piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
TagaSanPedroAko (2022-04-05 03:23:53+00:00): You've just renamed your account from "Franswa Belhadí", but what's all your reason for adding lots of Spanish names? Some of them cannot be proven, especially ones involving highways generically named "National Road/Highway".

(Machine translation)

Acabas de cambiar el nombre de tu cuenta de "Franswa Belhadí", pero ¿cuál es la razón por la que agregas muchos nombres en español?  Algunas de ellas no pueden ser probadas, especialmente las que involucran carreteras denominadas genéricamente "National Road/Highway" (en inglés).
leveskockaa (2022-04-17 10:26:06+00:00): Once again this definitely isn't a main line. Please stop.
Ryconik (2022-05-31 12:16:03+00:00): Sorry, I thought it was an international line.
leveskockaa (2022-06-01 00:28:30+00:00): It's okay, no meaningful through traffic at this time or in the near future
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-20 21:07:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 121260282 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some implausible mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5998 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6004 .
Kovoschiz (2022-04-05 05:36:50+00:00): 1. Why can't the entire district be CWB?
2. This is poor geography interpretation. The west side is full of business and owned by private lands. Government facilities are located near residential areas, and where empty lands exist. 

N-th reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Use `old_name=` as needed, which says it's the original, not whether something is correct or wrong. Put historic names and locations  in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hong_Kong). Use descriptive changeset comments. Don't use changeset comments for expressing your opinion in a debate. Respect the  One Feature, One Object rule, not mixing features up.
Kovoschiz (2022-04-05 05:37:35+00:00): 3. A  facility can be named based on the larger area it serves, and be located away from its proper or center.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-20 21:07:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 121260282 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some implausible mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5998 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6004 .
afgb1977 (2026-03-03 05:42:27+00:00): Hola Juan.
Por favor revisar: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1049170796 ya que no existe ningún edificio en el parque principal de Belén de Umbría y menos uno que ocupe toda su área.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-05-04 04:09:31+00:00): نرجوا منكم عدم تغيير التصنيف والمكان عدد سكانه حوالي 5 آلالاف نسمة ولا يصنف كمدينة أبداً!
Olk5 (2022-05-04 09:25:00+00:00): يا أخي الكريم من الظلم ان تصنف مدينة سكانها ٥ الاف نسمه قريه مثل قرى سكانها ٥٠٠ نسمه، ارجو ان يوضع التصنيف مدينة صغيرة او بلدة.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-05-04 10:00:52+00:00): أصلاً لا يوجد ما يثبت ان سكانها 5000 والمعلومات الرسمية الحكومية لا تذكر ذلك، ويمكن الرجوع هنا للمعلومات الرسمية المنشورة من الهيئة العامة للإحصاء:
https://www.stats.gov.sa/ar/13
شاهد:
"عدد السكان في المدن التي يزيد عدد سكانها عن (5000) نسمة"
https://www.stats.gov.sa/sites/default/files/census31-prim-05.pdf
لن تجد "دغبج" من بينها!!
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-05-04 04:06:14+00:00): طريق الخدمة هنا المقصود فيه المؤدي لمكان خدمات مثل الطريق الذي يكون في محطة وقود وهكذا وليس المتعارف عليه عندنا بأنه طريق ثانوي
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-05-04 04:03:45+00:00): أخي الكريم أنت قمت بحذف الوسوم:
amenity=place_of_worship	
وهو يدل على أن هذا مكان عبادة
religion=muslim
وهو الذي يدل أنه مكان عبادة للمسلمين

وهذه الوسوم مهمة جدا لتمييز المكان كمسجد في التطبيقات التي تستخدم الخريطة وقد قمت بتصحيحها
azakh-world (2022-04-06 14:01:44+00:00): Добрый день.
Напишите, пожалуйста, причину, по которой вы удалили адресные точки, добавленные в пакете правок 119199248.

