piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mueschel (2019-02-28 18:40:33+00:00): (excluding 'Zoning' and 'upload_version', they are mentioned)
stevea (2019-02-28 19:01:46+00:00): These tags on these polygons derive from tags on the government data.  If you follow the instructions on the wiki page to access the data (where it says "scroll to Zoning") you can further scroll to "Attributes" where there are some clickable web buttons for each tag.  (Some of these, like the SHAPE* data, appear to be broken, this appears to be a bug with the county's GIS web site).

I believe what you are saying (please correct me if I am wrong) is that "because I can't find a wiki page for these tags, they shouldn't be in OSM."  As I say above, it is true that a discussion usually ensues about which tags from "official" data are or are not appropriate (some are useful, some are not) when a new version is released (as v5 recently was).  However, you haven't made that case.

For the record, I'll say that I find it useful to know, for example in the polygon you quote above, that I find the BASEDTL tag a useful description of how the landuse is actually specifically designated (legally) in this case, the BASENM tag useful similarly, the BASEZN, FULLZN and Zoning tags useful abbreviations of zoning using a countywide standard protocol, the OBJECTID tag helpful for comparison of data between upload_versions, and (as mentioned before) SHAPESTAre and
SHAPESTLen useful geometric devices to accurately capture area and length data of the polygon.

Does that explanation satisfy you?  Would you prefer that this be in our wiki?  (The reason I hesitated to do so before, is, as I have said, these tags do drift slightly between upload_versions, changing slightly as time goes by, and these data are now in their fifth incarnation as upload_version=5).  I really am trying to do the right things here, avoid confusion, document fully and explain this when/where/as required.
mueschel (2019-02-28 19:04:11+00:00): If your community thinks these are important tags, it's fine to have them in the database.
Nonetheless, they should be documented.

I only noticed them because they are new and were not used at all before your edit. 
If such tags appear in a changeset, they are usually added by mistake - in my experience in  at least 90% of the cases. That's why I wrote a comment.
stevea (2019-02-28 19:19:12+00:00): I can certainly update our local wiki to better document these tags and capture the spirit of this conversation.  I agree that would help avoid future confusion.  I appreciate that you DID write a comment (here)!  Sometimes it takes changeset comments to spark the dialog, a good attitude by mature mappers, an explanation of (local) history, somebody reading a wiki page, somebody UPDATING a wiki page, and the positive intentions of "this is what's best for the map" to all blend together to have the best outcome.  I think that's what happened here and I thank you for the good dialog.
stevea (2019-02-28 19:26:23+00:00): Now completed/documented in the wiki link noted above.  Again, thank you, mueschel.
SHARCRASH (2019-05-16 11:36:17+00:00): Hi! Can you explain me why did you disconnect the elements from each other, thus generating extra nodes/data for no reason?
SHARCRASH (2019-05-16 11:37:40+00:00): I'm talking about this https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/673462961/history
SHARCRASH (2019-05-16 11:38:50+00:00): So this doesn't only generate extra useless data but makes it more complicated to add new elements too for other contributors.
pitscheplatsch (2019-02-28 19:46:41+00:00): Hi River Ridge, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several mapped objects (railways), which are still visible in the satellite imagery? Thanks.

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=67630921
pitscheplatsch (2019-02-28 19:49:16+00:00): Hi wriascos, welcome to OSM.

I think your changeset should be reviewed by a local contributor. Several mapped buildings don't look proper ...

