piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:06:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:57:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
literan (2021-11-22 20:21:58+00:00): и это дубль
literan (2021-11-22 20:21:31+00:00): дубль, откачу
OSM_RogerWilco (2021-11-22 09:48:56+00:00): Hallo hmkaiser,

wurde dieser automatische Edit besprochen? Ich halte eine Änderung in man_made=storage_tank + content=slurry für sinnvoller, da Gülletanks i.d.R. kein Gebäude nach OSM sind, was wohl auch der Grund ist, warum die auch als man_made=slurry_tank gemappt wurden.

Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dslurry_tank

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
hmkaiser (2021-11-22 10:26:35+00:00): Hallo Roger Wilco,

ich hatte fälschlicherweise in dem Bereich diverse Gülletanks als "man_made=slurry_tank" getagt. Laut OSM-Wiki sind sowohl "building=slurry_tank", als auch "man_made=storage_tank, content=slurry" möglich. Durch den Overpass-Edit habe diese falschen getagten "man_made=slurry_tank" in "building=slurry_tank" geändert.
Leider sind - das ist mir bewusst - die OSM-Keys an diesen Stellen mehrdeutig. Als "building" wird ein permanent "betretbares" Gebäude verstanden. Das ist in Hinblick auf "slurry_tank" eher nicht der Fall. Auf der anderen Seite, ist der Weg über "man_made=storage_tank/tank/silo" auch nicht eindeutig zu interpretieren. Noch deutlicher wird dies bei "building=digester", für die es keine Option über "man_made" gibt.
"slurry_tank" werde ich zukünftig nur noch über den "man_made"-Pfad definieren, die aktuell über "building" definierten "slurry_tank" lassen sich auf "man_made=storage_tank, content=slurry" ändern.
vulasala (2021-11-23 09:32:54+00:00): Hi Lily4VolunteerAtCadence,
Trust you are doing well. I have fixed the validation errors at way 644692144 and way 691851480.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114083083
PierZen (2021-11-22 14:39:49+00:00): Vous avez enlevé l'attribut highway=track alors que l'on voit clairement un chemin sur l'imagerie Bing. Svp communiquer avec contributeur modification récente via commentaire sur changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113664350
Vika_Nosovich (2021-11-23 07:42:53+00:00): Hello PierZen!

According to tags is railway=abandoned. I contacted wolfy1339 who added highway=track to this road. Thank you for your comment.

Best regards!
kartonage (2021-11-22 10:26:36+00:00): Hi,

are you aware of the import guidelines  (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines) and general code of conduct regarding automated edits (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct)? It is unclear where your data is coming from exactly and if there is any user input in the process.

I have also read your description in "bvnordic:readme" and have to inform you that you can not request other users to contact you before editing as OpenStreetMap is about the ability for everyone to edit. 
I would also suggest to keep meaningless values and tags like "bvnordic:commit-sha" out because they serve no purpose for OSM data or other users.

Best regards
bacforsyth (2021-11-23 06:17:21+00:00): Thanks for the feedback. I have submitted this changeset on behalf of the Bulkley Valley Cross Country Ski Club which maintains the trails in this changeset. The data comes from our GIS database in the linked to GitHub repository. It is maintained by our mapping team. The previous trails I deleted were out of date and rather than try to edit them manually we decided to start fresh from our QGIS data. 
The bvnordic:readme tag was inspired from other cross country ski clubs. We are responsible for the accuracy of the trail data here and would very much like OSM contributors to consult with us before making changes.
The commit-sha links to our GitHub repo and may have been better off in the changeset description.
mueschel (2021-11-23 11:06:16+00:00): I found several more issues here:

- you deleted existing highways, leaving several other tracks unconnected, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/643010169

- when highways cross, there needs to be a common node - these seem to be missing

- most of the piste ways already existed. It's recommended to update existing way instead of deleting and re-adding them.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:40:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114089675 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of vandalism of street names
Sree1922 (2021-11-22 10:17:10+00:00): Here I also used Vicmap.Transport:services.land.vic.gov.au
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 13:24:15+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5465
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 13:20:29+00:00): Please correct this as soon as possible, you are drawing fake buildings!

