piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2018-02-17 21:55:54+00:00): Kleine aanpassing verricht: 
► Uw node samengevoegd met bestaande adresnode
-tevens website toegevoegd
GerdP (2023-12-27 09:11:26+00:00): Moin aus Wildeshausen!
Diese runden Dinger 
https://www.osm.org/way/651783636
https://www.osm.org/way/400984498
https://www.osm.org/way/562071735
sind ziemlich laut Luftbild ziemlich sicher keine Silos sondern entweder man_made=storage_tank 
building=storage_tank
oder evtl. 
building=digester
Joško Horvat (2023-12-27 22:27:55+00:00): Hi,
Da ich nicht mehr in Deutchland bin, habe ich keine möglichkeit das nachzuprüfen. Bitte mach es so, wie du es für richtig hältst. Gruß nach Oldenburg.
GerdP (2023-12-28 08:20:25+00:00): OK, wollte nur sicher stellen, dass das unterschiedliche Tagging bekannt ist, weil hier in der Gegend so viele falsche silo erfasst wurden.
user_5359 (2018-02-17 21:23:48+00:00): Welcome to OSM! The tag area=yes only with the key name is useless. Did you mean place=neighbourhood (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Aplace%3Dneighbourhood) ?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:20:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:28:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:25:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:25:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:20:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:31:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
user_6110846 (2018-02-22 20:33:26+00:00): Тропа от ст. Партизанская на Юки-Тепе название не соотвествует формату Ест ь правило: в name мы не пишем то что дублирует название категории обьекта .Достаточно Станция Партизанская - Юки-Тепе

Второе в name нельзя писать сокращения и абревиатуры Если надо конвертор 'это сделает сам для каждого рендера .
user_6110846 (2018-02-22 20:33:56+00:00): а извините забыл поздороваться
sergeybe (2018-02-22 20:43:49+00:00): Здравствуйте! Внимательно посмотрите историю линии. Я редактировал только точки тропы и не вносил название. Я не первый год редактирую карту и прекрасно понимаю. 
Там сокращение не "станция", а "стоянка".
Спасибо!
user_6110846 (2018-02-23 06:33:58+00:00): Вот видите. Я воспринял  ст. как сокращение от станция . А вы утверждаете стоянка.   Вот почему на карте должна быть полностью стоянка Партизанская . Что б было четко каждому понятно.категорию объекта.
sergeybe (2018-02-23 07:24:53+00:00): Как насчет того, что этот вопрос не ко мене?
user_6110846 (2018-02-23 08:11:39+00:00): я задал уточнительный вопрос попереднику .Ждём ответа. Предъяву вам забираю .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:28:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:24:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2018-04-28 23:27:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 58510954, 58506260, 58507519, 58514650, 58514174, 58505701, 58509392, 58500784, 58512130, 58515035, 58510461, 58506875, 58508734, 58513728, 58513212, 58511524, 58502701, 58504854, 58509968, 58508131, 58512688 where the changeset comment is: Reverting recent unedited changes by Bonya_23, see http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=4355762 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Bonya_23/blocks for laundry list of issues; no communication.
Constable (2018-02-18 11:00:26+00:00): ciao, bentornato su openstreetmap con un nuovo account!
Scrivo direttamente in italiano tanto lo capisci di sicuro.
Qual è la fonte per queste tue modifiche? perché converti le strade in residenziali? perché non rispondi ai commenti? perché continui ad allineare elementi della mappa alle immagini aeree di Bing? perché nonostante i millemila changeset salvati, continui a inserire descrizioni senza senso? chi è sovigliana?
Pieter Vander Vennet (2018-02-18 20:56:35+00:00): Hey Maarten,

Niet elk paadje hoeft een naam - die voegen we enkel toe als er een naambordje staat. De paaltjes waarover je het hebt heb ik toegevoegd door een extra punt op de wegel te zetten en dit te markeren met 'bollard'.

