piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
glglgl (2018-06-25 10:50:17+00:00): Alas, this change now makes some parts of relation 3792880 overlap themselves.
I don't know what was the point of doing so, but maybe the coastlines and the boundaries should be separated here.
save2desk (2018-06-24 16:50:09+00:00): Откатил.
manings (2018-06-28 06:37:12+00:00): Fixed some errors from this changeset.  See: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60237156
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60117308
save2desk (2018-06-24 16:53:37+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 16:51:16+00:00): Откатил.
eggie (2018-06-24 11:27:04+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
eggie (2018-06-24 11:32:09+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Ddriving_school
Tip: Probeer svp op de adresnode bij te taggen. 
amenity=driving_school toegevoegd en samengevoegd met adresnode.
Paul_012 (2018-06-30 13:05:56+00:00): This edit has been found to be unconstructive and has been reverted.
save2desk (2018-06-24 16:38:11+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:56:08+00:00): Откатил.
"Не удаляйте объекты и теги. Вы ещё недостаточно опытны чтобы судить о том нужен ли данный объект/тег или нет. Даже если вам кажется что этот объект/тег мешает или бесполезен, всё равно воздержитесь от удаления — некоторые методы обозначения объектов могут оказаться неочевидными для новичка."
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:52:07+00:00): Откатил.
BCNorwich (2018-06-24 14:18:16+00:00): Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
The correct way to resolve the problem would be to tag/mark the facility as private or indicate who it is accessible to. It's always best to try to correct the database rather than just delete. Do you need help to revert and correct your editing?

