piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
sinopitt (2022-08-11 08:16:08+00:00): 大佬速度好快啊！是方舆论坛的朋友吗？
user_6584176 (2022-08-11 12:17:57+00:00): 偶尔上去看看
pitfire (2022-08-21 05:16:16+00:00): Hallo Schwoggel,
phone=Nummer, bitte die Nummer im internationalen (ITU-T E.164)-Format angegeben.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:phone#Anwendung
wireguy (2022-08-10 16:21:26+00:00): Lally, Welcome to OSM!   Good change.  If you know the area, I think the Zinburger around the corner has changed to something new.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-10 23:24:12+00:00): o seu mapeamento aqui ficou incorreto, você excluiu o mapeamento dos predios individuais para dar lugar a uma area unica. essa não é a forma correta.
HubMiner (2023-04-08 23:32:54+00:00): The OH rules do not make sense - is it open 24/7 or only during the specified hours?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9945504747/history
4004 (2023-04-09 13:34:19+00:00): struggling to remember now, but I think it was a locked waiting room that is open during those hours, but can be also unlocked (by station staff) 24/7?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 13:25:41+00:00): Usaste Agencia de Viajes para estos puntos, estás equivocado.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 13:25:52+00:00): Você usou Agência de turismo para estes pontos, está errado.
redd (2022-08-20 09:29:44+00:00): Hi Antonr,
thanks for your recent contributions to OpenStreetMap.
Regarding you changes on the shelters, you used the unclear and undocumented booking=yes.
Could you please have a look on the key and values of reservation=? I think this would suite that use case much better.
It"s affecting the shelters:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/513286967
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/513286960
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9945542287
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9945542288
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/513286973

Thanks!
redd
antonr (2022-08-23 20:52:36+00:00): Thanks for pointing that out! Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125288754
redd (2022-08-23 20:55:14+00:00): Thank you, antonr, for the quick response!
iWowik (2022-08-17 06:46:25+00:00): День добрый!
Деревня это не улица, для нее другой тег, а не addr:street
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/781899593/history
SHARCRASH (2022-08-10 16:53:11+00:00): + new elements
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 17:12:21+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085395873 is overlapping the green. Please fix this, thanks!
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 17:11:14+00:00): Hi,

Why did you delete this, it's still present in all imagery?
eggie (2022-08-16 11:15:57+00:00): PB gestuurd
wardmuylaert (2023-05-11 08:42:25+00:00): Hey, basically the way to do it is by cutting up the Bartlett Lane way into pieces. You can do so in iD editor by right clicking the node where you want to split the way and choosing "split". I did it for you for Bartlett Lane. Thanks for the contribution!
Dawid2849 (2022-08-15 10:13:50+00:00): Cześć! Dzięki za edycję w OSM, jednak ten adres był już dodany. iD nie jest przystosowane do adresów w Polsce. Gdy miejscowość nie posiada nazw ulic (tak jak to jest w przypadku Derylaków) nie dodajemy addr:city (które sugeruje iD) tylko addr:place. Na przyszłość możesz to poprawiać w sekcji "Wszystkie znaczniki". Ten adres już naprawiłem.
Robhubi (inaktiv) (2022-08-13 19:05:58+00:00): (1) "lack of support"? Waymarked Trails and cycle.travel support superroutes. Why is that not enough to start with?
(2) What should happen to the other superroutes that contain “foreign” sub-routes? Replace them with duplicates as well? Only in Austria? Worldwide?
Luzandro (2022-08-14 04:19:03+00:00): The way Waymarked Trails and cycle.travel handle this case is great and would make it a bit easier and more logical for mappers, but the majority of applications, which have shown this route for years, don't work this way and have no plans on changing that. Of course you could blame them, but as far as I can see, this behaviour isn't even documented, as the wiki explicitly says "The superroute has the same characteristics as the routes regarding route=*, ref=*, network=*, name=*", which may be the reason why I'm not aware of other major issues in this regard with EuroVelos for example.
Robhubi (inaktiv) (2022-08-14 21:21:34+00:00): I'm stepping out, the EV routes aren't worth the energy to me.
emersonveenstra (2022-08-11 12:22:22+00:00): Hi,