С уважением,
Алексей
KhoraKavat (2022-04-07 07:16:32+00:00): Добрый день! Данные адресные точки были удалены потому что не отображают реальные адреса на местности. Информацию об адресах мы берем от пользователей которые предоставляют нам документы, или собираем с местности вручную. А перенеся сведения с кадастра неглядя эти точки (и не только точки) создали неприятные ситуации. Ведь в кадастре к одному адресу может привязываться несколько земельных участков. Данные правки были расценены как вандализм, потому что пользователь считает что так мапить можно и нужно.
ZinaidaZ (2022-04-07 07:44:26+00:00): Добрый день! Хотелось бы, чтобы такие аспекты обсуждались непосредственно в ченджсетах с исправлениями, а не в личных сообщениях с пользователями. Так как наша команда имеет информацию о том, что Вы удалили внесенные точки, так как они рендерятся на Вашей карте и Ваши пользователи недовольны. Что, согласитесь, не кажется обоснованной причиной для отката, и может служить причиной для войны правок, так как мы не пришли к соглашению.
azakh-world (2022-04-07 07:44:44+00:00): Заносить адреса в OSM с кадастровой карты - нормальная практика. В соответствии с https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Вандализм, "Простые недоразумения и ошибки редактирования не являются вандализмом". Мы с готовностью учтём ваш опыт, чтобы делать меньше ошибок.

Вы удалили порядка 20 адресов. Пожалуйста, приведите подтверждение, что этих адресов не существует. Необоснованное удаление чужого труда скорее можно расценивать как вандализм.
kashcheeva (2022-04-07 07:57:15+00:00): Добрый день! Мы тоже столкнулись с таким впервые. И у вас пользователи и у нас. Но мы как местные жители можем выйти и проверить информацию. А как собираете информацию вы?
Мы не можем вам разгласить документы от пользователей, потому что это конфиденциальная информация. Номы можем предоставить модератору ОСМ топографические планы с местности которые мы собрали в том районе.
kashcheeva (2022-04-07 08:00:38+00:00): Так же мы постараемся поднять данную тему на форуме ОСМ сообщества, чтобы прийти к согласию. Думаю ветераны сообщества смогут урегулировать возникшую ситуацию
ZinaidaZ (2022-04-07 08:55:07+00:00): Мы собираем информацию из открытых и разрешенных к использованию в ОСМ источников. 
Действительно, в данном регионе мы не можем гарантировать, что внесем самую актуальную информацию, но мы не берем ее из воздуха.
Если говорить предметно, то, например, вот этот дом https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/462219052/history - нами были исправлены населенный пункт, улица, номер дома. Вы после нас изменили только номер дома. Получился адрес, который не подтверждается в ФИАСе и на пкк, вы можете утверждать, что Ваш адрес верен?
ZinaidaZ (2022-04-07 09:00:19+00:00): Мое пожелание в том, чтобы такие вопросы обсуждались в ченджсетах, не в личных сообщениях, тогда достигнуть понимания будет проще. Мы, равно как и вы, стараемся улучшить адресную базу, а не ухудшить.
Если хотите, можем также обсуждать это и на форуме.
kashcheeva (2022-04-07 09:31:21+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/462219052/history#map=19/43.23688/132.05251
Данный адрес ошибочно был таким образом исправлен, поскольку мы не делали откат правок, а исправляли в ручную. Поскольку он уже есть егрп, мы вернем его к вашей версии.
freeExec (2022-04-07 11:44:40+00:00): Указывайте в правке источники заимствованных данных. Копирование адресов из ПКК без указания его как источника - есть нарушение правил импорта данных.
azakh-world (2022-04-12 13:21:13+00:00): Обсуждение продолжилось на форуме
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=859813#p859813
Kovoschiz (2022-04-08 10:10:40+00:00): Please don't make up English names.
Kovoschiz (2022-04-08 10:12:36+00:00): 2. Don't attach lines to other  objects.
ejixxore (2022-04-05 05:49:14+00:00): خلیج فارس
Kovoschiz (2022-04-05 05:39:17+00:00): N-th reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Use `old_name=` as needed, which says it's the original, not whether something is correct or wrong. Put historic names and locations  in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hong_Kong). Use descriptive changeset comments. Don't use changeset comments for expressing your opinion in a debate. Respect the  One Feature, One Object rule, not mixing features up.
mueschel (2022-04-15 10:08:13+00:00): Hi,
could you check this node, it got a strange 'poel' tag:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4006214505
5m4u9 (2022-04-16 19:47:02+00:00): typo error, was pole=yes. thanks. fixed.
tastrax (2022-04-12 02:38:33+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Frans S (2022-04-18 10:36:54+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key. You did not square 10 buildings.
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119322346
user_5359 (2022-04-07 20:04:52+00:00): Hello (again)! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/37858646. What is the meaning of the tags
GEOID = 3680423
INTPTLAT = +42.6882295
INTPTLON = -073.8735427
PLACENS = 02390496
ke9tv (2022-04-08 03:39:48+00:00): Fixed.
Warin61 (2022-04-05 22:27:50+00:00): Umm ??? 
relation 14005113:
natural=sand
surface=grass

