piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
gscscnd (2020-08-08 10:24:03+00:00): 1. Nie przyklejaj chodników do granic administracyjnych.
2. Jeżeli chodnik przebiega pod budynkiem lub wewnątrz budynku, to zastosuj layer i/lub tunnel=building_passage, ale tylko na tym odcinku, a nie na całej długości chodnika.
3. Jeżeli chodnik nie jest ograniczony tylko do ruchu pieszego, to zamiast highway=footway stosuj highway=path.
Bąbel (2020-09-10 21:35:16+00:00): komu twoje duplikaty rysowane na istniejących i mijające się z faktycznym obrysem potrzebne
canfe (2020-11-13 10:05:21+00:00): Ma la chiesa Valgrande si chiama proprio così??
debos00s (2020-11-13 10:41:11+00:00): Questa è una bella domanda, la modifica è di un po' di tempo fa e ora sinceramente non ricordo. Ora non ho la possibilità di andare a controllare di persona, provo a cercare qualche fonte online e ti dico
debos00s (2020-11-13 10:46:35+00:00): ok ho cercato ed è "Cappella della madonna della neve", sita in rione Valgrande. Ora cambio 

qui è dove ho letto
http://www.chieseitaliane.chiesacattolica.it/chieseitaliane/AccessoEsterno.do?mode=guest&type=auto&code=60273&Cappella_della_Madonna_della_Neve__Valperga
canfe (2020-11-13 18:33:14+00:00): Grazie.
Sto sistemando le chiese senza "religion"...
Frans S (2020-09-09 15:13:03+00:00): Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.
I am sorry to say but your mappings should be more accurate and lacks the finishing touch of squaring them
I also noticed that you solved all issues on IDeditor. Well done.

Most buildings here have a rectangular pattern. Please follow the outlines precisely and square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
Frans S (2020-09-09 13:10:40+00:00): Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.
I am sorry to say but your mappings should be more accurate and lacks the finishing touch of squaring them

Most buildings here have a rectangular pattern. Please follow the outlines precisely and square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
Frans S (2020-10-13 11:56:49+00:00): Hello. 

Thank you for mapping on this project.
I am sorry to say but your mappings should be more accurate and lacks the finishing touch of squaring them

Most buildings here have a rectangular pattern. Please follow the outlines precisely and square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit?usp=sharing
Best regards and keep mapping
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-09-23 14:34:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 91371619, 91373494, 91364469, 91369701 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some edits in Penicuik that were made using an inappropriate source (at the request of the user)
Frans S (2020-08-09 10:17:52+00:00): Hello Daisyfields,
Thanks for mapping on this project
a question. you mapped quite a lot of tiny buildings on a rocky surface with no visible traces of buildings. 
I removed them.
I copy you some hints and tricks to improve your mappings
Best regards and keep mapping
DressyPear4 (2020-08-13 17:57:16+00:00): Olá, restrições necessitam de duas vias, adicionando apenas em uma não está correto.
nevw (2020-08-07 23:50:39+00:00): Hi
you added a building tag to an large area that contains a mix of buildings and other land uses. The building tag is only used for the buildings themselves and not an area with some buildings.
I changed the boundary to landuse=commercial and added an operator tag.
Please check if ok.
nevw (2020-08-08 00:04:06+00:00): I altered the tags to
landuse=commercial
name=ANC Forestry Group Pty. Ltd.
shop=forestry
Frans S (2020-08-09 10:56:00+00:00): hello. Thanks for mapping here.
Your mappings are fair. 
please map buildings individually, do not clurster them
I copy you some hints and tricks in a PM
Best regards and keep mapping
nevw (2020-08-07 23:39:00+00:00): Hi
I reverted changeset 89062151 which added a 'fuel sniff' to the OSM
Dantine (2020-08-07 02:09:18+00:00): Oops, jumped the gun on this one, no actual changes made here
DressyPear4 (2020-08-08 15:48:43+00:00): Olá, informações pessoais não são adicionadas no mapa, pra você seria melhor esse serviço
https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/pt-br/
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89062254
ohligser (2020-09-22 17:28:12+00:00): Hallo Dürpelfest.
In vorliegender Änderung hast Du das O-Quartier eingetragen in die Karte. Das ist so nicht in Ordnung.
Begründung: 
Derzeit ist das Viertel in Bau, nicht fertig. Wenn überhaupt, müsste jedes einzelne Objekt mit "im Bau" gekennzeichnet werden. Das ist bei Neubauten in dem Detailgrad unüblich, teilweise dürfte es nicht für alles Standards geben, damit es in der Karte korrekt dargestellt wird.
Zweitens bezweifle ich, dass die eingemalten Objekte stimmen. Was exakt dort gebaut wird, ist erst klar, wenn es steht. Insbesonder für Wegeverläufe und -freigaben gilt das. Pläne werden gerne noch geändert.
Drittens: Aus welcher Quelle stammen die Basisdaten, stehen die unter einer hinreichend freien Lizenz?