See https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=67631412
GinaroZ (2019-03-03 18:19:25+00:00): Am I missing something? These are all clearly names of the shops/POIs. Not sure why you've made the changes as they were tagged in the same way as they are elsewhere.
tms13 (2019-03-04 21:35:21+00:00): No, these are the names of the operators of those shops.  If they are mis-tagged elsewhere, that doesn't mean they should be in Elgin, too.
GinaroZ (2019-03-04 22:33:36+00:00): There's 535 banks in the UK tagged with name=Santander and 1273 pharmacies with name=Boots (compared to ~40 and ~100 uses of operator). I think it's safe to say that name= is the established tagging practice. Not sure what's to be gained by using operator instead of name.
tms13 (2019-03-05 12:00:16+00:00): Millions of flies eat shit, but pure numbers don't make a good argument: I'll not be changing my diet...
rskedgell (2019-03-06 11:58:15+00:00): @GinaroZ also, for most of the Boots stores, they are tagged with name=Boots + operator='Boots UK Limited', so operator was not being used as a substitute for name=* anyway. I'm not sure anyone using Overpass would be happy
to need to query both name and operator.
SomeoneElse (2019-03-06 23:55:01+00:00): @tms13 While I can see the argument for saying that the operator of a particular Boots pharmacy is "Boots", I bet if you walked in the door and asked "what is the name of this shop" you wouldn't get the answer "it has no name" - so in this case I don't think that adding an operator is wrong, but removing the name tag surely is.

Strictly speaking I believe the operator is actually now "The Boots Company PLC", which is a subsidiary of "Walgreens Boots Alliance", though this has changed a few times over the last few years and who knows what will happen next.

Taginfo shows a clear majority for "name" over "operator" (or "brand") here, even if you accumulate all the operator and brand variants:

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=boots#values

In OSM terms, where people can use any tags they like, pure numbers actually DO make a good argument, where they show what tags other mappers use for the same thing.  There are quite a few areas in OSM where you could take a "purist" argument and say that "the current established tagging is wrong (or at least misleading)", but you'd really need to run that past other mappers, perhaps on one of the mailing lists, to try and get other people's views about it before departing from established norms.
Best Regards,
Andy
GinaroZ (2019-03-21 23:34:13+00:00): Ok, I have reverted this changeset and also similar changes in Ayrshire. I think it's sensible to be consistent and follow the established tagging of POIs across the country, instead of just changing a tiny percentage of objects.
Szymson (2019-03-01 10:52:20+00:00): Tu mi chodziło o to, że w tym roku ma powstać rondo https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/563241610, które będzie bezpośrednio powiązane z węzłem Zryw https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8768970 i tędy jest przewidywany największy ruch od Redy do centrum Wejherowa
maraf24 (2019-03-01 11:15:47+00:00): Wydaje mi się, że o tym już była dyskusja-nie mapujemy przyszłości.
rivermont (2019-05-04 05:49:09+00:00): Hi Chris, please do not use the name tag as a descriptor. It is for objects that are actually named something. Also, please refrain from using building=house unless you know that the building is actually being used by a family for living.
Szymson (2019-03-01 11:13:44+00:00): Tutaj wydaje mi się, że to secondary na Obwodowej (droga powiatowa klasy Z) w Redzie i Kosynierów w Rumi było uzasadnione, jako ciąg łączący Gdynię, Rumię i Redę (alternatywa dla DK6)
maraf24 (2019-03-02 16:55:55+00:00): Ta cała droga jest wszak w Redzie, jak więc może łączyć 3 miejscowości?
Szymson (2019-03-02 19:01:42+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=54.5787%2C18.3976%3B54.5946%2C18.3615
Chodzi mi o Kosynierów/Morską
viloan (2019-02-27 21:27:27+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
saintam1 (2019-03-02 09:14:29+00:00): Hi birdeatscake,

postal_code is not the same as addr:postcode -- in Bulgaria there is exactly one post office per post code, The postal_code tag means this is the post office that the post office serves.

It's a fine point :) But they're not identical, I think.
birdymaps (2019-03-05 19:32:05+00:00): Thank you for taking the time to point this out to me! The two tags seem very similar but I appreciate knowing now that they are not identical. I believe I have now added the postal_code tags back to the all of the buildings and address points I removed them from. Again, thanks for letting me know about this practice in Sofia.
Ale_Zena_IT (2019-02-28 07:15:28+00:00): Ciao,
ma nel caso della Polizia Municipale il valore del tag operator non dovrebbe essere quello del comune di appartenenza?
L987 (2019-02-28 10:46:03+00:00): Ciao
la wiki riporta che anche in caso di Polizia Municipale l'operator è sempre Polizia Municipale e non del comune di appartenenza

