piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2020-05-08 18:58:13+00:00): Olá zeninguem,
Notei que todos os seus conjuntos de alterações recentes atuais têm o comentário "Aterto pelo Bing". Embora isso possa ser tecnicamente correto, isso realmente não ajuda outros mapeadores a entender o que você está fazendo. Você pode tentar adicionar um pouco mais de detalhes aos seus comentários?
Cumprimentos,
Andy
Arnebius (2020-06-13 10:46:24+00:00): Proszę pamiętać o dodawaniu pełnych danych adresowych nie tylko numeru adresu ale ulicy, nazwy miejscowości oraz jeśli znamy również kodu pocztowego.
aDSAT (2020-05-11 18:28:01+00:00): Correction, “Bing aerial imagery” was the aerial imagery source for this changeset. Yandex Panorama was used for ground level imagery.
PlaneMad (2023-05-29 16:07:28+00:00): Hi Rahul, many thank for your contributions around Karamana.

I was unable to verify most of the POIs on the group and it looks like you may have added fictional locations to the map. I'm cleaning them up, so as to not mislead others who may be looking for genuine places.
Diógenes de Sinope (2020-05-09 18:38:05+00:00): Bem-vindo ao OpenStreetMap Celson da Silva, 

estive a rever as edições feitas no OpenStreetMap do mapa em Luanda, enquanto o fazia, as alterações feitas neste conjunto de alterações destacaram-se para mim em particular, os nós da estrada terciária 'Avenida P Marien Ngouabi' foram distorcidos neste conjunto de alterações, tomei a liberdade de os realinhar

pode querer rever as etiquetas que acrescentou ao nó que estabeleceu para representar o "Edificio 88", acrescentou uma etiqueta que designa o nó como "parque", mas com base no que se pode ver através de imagens de satélite, parece um edifício - [ https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Tag:leisure%3Dpark ]

consulte o wiki do OpenStreetMap [ https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Main_Page ] se precisar de ajuda ou se quiser entrar em contacto comigo, terei todo o prazer em dar uma ajuda