Are you sure that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085402831 is the correct direction? The starting node doesn't connect to anything else so there's no way to use it right now
lizzyk17 (2022-08-11 13:31:02+00:00): Yes there’s a viewpoint right there that it goes off of/away from/up to
emersonveenstra (2022-08-11 14:12:19+00:00): right, but the oneway tag prevents anyone from going up to the viewpoint
aixbrick (2022-08-15 11:33:28+00:00): Hello,
I don't think, that the name of the network is "StädteRegion Aachen". That should be the oprator ("instead of Stadt Aachen"). The name could be "Wurm- und Broichbachtal" (based on  https://www.staedteregion-aachen.de/fileadmin/user_upload/A_58/Dateien/NEU_UEbersichtskarte-Wurmtal-Nord-0422_web.pdf). Moreover nodes south of A4 (on ground of Stadt Aachen) should not be part of that network. Maybe own network?
Regards
aixbrick (2022-08-15 13:27:42+00:00): >> Maybe own network
https://www.aachen.de/de/kultur_freizeit/freizeit_erholung/wandern/04stadtbezirke/haaren_verlautenheide/pdf_fotos_materialien/Faltkarte-Haaren_.pdf supports that.
jeroenrozema74 (2022-08-15 16:25:34+00:00): Hello,

Ok, good idea. What would be a good name for the Network south of the A4 ? Aachen or Stadt Aachen?

Greetings,
jeroenrozema74
aixbrick (2022-08-15 17:26:29+00:00): On the flyer it says "Wandern in Haaren und Verlautenheide". I think that's a good name for a start :-).
aixbrick (2022-08-16 07:43:01+00:00): Thank you for implementing.
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 18:51:02+00:00): Hi,

Please don't delete and recreate things like bunkers, simply adjust the nodes to where they should be. That way you aren't deleting other people's work
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124743017
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 18:51:31+00:00): Also don't name holes "1", that should only be in ref, not name
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 18:52:31+00:00): Finally, (sorry, wasn't expecting this many errors in a changeset) you drew the fairway on top of the green. Please fix that as well, thanks!
Hiblet (2022-08-11 11:57:03+00:00): Changeset reverted.
Danysan95 (2022-08-12 15:12:07+00:00): Are you sure that the tag needed to be deleted? The road had name:etymology:wikidata=Q8027 (which exists and contains Martin Luther King Jr., https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q8027), not Q230639 (which is cited in the changeset comment as the reason for the change)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124743213
Dino Michelini (2022-08-24 10:04:28+00:00): I was wrong, thanks for reporting this. I did a revert.
mueschel (2022-08-22 17:06:43+00:00): Hi,
you added several strange tags to buildings:
building:id
uc:type

Please check if there are no common tags available for your purpose.
MKINOSHI (2022-08-22 17:10:38+00:00): I agree that those tags were not clear to other users. I have change them to 

university_of_chicago:building_id
university_of_chicago:business_unit_name
Strubbl (2022-08-11 10:09:35+00:00): Hi Andreas, danke für das Einzeichnen der Baustelle. Falls die hw=service noch im Bau befindlich sind, könntest du sie solange mit hw=construction und construction=service als solche kartieren, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway=construction#Wie_kartieren.3F

Dann fragen andere Apps, wie zB. StreetComplete, regelmäßig nach, ob die Straße fertig gebaut ist und falls ja, werden dann die Tags automatisch richtig gesetzt.
AndreasP5 (2022-08-12 05:22:57+00:00): Hi Strubbl,
die Straßen sind komplett fertiggestellt. Ich konnte sie bereits (legal) befahren/ betreten. Trotzdem danke für den Hinweis.
LG Andreas
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 18:54:00+00:00): Hi,

what is the "uc:type" tag used for? It's not documented anywhere and I'm wondering if there's a better tag
MKINOSHI (2022-08-10 19:17:14+00:00): Hello emersonveenstra.
 I am from The University of Chicago (UC) BSD Facilities Services. UC have 3 separated entities; BSD (Biological science division), UCH (University Chicago Hospital) and the University. The buildings that are tagged as uc:type = BSD/UCH belongs to BSD and UCH entities.

Uc:type=BSD/UCH allows me to query using the API in QGIS API to load our buildings and export them as GeoJSON.