which is it? sand or grass? 

And then the relation has 2 outer ways .. that share segments ... that is an error. 

Think these should be simple ways .. no need for a relation.
tastrax (2022-04-05 22:48:54+00:00): Thanks Warin61 - all sorted.
Pink Duck (2022-04-05 10:08:51+00:00): Probably better to use surface=paved for BitMac surfaces, rather than surface=asphalt of typical driven road material.
adrianojbr (2022-04-05 13:50:32+00:00): Olá, Victor! Em minha verificação recente, alterei os limites de velocidade desse trecho da 101 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219319857/history) de 80 para 100 de forma geral e 80 para veículos pesados. Em pouco tempo, você voltou a velocidade máxima geral para 80. Não lembro de ter sinalização local limitando a velocidade a 80. Tem algum motivo especial para você ter feito essa alteração?
Victor 2015 (2022-04-05 13:58:03+00:00): Olá, Adriano, desculpe, se alterei o limite de velocidade, foi sem querer, que eu estava mexendo em outras coisas
adrianojbr (2022-04-05 16:38:45+00:00): Sem crise. Desconfiei disso. Provavelmente estávamos simultaneamente mexendo na mesma área e os dados em cache, mas eu salvei primeiro rsrs. O Josm até faz uma verificação de conflitos nesse caso (quando se está enviando alterações em dados que sofreram alteração). Pelo jeito, o iD não faz. Valeu! Abraço.
mariotomo (2022-04-05 14:21:56+00:00): hola y muy bienvenido a OSM. OSM es una comunidad de "maperos", cada quien con enfoque diferente, considerando cantidad y calidad de los datos. te invito a ponerse en contacto, a través del foro (https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61), del grupo Telegram (https://t.me/Comunidad_OSM_Panama) y de revisar el wiki, empezando por ejemplo por https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Buenos_comentarios_en_conjuntos_de_cambios.
mariotomo (2022-04-05 14:24:52+00:00): (hay otra herramienta de formación de comunidad, al URL https://community.openstreetmap.org/ se encuentra en un estadio muy inicial, pero podría volverse más importante, veremos)
abakus_uploader (2022-04-05 22:31:14+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
englu (2022-04-06 15:42:35+00:00): Ścieżka w okolicach Płyty Pamięci ma dziwny zygzak. Jeśli jest tam odejście do owej płyty, to raczej powinna to być pojedyncza ścieżka, a nie taki zygzak.
B_KSL (2022-04-08 04:04:49+00:00): Poprawione. Dzięki
DUGA (2023-01-01 02:26:06+00:00): Sorry, what is the point adding this?

How did you find an abandonded road via Bing maps?