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 13:24:10+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5465
BikePC (2021-11-23 20:24:11+00:00): Nieuwbouwproject Residence Du Govert. Website: https://www.residencedugovert.nl/
De adres- en naamnodes van de gesloopte gebouwen ook verwijderd.
ov_079 (2021-11-25 10:24:55+00:00): Ik ben weer eens slordig geweest, oeps
NieWnen (2021-11-23 12:47:31+00:00): Nie usuwaj landuse=education. 
To było poprawne oznaczenie na Zespół Szkół.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Deducation

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=830308#p830308
NieWnen (2021-11-23 13:13:52+00:00): service=parking_aisle może tutaj też nie być do końca poprawne. Ja bym tutaj użył raczej samo service bez oznaczeń, albo ostatecznie podjazd (driveway).

Widzę, że trochę ich dodajesz, ale wg wiki jest przyjęte, ze je się dodaje na parkingach "w alejkach parkingowych" jak nazwa mówi, poza "główną drogą parkingową", więc nie do końca tutaj pasuje.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:32:17+00:00): Streetname vandalism and bad changeset comments.  
This account is now blocked for 24 hours. Waiting for an explanation fro this user.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5462

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
Snalla (2021-11-22 08:24:35+00:00): Source: DCS NSW Base Map
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114086605
trigpoint (2021-11-22 09:12:13+00:00): I am concerned that you are adding a large number of postcodes on residential properties. If there was an open usable source they would have been added a long time ago so wondering what source you are using?

Cheers Phil
canfe (2021-11-22 17:59:34+00:00): Mi pare senza senso sia mettere maxheitght su si una linea metrò per di più in costruzione ma ancor di più su di una semplice strada
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087272
vulasala (2021-11-23 09:12:14+00:00): Hi Nurul Barokatunnisa Sumarlin,
Trust you are doing well. I have modified the classification of way 1005174225 from unclassified to residential, as the way is shorter path.
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087494
canfe (2021-11-22 18:03:49+00:00): Anche in questi casi: da cosa hai evinto le altezze standard? Che senso ha avere una "altezza" per una strada di campagna?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087616
canfe (2021-11-22 18:05:53+00:00): Anche in questo caso valgono i commenti precedenti riguardo all'altezza di una strada. Di certo non tutta la via ha una altezza massima.
Fonte dei dati dell'altezza??
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087645
canfe (2021-11-22 18:07:40+00:00): Il layer -1 non è certo da attribuire a tutta la corsia di servizio fino al distributore.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087700
canfe (2021-11-22 18:08:49+00:00): La way, suppongo vada spezzata ma l'altezza va verificata.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114087743
bad_mapper (2021-11-22 11:39:49+00:00): Привет! Надо вернуть полевые дороги на 58 километре Р23. Они там точно есть и я их использую.
Prusaker (2021-11-22 11:55:38+00:00): Привет.
На момент 20 ноября, когда я там ездил, в полосе отвода ЛЭП дорог не было - только трава, поэтому и убрал. И примыканий дороги к Р23 не было (во всяком случае в той половине, которая в сторону Слуцка). Есть запись с регистратора, могу ещё раз посмотреть. Там точно в обе стороны дорога идёт? Может тропинка? Тропинку я мог и не заметить с авто.
bad_mapper (2021-11-22 20:18:01+00:00): Да, по разметке на Р23 так и есть. Там недавно газопровод под ЛЭП прокладывали, кака-никакая дорога есть. А примыкающая со стороны Гая, точно должна быть, там сейчас лес вырубают и используют эту дорогу для вывоза.
Prusaker (2021-11-23 05:46:22+00:00): Дороги восстановил.
tux67 (2021-11-22 12:02:27+00:00): Hi mapix,
wäre gut, denn du bei deinen Changesets auch die Quelle mit angeben könntest:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
Source Feld bei iD oder JOSM

In diesem Fall nehme ich mal an von der Webseite?