Should I have done it differently? Please let me know. Thank you
MKINOSHI (2022-08-10 19:42:10+00:00): I was thinking about changing the tag name from uc:type to university_of_chicago:business_unit. Would that more clear?
MKINOSHI (2022-08-10 19:44:48+00:00): We also have a specific building ID that we use internally for our University. Instead of using building:id, maybe I should have used university_of_chicago:building_id. What do you think?
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 20:31:41+00:00): Yeah, that's fine either way, I just wanted to make sure that it wasn't a typo and that it wasn't something more common. I would say that using the `university_of_chicago` prefix will be more clear to everyone else and prevent confusion down the road
MKINOSHI (2022-08-10 21:00:52+00:00): I agree. I will update this or next week. Thank you.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 12:27:14+00:00): reverted
user_8655426 (2022-08-11 01:10:27+00:00): こんにちは。浜松市内を編集していただき、ありがとうございます。
この変更セットで編集された道路に関して、いくつか質問させてください。

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085411965/history

1.道路の名称 (name)を「国道152号改良（第1工区）」とされていますが、これは道路の正式な名称ですか？ それとも建設事業の名称ですか？

2.三遠南信広報チャンネル制作の YouTube の動画を source としていますが、これは OpenStreetMap の情報源として適切なものですか？
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65UlSunShCM

3.先日、OSMでの編集に利用可能なデータソース、著作権、情報の収集方法などについて書いたメッセージを送らせていただきましたが、お読みになられましたか？

以上、ご回答よろしくお願いいたします。
user_8655426 (2022-08-20 11:42:01+00:00): 浜松市天竜区に追加された、航空画像で確認できない道路を削除しました。
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125143880

7月24日の私のメッセージを読んでいれば、その理由はわかるはずです。
異議がありましたら、この変更セットにコメントをお願いします。
user_5359 (2022-08-21 06:39:45+00:00): Hello! Please have alook on http://www.osm.org/way/1085414035 (one of 73 objects). What is the meaning of the tag uc:type = BSD/UCH?
Why did have the object a key building:id but no key building?
MKINOSHI (2022-08-22 13:12:09+00:00): I have changed the tag to university_of_chicago:business_unit_name
ParadoX_ZLWC (2022-08-10 23:37:09+00:00): 请不要再将两个不同的发电厂建立关系。虽然两个发电厂地理位置靠近，但它们属于不同的公司，是独立的法人单位。如果您这样做，在拉取数据统计发电厂时会重复计算。
Ali Rouzbeh (2022-08-11 15:50:34+00:00): Based on this page the second way seems to be an expansion of the power plant and they don't seem to belong to different companies:
https://www.gem.wiki/Nanhai_Foshan_power_station
Please do not delete the changes unless you are sure that they need to be fixed.
zidel (2022-08-16 10:07:32+00:00): Hi, I took a look at your changes since you requested review and they look good. The reason you've changed the road in this case is because you added a node when you connected it with the trail which is perfectly fine.

The explanation for the farmland is the same, it ended up connected to the trail at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9945714948 . Since these don't need to be connected it is strictly speaking best to avoid this since it can make accidental changes more likely in the future, but the online editor really likes connecting things so it can be hard to avoid. In this case I wouldn't worry about it.

Welcome to Openstreetmap and thank you for making the map better!
syntex (2022-08-11 09:33:12+00:00): Test? Test czego?
VA00 (2022-08-14 04:30:29+00:00): Cierpliwości, teraz zepsułeś test. Square to rynek miejski, miejsce gdzie można spacerować. Nie można tak oznaczyć nazwy ronda.
emersonveenstra (2022-08-10 18:55:13+00:00): Hi,

Please always mark people's backyard pools with access=private so others don't think they're public use. Thanks!
Frans S (2022-09-23 14:44:07+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
* Nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.
* Most buildings are strict rectangular. Please square them after you drawn it, and still selected, with the Q key 
* You tagged a node as a bicycle parking.
Impossible to see on a satellite image !   Please don't add these extra's except you have local knowledge.
Best regards




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 !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124744945
Frans S (2022-09-23 14:38:45+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
* Be more accurate in your mappings. A number of buildings are mapped oversized.
* Nodes of buildings linked to residential areas.




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 !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124745443
bxl-forever (2022-08-11 09:38:49+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/154674305/history (v8)

lanes=0???