Falls drittens nicht gegeben ist, hat sich die Diskussion eh erübrigt, dann müssen die Änderungen zwingend wieder raus.

Bitte um Rückmeldung.
Herzlichen Gruß
ohligser
nevw (2020-08-07 23:33:38+00:00): Hi
I reverted changeset 89062421 which added a computer shop to an orchard.
This is a public map. Please only add mappable things that exist in the real world.
DressyPear4 (2020-08-13 17:59:23+00:00): Olá, restrições necessitam de duas vias, adicionando apenas em uma não está correto.
Emieden (2020-08-13 22:15:40+00:00): Olá Boa Noite DressyPear4, Sou novo aqui e agradeço as dicas, estou fazendo ajustes juntamente com meu suporte e gostaria de entender mais onde foi que errei nesse comentário, assim consigo melhorar mais ainda meus conhecimentos e ajudar mais ainda o OSP.

Desde já Agradeço.
DressyPear4 (2020-08-14 10:52:01+00:00): Em uma restrição, você informa se pode ou não ir de um ponto A ao B.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction
Como nessa restrição de proibido retornar no inicio onde está a mão única
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6252326
Veja que ele sugere fazer o retorno mais a frente
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=-28.32798%2C-49.19558%3B-28.32815%2C-49.19655#map=18/-28.32790/-49.19469
DressyPear4 (2020-08-14 11:10:21+00:00): Outro exemplo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10546820#map=19/-23.03323/-45.54028

https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=-23.03320%2C-45.54051%3B-23.03308%2C-45.54056#map=19/-23.03322/-45.53974

E aqui um exemplo onde está permitindo retornar onde é proibido
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=-22.59059%2C-44.97523%3B-22.59085%2C-44.97536#map=18/-22.59006/-44.97477

Mesmo a via tendo uma restrição de retorno do mesmo modo que você adicionou
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/207906327
Ou seja, para as restrições tem que informar "de onde para onde".
Emieden (2020-08-14 19:03:56+00:00): Boa Tarde  DressyPear4, Entendi, porém fiz essa correção a pedido do nosso suporte, onde me explicou que deveria ser utilizado "Restriction = No_u_turn", fiz conforme o mesmo estava fazendo.

Agradeço as dicas, e sempre que tiver alguma dúvida posso lhe perguntar?
DressyPear4 (2020-08-14 19:27:54+00:00): Sim, se quiser pode mandar mensagem direta ou pode entrar no grupo do telegram, onde vai ter muito mais gente para ajudar
@OSMBrasil_Comunidade
skquinn (2020-08-12 11:30:37+00:00): Oops, this changeset also had a bunch of buildings I added that should have been separate.
user_11435438 (2020-08-11 09:28:38+00:00): 杭深线甬深段5500半径，线上线下设计速度都是250，降速前也确实以250运营的，真的一定要改成200吗……
FreedSky (2020-08-18 11:26:19+00:00): 可以加个 设计时速。我觉得一大堆350 250都是假的。
提速了在maxspeed改比较好，好比兰新，资料都说下线原来有350现在砍成250了；实际大部分路段200也有250。

另外合福有资料是说设计300，也有资料说设计是350.。。云里雾里的。
gscholz (2020-08-15 07:30:20+00:00): Hi Dartmouthmapmaker,
your recent changeset have created again a huge amount of errors in the OSM database:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-64.70279&lat=44.94410&zoom=10&overlays=long_ways,self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

The old ones we lately discussed are also still there.
Can you please fix this?