feliz mapeamento
Puxan (2021-02-23 16:13:26+00:00): Hola @Gaby-Samu,  estoy verificando mapeos en Burundi. Hace unos 9 meses pusiste un nodo con la etiqueta de "emergengy=water_tank". Tienes algun conocimiento de la zona para decirlo? o no te diste cuenta de lo que ponias?   Te ruego que me contestes por si hay que eliminar la etiqueta, que puede llevar a confusiones.    Joaquim
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84911587
freeExec (2020-05-09 09:13:01+00:00): Парк это не любой кусочек дорожки и зелени во дворе. Не нужно его везде лепить. Если вам очень хочется то обозначайте непосредственно деревья. Вашу правку я откатил.
gall455 (2020-05-09 19:34:23+00:00): так я и не лепила, парков в нашем городе всего 5-6, остальное детские площадки, тренажеры и просто насаждения деревьев
freeExec (2020-05-09 20:01:34+00:00): И парки у вас были и деревья, которые накрывали всё включая здания. Так делать не нужно. Площадки детский у вас на всю свободную территорию, это тоже не верно. Не видите конкретную зону площадки - ставьте в центр точку. Это будет правильней.
naresksv (2020-05-11 07:02:01+00:00): Hi,
Thank you for the correction. I shall look at simplifying geometry for my future edits. 
Regards,
naresksv.
camelCaseNick (2020-05-10 00:43:13+00:00): Hey,
have you removed wikidata=Q2972413 by accident or on purpose?
CamelCaseNick
IDKS (2020-05-11 18:14:12+00:00): Hello, the change merged a lot of features wit rocks, forests, scrub and they do not render properly. Can you please revert or fix it?
aDSAT (2020-05-11 18:09:28+00:00): Correction, "Bing aerial imagery" was the aerial imagery source for this changeset along with ground level imagery from Yandex Panorama
m@rio (2020-06-28 11:27:57+00:00): Cześć Marcin Grzegorzek,
prośba o podanie źródła nazwy drogi między Pławnem a Zielonką dodanej przez Ciebie w tym zestawie zmian.
szydzio (2021-03-20 16:19:54+00:00): Nazw miejscowości które łączy dana droga nie wpisujemy w tag name. W/w nazwy usunąłem.
bbmiller (2020-05-11 13:56:21+00:00): Thanks for contributing to OSM! Your changes look good.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84913793
Frans S (2020-05-16 11:40:49+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. (see my PM)
about this task. Please do not connect nodes of buildings to other features like highways and residential areas.
Pay also attention on the warnings on the triangle on the right hand menu and solve them if possible
Best regards
BáthoryPéter (2023-09-06 15:17:57+00:00): Nem emlékszel esetleg, hogy ez a kút melyik utcában volt? A Sörház utcán biztos nincs, illetve a Vár utca kereszteződésében van egy másik. Erős a gyanúm, hogy ez annak lehet a duplikációja, bár a Varga utcán nem jártam.
Petró Tamás (2023-09-09 09:05:12+00:00): Nem tudom, kozkutak.hu bejelentés alapján vehettem fel..
BáthoryPéter (2023-09-09 20:39:55+00:00): Köszi, beírtam forrásnak a kozkutak.hu-t, és fixmebe a sejtésemet. Jövőre járok erre, ha még emlékezni fogok rá, megnézem.
Alan Bragg (2020-05-24 12:08:42+00:00): Thanks for adding buildings. It's very easy to make square buildings. Please read instructions.
user_5359 (2020-05-09 06:57:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
user_5359 (2020-05-09 06:53:01+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please noticed: An address is part of the (main) building, not of the highway (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7499218156) or property. An address isn't a name (use addr:full or the 5 details keys insetad). And a street doesn't have a name "Home"
abrensch (2020-05-10 08:12:22+00:00): Hallo stoerte,

was tust Du denn da?

Hälst Du Abbiegebeschränkungen zwischen Strassen und Strasenbahnschienen wirklich für erforderlich?

Mindestens dieses Geradeausfahrverbot hier zerstört aber das PKW-Routing über diese Kreuzung:
 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11082595

Schaust Du's mal an?

Danke und Gruss, Arndt
stoerte (2020-05-10 16:43:06+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, ist mir beim Drüberschauen wohl entgangen.
Zwingend erforderlich ist es aber tatsächlich nicht, da gebe ich dir Recht.
phidauex (2020-05-09 18:56:15+00:00): Hi, the road you removed was tagged "highway = service" and "service = driveway" which means it is a driveway - these are used by delivery services and emergency services for figuring out access to homes, can you please restore it? Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84915447
KSellers66 (2020-05-10 20:59:20+00:00): It *was* a driveway that led to a house that burned down 10 years ago and was not rebuilt.  Trust me, no deliveries are taking place there.
phidauex (2020-05-09 18:58:56+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contributions to the map. Is the road you deleted truly gone? IE, not there anymore at all? If not, then being tagged "highway = track" is appropriate, because that is for unmaintained agricultural and forest roads. If the road is present, but you couldn't drive a 4wd vehicle down it, then it could be downgraded to highway = path. Usually if something is present on the ground it shouldn't be deleted from the map, just adjusted to accurate tagging.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84915656
KSellers66 (2020-05-10 20:56:14+00:00): I can see why you would ask that, based on imagery.  The part that was deleted is behind a locked gate and leads only to property that I own.  Most maps of the area - correctly - do not show it as anything.
Markus Apple (2020-05-08 20:46:46+00:00): Partially mapped (I ran out of time). I had to redo a number of the previously created outlines and move streets around as they did not match the underlying map.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-01-17 23:41:36+00:00): Proszę, nie wprowadzaj fałszywych nazw
ParamPamP (2020-05-08 22:05:06+00:00): Состояние дорожки и применённые теги описаны в заметке https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Pavel%20Zubkou/diary/392992
Shaun das Schaf (2020-05-10 11:03:17+00:00): Hi tbkrtz, wäre statt amenity=bench (von dir schon entfernt) und highway=footway nicht vielleicht leisure=bleachers angebrachter?
Soweit ich weiß, ist das ja die Tribüne für die Greifvogelshow. Was meinst du?
tbkrtz (2020-05-12 07:40:33+00:00): Hey Shaun das Schaf, habe es korrigiert, danke für den Hinweis! 
Grüße 
tbkrtz
Djminisite (2020-05-08 23:36:01+00:00): I feel like Haswell Gardens park is better off marked as a playground as it fits the description at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=playground quite well.

