piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:48:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:50:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Frans S (2021-10-16 10:48:17+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not in according to the HOT quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A:Not accurate mapped
E: buildings not squared
G: Shadow included.



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
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112543261
UrSuS (2022-05-09 10:43:36+00:00): Sveiki! Kas te par nosaumu "Negga weg"?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/993048511
Anrijs Terauds (2022-05-09 10:56:42+00:00): https://vesture.dodies.lv/#m=15/56.70803/24.74958&l=O/VA
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:49:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:55:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Lee Carré (2021-10-16 00:08:11+00:00): That's an enormous bus stop.

http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

What makes for http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
impvan (2021-10-16 11:49:27+00:00): Ah, the dangers of cached unsaved changes...
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:56:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:51:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
user_2066394 (2021-10-16 11:23:37+00:00): Alternativ einfach shop=yes vom Gebäude entfernen und POI-Knoten unverändert beibehalten? shop=yes kam aus der Bearbeitung "Datenfehler korrigiert" (!)

Bei der Reparatur ist building:levels=* verlorengegangen.
munichbiker (2021-10-16 11:43:50+00:00): Hallo,
Das könnte ein Alternativ sein, ich habe aber dagegen entschieden. Ohne der Tag shop=yes wäre es einfach "Gebäude", und das versuche ich zu vermeiden, falls es genauer bekannt ist.

building:levels war absichtlich gelöscht, weil ich es anders erinnere. Werde noch überprüfen, und den richtigen Wert zuschreiben.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:48:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
zluuzki (2022-01-29 20:33:29+00:00): Ob das so sinnvoll war? Zahlreiche Bahnstrecken haben jetzt wikipedia/wikidata-Tags. Diese gehören allerdings in die Streckenrelationen, nicht die Gleise an sich.
Ist jetzt nicht so schlimm, ich verlange jetzt keinen Revert oder so, ich wollte es nur erwähnt haben.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-10-16 00:52:15+00:00): hello, thanks for your contributions. However that road is not tertiary at all in accordance with the portuguese community guidelines, please fix it to residencial
Starrkdave (2021-10-16 12:48:03+00:00): Hello Nuno.
I understand your comment, but I have a few questions on the correct classification os this road.
This is one of the main roads that connects to the localities of Lanço and Lombo. shouldnt this road be terciary as per the guidelines? "Estradas Terciárias
Esta etiqueta é atribuída às Estradas Municipais com pouca expressão e/ou com pouca segurança e condições de circulação (normalmente sem marcação na via ou que terminem em ruas residenciais) e aos Caminhos Municipais, desde que estes não configurem meras ruas residenciais, sem qualquer impacto em ligações entre povoações."
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-10-16 13:01:43+00:00): if that would be the case, we would have 50% of tetiary roads.
Starrkdave (2021-10-16 16:52:00+00:00): Maibe... Is that a big problem? For example, In S. Vicente I find many roads that I feel should have their qualification "elevated". for example, ER 208 from Fajã da Cinza to until the S. Vicente Industrial Area should be a Secondary road. And "Estrada das Lombadas", that is actually called "Estrada Municipal das Lombadas" should be a tertiary instead of Minor/unclass.
The same with "Estrada João Abel de Freitas"(tagged here as sitio do laranjal, I will correct that) It starts and ends in a primary road, and you have to use it to go to Lameiros or Cardais. To me it fits with the description of Tertiary Road.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2021-10-16 19:02:21+00:00): strongly disagree as this would be considered mapping for the render.

