piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Engy Fouda (2017-10-20 19:48:01+00:00): fgfjhhhjffjhfjhf
majid1359 (2017-10-20 19:30:20+00:00): تغییرات انجام شود
var-alex (2017-10-23 15:56:28+00:00): Здравствуйте!

Это прекрасно, что вы обозначили только болот и лугов, но только вот в мультиполигон леса их почему не включлили?
majid1359 (2017-10-20 19:38:29+00:00): آخرین تغییرات نقشه در opensetreet  اعمال شود
majid1359 (2017-10-20 19:46:05+00:00): تغییرات اعمال شود
R0bst3r (2017-10-23 21:04:08+00:00): Hallo mtz93,
willkommen bei OSM.
Deine ersten Änderungen sehen schon sehr gut aus. Weiter so!
Bei Fragen hilft wiki.osm.org weiter. Im Notfall helfe ich auch gerne aus.
Viele Grüße
Владимир К (2017-10-23 13:07:03+00:00): Отличная правка! 
Но пара замечаний: надо вернуть тег здания, всяие МБОУ лучше написать в official_name, а город можно не прописывать на каждом здании, если есть контур города.
Evgeny C (2017-10-23 13:11:35+00:00): Владимир, просто ни разу ничего не правил в ОСМ. Не дадите ссылку на какой-нибудь простой и быстрый tutorial?
Владимир К (2017-10-23 13:15:20+00:00): Я перетегировал, посмотрите в качестве примера. Контур забора вроде расмотрел на снимках esri, поправьте его, если я ошибся.
Владимир К (2017-10-23 13:18:20+00:00): конечно. 
вот вики, где можно быстро подсмотреть наиболее частые объекты
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BA_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C

Заходите на форум и телеграм-чат @ruosm. ещё немного полезной информации и ссылок прямо у меня в профиле тут.
Evgeny C (2017-10-23 13:22:29+00:00): То есть получается так: до правок здание школы было обозначено на карте просто как здание. При внесении правок - я поменял значение amenity на school и внес дополнительно атрибутивную информацию. Где именно я убрал тег "здания"?
Владимир К (2017-10-23 13:28:05+00:00): из истории http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369782361/history
 получается так
было
building	house
стало
addr:city	Байкальск
addr:housenumber	1
addr:postcode	665932
addr:street	Школьный переулок
amenity	school
name	Школа МБОУ "СОШ № 10"
website	http://sosh10.edusluda.ru

я не знаю как именно вы добавляли школу, но если просто нажимали на плитки, то видимо редактор на сайте затирает другие теги, при изменении. Не знаю. всегда можно редактировать теги напряму, там внизу есть вкладка. а лучше пользоваться JOSM :)
Kagami (2017-10-22 06:15:23+00:00): 基隆市立體育場繪製有誤
goedegazelle (2017-11-20 09:39:09+00:00): Kun je misschien iets specifieker zijn dan "shop=j" bij het Esso tankstation? Mvgr.
vindert (2017-11-20 21:33:04+00:00): Hoi,

Waarschijnlijk perongelijk typefout. Ik bedoelde ja, en dan ook nog verkeerde taal.
Nu hersteld en verbeterd:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/53961301
Miroslav Suchý (2017-10-23 10:41:38+00:00): Je to dobre.
Jeste by to chtelo doplnit
  source=gps
pokud jste to mapoval podle GPX stopy z gpsky. Nebo
  source=bing
pokud jste to delal podle fotomapy bingu.
Miroslav Suchý (2017-10-23 10:43:32+00:00): Jeden problem tam byl. Mel jste spatne tvar budovy (podle katastru je obdelnik). To jsem opravil.
Priste staci dvojklik na nejakou hranu a udela vam to novy uzel ktery muzete pretahnout.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-21 12:19:05+00:00): Czy plan budowy https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/274937707 jest aktualny? Jeśli tak - jakie jest tego źródło?
wilczywilk (2017-12-21 21:17:57+00:00): Źródło - SIWZ: http://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/d/c647440a0bc7040f04d2666cbff43faf
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-22 07:06:31+00:00): Czy jest ryzyko że ten plik zniknie zanim highway=proposed przestanie być aktualna? Zastanawiam się czy go gdzieś nie zarchiwizować.
wilczywilk (2017-12-24 00:25:36+00:00): Jest to obowiązujący dokument więc, tak długo jak jest aktualny, powinien znajdować się na stronie GDDKiA. Z drugiej strony zarchiwizować nie zaszkodzi.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-27 12:59:45+00:00): Zamówiłem archiwizację na http://web.archive.org/web/20171227125815/https://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/d/c647440a0bc7040f04d2666cbff43faf