I am still wondering how this can happen as you are using JOSM. Do you ignore the error warnings JOSM shows when you try to upload those errors?

Guido
Dartmouthmapmaker (2020-08-15 12:29:16+00:00): Jsom will let me delete the node found in validator
Dartmouthmapmaker (2020-08-15 12:42:03+00:00): deleted a bunch through downloading in current view and search via type:node untagged -child
Frans S (2020-08-19 14:34:22+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here 
Your mappings are rather fair and accurate. However you fails so now and then to square buildings.
Please square each building with the Q key
Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
skquinn (2020-08-07 04:25:27+00:00): Submitted by mistake with old comment. Should be: Reclassify as service
DressyPear4 (2020-08-08 15:39:14+00:00): Olá, building é apenas para área construída, para área total use landuse.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89068326
SomeoneElse (2020-10-17 12:00:45+00:00): Do you have any source for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/834874548 other than http://www.ukairfieldguide.net/airfields/Bonnallack ?
I don't see anything on the ground suggesting that it is in-use as an airstrip currently and to be honest, as your changeset comment already says,  you can't say from the imagery available to OSM that any particular airstrip was here.
Jan Olieslagers (2020-10-17 12:08:18+00:00): I will remove the offending reference, Though I am not convinced the site could not be used as source for inspiration, or hints on possible locations of aerodromes, either past or present. 
But the images both on Bing and Esri show the runway quite clearly, just next to the road, and with a turning loop at the NE end. Moreover, there is a N/S taxiway on the East side of the field, leading to what looks very much like a hangar, or even two.
SomeoneElse (2020-10-17 12:29:22+00:00): What you're seeing as an "airstrip" looks like it's more recently used as a farm track to bypass the gravel track to the north.  Your hangars look like farm buildings and your taxiway looks rather close to the hedge if that's what it really is.  Maybe it was used as that (your source suggests a couple of microlights flew from here), but is it really an airstrip?  There's a joke in New Zealand that "every farm has an airfield because every farm has a paddock".  This looks a bit like that...
naveenpf (2020-09-16 02:50:59+00:00): Welcome to OSM Kerala.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kerala/Members

To join OSM Kerala Telegram click on. 
https://t.me/osmkerala
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89069767
Antti72 (2020-08-07 06:26:50+00:00): http://www.paimio.fi/uutishuone/uutiset/uutisarkisto/skeittiramppi_jouduttiin_purkamaan.10704.news
Frans S (2020-08-09 10:28:59+00:00): Hello Eliza
Thanks for mapping here.
A request. Please pay more attention on squaring the mapped buildings with the Q key.
Best regards
pesec (2020-08-10 06:10:16+00:00): Не забудьте исправить после окончания ремонта.
Taxist23061982 (2020-08-11 03:45:46+00:00): Это само собой!!!!!
Kovoschiz (2020-08-07 09:30:17+00:00): Can you explain why you removed `tunnel=culvert`?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89073810
Kovoschiz (2020-08-07 09:40:21+00:00): Aside from the possible case of an integral bridge underbridge previously mentioned, these can be bridge-sized culverts.
Free gems 8 (2020-08-08 15:29:16+00:00): problem fixed.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-09-28 20:01:51+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3377926