regarding ER 208, it will be secondary road as soon as the connection to Estanquinhos is finished.
Starrkdave (2021-10-16 21:51:57+00:00): I agree that ER 208 is not yet a secondary road, as it is unfinished, but for the rest of the roads i mentioned I don't see how you can consider what I said to be "mapping for the render". I just say follow the guidelines as strictly as possible!
I guess we are talking about the rules stated on this page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Portugal/Padroniza%C3%A7%C3%A3o  rigth?
Here it is stated "desde que estes não configurem meras ruas residenciais, sem qualquer impacto em ligações entre povoações". So if the road is not merely residential, and it provides a meaningful connection to a locality, it should be tertiary. Again, I feel I am reading the text, and trying to apply it as linearly as possible, and you are kind of afraid of having too many tertiary roads..... And I fail in seeing the problem with 50% of the roads being tertiary, if that is what they are.
AntMadeira (2021-10-19 00:31:34+00:00): Hi, Starrkdave.
Can you tell me if the roads you changed to tertiary are marked longitudinally?
Starrkdave (2021-10-19 11:04:14+00:00): Hi AntMadeira. No, they are not marked longitudinally
AntMadeira (2021-10-19 13:49:43+00:00): If they are not marked and they are not officially municipal roads (in the highway system, not in the name), they shouldn't be elevated to tertiary roads.

Regards,
António.
Starrkdave (2021-10-20 08:39:11+00:00): Olá António.
Há alguma razão especial para termos esta conversa em Inglês?
Eu reverti as estradas em discussão para "unclassified", mas não acho que a questão esteja resolvida. Por um lado, o facto de a estrada ter marcação não é um factor importante na classificação das vias terciarias, aliás até há um parentesis nas guidelines a dizer que normalmente estas estradas não estão marcadas!
Outra questão que levanta é o facto de estas estradas não serem oficialmente "estradas municipais". Eu já procurei muito, e não encontrei para o concelho de S. Vicente, ou para a ilha da Madeira nenhuma lista das estradas municipais. Onde encontro essa informação? O mais próximo que encontrei foi este plano do pdm de s. Vicente, https://imgur.com/snI6L22 mas não referencia se as estradas são oficialmente estradas municipais.
AntMadeira (2021-10-21 23:08:48+00:00): Olá, starrkdave.
Não há nenhum motivo, limitei-me a seguir o idioma que tinha sido adotado nas mensagens anteriores, provavelmente porque o Nuno pensou que não eras português.

Quanto à edição:
A etiqueta de estrada terciária é atribuída a 1) caminhos municipais 2) estradas não classificadas (com referência oficial) que estejam marcadas longitudinalmente e que tenham alguma relevância no trânsito local. Isso está bem claro na página da padronização das estradas. Claro que esta padronização não vai abranger todos os casos limites/bizarros e exceções, desde que bem justificados. Neste caso em análise, e não conhecendo o terreno, penso que há troços que são claramente estradas residenciais e não "unclassified". Se têm toponímia e têm casas de habitação junto ou perto à estrada, são estradas residenciais.

Outra coisa: os nomes nunca devem estar abreviados.
"Estr. Dona Lucinda de Andrade", por exemplo, deve ser escrito como "Estrada Dona Lucinda de Andrade".
Mais informações, aqui:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Names

Qualquer dúvida, podes contactar-nos por aqui ou no canal Telegram da comunidade portuguesa:
https://t.me/OSMPortugal

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
skquinn (2021-10-15 17:35:16+00:00): Especially when deleting a lot of stuff like this, it is important to use a specific changeset comment so others have a better idea what is going on. Why are these paths and service roads being deleted? What exactly is being "updated" at Brock Park?
ajnunley (2021-10-15 18:45:58+00:00): Sorry about that! I will make sure to add better comments in the future. The old Brock Park Golf Course is being converted into Brock Adventure Park. These old golf course paths were converted into a disc golf area, with some different paths than the old routes. The 2 original bridges were removed & 1 was replaced with a brand new one. And, the John Ralston entrance is still currently closed due to construction and work on the east side of the park. 

Here is a sample of the new paths (sorry, I didn't have time to draw them in yet)

https://www.dgcoursereview.com/media.php?id=11953&mode=media#
skyper (2021-10-17 12:27:53+00:00): Hi 5bird
Yes, there are problems with the suggestions from iD. E.g. https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=74011 and my comment https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=843723#p843723.
Especially, touching objects just to change FIXME to fixme is not nice as there is nothing wrong with FIXME and it is not deprecated.

Instead solving the issue and removing the FIXME completely would help a lot more. Do you plan to do so?