Bedankt voor je toevoegingen!
viloan (2018-02-17 21:44:46+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

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

Também 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 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!
ACarlotti (2018-04-30 11:19:50+00:00): Can you provide some evidence of this? The only documents I can find online relating to this suggest that it might become an 'expressway', which is not (initially, at least) the same thing.
Greyseal18 (2018-04-30 14:40:15+00:00): An expressway is a new type of motorway and the A14(M) will be the first one.
ACarlotti (2018-04-30 21:06:00+00:00): I've now read more of the Highways England Strategic Road Network Initial Report, and it seems that I was previously misinterpreting it. According to the report (P58-59), the highest classifications of roads will be "Smart Motorway", "Motorway", "Expressway" and "All Purpose Trunk Road", with expressways differing from smart motorways only in the typical number of lanes (2 instead of 4) and the typical designation (A*(M) instead of M*). I had previously read only P78, from which I incorrectly inferred that 'expressway' referred to only phases 1-3 in that description, whereas I now believe those are pre-expressway.
(Since I presume you've already read that document, I write this more for the benefit of anyone else reading this.)
SomeoneElse (2018-07-28 09:35:16+00:00): What actually was the source for this change?  Is the licence compatible with OSM?
Greyseal18 (2018-07-28 12:56:25+00:00): Highways England Strategic Road Network Initial Report
DD1GJ (2018-02-17 23:57:14+00:00): Hallo Varrom, nachträglich willkommen bei OSM und Danke für Deine Beiträge vom letzten Jahr. Allerdings war Deine gestriger Beitrag sehr unglaubwürdig bzw. falsch. Ich habe daher alle obskuren Pokémon-relevanten Objekte gelöscht oder auf den eigentlichen Wert wieder hergestellt.

Lies Dir bitte das folgenden Links durch.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

http://blog.openstreetmap.de/blog/2017/01/achtung-pokemon-alarm/
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-10-18 09:51:27+00:00): Can you look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1564333?
DaveF (2022-09-21 14:28:36+00:00): Hi
To check, do you recall if this path was signed as a public footpath?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/562081434/history