Would you please stop adding junks  when "oh I find something was there via a map made around 60 years ago"?


If that road was there long ago, it was removed to have a better driving experience, what's the point bringing it back in OSM, because of...nostalgia?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1049200180#map=16/41.3878/-76.2781
RussNelson (2023-01-01 03:27:43+00:00): Thanks for your comments. I've been there, and I saw it. If you haven't been there, then how can you say "please stop adding junks"?
DUGA (2023-01-01 03:33:06+00:00): You have been there? Please show us the evidences that can be used to identify it as an abandoned road. 

I’ve been there as well, numerous of times for state parks. That does not mean anything and I don’t mention it.
RussNelson (2023-01-01 03:40:43+00:00): Your comments are very hostile. I am not going to supply you with ANY evidence because you will not believe it any more than you will believe my word. If you want to see the evidence go there. I suggest you park in the parking lot with the historic sign next to Mehoopany Creek. That will give you a good view of it.
RussNelson (2023-01-01 03:47:26+00:00): You can see it on the LIDAR just in case you have never been in Ricketts the ghost town, not the state park: russnelson.com/temp/Ricketts-road.png
DUGA (2023-01-01 04:24:30+00:00): I do not need to check LiDAR to see what is there, that is just ridiculous if you map abandoned based on LiDAR because we have so many abandoned stuffs since civil war and that is equivalent to adding junks (but to be fair I don’t think you do this all the time so let’s not discuss that). Historic sign means nothing, that sign does not serve as a map and it does not tell you what the road looked like decades ago. All you added are something abandoned, but do you have any guarantee that the road looked exactly like this in the past? BTW Bing does not display any data like this, so you added them based on your imagination, which is why we call it unacceptable.

I have plenty of evidence showing nothing there that “makes you think it is something abandoned in the year of 2022”, but more like scrubs and bushes.  Connecting any “abandoned” with current road is not acceptable. We have OHM, perhaps you need to move to a new place.

It is ok to draw something abandoned, but it is not ok to restore them just because there is a sign, there is a trace in LiDAR.

Many developments will make road shorter, easier to drive, aligned with terrain for better sights. If you restore them as abandoned, I’m afraid this is called vandalism.
RussNelson (2023-01-02 17:44:36+00:00): I saw from your profile that you don't want anything which could be tagged as abandoned to be in OSM. Is that a fair characterization? But why keep the name Ricketts when the town has been abandoned? Clearly there is value in mapping things that exist in the real world, including ghost town names and ghost town roads.

I'm sorry you feel that way about mapping abandoned things, but if it exists, I'm going to map it, and if people aren't using it, I'll tag it accurately as abandoned.

Perhaps you should spend more time mapping things that you care about than fighting about the things other people are about? It's not like OSM is full! There are tons of poorly mapped (that is, TIGER) rural roads in PA that you could fix.
DUGA (2023-01-02 18:28:14+00:00): I don’t have issue with a ghost town, but it does not have much value at the time I replied here. Why we are against mapping these abandoned things is because generally speaking you add something that can’t be verified by most others (it does not exist in a form that we can identify, except for railways, still controversial) but generating more conflicts.

People have mentioned this to you since 2014, at GitHub, at mailing list... I don’t need to repeat. I’m not the one concerned about your profile, but you should carefully map anything without imagination. From your changeset history at this place, you added something without any reliable sources, it is not “you won’t show me any because I’m being aggressive”. You gave me a photo cropped from LiDAR, but the LiDAR source does not even show up in your changeset history as well. Therefore, you initially added something based on fantasy. It can be a sketch, but seriously speaking, when you have to add something in this way, perhaps you should rethink about it.

No one is going to cleanup these things / realign those you add because we can’t verify your edits, I even suggest not dropping FIXME because we do not have the ability to fix. Moreover, eventually all these junks will be gone, people (not just me) won’t stop deleting them because you add something that can’t be verified as a part of the current street. 