(zrobiłem to przez wejście na http://web.archive.org/save/http://www.gddkia.gov.pl/pl/d/c647440a0bc7040f04d2666cbff43fafm - można w ten sposób większość urli zarchiwizować)
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-27 13:01:07+00:00): dodałem też url źródła jako tag na https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/274937707#map=19/53.83762/22.24759
wilczywilk (2017-12-27 20:18:30+00:00): ok, dzięki!
muralito (2017-10-20 23:49:22+00:00): I could provide some nodes that were deleted and were not advertising.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1118036691

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5135199111

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5057146412/history

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5042809017/history

The 4 seems valid elements, and maybe in one of them the description could be considered as biased, but not advertising.

Please review how your algorithm is selecting the cases.
naoliv (2017-10-21 04:16:55+00:00): It seems the same case from some nodes in Brazil.
I wouldn't call them *wrong* but incomplete and/or with unnecessary information.
(New) users sometimes misunderstand the "description" tag and are too much verbose when using it.
Instead deleting, is it possible to create a list of affected objects, for manual review?
Or maybe simply remove description=* from the objects?
For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4976338726/history seems to be a case where the new mapper misunderstood description and note (and overly described the object).
funnimonk (2017-10-21 05:55:29+00:00): please never do things like this again. you've basically deleted street names etc from the dataset. some of us rely on these things like names an geometries and now we have to restore them and you know how difficult that is!! to what end, all this deletion? couldn't you just change the descriptions??!! and why didn't you take it up with this mapper that you speak of??
woodpeck (2017-10-21 08:23:30+00:00): Hello, I'm sorry if I have accidentally deleted things that were not advertising. I'll look into the IDs specified by muralito and replace them. I have only deleted objects that were created by users who had a very small number of edits (usually, only one edit!) and who have added a long description tag that went like "XYZ is the best restaurant in ABC town" or so, i.e. where the description was clearly marketing and not just "descriptive". Tre0xf, it was not possible to "take it up with the user" because all these users have done practically nothing but add one POI and never use their account again! Can you point me to a specific thing that you think should not have been removed?
Prince Kassad (2017-10-21 08:25:44+00:00): This changeset also deleted objects that no longer had SEO advertising in their newest revision, i. e. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/266904941/history. This is an extremely harmful changeset and should be undone immediately.
Владимир К (2017-10-21 08:54:35+00:00): is this a joke? all objects i checked are NOT SEO or even advertising! These descriptions were just descriptions. I think it is totally wrong to delete things, you even don''t understand in another language! You even deleted the hole building, that exists on satimagery!
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/216570290/history#map=12/56.0350/92.8873
it's vandalism, I'll revert this
Владимир К (2017-10-21 09:05:24+00:00): in Moscow only 2 of 8 deleted objects have description! and another exxisting building was deleted
woodpeck (2017-10-21 09:49:23+00:00): Hello Владимир К, Prince Kassad, indeed I have removed objects even if they *had* advertising in the past, and other mappers had removed the advertising in the mean time. That was unnecessary. I'll undelete the affected objects. Please refrain from reverting the full changeset because that would make you the "last editor" of thousands of SEO messages in OSM and you don't want that.
woodpeck (2017-10-21 10:55:51+00:00): Hello Владимир, against my warning you have reverted this and now re-created things like this: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/384176165 - will you now take over and do this properly, removing advertising from where it doesn't belong, or do you expect others to do this?
muralito (2017-10-21 20:13:08+00:00): I just wanted to raise the flag that there are some false positives in the algorithm, so i asked for an improvement, I also understand if the algorithm is not disclosed as it can be used by advertisers for "tunning" their ads.

In thousands of elements there are probably a lot of distinct cases to consider.
Maybe using a scoring system, so clearly ads could be deleted, and other cases can be tagged for manual review.

For example, this case, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5046708259/history , if the element is valid, and the description is considered as advertisement, why not only delete this tag, and not the whole node?