It's shown as a PROW on the council's data, but I seem to remember the signs & gates going along this route:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370727134#map=17/51.43223/-2.31142
Steve Mapping (2022-09-21 15:42:11+00:00): Sorry No. to long ago
Road–Runner (2018-04-10 10:41:11+00:00): ist das sicher ein autoverkäufer oder nur ein vermieter?
melnibon (2019-10-10 18:00:44+00:00): Bonjour. Pourrais-tu vérifier la réalité du chemin #562083141 que tu as recopié du cadastre, sans aucun discernement comme d'habitude puisque tu cartographies sans visiter les lieux. Merci de respecter les randonneurs qui comptent sur la carte. Et fais quelques efforts pour limiter ta mégalomanie à polluer la carte en qualifiant les talus et fossés de "path" et "tracks".
melnibon (2019-10-18 17:24:00+00:00): Salut jojo29,
Encore un problème avec un autre chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/562083150
Je te mets en demeure de :
- soit le supprimer,
- soit prouver son existence par une photo ou une trace GPX récente.
Faute de quoi, je vais signaler ton cas à SomeoneElse et demander qu'il bloque ton compte le temps que tu t'expliques.
jo2929 (2019-10-18 21:26:09+00:00): Il y a des manières de s'exprimer qui me dépassent. Il aurait été préférable pour tout le monde que tu  procèdes à la suppression du tracé incriminé par toi-même plutôt que te perdre du temps dans des invectives qui n'ont pas leurs places ici
Rom1 (2019-11-04 10:07:43+00:00): Bonjour, je me permets d'intervenir dans cette discussion. Je peux comprendre l'énervement de melnibon car il est beaucoup plus gratifiant de contribuer à OSM en y ajoutant des informations justes que de passer du temps à corriger des contributions erronées. jo2929, il n'y a aucun intérêt à vouloir "remplir" la base si la qualité n'y est pas. Merci de prendre en compte les observations qui te sont faites dès l'origine. Aussi, il n'est pas correct de demander à quelqu'un d'autre de faire le ménage s'il s'agit de contributions manifestement incorrectes. Merci et bonne continuation à tous les deux.
melnibon (2019-11-04 16:37:02+00:00): Bonsoir à tous,
Merci à Rom1 pour son avis. Bon. Je reconnais mon énervement et mes propos déplacés.
Juste pour faire connaître mon point de vue : je suis principalement randonneur, à pied et à VTT. La carte OSM me sert à préparer des itinéraires et arrivé sur zone, à éventuellement modifier le trajet prévu, avec l'appli OSMand. Je compte donc fortement sur une carte correcte.
Ce qui me pose un énorme problème, ce sont les faux sentiers et chemins. J'ai déjà souffert, dans le centre Bretagne, d'un chemin totalement impassable, disparu depuis des années, obligeant à un long détour, je ne serais pas venu là si j'avais su, au point que, maintenant, je me fie seulement à la carte IGN (qui, elle aussi n'est pas toujours très à jour). Qu'il y ait une ou deux erreurs de ci, de là, c'est inévitable. Mais qu'il y ait un nombre conséquent de chemins faux, c'est très grave. Je n'ose pas imaginer le problème en montagne...
Le cadastre n'est pas une carte géographique, mais représente seulement les limites de propriétés. Ensuite, les propriétaires et communes font ce qu'ils veulent avec leurs chemins. Ils les maintiennent quand ils en ont la nécessité. Alors recopier le cadastre systématiquement, sans visiter les lieux, ni même vérifier avec les photos aériennes récentes, c'est irresponsable, et ça devrait être condamné très fermement.
Dans ma zone, il y a deux personnes qui se livrent cette petite compétition, jo2929 et DiaouligRu. Ils tracent des chemins dans des fossés, des talus, des limites de champ, etc. en recopiant directement le cadastre. Souvent, ça tombe quand même juste, mais dans de trop nombreux cas, c'est faux.
En plus, un truc assez marrant, c'est que, sur le cadastre, les contours des bâtiments sont très approximatifs, car dessinés à la main d'après les déclarations de travaux des propriétaires (on doit dessiner soi-même sur un extrait du cadastre quand on fait construire quelque chose, genre un cabanon). Alors les chemins tracés par les propriétaires quand aucun géomètre n'y a travaillé...
Il faudrait prendre définitivement conscience qu'il est très difficile de supprimer un chemin tracé par erreur : il faut effectivement s'en rendre compte, donc planifier une randonnée par là et constater sur place, d'un bout à l'autre, etc. Tandis que dessiner à partir d'une trace GPX valide, puis affiner avec le cadastre, ça serait honnête.
Bonne soirée à tous,
os-emmer (2024-02-12 17:00:04+00:00): Hallo Lionking,
du hast hier name=THW an ein Gebäude vergeben. Gehört das Gebäude zum THW Ortsverband Oberviechtach? Weißt du, wie es dies bezüglich mit dem östlich von hier gelegenen Gebäude aussieht?
Lionking (2024-02-12 17:21:06+00:00): Hallo,
die drei Gebäude rechts der Straße "Am Sandradl" gehören alle zum THW.
Wie der rechtliche Stand aussieht, sprich, ob die Gebäude dem Ortsverband gehören oder dem Staat kann ich nicht sagen.
os-emmer (2024-02-12 17:57:04+00:00): Hallo Lionking,
danke für deine schnelle und konkrete Antwort. Ich habe jetzt das THW als operator an den Gebäuden eingetragen und den name=THW von dem einen Gebäude entfernt, da das Gebäude ja nicht so heißt.
GinaroZ (2018-02-17 22:55:01+00:00): Pretty sure that is a motorway link - and not sure it should be called A92(M) either... https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=A92(M)
Greyseal18 (2018-02-18 10:13:51+00:00): Well if you go onto view source you can see it’s a current motorway and if you go onto a website called Pathetic Motorways it also uses the A92(M)
SomeoneElse (2018-07-22 21:58:15+00:00): As discussed on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/56451569 the Sabre wiki isn't an appropriate source for OSM.
Greyseal18 (2018-07-22 22:03:46+00:00): Yes it is as I use it and all the information is true and if there was false info on the website your account will get banned. Also most of the info is on Transport for Scotland and Highways England.
It is the information on OMS that can be false. This is not 1 of them it is true.
Greyseal18 (2018-07-22 22:04:29+00:00): Also if you think it’s false then I’m removing the A14(M) from the A1(M) J14 to the A14 Spur
SomeoneElse (2018-07-22 22:56:30+00:00): @Greyseal18 To be clear, just because a source is "likely to be correct" does not mean that we will be able to use it in OpenStreetMap.  It has to be licensed appropriately so that it's OK for OSM to use it and also for downstream data consumers to use it as well. This applies to data from Sabre, Transport for Scotland and Highways England - the if the information has been released under an appropriate licence then you can use it in OSM; if not then you can't.  Sometimes sources that you'd think "ought" to be compatible aren't - wikipedia is an example of that.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
GinaroZ (2018-07-23 19:05:45+00:00): @Greyseal18 - The Sabre page I linked to literally says the A92(M) is a possible number, and the existence of the number is disputed. So probably best to leave the ref= blank!