Can you look at this note? Maybe you can help with it even if plenty of time since the edit (if not - then I wish you a happy mapping!)
opendcc (2020-08-07 07:42:36+00:00): Und wie kommt jetzt zu den Häusern? Nur als Radfahrer?
Alexander-M (2020-08-07 09:19:08+00:00): Die Zufahrt läuft jetzt über Mehlmäusl (siehe die beiden Bushaltestellen). Diese Straße ist auch auf dem Satellitenbild deutlich zu erkennen.
opendcc (2020-08-07 12:35:45+00:00): Ich habe die Zufahrt ergänzt
Martin Borsje (2020-08-07 08:15:58+00:00): Ziet er goed uit! Ik neem aan dat je lokaal bekend bent.
Martin Borsje (2020-08-07 08:14:20+00:00): weet je zeker dat er geen ander verkeer dan voetgangers overmogen? Bijvoorbeeld fietsers.
horse=motor_vehicle=no is natuurlijk overbodig, net als maxspeed.
Misschien is service highway beter? 
Een pedestrian street is meestal een breder voetgangersgebied als een winkelstraat.
Kijk eens in de OSM wiki en laat het weten als je hulp waardeert!
Mark Schoot Uiterkamp (2020-08-07 08:20:51+00:00): thanks voor de Hulp maar het is echt een voetgangers gebied.
Martin Borsje (2020-08-07 08:22:20+00:00): Je had zelf een review gevraagd bij je edit...:)
vehicle=no etc. mag er natuurlijk af, maar kunnen geen kwaad.
Gr.
eggie (2020-08-07 08:40:00+00:00): Beste Mark,

Waarom hier oneway=yes hier  en een uitzondering voor fietsers. Dat is overigens coorect. Dan mag je er toch ook fietsen?
Waarom maxspeed 50?
Ergens klopt iets niet.
Je edits http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=89076445
MVG,
eggie
MKnight (2020-08-07 07:59:20+00:00): Moin, ist das ein reiner Radweg oder ein gemischter Weg?
cp76 (2020-08-07 13:27:05+00:00): Servus....
Ja, aber wie gesagt als offizieller Radweg ausgewiesen.  Bin über die OpenCycleMap darauf gestoßen, denn dort ist der Weg nicht als Radweg ausgewiesen. Demnach müsste man die Straße (Bahnhofstraße in Stadtroda) benutzen, nur herrscht dort ein hohes Verkehrsaufkommen, dass ich das nicht empfehlen würde.
MKnight (2020-08-07 15:27:26+00:00): Ich muss nochmal anders fragen: man darf dort nicht zu Fuß lang? Ziemlich ungewöhnlich.
MKnight (2020-08-07 15:30:46+00:00): nachtrag:
Hier:
https://www.otz.de/regionen/eisenberg/weg-von-stadtroda-nach-hainbuecht-wird-gebaut-id227310205.html
ist zu lesen es wäre ein Fuß- und Radweg.
das wäre dann highway=path + foot=designated + bicycle=designated
eggie (2020-08-07 08:34:29+00:00): Dag Mark,

Vaak zijn tweewielers uitgezonderd van eenrichtingsverkeer. is dat hier het geval. Dan toevoegen 
oneway:bicycle=no
en evt.
oneway:moped=no
Het zal anders hier niet meer goed routeren.
Op de Begijnhofstr staat zit nog de oude tagging met cycleway=opposite. dat kan dan ook worden aangepast.
Je edits http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=89076989
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-08-07 11:12:07+00:00): Uitzonderingen tweewielers toegevoegd op Maria Wijngaard. 
Zie bovenstaande tagging
Wellicht ook op Begijnenhofstr?
MVG,
Eggie
Mark Schoot Uiterkamp (2020-08-07 11:21:47+00:00): uitzondering tweewielers ook toegveogd aan de begijnenhofstr. bedankt voor de Tip
FransWillem (2020-08-25 10:03:40+00:00): Hello Imadriaga.
Thanks for mapping on this project
You asked for a review.
In general your mappings are fair but not squared.
Most buildings here are rectangular. Please square each of them with the Q key in the editor