Just keep hunting ads, but instead of a nuke use a sniper. :-)
woodpeck (2017-10-21 20:38:24+00:00): Yes, it was not an algorithm that I was planning to run regularly, I just had identified long-description objects made by users who have contributed very little, and then went through the list manually, using a translating web site for anything other than English and German. Quite possible that I accidentally removed a few good ones. My idea was to not reward spammers by leaving their shop or office on the map at all. I'm now waiting to see if Владимир К has more to offer than a knee-jerk revert.
SimonvdP (2017-10-21 22:36:06+00:00): Did you even check your example?, removing part of a likely valid secondary road seems worse than leaving it there with the useless description on it,
Chris Fleming (2017-10-22 22:48:21+00:00): This feels excessive to me - generally when I see these added, provided the information is accurate then I don't mind the "spammy description"; but there is also a case for removing. My worry with this changeset is that by completely  removing the object we remove information that had been added prior to the "spammy" additions. Is there a standard policy on what is considered spammy and what isn't - for example should we be removing all the hilton hotels that would get hit by this?
woodpeck (2017-10-23 05:47:30+00:00): I think that any contribution made by a spammer should be entirely removed because it has not been made with OSM's interests at heart; most likely the coordinates are from a proprietary geocoder and the object will usually be placed with little regard to what's around it. So if the spammer adds a hotel I would remove it. However if the spammer only adds a description tag to an already existing object then, as you say, it is excessive to delete the full object. That was the problem with this changeset - it even deleted a couple of roads that had been the target of spammers.
Chris Fleming (2017-10-23 13:19:47+00:00): Thanks - I think we are in Broad agreeement :)
GRUBERND (2017-10-24 07:45:14+00:00): i think deleting things by algorithm is the most wrong thing one can to do to the OSM database. especially at this scale. it's the same as an import: automated changes of HUGE amounts of data.

things like these should always run through individual inspection on a case-by-case basis. cue map-roulette etc.

just sayin'.
muralito (2017-10-24 11:28:46+00:00): @GRUBERND, I would agree if you write that sentence considering that using an algorithm does not necessarily imply automation.
muralito (2017-10-24 11:33:29+00:00): @woodpeck (regarding your last comment)
Often a spammer (or any other user) deletes an existing object (street, POI, etc.) and adds a new one with her data. Please consider those cases when deleting or redacting objects.
woodpeck (2017-10-24 18:55:26+00:00): I have started carefully removing the spam objects here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/53216381 : Where a spammy description and contact information were added to a building but there was no shop/office/amenity tag (just name/phone/payment methods etc), I reduced the object to a mere building and did NOT help the spammers by finding the right tags for the business.
Where a spammy description was added to a properly tagged business, I removed the spammy description only. Where a spammy description and address were added to a node or way but the address did not add any info because another nearby object already had that address, I d
eleted the whole thing. I also deleted the object where it was clear from aerial imagery that the node had not been properly placed (middle of road etc).
SafwatHalaby (2017-10-24 20:55:42+00:00): I think the algorithm is horrible.
SafwatHalaby (2017-10-24 20:58:12+00:00): For instance, this has a slightly "positive tone" but seems to be a 100% valid node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5109075827
.
I think your definition of a "spammy description" need to be narrowed.
SafwatHalaby (2017-10-24 21:00:25+00:00): Oh, I was reviewing via OSMCHA and I have a long backlog, and it seems that particular node was added back. Please ignore my comment if all the non spammy nodes were reverted.
PT-53 (2017-10-21 06:32:10+00:00): Hallo Gerold,
ist das Haus wirklich so groß !?
Gerold (2017-10-21 08:42:38+00:00): Ich weiß ja nicht wo Du den Umriss her hast, aber von mir ist der nicht.
PT-53 (2017-10-21 13:20:08+00:00): Du hast in aber verändert / vergrößert - Siehe: http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=53114674
Gerold (2017-10-21 13:42:01+00:00): Um das klarzustellen: Du glaubst ernsthaft, ich hätte das Gebäude so eingezeichnet, dass es den Fußweg überschneidet?
MKnight (2017-10-21 13:42:38+00:00): laut Bing ist die aktuelle Version die korrekte Grösse.
MKnight (2017-10-21 13:44:01+00:00): gerold, nein es geht nicht um den CS-Rahmen der hier angezeigt wird, sondern nur um das Gebäude. Und das ist wie gesagt korrekt.(wenn ich nix übersehe)
PT-53 (2017-10-21 17:22:12+00:00): Korrekt ? Na ja. So groß wie der Dachumriß ist das Gebäude sicher nicht. Und die Lage ist falsch, da der Versatz des Bing-Luftbildes nicht berüchsichtigt wurde, wie man anhand der Nachbargebäude sehen kann, die von mir anhand Maps4BW korrekt eingezeichnet wurden!
MKnight (2017-10-21 17:46:31+00:00): Wenn's Dir um den Dach- und/oder Bingversatz ging, warum sagste das nicht gleich?
Ich dachte, es ginge um echte Probleme...
PT-53 (2017-10-21 17:55:19+00:00): MKnight: Wie definiser Du echte Probleme ?