Regards Bernard
curt1us (2018-06-24 14:49:35+00:00): Dear Bernard - thank you for your comments. Of course I am new to map editing, and your point about my first edit and about how to deal with private facilities is well taken  - but I feel there is a difference between showing facilities on the map which everyone would be able to see or know exist because they can be observed from the public domain and which they may need to know the location of, although they are private and off-limits, versus those facilities that are strictly private and the location of which is of no interest to anyone. Many buildings have internal laundry facilities but still those are not indicated on a public map because they are of no interest to anyone except the owners and tenants of that building. Nobody except the residents of these premesis need to know about the existence and location of these washing machines. My problem is that I have seen random people trying to access our strictly private facilities here to do their laundry, by slipping into the building when others are leaving – the reason that they know there is such a facility is probably that it is indicated on a public map. This is unacceptable and for this reason I deleted the marker from the map. I think your suggestion to revert the edit would be applicable in a different case, namely, as said, for a facility that is private but the location of which is of general interest. I hope you agree. Looking forward to your reply.
eggie (2018-06-26 19:46:59+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap Nederland. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:35:18+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:31:58+00:00): Откатил.
Paul_012 (2018-06-30 13:05:01+00:00): This edit has been found to be unconstructive and has been reverted.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:28:12+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:26:17+00:00): Откатил. И продолжу откатывать, пока не будет объяснения удалениям объектов, которые кем-то созданы и кому-то нужны.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:24:05+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:22:20+00:00): Откатил.
eggie (2018-06-24 11:36:15+00:00): Info heb ik samengevoegd met de adresnode
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:18:45+00:00): Откатил.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:14:18+00:00): Откатил.
frydzio (2018-06-24 19:38:17+00:00): Dlaczego wybudowany chodnik wzdłuż Nowomelomanów zamienił się w nieznaną drogę z ograniczeniem prędkości do 50 km/h? Czy Nowomelomanów da się dojechać do osiedla? Na koniec zeszłego roku brakowało tam przepustu http://zmid.waw.pl/files/galerie/zadania_realizowane/Czerniakowska_-_bis_-_budowa_ulicy_na_odc._od_ul._Czerniakowskiej_do_ul._Wolickiej/006_7_grudnia_2017_r/DSC_0842.jpg
MarcinLeitner (2018-06-24 20:14:36+00:00): Racja - pomyliłem kreski. Już poprawione na chodnik. Nie ma jeszcze przebicie Nowomelomanów do osiedla, ale da się dojechać już prawie do tego kanałku (jak byłem tam tydzień temu, to oficjalnie dało się tam dojechać)
frydzio (2018-06-25 07:15:33+00:00): Skoro nie da się dojechać do osiedla to droga też jest do poprawki. Teraz patrząc na mapę możliwość dojazdu istnieje. Należy przeciąć ją przed kanałkiem. Algorytmy wyznaczające trasę jeszcze nie uwzględniają tych zmian, ale zaczną wyznaczać tędy trasę.
dvdhoven (2018-06-24 12:43:41+00:00): De Schaapsallee is doorgeknipt en daarbij is de volgorde van rcnroute 41-95, de LF4 en een Europese fietsroute verstoord geraakt.
Dit hersteld.
Na doorknippen van een weg altijd alle routerelaties controleren op verstoring van de volgorde of voor het doorkniippen de routerelaties ieder in een eigen venster openen, na doorknippen verversen en eventueel nog de volgorde herstellen.
Commodoortje (2018-06-24 13:18:24+00:00): Excuus.
Normaal gaat het opknippen in JOSM wel goed volgens mij. 
Helaas heb ik geen ervaring met de tools waarmee jij de problemen opspoort (VMarc)
dvdhoven (2018-06-24 13:38:49+00:00): Nee, het opknippen in JOSM gaat heel vaak fout. 
En verder no hard feelings. Ik ben nog al eens direct in mijn bewoordingen, maar het was niet hard bedoeld
Dat was gewoon bedoeld als attentieseintje.
Overigens ben je in een gebied bezig, waar ik al als klein jongetje kwam.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:02:00+00:00): Не лезь в редактирование карт, не ознакомившись с мануалами.
save2desk (2018-06-24 12:11:30+00:00): Откатил.
5m4u9 (2018-06-26 20:28:11+00:00): hola, gracias por registrar el negocio, pero como se registró 3 veces, lo tuve que revertir (borrarlo), vuelve a registrar en el lugar correcto
dikkeknodel (2018-06-25 09:34:52+00:00): Hoi melwil,
Du hast eine Review gefragt, deswegen schreibe ich dir. 
Du hast den Fussweg die Markierungen horse=no und motor_vehicle=no gegeben. Jedoch sie nicht falsch sind, sind sie auch nicht nötwending. highway=footway impliziert schon das Pferde und Kraftfahrzeugen nicht erlaubt sind (sehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access-Restrictions#Switzerland).
Der access=destination beim Höhenweg ist vielleicht zu allgemein, weil das jetzt bedeutet das auch Fussgänger nur als Zielverkehr dort sein dürfen. Soll das nicht sein 'motor_vehicle=destination'? Am besten soll du das vor Ort überprüfen, welches Verkehrstafel gibt es dort?
Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel
dikkeknodel (2018-06-25 10:01:26+00:00): Das Haus Hubelacher und der Fussweg überlappen einander, das ist nicht annehmbar. Liebe Grüsse, dikkeknodel
frosm (2024-09-22 09:58:33+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31778762/history
c'est un double sens cyclable ou pas ?
CartoCharles (2024-09-24 12:47:58+00:00): Bonjour,