Gruß
tux67
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114089028
mapix (2021-11-24 09:09:44+00:00): Hallo tux67.
Vielen Dank für deinen Hinweis.
Ich hatte allerdings Quellen angegeben.
"source 	flyer;homepage"
Vielleicht ist "homepage" unglücklich.
Ist "website" besser?
Schöne mapper-Grüße
mapix
tux67 (2021-11-24 13:45:18+00:00): Oha, entschuldige bitte. Beim review mit osmcha hab' ich das scheinbar überblättert.

Danke für die Rückmeldung und Gruß
tux67
Max-Kritic (2021-11-25 09:29:47+00:00): Cela m'arrangerait si tu n'oubliais pas le tag "segregated" pour les highway foot et path accessibles aux cyclistes ! Je ne sais pas combien de fois je suis passé derrière toi pour corriger.

Voir http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/map/#zoom=12&lat=50.636&lon=3.0064&item=xxxx&level=1%2C2%2C3&issue_uuid=13e3c594-e618-5e4f-3020-bf1c16a3e2da&username=Mathias_ADAV
goedegazelle (2021-11-22 09:32:16+00:00): Bouw is afgerond, gebouwen zijn bewoond.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:41:03+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 114077308, 114077365, 114077644, 114077978, 114078100, 114078556, 114078559, 114079100, 114079137, 114079169, 114079304, 114079602, 114080370, 114080491, 114080676, 114080734, 114080782, 114080991, 114081059, 114081270, 114083452, 114083536, 114085338, 114085439, 114085629, 114085682, 114085824, 114085907, 114086323, 114086462.
mosstreet (2021-11-22 09:48:55+00:00): Вам поправил немного и просьба не надо ваши местные дороги по селу отмечать как те что центральные по району вашему
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:48:52+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 00:47:53+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.
czubi (2021-11-25 10:55:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114056486#map=18/50.84550/10.94008
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 09:54:46+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changeset 113847080.
G_P_J (2021-11-23 07:14:01+00:00): OpenStreetMap nie służy do zabawy. Zmiana wycofana.
Valerio_Bozzolan (2021-11-22 09:59:12+00:00): Le informazioni sono state utilizzate in seguito al lavoro preparatorio per questa attività del volontario Fausto Picchi:
https://wiki.wikimedia.it/wiki/Microgrant/2021/A_spasso_per_Mantova_a_6_zampe_con_OpenStreetMap
haukep (2021-11-22 12:49:36+00:00): Hi! Du hattest den Namen und "brand:wikidata" in K+K umgetragen, aber "operator" und "brand:wikipedia" unverändert gelassen. Ist das aus Versehen so geblieben oder versteckt sich mehr dahinter? Beste Grüße
madmaxms (2021-11-22 13:48:54+00:00): Hi, das war tatsächlich ein Versehen. Das kommt davon, wenn man OSM en passant editiert 😅. Ist korrigiert.
G_P_J (2021-11-23 07:23:23+00:00): OpenStreetMap nie służy do zabawy. Zmiana wycofana.
G_P_J (2021-11-23 07:23:35+00:00): OpenStreetMap nie służy do zabawy. Zmiana wycofana.
Местный 2 (2021-11-22 18:22:04+00:00): Вижу появился водопад, и часть трека удалено. Так глядишь совместными усилиями найдем тропу)
NM$L (2021-11-24 16:26:48+00:00): Thanks for adding tag. But it may be wrong that tag Lulin Region( https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3964620 ) controlled by China. Actually this area is controlled by both China and Bhutan, and Bhutan controls more area of it, such as Charit. Although I'm a Chinese user, I would respect that fact. So in my opinion, it may be better to tag its controlled_by tag as BT. Could you help to correct the tag? Thank you.
seichter (2021-11-25 01:48:55+00:00): My orientation for tagging in this disputed area was the AL2-boundary with tagging administrative. This is the recommendation for "line of control" by the "on the ground rule".
I have no local knowledge about the real control and so I removed the controlled_by tag.
I'm e.g. not sure about the control of Charit since there is a road connection from China to Doslinma and further a path of just 1 km down to Charit as well as a path from Dürzen up the Sharitang Chu valley.
The connection to undisputed Bhutan territory at Haa Chu is over two mountain passes.
Leo Slager (2021-11-22 23:20:53+00:00): Dag jeij,