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity=police?uselang=it
Alecs01 (2019-02-28 19:48:26+00:00): Ciao, anche secondo me ha più senso operator = Comune di xx ciascuna dipende dal proprio comune (o unione di comuni in qualche caso).
sorcrosc (2019-02-28 23:27:16+00:00): +1
schwappo (2023-05-23 18:38:50+00:00): Gut gesehen und eingetragen! Jedoch verstehe ich `religion=christian` auf einer Überwachungskamera nicht.
Reclus (2023-05-24 10:38:50+00:00): „religion=christian“ ist eine Spezifizierung von „operator:type=religious“ und das bezieht sich auf „operator=…“. „operator:type=…“ und „religion:wikidata=…” sind dafür da, dass ein Wert besser maschinell ausgewertet werden können, also nicht nur eine strukturlose Zeichenkette sind.

Einen Wert über eine Verwendung von des Werts im nächsten Schritt als Schlüssel zu verwenden, ist in OpenStreetMap sehr häufig, z.B. beim Thema Parken, und sollte deshalb allgemein verständlich sein.

foo=bar
bar=baz
schwappo (2023-05-24 20:19:24+00:00): Den Aspekt foo=bar – bar=baz hatte ich verstanden. Ich meinte, dass die Daten redundant wären, weil die Kamera in der Nähe einer Kirche sei. Aber ich kann jetzt nachvollziehen, dass es für eine „maschinelle Auswertung“ notwendig ist. Danke
literan (2019-02-28 17:15:30+00:00): криво пишете адреса - посмотрите, как написано на домах. Удалил. Также, теги на русском - только name и description. Остальное вычистил (вместе с "Наши услуги").
JochenOSM (2020-01-26 10:01:24+00:00): Hallo,
diese ways haben keine tags. Schaust du dir das nochmal an?
way 673493716
way 673493715
way 673493714
Szymson (2019-03-01 10:58:34+00:00): Zgłaszałem moją propozycję zmian na forum https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=720599#p720599 ale pozostała ona wtedy bez odzewu
maraf24 (2019-03-01 11:18:28+00:00): Czyli nikt tego nie poparł. 
Te zmiany na secondary od miesięcy budzą kontrowersje-parę razy to już było na czacie.
Szymson (2019-03-01 11:23:32+00:00): Rozumiem, uznałem milczenie za zgodę, bo ta droga jest klasy Z i ma prawie 40 km długości https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8769318
maraf24 (2019-03-02 17:04:30+00:00): Najlepiej znaleźć choć jedną osobę (z doświadczeniem w osm), która by taką zmianę poparła. Gdyby np. szalona_entropia napisał, że wg niego to może być, to ja bym się nie czepiał:)
azakh-world (2019-03-22 15:02:37+00:00): Hello.
When you create a node for a subway station and remove "station" tags from building, please, add the newly created node into stop_area relation. As an example, look at relation 3801709.
pitscheplatsch (2019-02-28 19:49:51+00:00): Hi wriascos, welcome to OSM.

Same here, I think your changeset should be reviewed by a local contributor. Several mapped buildings don't look proper ...

See https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=67631412
muralito (2019-03-01 16:41:29+00:00): Hola Santiago.

Esta calle, si no hubo cambios en los ultimos meses, y sigue siendo una calle con una sola senda para autos, de baja velocidad, y veredas amplias, se mapea como ya estaba, no con una via separada para peatones.
Santiago Merello (2019-03-01 16:46:31+00:00): El cambio no lo hice yo, está hace meses marcado así en openstreetmap, me apareció para que le marque los cruces con las calles que no estaban señalizados y lo hice.
R0bst3r (2019-03-01 08:43:28+00:00): Hallo Funktown,
willkommen bei OSM.
Ich habe deine Änderungen geprüft, sie sehen gut aus, aber Gebäude sollten sich in der Regel nicht überschneiden. Wenn doch, dann sollte geklärt werden mit dem layer Tag (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:layer), welches Gebäude über einem anderen liegt oder wenn du detaillierter werden willst 3D Tagging angewendet werden.
Viel Erfolg und weiterhin viel Spaß!
Grüße
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/67634108
Funktown (2019-03-02 07:37:23+00:00): Hallo R0bst3r,
vielen Dank für deine Rückmeldung! Ich werde mir deine Hinweise zu Herzen nehmen. Es macht auf jeden Fall schon Spaß:-)!
Viele Grüße zurück!
pitscheplatsch (2019-02-28 19:52:45+00:00): Hi ck_updates, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind removing several mapped service ways? Thanks.