I suggest you use lane_markings=no instead.
oa_osm (2022-10-31 13:05:24+00:00): Hallo,
Vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag zu Openstreetmap. Bei deiser Änderung ist jedoch zu Beachten, dass im Sinne der Überprüfbeakeit keine objetiven Orte in die Karte aufgenommen werden können. Hier ist kein ausgeschilderter Campingplatz, daher ist dies nicht überprüfbar. (Beispliel: Sonst könnte man ja gleich damit anfangen überall Baustellen mit der Beschriftung "Guter Bauplatz für eine Bergbahn" einzutragen...) Siehe auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#%C3%9Cberpr%C3%BCfbarkeit
KasperSFranz (2024-02-07 22:16:52+00:00): I know this is an old changeset - but what is the purpose of resort=resort32.77390277406193,_13.9355599414551332.77390277406193,_13.93555994145513
?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/124745472
Langelil (2022-08-10 19:56:33+00:00): Note aux réviseurs: J'ai des photos prises aux deux extrémités; je peux les partager au besoin: llangelier57@gmail.com .
Patr1k_P (2022-08-13 16:22:23+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3829962591

kaplnka tam uz bola, vytvorili ste duplikaciu a "name" tam byt nema
knowak (2022-08-17 15:09:32+00:00): Yes, but it was a point, I added the area.
The name I found in the neighbouring Marianska studnicka. It is also described at page http://www.obecjarabina.sk/ as: Kaplnka Zosnutia Presvätej Bohorodičky na
hôrke Háj
Patr1k_P (2022-08-18 15:08:16+00:00): cely objekt nie je vsak budova, kedze cast tvori pristresok a bod sa mal potom teda vymazat..to meno som nikde akosi nenasiel, mozno to tak len volaju
knowak (2022-08-19 17:10:11+00:00): I've made changes according to your suggestions. But now I have a doubt about the proper Slovak declination. In description found at nearby well there is "v Haji", but on the page http://www.obecjarabina.sk/-kaplnka-v-haju "v Haju".
Patr1k_P (2022-08-20 08:49:17+00:00): myslim ze spravne je v Haji..asi by som to takto uz nechal
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 12:28:01+00:00): reverted
ceyu (2022-08-11 14:30:51+00:00): It seems like you left the gpx data imported by JOSM (gpx:ele, gpx:hdop, gpx:time) in the nodes of the track. Was this intentional? Your track seems to be the only one with such tags.
woodpeck_repair (2022-08-12 19:46:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124830458 where the changeset comment is: revert vandalism by Jimbo the Geographer
pierre_geovelo (2025-04-22 09:22:24+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai remarqué que certains stationnement vélo que vous avez modifié sont noté comme payant, cela est-il toujours d'actualité ? 
Cordialement 
Pierre
FahRadler (2022-09-25 13:54:38+00:00): Hallo Vinzenz,
woher hast du denn die Information dass dort auf diesen Pfaden kein Zutritt ist?
FahRadler
FahRadler (2022-10-11 17:11:56+00:00): Hallo Vinzenz,

als OSM-Mitglied ist es üblich auf Fragen der Kollegen zu antworten.
Da du seit meiner Frage eifrig gemappt hast solltest du meine Frage schon gesehen haben.
Vinzenz Mai (2022-10-11 17:45:32+00:00): Hallo,

sorry, aber ich hatte die erste Mail übersehen. Ich bitte um Entschuldigung.

Am 1. August war ich an der verschlossenen Tür an der Rue de Schoeneck, am 10. August am verschlossenen Tor am Chemin du Holweg. Aus diesen beiden Beobachtungen, schloss ich, dass der Zugang nicht möglich ist.
FahRadler (2022-10-12 12:08:53+00:00): Hallo Vinzenz,
das Tor am Holweg scheint mal offen mal zu zu sein. Von der anderen Seite gibt es aber kein Tor (es geht wie dargestellt links am alten Schacht vorbei), auch von der Rue du Coin - offen.
Ich mach den Weg wieder frei.
Vinzenz Mai (2022-10-13 08:39:49+00:00): Hallo FahRadler,