Thanks for sorting out the other park though
SomeoneElse (2020-05-08 22:34:34+00:00): Although the changeset comment says "removed park" you haven't actually removed it - just made the area smaller so that it only includes the pub.
The way I interpret the latest comment on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81607853 and elsewhere is that _none of it_ is a park.
To map a pub beer garden I'd suggest "leisure=garden; garden=beer_garden; access=customers" or similar.
Best Regards,
Andy
Djminisite (2020-05-08 23:33:39+00:00): Thanks Andy, I would concur - the area round the front of the pub is predominantly the pub car park! I'd certainly suggest a survey to confirm if there is any beer garden / park features nearby

Thanks
AurélienQ (2023-02-17 14:33:36+00:00): Hi, 
I saw that for the French part of the Pyrenees tunnel of the High-speed Perpignan-Figueras, you named it in Catalonia as local name. But the local name is French because it's in France. 
So can you explain me why ?
Patrick1977Bln (2023-02-17 16:03:02+00:00): Salut ;-),
that was three years ago and was not intentional. In Spain, I renamed the railway line according to the standard there. You can rename the line again in France.
AurélienQ (2023-02-17 19:13:24+00:00): D'accord tu es francophone.
Ok donc je fais ça.
Merci pour la réponse !
Geofreund1 (2020-08-26 18:02:51+00:00): Hallo stoerte,
in Dessau sind derzeit ziemlich viele Abbiegebeschränkungen im Zusammenhang mit den service ways, auf denen Bahnen und Busse fahren, eingetragen. Ich finde das etwas unübersichtlich und schwer auszuwerten. Mein Vorschlag wäre, diese service ways mit access=no und bus=yes zu taggen. Damit könnte man auf die Abbiegebeschränkungen verzichten.
Awania Morish (2020-05-09 15:07:54+00:00): you have added the park in the wrong place thanks for mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84918460
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-02-16 13:50:32+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/486838483/history

You added shop=restaurant there.

Have you intended to map a restaurant?

Or place selling equipment for restaurants?