Regards, skyper
5bird (2021-11-22 15:33:05+00:00): Hi skyper,
thank you for the information. I totally agree with your opinion in the post mentioned.
Please, could you revert the changes or tell me how to revert the changeset?

BR 5bird
skyper (2021-12-20 13:29:35+00:00): Hi 5bird
sorry, for the late response missed yours.
I am undecided whether to revert or leave it as it is, as it would just add up again to the version number without changing anything and for sure not change the FIXMEs themselves.
I rather revert it the next time I gonna make some real changes to the objects and hopefully getting rid of the FIXME. At least for the public_transport objects this will be quite soon, I guess.

By the way, the power substation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/905874203) ref tag should rather be expressed as address and addr:*

Take care,
skyper
ftrebien (2025-03-12 00:48:19+00:00): Nunca foi 60 km/h na Bartolomeu de Gusmão entre a Oscar Horn e a Guia Lopes, estava mapeado certo antes desta alteração.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:58:38+00:00): Объясните свою правку. Похоже на вандализм.
literan (2021-10-17 17:06:51+00:00): в следующий раз за такое будет блок
skyper (2021-10-18 22:59:40+00:00): Hello 5bird
Please, this is no playground and the surface is not salt. We probably have no tag for it but using a wrong one is not a solution. You can always create new tags.
I rather tend to healthcare than leisure here as this is more a therapy.
Taginfo shows two keys with value "salt_inhalation_therapy":
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=salt_inhalation_therapy#values

Please, change it to one of these tags. Thanks

Best regards, skyper
5bird (2021-11-22 16:50:26+00:00): Hello skyper,
thanks again for suggesting the tags "salt_inhalation_therapy". I'll gladly use this.
Do you have any advice for me whether it is healthcare or amenity?
Thanks!
BR 5bird
skyper (2021-11-26 18:39:28+00:00): Salli 5bird
Habe mittlerweile festgestellt, dass "playground" in OSM für alles möglich verwendet wird. Gefällt mir zwar nicht, aber ohne Alternativen wird sich daran auch nichts ändern.

`healtcare` hat den Vorteil, dass ich `amennity` noch für was anderes verwenden kann.

P.S.: Wenn ich Dir doch noch beim Umstieg auf JOSM helfen kann, stehe ich Dir für Fragen und Tipps zur Verfügung.

Grüße skyper
Wilmer Osario (2021-10-19 10:06:17+00:00): Please do not remove the name of the ramps, called "distribuidores", because those are the official and colloquial names that are given to these types of roads in Venezuela. Their names are very important in road navigation in this country.
VigotheCarpathian (2021-10-19 17:16:29+00:00): See changeset: 112667609 for details.
Syl (2021-10-16 15:41:48+00:00): Hello, I revert this changeset, it had no information in OpenStreetMap.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:55:11+00:00): Для точки внутри здания не надо указывать адрес, так как он наследуется от полигона здания. Телефон указыватеся в формате +7 999 9999999 без тире.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112545830
Andrea Musuruane (2021-10-16 09:34:58+00:00): Ciao. Dubito che il seguente nodo sia un'area di servizio (autostradale) https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9174682617/ Puoi spiegare cosa stavi cercando di inserire? Ciao, Andrea
nicovota (2021-10-16 11:17:51+00:00): Ciao Andrea in effetti volevo inserire un area picnic
Lo correggi tu o faccio io?
Grazie mille x la nota
Andrea Musuruane (2021-10-16 11:52:40+00:00): Correggio io. Ciao, Andrea
SomeoneElse (2021-10-24 10:51:33+00:00): Hello,
I hope you don't mind me asking a couple of questions - in this changeset you've set the maxspeed of the roundabout as "70mph" - that seems wrong on a couple of levels - normally the convention is to have a space between the number and "mph" (not a big issue, but JOSM's vaidator flags it).
The other is that 70 seems unlikely for something that was previously UK:nsl_single (i.e. 60)?
Normally when something is within a national speed limit section I'd add both "maxspeed=60 mph" and "maxspeed:type=GB:nsl_single" to make it obvious what the actually speed is and how it is set.
Finally one more question - what does "source:tooling" in the changeset tag?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-10-24 10:54:04+00:00): Hallo,
Ich hoffe, es macht Ihnen nichts aus, wenn ich ein paar Fragen stelle - in diesem Änderungssatz haben Sie die Höchstgeschwindigkeit des Kreisverkehrs auf "70mph" eingestellt - das scheint auf einigen Ebenen falsch zu sein - normalerweise ist es üblich, ein Leerzeichen zwischen den Zahl und "mph" (kein großes Problem, aber der Validator von JOSM weist darauf hin).
Die andere ist, dass "70 mph" für etwas unwahrscheinlich erscheint, das zuvor UK:nsl_single (d. h. "60 mph") war?
Normalerweise, wenn etwas innerhalb eines nationalen Geschwindigkeitsbegrenzungsbereichs liegt, würde ich sowohl "maxspeed=60 mph" als auch "maxspeed:type=GB:nsl_single" hinzufügen, um offensichtlich zu machen, was die tatsächliche Geschwindigkeit ist und wie sie eingestellt wird.
Abschließend noch eine Frage - was bedeutet "source:tooling" im Changeset-Tag?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Andy
DennisL (2021-10-24 11:25:12+00:00): Hi Andy,