das ist ok. Ich werde es demnächst mal von der Rue de Schoeneck versuchen.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-08-11 12:25:44+00:00): reverted
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-08-13 07:17:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124842370 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to use of offensive names
marczoutendijk (2022-08-14 12:44:13+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6233
OSM_RogerWilco (2022-08-12 06:07:29+00:00): Hallo Patrick1977Bln,

bei der Straße https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1083331430 handelt es sich offensichtlich um eine Grundstückszufahrt. Grundstückszufahrten werden als hw=service erfasst:

highway=service
service=driveway

Ein access=private braucht es da eigentlich nicht mehr, da sich der private Zugang von service=driveway ableiten lässt. Außer Postboten, Schornsteinfeger oder Paketdienstleister dürfen/ können dort nicht entlang und der Weg wird wirklich ausschließlich privat benutzt.

Dann stelle ich mir die Frage, ob die Zufahrt wirklich den offiziell gewidmeten Namen "Schmidtsrögen" trägt.

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco

P.S.: Bitte versuche Deine Änderungen lokal zu halten, damit die Änderung nicht so ein großes Gebiet umspannt. Sprich: Hier hättest Du die Änderung am Altkleidercontainer und der Einfahrt als jeweils separat speichern sollen.
DeFra85 (2022-11-07 09:18:10+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9935834910
hier auch, der Lagerberg ist weiter südlich als natural=peak eingetragen
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-09-04 22:33:36+00:00): debe volver a agregar las rutas que eliminó en esta área. como puede ver aquí:https://osmcha.org/changesets/124706879/ ¡eran demasiadas!
gscscnd (2022-08-13 21:18:21+00:00): Na <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/96303947> jest zakaz jazdy rowerem?
Smk___________ (2022-08-14 05:38:31+00:00): Nie ma możliwości wjazdu tutaj rowerem bo ścieżka jest całkowicie zarosnieta i nierówna. 
Czy to uzasadnia oznaczenie jako braku możliwości wjazdu rowerem? (Zakazu nie ma więc w sumie uwaga dobra, poważnie nie wiem).
Chodzi mi o to aby narzędzia do nawigacji rowerowej nie używały takiej ścieżki.
Może wystarczy oznaczenie jej jako ścieżka niskiej jakosci
gscscnd (2022-08-14 07:24:10+00:00): bicycle (i inne tagi z rodziny https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access) służy do oznaczenia legalności dostępu do drogi, w tym przypadku lepsze byłyby tagi opisujące jej jakość:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:smoothness
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mtb_scale
Smk___________ (2022-08-14 07:39:45+00:00): Masz rację. Poprawie za tydzień jak będę miał dostęp do kompa.
gscscnd (2022-09-13 17:48:28+00:00): Ustawiłem surface=grass i smoothness=very_bad (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126145482). Jeśli masz jeszcze jakieś pomysły, to zachęcam do poprawienia.
Smk___________ (2022-09-14 08:04:56+00:00): Dzięki za poprawienie. Zapomniałem o tym.
woodpeck_repair (2022-08-12 19:45:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124830458 where the changeset comment is: revert vandalism by Jimbo the Geographer
bxl-forever (2022-08-11 09:09:24+00:00): Hello,

Do you really need a noexit tag here?
Does an app require it?

First, it triggers validation issues on the map because the road _is_ physically connected on both sides

Second, this looks like a car-centric view, ignoring cyclists and pedestrian may legally pass through.  ("noexit" applies to everyone, not just motorists.)

I suggest you remove it.  Having the block across the road is enough to get routing work properly.
bxl-forever (2022-08-11 09:10:52+00:00): If there is a road sign you can add it as a node, e.g. traffic_sign=BE:F45b
Mizuna (2022-08-11 12:31:50+00:00): Luckily there was no car-centric or legal problem: even OSRM and GraphHopper let people pass on foot and by bicycle, not by car...
eggie (2022-08-10 21:27:17+00:00): Dag EdNiMo   Je hotelinfo heb ik samengevoegd met de aanwezige adresnode.
MVG
eggie
EdNiMo (2022-08-11 06:07:41+00:00): Bedankt eggie.
Groeten EdNiMo
woodpeck_repair (2022-08-12 19:45:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 124830458 where the changeset comment is: revert vandalism by Jimbo the Geographer
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:24:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:24:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:24:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:25:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:25:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:24:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:24:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 16:25:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128218262 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.