Or something else?
GinaroZ (2020-05-10 13:47:38+00:00): Hi, thanks for the adding the post office. I've removed this shop you added - https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7499485195/history - as it's a duplicate of the one here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/346321054
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-01-10 11:17:21+00:00): Ca you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3512145 ?
mariotomo (2022-10-01 15:26:26+00:00): all ways added here have been removed as non matching reality.
ovruni (2020-05-09 19:12:00+00:00): Hola
Gracias por tu interés en editar en OSM.
La etiqueta correcta para manzanas es "place=city_block"[0], "building=yes" está destinada para edificaciones de manera individual. Ademas, otros objetos como colegios o mercados tienen sus respectivas etiquetas, por favor no retirarlas para colocar building=yes, ni tampoco eliminar otros objetos que fueron creados por otros usuarios de tal forma que se pierdan información como la de restaurantes y hoteles. Por los motivos mencionados anteriormente he revertido y modificado algunas de tus ediciones.
Cualquier consulta que tengas puedes comunicarte con la comunidad de OSM en Perú por nuestro grupo en Telegram o la lista de correos: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Per%C3%BA#Comunidad
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:place%3Dcity_block
fkv (2021-04-17 20:22:28+00:00): Ist mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7499550855 das schon länger auf der anderen Straßenseite gemappt Kreuz gemeint?
TBKMrt (2021-04-18 08:38:56+00:00): Das ist schon so lange her, dass weiß ich nicht mehr. 
Kann sein, kann genau so gut auch nicht sein. StreetView nach (https://www.google.at/maps/@48.2139175,15.4992668,3a,75y,89.95h,78.84t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s0nYLXo2Cts4CFKT3aXr7JA!2e0!7i16384!8i8192) würde ich dir recht geben, aber ich weiß es nicht mehr.
Ich habe mal https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2627935 erstellt. Wenn ich das nächste Mal in der Gegend bin und mich erinnere versuche ich nachzusehen.
mariotomo (2020-11-03 16:17:28+00:00): Alvarado, esto es terrible ... cuántas casas has mapeado así?  tienes intención de mejorarlas, o piensas dejarlo como tarea a los demás maperos?
Alvarado2510 (2021-02-14 05:19:59+00:00): Saludos, quizás pueda haber diferencia entre las imágenes aéreas, de Esri y la nueva conocida en el grupo Maxar, revisare para ver si hay diferencias y corregire.
mariotomo (2021-04-02 21:08:56+00:00): sí, quizás hay diferencia entre … vemos … Maxar, Bing y Esri están todas de acuerdo.  así que no será que la diferencia esté entre las fotos y tu propias intenciones?  lo que estás mapeando no corresponde con David.
ovruni (2020-05-09 19:07:36+00:00): Hola
Gracias por tu interés en editar en OSM.
La etiqueta correcta para manzanas es "place=city_block"[0], "building=yes" está destinada para edificaciones de manera individual. Ademas, otros objetos como colegios o mercados tienen sus respectivas etiquetas, por favor no retirarlas para colocar building=yes, ni tampoco eliminar otros objetos que fueron creados por otros usuarios. Por los motivos mencionados anteriormente he revertido y modificado algunas de tus ediciones.
Cualquier consulta que tengas puedes comunicarte con la comunidad de OSM en Perú por nuestro grupo en Telegram o la lista de correos: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Per%C3%BA#Comunidad
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:place%3Dcity_block
gileri (2020-05-09 09:13:32+00:00): Bonjour,

Les bandes podotactiles ne sont plus présentes sur ce passage ? Autant les autres tags n'ont pas vraiment de sens, merci de les avoir enlevés, autant je pense qu'il faut laisser tactile_paving si présent sur le terrain.
Ludovic Drouard (2020-05-09 12:21:53+00:00): Pour corriger le conflit railway / highway remonté par Osmose, j'avais supprimé les tags relatif au highway... Mais effectivement, après vérification sur le wiki, ces 2 POI semblent partager un certain nombre de "Key" (ce qui est aussi vrai dans la réalité).
J'ai restauré et corrigé au passage les incohérences (crossing=uncontrolled => crossing=traffic_signals) entre le railway=crossing et le highway=crossing qui font référence au même chemin (une erreur de saisie que j'ai faite à l'époque).
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-11 06:49:38+00:00): fixme=eee ?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/801793286/history
Alecs01 (2020-05-12 10:23:25+00:00): Ciao, se intendi dire che le strade pedonali del centro (es. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23185944/history) sono percorribili da biciclette dovresti aggiungere il tag bicycle=yes e NON trasformarle in massa in ciclabili, che è un'altra cosa. Per me va fatto il revert di questo gruppo di modifiche.
EMANUELE CAPRARA (2020-05-12 15:38:58+00:00): Ok. Corretto. Provvedo alle modifiche. Sono alle mie prime esperienze, ho ricevuto istruzioni non precise e me ne scuso. Vedo di risistemare la definizione delle strade pedonali del centro. La modifica apportata nasceva dal fatto che, contrariamente alle norme (CdS e norme Comunali), quasi tutte le aree pedonali del centro non prevedevano l'accesso alle bici. Non c'era nemmeno un accesso ciclistico a Piazza Maggiore. Stiamo aggiornando per la Consulta Comunale della Bicicletta la rete di ciclabili e percorsi ciclopedonali che era carente di molte indicazioni e collegamenti
Alecs01 (2020-05-12 15:59:46+00:00): Perfetto, grazie della risposta! Guardo più tardi se riesco a corregere io, farlo con JOSM è molto più rapido che con ID.
Alecs01 (2020-05-12 18:44:39+00:00): Dovrebbe essere a posto ora, controlla pure, ciao!
EMANUELE CAPRARA (2020-05-12 20:47:22+00:00): Sì, visto. Grazie mille. In effetti non avendo pratica di strumenti come Josm stavo rimettendo a posto con modifiche una ad una.... Grazie ancora
ccamara (2020-07-01 15:21:33+00:00): hola, em sembla que les dues àrees que has marcat com a gespa són incorrectes: una de les zones és un sorral i l'altre està pavimentat. Per això, si no dius el contrari, en breu les eliminaré (deixant, això sí, la resta d'eleemnts que has afegit correctament.
trigpoint (2020-05-09 08:14:52+00:00): Hi, this change is a little misleading to map users. They are unlikely to look at a covid19 opening hours tag.
Aldi is not opening 'until further notice' hence it should not be tagged as shop=supermarket until that actually happens. I had been deliberately leaving off any more that construction until that happens which is unlikely in the near future.