schau noch mal nach dem Leerzeichen. Das sieht auf meiner Seite korrekt aus.

Die 70 ist in der Tat ein Typo. Hab ich gefixt. Danke

source=tooling bedeutet, dass das Straßensegment von einem meiner Tools identifiziert wurde. Details dazu werde ich bald an anderer Stelle veröffentlichen.

Grüße,
Dennis
SomeoneElse (2021-10-24 11:49:21+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3376262 still has "maxspeed=70mph" on it.
Please do not remove the type information - move it to "maxspeed:type=GB:nsl_single" instead.
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-10-24 11:49:49+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/3376262 hat immer noch "maxspeed=70mph" drauf.
Bitte entfernen Sie die Typinformationen nicht - verschieben Sie sie stattdessen nach "maxspeed:type=GB:nsl_single".
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Andy
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:49:55+00:00): Во-первых, в России линки принято рисовать по младшему типу. У вас сейчас осталось главное примыкание типа service, а съезды с трассы и на трассу почему-то secondary_link. В этом нет логики и выглядит странно.
Без запрета соответствующих манёвров это вдвойне странно? Или просто для красоты рисуем?

Настоятельно рекомендую сначала либо читать вики, либо спрашивать в сообществе в ТГ-канале: @ruosm
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112547440
RemyDog (2021-10-19 20:43:26+00:00): Спасибо за информацию, Ser9ei. Я узнал об этом предпочтении политики только после того, как вы уже заметили мои правки. Я еще раз пересмотрю любые другие дороги, которые требуют исправления. Мне любопытно, о чем вы имеете в виду, когда упоминаете "запрет на определенные маневры". Вы описываете ограничения поворота, которые, по вашему мнению, следует добавить? Не могли бы вы добавить их, чтобы показать мне, что вы имеете ввиду?

Спасибо,
RemiDog
Ser9ei (2021-10-20 05:35:35+00:00): Да, имелись в виду turn restrictions https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction

Я бы добавил ограничения, но вы убрали дополнительные полосы для правого поворота. Суть в том, что, если добавляете отдельную полосу для правого поворота, то этот манёвр на основном примыкании стоит запретить.
Ser9ei (2021-10-20 06:01:40+00:00): Сделал для примера тут: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/61.34770/73.62871

Для unclassified нет соответствующего линка, поэтому использован основной тип.
RemyDog (2021-10-20 22:38:57+00:00): Спасибо за вашу готовность обсудить это со мной. Я смоделировал эти перекрестки так как вы нам предложили. Я проинформировал других в моей команде и теперь мы попытаемся смоделировать ссылки в соответствии со стандартами, которые вы нам предоставили.