However the other issue is why it was changed to a motorway, as it seems like a motorway_link to me?
viloan (2018-02-17 22:56:37+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

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

Também 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 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!
lakedistrict (2018-02-18 14:39:42+00:00): Hi Greyseal18 and welcome to OSM. 

I don't think that renumbering the motorway slip roads and changing them from highway=motorway_link to highway=motorway is entirely correct. The motorway sliproads were tagged A1508 and A167(M) because that's how they're labelled on the road signs. We tend to "map what's on the ground" through surveys (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground) rather than take info from other maps and websites. Any questions just ask. I can revert this changeset for you if you like.
 
lakedistrict :)
Greyseal18 (2018-02-18 14:43:00+00:00): If it’s more on the ground why can I see the A195(M) and the A14(M). Also on website like Pathetic Motorways and SABRE Wiki can I see the number A1058(M).
lakedistrict (2018-02-18 14:52:43+00:00): I don't know about those motorways, I was talking about A1508 and A167(M). Perhaps the road signs that say "A1508" and "A167(M)" (surveyed by OSMers) are incorrect, if the websites you mention are more reliable. But motorway_link should be used for sliproads, which is what these are.
Greyseal18 (2018-02-18 14:55:30+00:00): Ok I got the road type wrong but SABRE Wiki is the most factual website on the road network. Go to https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/wiki/index.php?title=A1058(M) and you will see that I’m right.
SK53 (2018-02-18 15:19:17+00:00): We don't generally give motorways names: these are usually terms which were used to describe the motorway when it was built. These names are not signed, nor in widespread use. Adding such names can interfere with routing applications which use such information for spoken directions. Changing motorway_link to motorway can also have unwanted effects on routing information (for instance routers can no longer identify that the road is a slip road). There is a substantial backlog of discussions about these issues going back over 9 years. The names on the motorways were not lacking we (that is the GB mapping community on the talk-gb list) have at various times discussed this and decided that the name tag is not the appropriate place for such information on OSM. Furthermore if there are no signs showing the highway code then in general we dont show it. You can use admin_ref or official_ref for such things. The reason is that we follow an 'on-the-ground rule : another mapper should be able to go to the location and say "Oh, yes this is the A1058(M) because that's what the signs say".
Richard (2018-02-18 15:41:41+00:00): > SABRE Wiki is the most factual website on the road network

It also doesn't expressly have an open licence. We can't copy information from it without that.
lakedistrict (2018-02-18 19:12:41+00:00): Following the above discussion, I've reverted this changeset in 56471405.
Constable (2018-02-18 11:06:04+00:00): Ciao, bentrovato anche qua. Tieni conto per favore che il tuo "editing cima" è come il mio "drank latte" per colazione. Per favore inserisci dei commenti adatti alle tue modifiche e soprattutto inizia a collaborare con gli altri mappatori.
Da dove arrivano i nomi delle strade di Porlezza? google maps? sedute con sciamani aborigeni? geoportale nazionale del regno di Andany?
Alecs01 (2018-02-18 12:29:09+00:00): Ciao, per indicare che si tratta di un campo di calcio https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/81694855/history, il tag corretto è sport=soccer, name=calcio non ha senso, non è senz'altro il nome proprio del campetto
ACS1986 (2018-02-18 17:13:55+00:00): Hi,
Welcome to OSM. The Walton Summit motorway has been discussed before on the UK mailing list, see https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2017-May/020281.html
Though 'Walton Summit Motorway' is a convenient description for road enthusiasts to use to refer to the road, it has never been its proper name and it shouldn't be tagged as such in OSM. We use the loc_name for unofficial colloquial names and this seems the best fit for this scenario. I've change the tags back accordingly.
I'm happy to help if you have any questions or need any help. If you'd like to revisit the discussion about the name of this road, please feel free to join the mailing list and start a new discussion.
KInd regards,
Adam
treestryder (2018-02-26 14:31:47+00:00): This looks like a house.  Is it really named "SigmaCubes"?
wyskoj (2018-02-26 16:17:48+00:00): Yes, it is a business office. You can confirm by contacting them.
treestryder (2018-02-26 16:29:08+00:00): Ah... Then you will want to add an office tag. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:office
freebeer (2018-05-30 16:53:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 59404291 where the changeset comment is: Delete bogus maps.me personal inappropriate spammage