Cheers Phil
jobau1 (2020-05-10 17:58:46+00:00): Hi pol_ja, ich bin immer wieder in der Gegend unterwegs. Aber dass der Radweg 413 in Leitsberg beginnt und über Trainst nach Lanzendorf bis zur Abzweigung nach Stössing führt ist mir nicht bekannt. Ich habe noch keine diesbezügliche Beschilderung entdeckt. Soweit ich weiß. kommt er aus Stössing. Es gibt aber leider kaum offizielle Unterlagen. lg jobau1
mariotomo (2020-11-03 17:26:15+00:00): otros edificios todos igualitos, casi sin relación con la imagen Bing.
Alvarado2510 (2021-02-14 05:27:11+00:00): Saludos los comparare y corrigiere, gracias.
mariotomo (2021-07-20 13:31:34+00:00): cuándo?
mariotomo (2022-08-08 22:21:22+00:00): apparently, never … see changeset 110694812.
Alvarado2510 (2023-01-23 04:01:18+00:00): Gracias por el apoyo.
mariotomo (2023-01-23 13:24:18+00:00): si quieres ver cuántos más faltan: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=73759
user_6771650 (2020-05-09 01:41:55+00:00): Thanks for contributing to OSM! Your changes look good. However, next time you draw square or rectangular buildings, square the corners by using the Q key in iD.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84922639
user_6771650 (2020-05-09 01:49:42+00:00): 嗨feiyang5000。感谢您添加到OSM！您所做的更改看起来不错。
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84922759
Mashin (2020-05-12 20:51:47+00:00): These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.
stevea (2020-05-12 22:03:12+00:00): Unless and until there is recent consensus on what it is best to change these boundaries TO, leaving them at a "status quo as agreed to in 2017" seems best. They are not "mass" changes, they are changes to eight relations, and only some modest tagging distinctions (according to our wiki and consensus), none of the actual boundaries were changed. (If many of the boundaries were changed, that might be "mass changes," but it wasn't, so this isn't).
Mashin (2020-05-14 02:17:26+00:00): Status quo is counties at admin_level=6, as they were for last 10 years. And COGs as admin_level=5 as I originally created those data. If not I will have to escalate this issue.
stevea (2020-05-14 02:55:34+00:00): When a county has little or no administration, as in Rhode Island (absolutely) and Connecticut (as in "only the judiciary"), then these counties being tagged without a boundary=administrative tag is correct.