RemyDog
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:40:19+00:00): "улица" пишется с маленькой буквы и после названия, если название выражено прилагательным, т.е. "Солнечная улица"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112547459
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:35:40+00:00): Пожалуйста, сначала разберитесь хотя бы в азах osm, потом приступайте к редактированию. Меняя значение с unclassified на track, вы фактически ломаете навигацию, так как со стандартными настройками большинство навигаторов не поведёт через track. Если это дорога обычно не используется и проходима только для внедорожника или спецтехники, то такая правка легитимна. Но тут это единственная дорога к НП, насколько я вижу. Для проходимости другие ключи:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:smoothness
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:surface
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:tracktype

Эту правку откачу, так как к НП должна вести хотя бы одна дорога выше track.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112547764
Вадим Медведев (2021-10-16 14:54:51+00:00): Перевалка - это не населенный пункт, а маленькая турбаза. 

И естественно цель данной правки была в том, чтобы навигатор НИ В КОЕМ случае не вёл по этой дороге, т.к. 99% машин там не проедут. Это не дорога, а направление, не более.

Собственно я сам по OSM в своё время туда сунулся и быстро осознал свою ошибку. 

Правильный путь (проезжабельный на кроссовере в хорошую погоду) - это объездная тропа чуть западней. Если вы знаете как сделать так, чтобы навигация вела именно по нему, но не по лобовому подъёму - сделайте именно так. 

Но повторюсь - в текущем виде карта неверна и ведёт людей в засаду.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 15:29:42+00:00): Дайте номер линии, которая проезжабельна. Для этого в слоях карты нажмите "Данные карты" и выберете дорогу. В левой панели появится "Линия:" с номером. Номер скиньте сюда. Тогда поправлю навигацию.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 15:32:47+00:00): Или надо комплексно подходить к маршруту. Меняя просто кусок трассы на track, вы просто разрываете граф для тех, кто специально не настраивает навигатор на использование просёлочных дорог.  Меняя один подъезд на track, надо обязательно отметить другой как минимум как unclassified.
Вадим Медведев (2021-10-16 15:43:46+00:00): Way: 313361138
Вадим Медведев (2021-10-16 15:45:41+00:00): А есть какой-то FAQ или best practices по обозначению дорог? 

Как асфальтовые обозначать понятно. А как лучше обозначать типичные российские градации типа "нормальная гравийка", "хорошая грунтовка", "плохая грунтовка", "совсем плохая, только на подготовленном джипе"?
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 16:35:54+00:00): Основной источник информации по редактированию карты - это вики: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%97%D0%B0%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B0

А вообще полезно присоединиться к сообществу в телеграме: @ruosm, где можете задавть любые вопросы.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 16:47:43+00:00): Исправил навигацию. Но, вообще, судя по Страве, чаще используется дорога напрямик. Хотя для велосипедистов, может, так быстрее.
eBin (2021-11-17 16:50:53+00:00): Mieszkańcy nie mają teraz jak dojechać do swoich domów. Na prawdę jest tutaj jakiś kamień i droga się kończy czy mogę to poprawić?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9174754935
Władysław Komorek (2021-11-18 07:33:32+00:00): Był krawężnik. Przejazd był przez ten krawężnik.
Konieczna wizja lokalna, przed zmianą, którego brak na Geoportal..
Może już skończyli brukować Fiołkową,.
philippec (2021-10-15 17:40:18+00:00): Blankenberge industrieterrein De Riethoek aed, op het gras gezet en een foto met lat/lon en tijd, zodat controle en onderhoud gemakkelijk wordt.
Ser9ei (2021-10-16 14:26:27+00:00): По-моему, вы двигаете объекты без правильно настроенного смещения подложки. Рекомендую сначала выравнивать подложку по Strava Heatmap: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Strava
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/112548893
urbalazs (2021-10-20 06:34:23+00:00): Szia zsolt! Szép munka a növényzet megrajzolása a Tétényi fennsíkon. Viszont a landuse=forest olyan területre való, ahol ültetett erdő van kitermelési céllal. Itt egyértelműen nem ez a helyzet. Át tudnád írni natural=wood értékre? Bővebben a wikiben: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dforest