Again, you are welcome to map at OHM for the historical things, but OSM is a project not just used by yourself. Based on your reply, I can say the same: If it is not there, I’m going to remove it. The reason of leaving these sudden comments is because I’ve been camping here in the last 4 days and yesterday I even went to the same location and I spent 1 hour walking around and still couldn’t verify your edits. Adding non existent paths/roads may impact the vegetation as well as endangering people, while it is unclear what kind of benefits can be brought.

I’m not a remote mapper in Pennsylvania and I do travel across towns for fixing TIGER junks, I welcome everyone to assist but we need to figure out a bottom line on these abandoned things that constantly cause confusions to other mappers.

https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/pull/542

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-August/073670.html

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2015-September/074092.html
RussNelson (2023-01-02 21:46:30+00:00): Yes, Frederik and I have been at loggerheads for decades now. He thinks that abandoned railroads should NEVER be mapped, and if they're still visible, they should be mapped as embankment=yes or barrier=fence or whatever. He's welcome to be wrong, I've given up on getting wisdom from him.

I realize that people disagree with me over the value of mapping abandoned railroads. The Facebook group "Abandoned Railroads" has 109K users so clearly people want them mapped.

I don't see the value in deleting things that someone else has added. Thank you, by the way, for contacting me rather than simply deleting this road. I guess you missed the abutments upstream on Mahoopany Creek?
RussNelson (2023-01-02 21:53:12+00:00): I suppose you also didn't see this? Obviously looks like a road to me. https://www.google.com/maps/@41.3908067,-76.2778874,3a,55y,240.79h,82.28t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sPJa_yBqaL6k1MxZt9YJlRw!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
RussNelson (2023-01-02 21:55:15+00:00): My philosophical complaint about deletionism is that it is FAR FAR easier to select and hit delete than it is to find these things in the first place. Multiple days of exploration, getting the routing correct, and some armchair mapper (NOT you! but others) can't see it on an aerial and hit delete.
DUGA (2023-01-07 18:27:37+00:00): > Yes, Frederik and I have been at loggerheads for decades now. He thinks that abandoned railroads should NEVER be mapped, and if they're still visible, they should be mapped as embankment=yes or barrier=fence or whatever. He's welcome to be wrong, I've given up on getting wisdom from him.

Yes, you have the freedom to do this in OHM, since you two cannot agree with each other, and a lot of people cannot disagree with any of you as well.

> I realize that people disagree with me over the value of mapping abandoned railroads. The Facebook group "Abandoned Railroads" has 109K users so clearly people want them mapped.

If you constantly get into things like this, then it is your problem. 109K users/bots is not the point here. I think the last time you mentioned is around 80K, sounds like not many people agree with you over the years.

> I don't see the value in deleting things that someone else has added. 

It depends, but let's not shift the topic to a wider range.

---

> I suppose you also didn't see this? Obviously looks like a road to me.

It does not, more like a firebreak.
RussNelson (2023-01-10 14:13:55+00:00): Your "a lot of people" is four people that you could identify by name. That's not a lot.

I still don't see the value in deleting things that someone else has added. They had a reason for adding it.

It's a "firebreak" exactly where the road goes? Give me a break, you're clowning me.
Trevor_1 (2022-04-05 03:35:22+00:00): *downgraded
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:33+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:40+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
JoeMapsTheWorld (2022-04-05 14:38:16+00:00): Why did you remove the Levels tag on these buildings
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-04-25 15:00:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120169497 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for deleting and editing buildings without prior contact with the original mappers
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:47+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
aharvey (2022-04-05 05:39:26+00:00): It's generally considered better practice to use turn:lanes=* on the existing way rather than adding a new way where there is no physical separation, which does not seem to be the case here from what I can tell.

I'll update the tagging to use turn:lanes
aharvey (2022-04-05 06:04:36+00:00): I've updated this in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119327254
mavl (2022-05-20 15:57:40+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.