EIGHT years ago, I myself suggested that a COG-like thing in California (where I live) might be (I posited it as "might" not "is," as you did) an admin_level=5.  It was determined not to be and I and OSM accepted that.  You seem bent on not accepting that, yet it is documented to be true.

Be my guest at "escalating this," although you should know that SomeoneElse (Andy Townsend, member of the Data Working Group and with a blue star next to his name) is already involved, contributing to these very Changeset Discussions:  you can't get any more "escalated" than that.
Mashin (2020-05-14 05:12:32+00:00): Even if that would be true, you have no right to change other user’s data. No tags are forbidden even deprecated. And you were not acting from power of DWG.
stevea (2020-05-14 05:34:30+00:00): Anybody has a right to change another user's data in OSM, especially when two things about that are true:  1)  The data contradict wiki or established consensus and 2) the changer of the data makes a good faith effort to contact and communicate with the author and persuade them of their error.  I did both.

You misunderstand:  I never "acted from power of DWG," I merely mentioned that the DWG (in the guise of SomeoneElse, as he is following these changeset comments) is already here.  So your "I will have to escalate this issue" is moot:  the issue is plenty escalated already.
Mashin (2020-05-14 14:37:00+00:00): I am going to repeat myself here: 
1. You have no privilege to mass edit someones OSM contributions. 
2. I gave you no permission nor was the conversation finished.
3. You refuse to provide evidence of wide consensus to such tagging.
4. You make your own personal interpretation of tags that many disagree with and made some users upset.

From previous personal conversation with you, I am not surprised you can’t accept your fault. 
But I just want to raise this to the community, if we are really fine with this kind of behavior. This approach can be really damaging. What motivation do I have to contribute to OSM if someone can just come and claim it for themself by tagging/modifying it to their liking?
stevea (2020-05-14 19:53:21+00:00): 1)  This was not a mass edit.  It was minor tag changing on 8 relations to comply with what we discussed, decided and documented in our wiki.

2)  "Your" permission was not necessary, though it was solicited for several days in the Talk page of the wiki.

3)  I have provided such evidence several times, going back to 2017 and 2012-13.

4)  These are not my personal interpretations, there have been many Contributors besides me.

I have no idea what you are accusing me of, what is "my fault."  "This behavior" and "this approach" are exactly what is prescribed:  when somebody like Mashin changes both the map and the wiki contradictory to what is documented there, I tried to engage with him there to support his contradictory position.  He did not, I changed his tagging to comply.  It is not "to my liking," it is what the community achieved consensus about.
stevea (2020-05-14 23:46:03+00:00): This has been proposed multiple times by now:  tag counties admin_level=6 and keep boundary=COG on RCOG boundaries.  That is what they are.  For now.  If this continuing narrowing of the scope like this continues (putting it now on eight or nine of these or those), we winnow in on a winner.

We craft some footnotes (as we have done and do) that explain that in CT counties are weaker and COGs do the administration that happens at this level.  I feel like I'm wearing a white robe as I bear witness like this.  I want to say it like it is.
stevea (2020-05-14 23:52:42+00:00): Really, to describe sixty years of history here with two slightly differently tagged data (eight of these, nine of those) with fairly exact and well-constructed boundaries, that's pretty good work, really.  Elegant, even.  Calling one "relatively weak compared to other states" and the other "does all we need to do at this level of government" in footnotes, voilà.  That's the way it is, right?
Mashin (2020-05-15 01:43:35+00:00): Again so you can understand it:
* I did not change any data, I only added new data to OSM. You changed all counties in two states (CT, RI) and all COGs. That is a mass edit.
* Providing two numbers is no evidence of any wide consensus as you claim. All I can say is that you are just making it up and present your own ideas as what the community wanted.
* The dispute was not settled and is still active, yet you went ahead and executed your will.

I am accusing you of unethical conduct that is non collegial and is disrupting to the OSM community. If everybody would at like you do you would certainly not like it.