Met het opknippen of toevoegen van highways heb je alle routerelaties die over de N226 lopen beschadigd.
Dat heeft me meer als half uur gekost om de schade te herstellen.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114117600
Met de editor iD die je gebruikt is dat helaas onvermijdelijk.
Als je werkelijk wilt doorgaan met het bewerken van wegen, dan raad ik je dringend aan om over te stappen naar de editor JOSM. Dan kun je de routerelaties ook correct bewerken. En dat is met de editor iD niet mogelijk.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:50:06+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.
SekeRob (2021-11-22 10:49:10+00:00): Added sidewalk tags, state of lighting.
canfe (2021-11-22 18:29:44+00:00): Anche in questo caso, come molti altri che hai mappato nella Pianura Padana, da cosa ricavi il parametro dell'altezza del tunnel?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:52:33+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.
laurent-38 (2021-11-22 11:42:55+00:00): Bonjour Pravaz 2GT6,

Merci pour cette contribution.

Néanmoins, attention à ne pas connecter les chemins aux lignes hautes tensions ( voir nœuds https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9274519033 et https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9274519040 ).

En revanche, ce chemin https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005204889 devrait être connecté à la voie romaine au nord.

De plus, pour ce chemin , le type de voie « Chemin piéton » (highway=footway) est inadapté ici, voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:highway=footway. On préférera « Chemin carrossable » (highway=path) ou « Piste agricole ou forestière » (highway=track).

Voulez-vous corriger ces détails ? Je peux éventuellement m'en charger.

Cordialement
~~
laurent-38
marczoutendijk (2021-11-22 11:01:32+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 113921570, 113921630, 113921735, 113922017, 113922051, 113923516, 113923725, 113923893, 113923986, 113970058, 113970243, 113997437, 114015789, 114016211, 114016369, 114016432, 114016708, 114016856, 114016981, 114017130, 114017235, 114017387, 114017505, 114018309, 114018358, 114018413, 114018451, 114018505, 114018575, 114018766, 114019006, 114019016, 114019096, 114019661, 114019884, 114030531, 114030619, 114030784, 114030983, 114031093, 114031226, 114031542, 114031633, 114032179, 114032394, 114032565, 114032599, 114032648, 114033113, 114059648, 114059907, 114059948, 114060032, 114060233, 114060277, 114061419, 114064878, 114064924, 114065280, 114065421, 114065965, 114066044, 114077146, 114077157, 114077200, 114077281, 114077329, 114077513, 114077678, 114077748, 114079151, 114079582, 114081322.
ratrun (2021-11-23 16:57:24+00:00): Can you please describe the purpose of the change in more detail? This changeset is duplicating a couple of ways, resulting in OSM inspector to detect lots of errors. See http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=39.25848&lat=-6.80448&zoom=14&overlays=snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1 . I therefore think that this changeset should be reverted.
martin-kokos (2021-11-25 14:52:20+00:00): I agree with revert
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114093444
ratrun (2021-11-25 17:49:47+00:00): This changeset is not the only one which introduced lots of duplications.  I tried to revert this changeset via the JOSM reverter, but there are a couple of of more changesets involved, e.g. 113943511. This seems to be an issue for the data working group.
ratrun (2021-11-25 18:16:05+00:00): I sent a mail to the data workinggroup and asked for their help.
tonny john (2021-11-26 13:12:50+00:00): The team is working on cleaning this data sets, we are hoping to update everything in the mid of coming week @Benedcto Adamu @kombe1207
ratrun (2021-11-26 13:51:45+00:00): @tonny John: Thanks for joining the discussion. Can you please answer my initial question first: What are all these changes marked as  "#SWM Field Survey 2021" about? To me this looks as like a bad import which is not aligned with the OSM rules for an import. What are the sources for all this changes?
Benedcto Adamu (2021-11-26 14:52:11+00:00): We conducted a ground survey under a project called Solid Waste Management (SWM) of 2021,and we always use the source to add a project name but we can discuss if this is appropriate to be added or can be removed?

We are flexible on updating this as we are still working on cleaning the data into the entirely area

Thanks
marczoutendijk (2021-11-26 14:53:27+00:00): After I had blocked Benedcto Adamu with a zero-hour block:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5475, he contacted me and told me there had been a mistake with the imports. 
I asked him again to reply on this changeset.

Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
marczoutendijk (2021-11-26 14:56:22+00:00): And just after I typed my message ^ I see that Benedcto Adamu has replied here.
ratrun (2021-11-26 15:34:22+00:00): Thanks Benedcto Adamu for answering. It would be good if you described in more detail how it could happen that you imported so many duplicates in such short amount of time. I mean how did you manage this technically? I see that you uploaded your changes via JOSM, but where did you get the data from? It would be also good if you describe who "we" are, as it is impossible for a single person gather  so many details. If you already had an import discussion please point me to it.
Last but not least I would like to know how you intend to clean the data. Do you plan to do this manually changeset after changeset or so you intend to do this somehow automatically again? I'm asking because I fear that you might make the situation even more complicated if you started and introduced new errors.
Thank you.
Benedcto Adamu (2021-11-26 16:49:31+00:00): The data were collected from ground by using community engagements and the Mappers trained under OMDTZ, and Resilience Academy,so we have a big data that needed to be updated into osm regarding the area of interest(AOI).

So we noticed  the errors before and we are looking forward to erase all the duplicates in the coming week,and in this time will try to upload in small portion,

Thanks
SHARCRASH (2021-11-22 14:13:37+00:00): Hello! Welcome to OSM and thanks for your first contributions! Please, notice:
- specific tags “key=value” have a specific definition and therefore define what its element is embodying from reality in OSM. You used highway=pedestrians which embody very large ways exclusively for pedestrians like the "Rue de l'Alzette", but the ways you plotted are rather thin, only one or two max beings side by side. Therefore the right tag is highway=path or highway=footway. Youc an find those definitions in OSM's Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/ I corrected this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005219324
- For this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005226685 you "faked" its intersection. You plotted it going up and then directly down to the road. You cannot do that because if someone would want to plan a route from Rue Acier to Rue Docteurs MW thanks to a routing service, the directions would be forced to go up too and then down. The proper method is with 2 ways intersecting both. Also you made it cross the building whereas no one can cross a building. I know you didn't create the building but it would have been nice of you to correct its position too. I let you correct its tag and geometry so you can practice.

Thanks for your comprehension! :)
SHARCRASH (2021-11-22 15:03:17+00:00): If you check now the rendered standard OSM Carto Map layer you will see the recent differences between both: highway=pedestrian is rendered as large as a road, whereas a path or footway is rendered much thinner, giving an idea to people who see the map what to expect in real.
literan (2021-11-22 20:08:37+00:00): cafe=yes, добавил

вы еще мусорку случайно за 200 м утащили; вернул
Const84 (2021-11-22 20:34:14+00:00): Спасибо.
Я очень извиняюсь за мусорку. Постараюсь внимательнее относиться к своим действиям.
literan (2021-11-22 21:10:18+00:00): все нормально, с кем не бывает )
Enock4seth (2021-11-23 14:39:06+00:00): Thank you for fixing this, happy mapping :)
RicoElectrico (2021-11-23 11:04:55+00:00): To trzeba będzie trochę inaczej oznaczyć i chyba bez nazwy "skały wapienne". Spytałem się na naszym discordzie, bo przyznam, że nie wiem jak to otagować :)
RicoElectrico (2021-11-23 11:08:19+00:00): To co mi przyszło, to natural=bare_rock ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dbare_rock ) plus jakieś wyspecyfikowanie że to skały wapienne (tego nikt nie ustandaryzował, ale znalazłem na taginfo bare_rock=limestone - https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=bare_rock%3Dlimestone
Konradiks (2021-11-23 18:26:38+00:00): Czy dasz radę mi pomóc, bo sprawa mnie trochę przerasta. Z racji że to moja pierwsza edycja, chciałem zmapować coś z okolic mojego miejsca zamieszkania. Przez to, że te tereny znam dość dobrze, wzorowałem się na tej lokacji 50.34083, 19.55042 . Tam są podobne już zmapowane skały. Nie zauważyłem, że tam jest to zaznaczone linią, nie obszarem :( Nie mogę znaleźć opcji edycji do takiej zmiany. A może lepiej to skasować?