See https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=67634238
nevw (2019-02-28 09:42:50+00:00): Why have you shifted the node for Redhead suburb?
Szymson (2019-03-01 10:48:11+00:00): To jest podjazd do planowanego tunelu pod DK6 i linią kolejową https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8768970 , dałem tam tag access=no (znak pionowy zakaz ruchu w obu kierunkach), ale jeżeli tam i tak czy siak nie można wjechać to może być i service
maraf24 (2019-03-01 11:13:32+00:00): Jest service, bo dalszy ciag jest dopiero planowany. Gdyby był w budowie można by wcześniej dać docelową kategorię.
Przystanki przy tej drodze też raczej niedziałają (disabled: by się przydało dać).
Szymson (2019-03-01 11:20:22+00:00): Zgadza się, dalszy ciąg jest planowany i jest związany z budową 2 dodatkowych torów kolejowych z Chyloni do Wejherowa (PKP wykona przekop przez tory kolejowe), a prace mają trwać od 2020 do 2023 roku
flohoff (2019-02-28 07:34:16+00:00): Moin,
hier die Wiese müsste noch in eine multipolygon relation für den landuse=residential aussen rum.

Flo
bielebog (2019-02-28 17:38:59+00:00): Das sähe dann nun so 
  https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1153253
aus. Was meinste?
gsa (2019-03-31 13:46:03+00:00): Wenn bei Project-GC etwas falsch angezeigt wird, dann ist das ein Fehler von Project-GC und muss auch dort behoben werden. Ich glaube, dass die alte Angabe von 3510 m richtig war. Bitte rückgängig machen.
Warin61 (2019-02-28 08:05:11+00:00): Hi,
Way 673509617 made into a multi poyon retlation. It is the only method to have an area with a hole  in it.
cleary (2019-02-28 08:26:04+00:00): Thanks
pitscheplatsch (2019-02-28 19:54:07+00:00): Hi christophercjc2, welcome to OSM. 

Could you please don't remove and redraw more or less the same objects? This deletes the history. Thanks.
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=67635410
Akkurator (2019-03-04 12:41:24+00:00): Danke für die Verwendung von Lifecycle-Tags, anstatt einfach zu löschen. :-)
viloan (2019-02-28 01:59:18+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
interdite (2019-04-05 18:08:50+00:00): Hi lcmortensen,

are power lines like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/121308338 really going through the open sea?
mueschel (2019-03-01 11:15:23+00:00): Hi,
you uploaded some ways with strange tags like this one:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/673521241

Did you forget to remove those tags?

Jan
MelioraCogito (2019-03-07 23:24:20+00:00): Very likely...
user_8759106 (2019-02-28 09:26:19+00:00): Thanks for contributing. lift_gate seems fine. I don't think access private on the barrier makes sense. It would probably be better to split the way (road) at the barrier and mark the section after the barrier as private
ShinesMapper (2019-02-28 20:14:07+00:00): Thanks, done! I made some more changes here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67663007
WoodWoseWulf (2019-02-28 03:55:01+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM - are you sure you meant to tag these two locations as parks? One appears to be a back yard, the other some kind of row house development?

Check the OSM wiki for how we define parks: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark
Wulf4096 (2019-05-05 15:47:16+00:00): Hallo,
du behauptest hier, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115716614 entspreche nicht dem echten Verlauf.
Ich möchte nicht behaupten, dass du damit unrecht hast.
Kennst du eine *zuverlässige* Quelle für den Verlauf?
Laut Geoportal mündet die Lohbek wahlweise in die Schillingsbek an deren Unterführung (davor bzw. auch danach) unter der Julius-Vosseler (vor Ort nicht zu erkennen!) oder unter der Verrohrung Grelckstraße oder irgendwo ganz anders (nach Erinnerung, finde die Karte nicht mehr). Laut Wikipedia ist der Verlauf nach OSM korrekt, aber die können auch abgeschrieben haben.
Warin61 (2019-03-17 05:18:41+00:00): Hi,
The scrub area Relation: 9361368 has included some 'bear rock' areas (I prefer the term 'mainly rock') and lakes. I have edited it with a few new inners for those that are totally enclosed. 