Here are some tips and hints which might be helpful to improve your mapping skills

https://docs.google.com/document/d/e/2PACX-1vT_4K-s7HItsGTDt4dx43C3iD7u5uHtUyvasd_eMUQIq9zWbwlMXQk90jDHcdq6OcOnMc6B1NHYG4cO/pub
Best regards and keep mapping
VinasCZ (2020-08-07 08:29:39+00:00): Resolves https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2209658
aceman444 (2022-07-24 13:59:06+00:00): Dakujem za upravy plazi. Ale to petangove ihrisko bolo v poriadku, neboli potrebne ziadne zmeny. Hlavne nie pridavat opisny nazov, ktory nepridava ziadnu informaciu a hlavne je v OSM neplatny. Nazov ma obsahovat vlastne meno objektu, len ak existuje. Nie opis popisujuci typ objektu.
Riyadi IRM-RV (2020-08-12 06:31:10+00:00): halo. ooha. just to inform. i change several some classification and realign several node and segment on your changeset. thank you
naveenpf (2020-09-16 02:11:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM India.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India

To join OSM India Telegram click on.
https://t.me/OSMIndia
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89081695
user_5359 (2020-08-07 14:51:11+00:00): Hello! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved the node https://www.osm.org/node/2746833313/history over 100 meters, so there were problems with the corresponding way. I have moved the point back to its original position.
fkv (2021-04-26 23:14:45+00:00): Namensänderung warum? Dass hier 2 benachbarte Hütten beide Lahninghütte heißen, erscheint unplausibel.
hajo314 (2021-04-27 06:54:05+00:00): Beide Hütten liegen an(in) der Lahnig-Piste. Die Obere ist die Lahning - Bergrettungshütte während die Lahning - Hütte (priv.) 
Vorschlag: die "Lahninghütte Bergrettung" in "Bergrettungshütte Lahning" umzubennen.
fkv (2021-04-27 07:31:47+00:00): Na es geht jetzt nicht darum, dass wir zwei uns einig werden, sondern wie die Hütten wirklich heißen. Ist vor Ort (an den Hütten oder an Wegweisern) ein Name angeschrieben? Oder vielleicht findet man die Namen auf den Websites der Besitzer oder in alter Literatur, ich hab jetzt nicht recherchiert. Ich fürchte auch, dass ich da noch nie vorbeigegangen bin, weil ich den Schneeberg selten von dieser Seite bestiegen habe und dann eher den markierten Weg weiter nördlich genommen habe.
hajo314 (2021-04-27 08:47:11+00:00): www.hansundhannerl.at
dieser Bau wurde 1904 als Jagdhütte errichtet. In 1924 um einen Schupfen erweitert. Ich habe die Hütte seit 20 Jahren gepachtet, renoviert und erhalten.
fkv (2021-04-27 09:41:27+00:00): Ach so, das ist deine eigene Hütte? Dann weißt du natürlich am besten, wie sie heißt. Vielleicht wär eine Absprache zwischen denen, die diese zwei Hütten benannt haben, ganz gut gewesen um zu vermeiden, dass sie genau gleich heißen und dann immer verwechselt werden. In Openstreetmap gibt es keine wirklich befriedigende Lösung um diese Verwechslungsgefahr zu umgehen ohne die Taggingstandards zu verletzen.
hajo314 (2021-04-27 14:39:22+00:00): Werde es einmal mit einer Umbenennung versuchen
mavl (2020-08-09 09:09:56+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок добавляет на карту OpenStreetMap объект, которого нет в реальности. Пожалуйста, добавляйте на карту реальные объекты. И спасибо, что удалили ваш рисунок.  
  
Владимир Маршинин  
Рабочая группа по данным
dmfr (2024-02-06 19:05:26+00:00): Olá! Podes verificar se o ecoponto no nodo 1436450760 existe? Porque tentei ver e pareceu-me que não existe.
Rodolfo Dias (2024-02-07 15:45:52+00:00): Viva! Na altura existia, presentemente não consigo dizer pois há bastante tempo que não vou para aquela zona nem é ponto de passagem para mim...
dmfr (2024-02-07 15:53:58+00:00): Obrigado pela resposta!