Wenn ein Mapper OSM-Objekte überarbeitet, die ein anderer eingezeichnet hat, erwarte ich echte Verbesserungen. Wo sind hier Verbesserungen ?
MKnight (2017-10-21 18:33:03+00:00): Soweit ich das jetzt* überblicke, ist das Haus nach der "Verbesserung" näher an der korrekten Position und näher an der korrekten Grösse. Kann mich irren, vielleicht verirrt sich noch jemand hierher, der freundlicher kommunizieren kann als mit geplenkten Ausrufezeichen an ner Frage.

*Jetzt heisst, dass ich jetzt zum wahrscheinlich 5. Male da draufschaue und grob erkenne, was Dein Problem ist.
Das hätten alle Beteiligten einfacher und stressfreier haben können.

Das Haus ist, wenn ich mal polemisch übertreiben darf, nach der "Verbesserung" 
immer noch einen Quadratmeter zu gross und 1,5m an der falschen Stelle. Weltuntergang!
Es gibt weltweit eine Dillion Häuser, die zu klein sind und oder nach versetzten Bing-karten ausgerichtet. Viel Spass beim CS-Comments schreiben. 
Pro-tip: Gleich mit der Tür ins Haus fallen (Bing maps ist verschoben, wir mappen keine Dächer, achte doch bitte zukünftig darauf (o.s.Ä.)) ist (imho) zielführender als, übertrieben gesagt, so ein Fass aufzumachen.