Unfortunately there are a number that cross ways ... More work needs to be done to resolve these issues - I would recommend zooming in more and trying to stick to a more precise definition. Leaving a few blank areas on the map can be a good thing, encourages others to look.
Константин Гам (2019-03-18 22:25:36+00:00): Уважаемый, зачем понижать статус полноценного кармана до service? Вы сломали навигацию... не надо так!
DemoLogin (2019-03-18 23:30:14+00:00): Вы под какой навигатор мапите?
DemoLogin (2019-03-19 09:44:47+00:00): В любом случае спасибо за замечание.

Я откачу подобные правки, так как подразумевалось только указание названий, без изменений их статуса.
DemoLogin (2019-03-20 21:36:37+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68353675
jcr83 (2019-04-12 12:18:27+00:00): Bonjour,
J'ai un doute sur cette contribution. Je pense que l'allée du château de Mougins est située une centaine de mètres plus à l'Est.
al340 (2019-04-13 22:00:39+00:00): En effet, il y a aussi une allée nomée allée du château de Mougins une centaine de mètres plus loin, mais le panneau (situé juste à la sortie du nouveau rond-point) indique bien allée du château de Mougins.
jcr83 (2019-04-16 06:38:17+00:00): Exact, je n'avais pas vu le panneau. Mais c'est bizarre, je vais faire quelques recherches.
mavl (2019-03-09 14:30:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67959806 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2019-03-08 14:18:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67923030 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
user_5359 (2019-03-14 19:10:37+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on the newest version of your node. You take some very unusual keys of the address information.
mavl (2019-03-08 14:17:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67923030 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
Dimacn (2019-03-01 05:55:09+00:00): Здравствуйте. Спасибо за улучшение карты. Но для дворовых проездов надо использовать теги highway=service и living_street=yes  .   Подробно здесь - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway
mavl (2019-03-08 14:18:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67923030 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2019-03-08 14:18:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67923030 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2019-03-08 14:18:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 67923030 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
Matthew Darwin (2019-02-28 13:33:29+00:00): Hi,

You have a lot of street names which are not matching anything in OSM. "Abbott Rue Est" or "Den Haag Promenade".  The street names are always the English version for an address, and here you don't even match the French name.

Could you please review your import?
DannyMcD (2019-02-28 14:16:02+00:00): In addition, imports are supposed to get buy-in from the local community.  Did you do this?
zzptichka (2019-02-28 14:28:43+00:00): Matt, do you have a list of problems so I can go through them?

Danny, I've been importing minor city datasets for a while with local buy-in. Imported this one by extension. If you have concerns let me know.
DannyMcD (2019-02-28 14:47:33+00:00): In terms of problems you,
- overwrote on-the-ground names
- created duplicates for many existing childcare centres
- failed to validate that the centres still existed
- used addr:postal_code instead of addr:postcode, and didn't put a space in addr:postal_code
- failed to validate the addresses, which are sometimes not in an OSM-friendly format.
I am going through this import and validating it.
zzptichka (2019-02-28 14:53:41+00:00): Thanks. I see now it's pretty dirty indeed. Should've gone the task manager way.
Feel free to revert it if it's too much of a trouble, I'll create the TM project instead.
DannyMcD (2019-02-28 15:21:55+00:00): And to be clear, it is great that these centres have been imported - it just would have been nice to have a heads up.  In terms of reverting, I've already done enough validation to make that undesirable.
zzptichka (2019-02-28 15:31:41+00:00): OK, I'll keep that in mind.
Matthew Darwin (2019-03-01 16:17:26+00:00): I fixed more addresses today.
Matthew Darwin (2019-03-01 16:18:11+00:00): What is the location this data came from.  I need to send comments to the city about its crappiness.