É que a posição até é um bocado estranha... junto a uma ponte, aparentemente sem acesso para os camiões do lixo recolherem; e sem caminhos pedonais (exceto a ponte).

De qualquer forma, vou colocar uma nota para verificar se ainda existe.

Podes só dizer se se trata de um ecoponto, ou apenas de caixotes do lixo com separação (se ainda te lembrares)?
Frans S (2020-08-09 10:08:15+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Accurate mapped.
Just a remark. 
Do not map a courtyard including the building , just map the building only
Best regards and keep mapping
gendy54 (2021-01-21 21:46:36+00:00): Bonjour,

Juste un petit mot pour te dire que tu avais enlevé le seul tag sur la gendarmerie qu'il ne fallait pas enlever: 
 amenity=police.

J'en profite pour te dire que les commentaires de tes modifications doivent être plus détaillés que Ajout. Voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bonnes_pratiques#Bons_commentaires_de_groupe_de_modifications

A ta disposition si besoin.

Donat
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-02-19 15:35:35+00:00): Hej, zostały do posprzątania stare adresy jak https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3957616738
Emmanuel-201901 (2020-08-08 21:00:29+00:00): Non c'est bien signalisé pour les vélos, avec signalisation verticale et horizontale. Effectivement, elle n'est pas fini mais c'est pas grave, autant indiquer et mettre en valeur tout ce qui est déjà réalisé.
Patoleon (2020-08-08 21:10:03+00:00): Pas d'accord ici aussi => pas fini = dangereux. La signalisation n'a aucune importance seul les faits comptent.
Patoleon (2020-08-08 21:12:03+00:00): En plus elles est bourrée de plots et de sorties de résidence à partir des maisons. Pour moi c'est bien un trottoir cyclable.
Moldovan_Merkator (2020-08-08 20:10:35+00:00): Te rog frumos, nu șterge cheile name:mo adăugate de mine, în caz contrar eu voi scrie moderatorilor OSM că tu ștergi date, ceea ce este egal cu vandalism, dacă nici aceasta nu va ajuta eu mă jur că voi șterge ABSOLUT TOATE cheile name:ro.
VitalieS (2020-08-08 23:37:38+00:00): Bună,

De ce doriți (amenințați) să ștergeți toate denumirile în limba locală română și care e rostul să propuneți adăugarea unui cod ISO 639-1 inexistent sau, mai direct spus, al unei „limbi” inexistente (= vandalism)?

Pentru referină, lista codurilor existente ISO 639-1: http://www.loc.gov/standards/iso639-2/php/code_list.php

De altfel, vă îndemn să vă abțineți de la atacuri sau amenințări, scopul fiecărui editor fiind același: de a ameliora calitatea informațiilor și datelor cartografice.

Mult succes în continuare.
Moldovan_Merkator (2020-08-09 13:02:58+00:00): Limba „locală” majoritară vorbită pe teritoriul Republicii Moldova, conform ultimului recensămînt (din 2014) este limba moldovenească, vorbită de 56,7% din cetățenii Republicii Moldova, indiferent are cod ISO sau nu, libera alegere a limbii materne o au toți cetățenii, iar recensămintele sunt unul din instrumentele prin care această alegere este reprezentată, mai mult ca atît, conform principiului democratic majoritatar, dumneavoastră nu aveți dreptate să faceți acest lucru, din motivul că opinia dumneavoastră este una minoritară, iar în democrație conduce doar majoritatea.
Ceea ce eu v-am scris mai sus nu este o amenințare, ci o constatare după principiul talionic, fiecare acțiune se răsplătește cu o astfel de acțiune săvîrșită, „ochi pentru ochi, dinte pentru dinte..” aceasta spune și Biblia. :)
Toate cele bune!