Oui c'en est un :)
WomoMap (2018-07-26 05:24:18+00:00): I have made a mistake in adding the source "map.geo.admin.ch" witch was only the base info for my trip. The data I entered is from my own experience and actually I am the source.
eggie (2018-06-24 12:48:38+00:00): Waarom verwijder je de adressen zoals die bekend zijn bij het Kadaster? 
Graag reactie
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2018-06-24 12:52:28+00:00): Wanneer deze nummers niet meer in gebruilk zijn dan zou je dit kunnen doorgeven via de site van het Kadaster.
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=hoofdweg%2094%20wester&resultOffset=0&objectId=1895100000017280&geometry.x=261869.00740052&geometry.y=574125.7985982&zoomlevel=7&detailsObjectId=1895010000022558
stromo (2018-06-26 11:29:41+00:00): This is a mechanical edit. I doubt, that you have really verified all 448 features on imagery and so reverted your changeset.
ForstEK (2018-06-26 16:58:28+00:00): Hi, young mapper!
First, this is not a mechanical edit, but a correction of the wrong tagging scheme according to the wiki. Openstreetmap is a large geodatabase, and there are rules, they are set out in the wiki, the database must be in order, and your rollback has returned a mess. The tag man_made=cooling_tower is outdated, it is described there. In addition, the package of edits have been removed extra outdated tags like source=bing (by the rules, this is written in the notes to the package of edits).
Second, if you "doubt", this not means, that I not tested - first find the example wrong changed object, and then discuss it.
Third, in addition to JOSM, there are many other, more complex and strong programs and tools - overpass, QGIS, ArcGIS, QuickMapServices, Level0 and others - the data of that changeset were checked by WMS layers bing and others in QGIS.
woodpeck (2018-06-26 21:14:52+00:00): Hi, young mapper yourself. Please be advised that what you have done *is* a mechanical edit, whether it contains mistakes or not. Any edit where you change objects without inspecting the individual object is a mechanical edit and MUST be discussed with the relevant community beforehand (in this case, either locally with the community in China or on an international mailing list or forum). Whether or not the wiki documents something as outdated does NOT make a difference, and crucially is NOT an excuse for an un-discussed mechanical edit (note that wiki pages do not necessarily reflect what is "correct" either). If you had checked your edits then you would for example have spotted that the cooling towers in https://www.openstreetmap.org/query?lat=40.46248&lon=90.85942#map=19/40.46219/90.85908&layers=D which you have modified contain a "chimney" node which is not how cooling towers ought to be mapped. Reverting an un-discussed mechanical edit (what stromo did) is ok; reverting such a revert (what you did) is the start of an edit war. Don't do it.
ForstEK (2018-06-26 22:28:19+00:00): Hi, woodpeck.
Try to understand.
Yes, I know this rule, but I repeat that the all objects in this changeset were checked by bing images in QGIS, the same could have been created in JOSM, so I do not agree about mechanical editing. Yes, you find a mistake with a chimney inside the cooling tower, but I only checked the cooling towers themselves by downloading them into geojson via overpass. Is it worth discussing every edit at all with the community? I think the question here is more of a tag choice - it doesn't matter to me, but man_made=tower + tower:type=cooling is used much more often according to taginfo and does not cause warnings in the wiki. I am against any "war of changesets", I think it is worth voting and choosing one end variant, but argumentatively, and not for mapping under the render. No one wants meaningless fixes, and everyone is sorry to redo their work, I also did a lot of work when processing these cooling towers, so this issue should be resolved from the top.