Um Deine Frage noch zu beantworten, echte Probleme, nunja QA-Tools können helfen solche zu finden. Was auch ein echter Fehler ist: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenk ... hat in CS-Comments zwar nicht so schlimme Auswirkungen, sieht nur trotzdem doof aus so ein Versatz um 1em
PT-53 (2017-10-22 08:23:21+00:00): Ja Du irrst Dich.
PT-53 (2017-10-21 15:03:24+00:00): Hallo Gerold,
ergibt sich (nur) aus dem Löschen des Fixme_Vermerkes "Position verbessern" eine Positionsverbesserung ?
ginfix (2017-10-20 23:16:35+00:00): Scusate, ho inserito parcheggi e viali pedonali
Ciao
Cascafico (2018-04-05 16:56:43+00:00): Which source did you use to modify bilingual name?
Madeline Steele (2017-10-22 16:37:03+00:00): Hello Oregon on Demand! It looks like you may have been importing external data to OSM. Have you had a chance to review the import guideslines, here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines? It's important to notify local OSM contributors before undertaking something like this - one communication channel you might consider using would be https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/osm-pdx
Oregon On Demand (2017-10-22 17:27:32+00:00): Greetings! All data was manually traced using authorized sources, mainly the USGS topographic maps. Thanks!
Madeline Steele (2017-10-22 21:05:57+00:00): Ah, awesome! Thank *you*I
daniel_solow (2017-10-21 01:22:04+00:00): Wrong changeset comment on that last one. I made edits to the bus stops on E 233 Street and added stop lights
maxolasersquad (2018-03-27 17:31:59+00:00): Can you elaborate on this dog park? It says it is "planned", which means it shouldn't be on the map yet. It is also overlapping buildings within the apartment complex. I'm not a member of this community, but from the road it looks like those buildings are still there.
praeteritum (2023-12-08 05:51:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 144888644.
mavl (2017-10-21 04:37:42+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 44365683, 44365752, 44365902, 44366006, 44366074, 44366398, 44366533, 44366671, 44366799, 44366889, 44366904, 44367281, 44367446, 44368937, 44369505, 44369580, 44369670, 44369820, 44370056, 44370153, 44370303, 44370415, 44370434, 44370554, 44370679, 44370955, 44371167, 44371353, 44371547, 44371766, 44372106, 44372246, 44372452, 44373017, 44373074, 44373457, 44373652, 44373699, 44390034, 44390201, 44390358, 44390457, 44390472, 44390490, 44390771, 44390939, 44391085, 44391249, 44391475, 44391698, 44391855.
tonyf1 (2017-10-21 04:18:44+00:00): Hi. You might find http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access helpful here.
majid1359 (2017-10-21 03:48:20+00:00): تهییرات
fkv (2018-03-22 00:35:10+00:00): zum landuse: 1.) Was da jetzt als landuse=grass getaggt ist, ist nicht alles Gras, 2.) was kein Wald ist, sollte vom Wald ausgenommen werden, 3.) Ortsname bitte nicht aufs landuse=residential setzen, sondern nur auf den place-Node, denn eine Siedlung kann aus verschiedenen landuse-Flächen bestehen, und man möchte den Ort nur 1x angezeigt bekommen und nicht vielfach (betrifft sowohl die Karte als auch Suchergebnisse).
mavl (2017-10-21 06:02:18+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 44274326, 44274436, 44274514, 44274547, 44274598, 44274678, 44274778, 44274911, 44275048, 44275066, 44275109, 44275201, 44275214, 44275255, 44275362, 44275426, 44275489, 44275515, 44275532, 44275609, 44275667, 44275718, 44275810, 44275820, 44275896, 44275929, 44275999, 44276157, 44276173, 44276244, 44276272, 44276483, 44276498, 44276629, 44276681, 44276743, 44276843, 44277426, 44281247, 44281818, 44281995, 44282109, 44282212, 44282472, 44282827, 44282903, 44282949, 44283161, 44283189, 44283488, 44283497, 44283530, 44283563, 44338335, 44338353, 44339102, 44339387, 44339413, 44339503, 44339547, 44339651, 44339850, 44339914, 44339948, 44339972, 44340221, 44340375, 44340530, 44341158, 44342570, 44342720, 44342741, 44342764, 44342777, 44342790, 44342844, 44342920, 44342991, 44343041, 44343949, 44343979, 44344082, 44344100, 44344240, 44344352, 44344472, 44344634, 44345078, 44345833, 44346001, 44346163, 44346497, 44346682, 44346787, 44346814, 44346831, 44347009, 44347081, 44347127, 44347188, 44347265, 44347305, 44347461, 44347811, 44347862, 44363954, 44363985, 44364021, 44364117, 44364177, 44364283, 44364342, 44364369, 44364391, 44364411, 44364548, 44364736, 44365028, 44365477.
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:02:28+00:00): تغییرات
VA00 (2021-08-17 18:07:38+00:00): Co znaczy direction = forward ?
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:22:21+00:00): اداره دادگستری
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:23:48+00:00): تغییرات
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:31:16+00:00): دادگستری را عوض نکن
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:39:20+00:00): تغییرات اعمال شود
majid1359 (2017-10-21 05:42:05+00:00): اپدیت شود
Miroslav Suchý (2017-10-23 10:39:18+00:00): Ano to je dobre.
Jeste byste tam mohl pridat
source=survey
nebo
source=gps
podle toho jak vite, ze se to nachazi presne na tom miste.
mavl (2017-10-21 14:58:42+00:00): Здравствуйте. Это кафе уже было обозначено. Вы добавили его снова, то есть создали дубликат. Этот пакет правок будет частично отменён.
majid1359 (2017-10-21 06:15:46+00:00): تغییرات
mentaken (2020-01-16 17:39:44+00:00): Hallo escada, wat bedoel je met Kasteelhoeve, nu rijschool? De amenity=school en leisure=horse_riding geven een conflict.
escada (2020-01-17 04:50:55+00:00): Hallo mentaken,

die tags komen niet van mij, maar zijn door openstreetmapper001 erop gezet: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78787423#map=19/50.87478/4.26470 en in de vorige changezet van dat object.

Dus ik kan je niet verder helpen

mvg
majid1359 (2017-10-21 06:30:18+00:00): اسم مسجد مسجد امام جواد (ع) است در نقشه ثبت گردد
mavl (2018-12-25 19:52:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:16:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:35:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:51:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:29:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:45:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:33:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:44:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:50:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
user_6110846 (2018-01-04 12:07:57+00:00): согласно правилам проекта название укороченніе неприемлемьі на карте 
Используйте полньіе названия Юридический факультет Донецкого Национального Университета
user_6110846 (2018-01-04 12:09:02+00:00): согласно правилам landuse=depot используется для депо