri (2016-01-02 17:59:34+00:00): Das ist ok, dass Du dort arbeitest, beantwortet aber nicht die Fragen.
WARUM benennst Du
Weg: (365508921) in "Fürstenrieder Straße 263 " um ? Das ist definitiv FALSCH (auch wenn Du dort arbeitest).
Auch bezweifle ich, dass Knoten: 2411477908 (Pählstrasse 6a) bei der Nummer 14 ist, wo Du es hingeschoben hast.
Könnte es sein, dass Du Dich vertan hast ?
Gruss
derBeKri
rumenAA (2016-01-06 15:53:06+00:00): Lieber BeKri,

wünsche Dir auch ein Frohes und Gesundes Neues Jahr.

Leider hast Du recht. Ich wollte eigentlich nur in der Fürstenrieder Str. 263 eine Firma eintragen.

Jetzt habe ich bedenken was erneut zu ändern…. 

Kannst Du mir bitte helfen?!?!? 

Vielen Dank im Voraus!
BeKri (2016-01-07 10:05:21+00:00): Servus,
Hmmm, klar kann ich Dir helfen, möchte Dich aber ehrlich gesagt ermutigen, es selber noch mal zu probieren,
es kann "nix kapuutt gehen" ;-)
Es sei dem, Du möchtest mit OSM "nie wieder was zu tun haben", dann gib kurz Bescheid, dann ändere ich es, wie ich meine, dass es richtig ist.
Gruss BeKri
rumenAA (2016-01-07 18:49:35+00:00): Hi, ich wollte primär nur die Firma eingeben. Bei google war dies einfacher 😃.
Ich wäre Dir sehr dankbar wenn Du meine Änderungen rückgängig machen kannst. 

Nächstes mal werde ich mich vor ganz genau einlesen.

Vielen Dank im Voraus!

Schöne Größe!
BeKri (2016-01-14 07:13:59+00:00): Servus,
na die Firma hast Du doch eingegeben,
es wird nur nicht alles dargestellt,
dass denke ich war Dein Manko.
Ich korregiere es dann mal in deinem Sinn.
Schöne Grüße und trau Dich ;-)
GerdP (2015-12-31 08:12:49+00:00): Hallo!
Mir ist der Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388787816
mit highway=turning_circle aufgefallen. 
Dieses Tag dient eigentlich dazu, die Mitte des Wendepunktes zu markieren,
sprich, man zeichnet den Weg bis zur Mitte und gibt den Knoten ein highway=turning_circle 
Macht aus meiner Sicht auch mehr Sinn, denn man fährt ja nicht am Rand entlang.
aseerel4c26 (2016-01-01 16:56:36+00:00): Hi Gerd, danke für deinen Kommentar! - 

Okay, vielleicht meinte ich es hier zu gut (vorher war es eine Straße mit Kringel am Ende - wie [dort](https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24780763#map=19/50.05293/9.06509). Allerdings hatte ich ja extra area=yes angefügt, um zu verdeutlichen, dass es eben nicht nur der Rand ist. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/388696465 hier ist Gleiches. - Ich habe es [umgebaut](https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36301489). Wie findest du es so? Dann baue ich die anderen auch noch um.

 -   Übrigens sah ich deinen Kommentar hier nur per Zufall (per OSM-Website bekommt man leider noch keine Benachrichtigung über neue Kommentare).

- Viele Grüße!
GerdP (2016-01-01 19:28:24+00:00): Danke, ich finde es so besser. Wegen der
Benachrichtigung solltest Du mal Deine Spam-Konfiguration prüfen (lassen), OSM verschickt auf jeden Fall eine Nachricht.
Ciao, 
Gerd
gendy54 (2021-04-13 18:37:43+00:00): Bonjour,

A quoi correspondent des rectangles auxquels ils manquent le tag principal.
SomeoneElse (2017-04-01 09:07:39+00:00): Hi Stu,
To my knowledge, none of these roads "have numbers" in any meaningful sense.  They were already tagged with an "official_ref" (used by and only useful to the council).  There are no signs, so C93 through Flaxton isn't anything that you can "refer" to.
Best Regards,
Andy
Stu Mitch (2017-04-01 09:58:14+00:00): Hi Andy, I wondered about this. Occasionally you see these on signs but yes it is only occasional. They are references by local authorities, so if you had to report to a council it could be useful or if you wanted to query council work. Thanks for the comment though. 

Regards, Stu
SomeoneElse (2017-04-01 10:48:19+00:00): There is (or used to be) at least one signed "C" road near Helmsley, but they're pretty rare.
It would certainly be possible (and not that difficult) to render "official_ref" on a map, but it doesn't make much sense to do so on a general purpose one.  As an example, the "prow_ref" on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/266477112 is shown on https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=16&lat=53.23708&lon=-1.10346 - it would be possible to do something similar for offical_ref.
Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2018-10-21 16:57:29+00:00): Just for info, someone's since changed the C road refs here to "highway_authority_ref".  If you want to see that you can look at https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=16&lat=54.05272&lon=-0.96757 , which shows them.
neuhausr (2016-01-11 21:07:22+00:00): wow, are you planning to do all of these? :)
user_5359 (2015-12-31 14:09:20+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Is your company really a road?
manings (2016-01-04 09:20:39+00:00): some of your edits, overlapped with existing data.  can you have a look again and fix.  tnx.!
manings (2016-01-18 06:24:45+00:00): Overlapping roads: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/90800151/history

Please fix.
cquest (2016-04-03 22:44:17+00:00): changeset reverted: only orphan nodes at same lat/lon
GOwin (2015-12-31 07:35:08+00:00): Nice one! Thanks.
TagaSanPedroAko (2015-12-31 12:00:53+00:00): You are welcome for any feedback. I will continue to map other jeepney routes around Batangas City, and also bus routes to Manila etc.
lokejul (2016-01-29 05:34:22+00:00): The 2 turn lanes from eastbound Fraser Hwy toward northbound Mt Lehman Rd are not physically separate from the other eastbound lanes of Fraser Hwy. That's why eastbound Fraser Hwy is already tagged 5 lanes with two left-turn lanes.
Alecs01 (2016-01-02 16:11:41+00:00): Something went wrong here, you created 10k of empty nodes in the same spot, an editor's bug maybe?
Wright One (2016-04-05 12:09:32+00:00): It seems there is a bug which causes creation of unwanted empty nodes in a particular coordinate. Avoid using editor provided by "http://wemap.qq.com" (An OSM-like clone targetted to China only)
Alecs01 (2016-01-02 16:14:26+00:00): Same here, as in previous changesets 36278107 36277103 36276786 36275511 lots of overlapping empty nodes
cquest (2016-04-03 22:15:32+00:00): orphans nodes reverted
trigpoint (2016-09-16 12:39:10+00:00): I have removed the name node you added, as the name was already on the beach area way