dieterdreist (2018-06-26 22:33:11+00:00): I propose you fix the Russian translation of the wiki definition for man_made=cooling_tower
The tag is not deprecated, although there is some discussion because of the 2 alternative ways to tag them
ForstEK (2018-06-26 22:43:30+00:00): It's deal with not a Russian or English page, but in a centralized solution. How many useless fixes! My argument is for the predominant option according to taginfo - there's less work to do to bring everything to one scheme (in the world). We have four different wiki pages now: in English, Czech, German and Russian. Accordingly to stay to just one option, but the current situation seems like a mess.
dieterdreist (2018-06-27 08:25:17+00:00): According to the recent discussion, there is not a clear winner between man_made=tower with tower:type=cooling and the tag man_made=cooling_tower, they are both used in similar numbers.
If you tag these as man_made=tower you will not create more consistency (there are already other objects with "tower" in the name which are established, e.g. man_made=water_tower (84000 uses) and power=tower. The definition of man_made=tower is in conflict with cooling towers for several reasons (not accessible, no platforms, not a building), so IMHO this is not a good solution. What are the advantages of requiring looking at the tower:type tag to see if it is an actual tower, or some other structure like a cooling tower?
iwhs (2018-09-29 15:39:32+00:00): Hi, when you named 'Bullen Hill', you also made this track a bridge......
dvdhoven (2018-06-24 12:37:35+00:00): Knooppuntroute 32-68 was compleet aan gort geholpen. Ik heb hem zo goed mogelijk hersteld, maar ik twijfel of de route zo wel klopt. Het lijkt erop dat er wegen omgebogen zijn met de knooppuntroute erop.
Commodoortje (2018-06-24 13:27:15+00:00): Ik ben vandaag wel bezig geweest met de MTB Route Veluwezoom. Volgens mij (en deep historie heb ik niet aan de relatie 32-68 gezeten, hoogstens heb ik de wegasligging verbeterd.
http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=20208
dvdhoven (2018-06-24 13:54:40+00:00): VMarc heeft tegenwoordig een nieuwe analyse en die geeft aan dat route 32-68 onderbroken is geraakt door wijzigingsset 60118890.
Dat is idd niet deze wijzigingsset, sorry, maar wel een andere wijzigingsset van jou.
Je hoeft ook niet aan de relatie zelf te zitten. Als je bijv. van een weg een disconnect node doet van de node waarmee de weg op een andere weg aansluit, is de route al stuk, zonder dat je iets aan de route hebt gedaan.
Dit is de analyse van VMarc:
https://knooppuntnet.nl/nl/changeset/60118890/3029102
Je moet je hiervoor wel aanmelden met je OSM account
Commodoortje (2018-06-24 19:45:04+00:00): Mocht je meer problemen tegenkomen, laat ze me dan weten. Dan probeer ik te vinden waarom JOSM de ene keer wel, en de andere keer niet een bestaande route in de war gooit na het opknippen van een wegdeel.
eggie (2018-06-24 13:54:55+00:00): Heet de track zonder naam tussen de Schoolweg en de Eschbeekweg misschien Zuidkamp? Die heeft geen naam. Nr 43A en 37 geven dat als straatnaam aan? 
MVG,
Eggie
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-23 01:24:42+00:00): These are not the official names.

Changeset was reverted in:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/132904825
mor (2018-06-26 20:44:01+00:00): No inventes ¿por qué inventas?
Ars-UA (2018-06-24 12:27:54+00:00): area
Noen (2018-06-26 13:44:19+00:00): Om du laster opp endringene for Skien og Trondheim hver for seg, så er det ryddigere.
SHARCRASH (2018-06-24 14:03:27+00:00): You do not
SHARCRASH (2018-06-24 14:11:48+00:00): ...add parking spots along the road with that element and tag otherwise the map will be overloaded with parking signs everywhere. We all know that often we can find parking spots along the roads. There is a specific tag, check here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:parking:lane
I already commented in one of your previous changesets that you should check the OSM's Wikipedia to respect the community consensus and you neither answered, cared, checked and have redone the same mistake.
aixbrick (2018-06-24 13:01:45+00:00): Falscher Kommentar, korrekt: e.GO Werk eingetragen (Quelle: PDOK Luftbild).
viloan (2018-06-24 13:14:52+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

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 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

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!
eggie (2018-06-24 15:46:26+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Kiromiji (2018-06-24 16:44:29+00:00): Thanks, I've seen the comment (dankjewel, ik heb het commentaar gezien)
user_5359 (2018-06-24 14:07:55+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please read the definition of highway type  (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtertiary).
mavl (2018-12-25 00:11:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
user_5359 (2018-06-24 14:10:48+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look of the changed notation of the volleyball pitch.
mavl (2018-12-25 00:15:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mueschel (2018-06-24 17:59:21+00:00): Hallo,
dürfen hier wirklich nur Fußgänger, Radfahrer und Pferde durch? Keine forst/landwirtschaftlichen Fahrzeuge?
Jan
Alibaer (2018-06-25 10:11:37+00:00): Auf diese genaue Unterscheidung habe ich bisher noch nicht so genau geachtet. Mir war nur klar, dass anders als bisher in der OSM dort keine PKWs durchfahren dürfen. Sicher dürfen forstwirtschaftliche Fahrzeuge durch. Bei der nächsten Fahrt dort (evtl. schon heute) schau ich mal, ob ein entsprechendes Vebotsschild aufgestellt ist und ändere entsprechend.
Alibaer (2018-06-25 21:14:46+00:00): War heute auf dieser Strecke. Durchfahrt ist für Autos und Motorräder verboten, Forst- und landwirschaftliche Fahrzeuge frei. Werde es ändern.
Alibaer (2018-06-26 09:39:08+00:00): Wollte den Eintrag ändern, klappt aber mit den Vorgaben auf der Bearbeitenseite nicht. Für den Wegabschnitt gibt es auf beiden Seiten ein Verbotsschild 260 (oben Auto, unten Motorradfahrer), darunter, dass forstwirtschaftliche und landwirtschaftliche Fahrzeuge erlaubt sind. Vielleicht kannst du mir ja schreiben, wie das in der Änderung korrekt eingetragen werden muss.

Gruß Albert
mueschel (2018-06-26 11:19:10+00:00): Dafür gibt es dieses praktische Tool:
http://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=260,1026-38
mavl (2018-12-25 00:22:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
dikkeknodel (2018-06-25 06:49:43+00:00): Hi Patric,
Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap. After your action there were was a naming discrepancy that typically happens with MAPS.me (names different in multiple languages). 

I've corrected that in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60137532

Cheers,
dikkeknodel
mavl (2018-12-24 23:42:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:42:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:48:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:54:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-24 23:47:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:17:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Mike Baggaley (2018-07-06 17:32:16+00:00): HI on footway 200267632 you have set access=no and foot=yes, which leads to confusion as to whether or not pedestrian access is allowed. If pedestrian access is allowed, please remove access=no, if it is not, please remove foot=yes.

Thanks,
Mike
kaferna (2018-07-06 21:06:14+00:00): Hi Mike, thanks for pointing out my error. Pedestrian access is in fact allowed, so I have removed the access=no tag.
BER319 (2018-06-24 17:37:17+00:00): addendum additional cardlayer bing
dikkeknodel (2018-06-25 06:42:41+00:00): Hi sternli,
Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap.

Please take my comment on access restrictions in on of your other changesets into account (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60121168).

Specifically for this changeset I have a question on the amenity=drinking_water node. You have given a name to it which seems more a description, but a description that does not give more information than the amenity=drinking_water tag in itself. The name tag should include the actual name of an object. If there is not really a name, the name tag should not be used.

See the wiki for more details (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names).

Cheers, dikkeknodel
sternli (2018-08-03 19:21:10+00:00): hallo dikkeknodel
du darfst mein Name also entfernen. Danke.
Ich dachte maps.me will einen name haben...
Gruss, sternli
dikkeknodel (2018-08-04 15:40:31+00:00): Danke für die Antwort, ich habe es korrigiert.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61356315
Ich kann die MAPS.ME Implementierung verstehen, weil sie fast oft für Restaurants uzw. gebraucht wird. Aber ein Name gibt man nur wenn etwas wirklich ein Name hat.
LG, dikkeknodel
mavl (2018-12-25 00:13:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
dikkeknodel (2018-06-25 06:37:35+00:00): Hi Sternli,

Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap. You have added a name to the parking, which does not sound like a name, but an access restriction. 

Please read the following wiki page for information how to specify access restrictions correctly, and change accordingly.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
I also see you did similar actions in another changeset, please also update these accordingly:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/60121116

Cheers,
dikkeknodel