piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Anton Khorev (2021-09-22 22:51:59+00:00): *Reducing clutter* and *accuracy* are opposite goals in this case, you can't pursue both by deleting separate paths. Tagging the absence is not "the way to deal with that", it's just *one of the ways*:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Sidewalks
Pete Owens (2021-09-23 00:09:45+00:00): But in this case there IS NO SEPARATE WAY. So mapping a separate way is both inaccurate and adds clutter. 

Viritually every street in the country has pavements - and in virtually every case these are not explicitly mapped (either by a tag or as a separate way). This is why it is generally those roads without pavements  where the absence is noted with the tag sidewalk=no (eg. Birchwood Way). Unless you are proposing to ststematically map all the pavements alongside every street in Warrington then isolated sections of such mapping are misleading since they imply a physically separate route. It also makes routing excessively complicated.
Pete Owens (2021-09-23 00:40:49+00:00): Re: You don't mind this part of the footway to exist as a separate way:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/964452554

A particularly absurd example - since there are pavements on both sides of the road, yet only one side is mapped explicitly. My main concern is the accuracy of routing for cyclists, so I have corrected it to indicate that cycling on pavements is illegal.
Falsernet (2021-09-23 14:08:36+00:00): I'd liken mapping for routing to mapping for the renderer. The fact of the matter is it's both local convention and accepted mapping practice to map pavements dedicated as cycleways as their own independent way. Also as Anton mentioned, the wiki does specify it is perfectly acceptable to map pavements separately. And this is the case in a lot of junctions in the local area. So why you'd choose to destroy accurate data here specifically is beyond me. Perhaps because you believe I can't edit your precious cycle routes. I have contacted the Data Working Group about the most recent changeset here.
Anton Khorev (2021-09-23 21:05:47+00:00): Pete Owens,  
did you delete this way  
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/964452559  
because it's illegal to cycle on this sidewalk and the bike lane is actually outside of this sidewalk?
Pete Owens (2021-09-23 21:59:53+00:00): I deleted it because it is duplicate mapping. The cycleway (actually a shared use pavement) was already mapped by tagging the highway of which it is part. There is no separate path and never has been.
Anton Khorev (2021-09-23 22:39:22+00:00): Pete Owens, 
When you said "cycling on pavements is illegal" was it only about this way  
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/964452554 ?

Did you delete this way  
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/964452559  
with both bicycle and foot tagging
because the street already had a bicycle tag (`cycleway:right=track`) 
and
you don't think that the presence of sidewalks should be tagged at all? (there are no sidewalk tags on the street, therefore there was no duplicate mapping for the sidewalk)
Falsernet (2021-09-23 22:43:00+00:00): "Separate" is subjective language. There's a kerb between them, I would consider that separate, but that's obviously down to individual opinion. Regardless, there is no accepted practice of deleting cycleways mapped as separate ways because you think they are nicer as tags along the road. I don't see why you're continuing this narrative, and I'm hopeful that someone more senior and qualified will revert your changeset(s) upon my request, such that I can withdraw from this unproductive argument.
Pete Owens (2021-09-24 00:25:58+00:00): The presence of "sidewalks" (or pavements as we tend to call them in the UK) is very rarely tagged since they are a near universal feature of streets - only the absence in note worthy. However the best way to represent them is by tagging the highway with  footway=yes/no unless they follow separate paths. Otherwise, pedestrian routes become excessively convoluted whenever this involves crossing a road. Certainly any separately mapped pavement needs to be explicitly tagged bicycle=no, otherwise they will be picked up by cycle routing applications.
Falsernet (2021-09-24 00:34:46+00:00): Being tagged as pavements without explicitly cycle=yes should be enough. That's a problem for the routing applications to deal with. In the meantime, tag to your heart's content, but don't damage accurate data for the sake of what you personally believe to be "less clutter"
Pete Owens (2021-09-24 01:24:28+00:00): Falsernet - Don't add duplicate non-existent ways when a cycleway has ALREADY BEEN MAPPED.

Don't delete existing roads and then complain when they are restored.

Don't merge sections of road with different tagging - taking out a section of the national cycle network in the process,

Don't add ways where cycling is prohibited, without tagging them as such. From a UK perspective it would be useful if OSM set bicycle=no by default pavements in the same way as it does for motorways, but it doesn't. Fortunately this isn't a big problem because nobody maps pavements separately.
Falsernet (2021-09-24 01:52:10+00:00): No need to get heated, this was never a personal issue, though now you've brought things up, let's address. (Things that I am surprised you remembered was the same specific user, let alone can list in great detail, clearly control over your turf is very important to you.)

Firstly - that's an issue for the data working group and associates now. (Or I could just remap the data you destroyed and we call it a day, but I have a feeling this is your choice of hill on which to succumb. I've deliberately left it untouched so as not to tamper.)

Second - mistakes may have been made, but I don't recall "complaining". I am willing to accept where it is objective fact that my edits aren't accurate. (Keep in mind data accuracy is of high priority on this platform.) In good faith I aim to map with accuracy as my ultimate goal. (Regardless, thanks for the reminder to survey the location myself, I've been meaning to.)

Thirdly - "nobody"? That's not very observant. A minority of mappers? Sure, point taken in that case. More importantly, it would be relatively achievable to implement a routing algorithm patch, such that within the UK, map interpreters could exclude pavements from bicycle routing, or not 'prefer' them in the same way they prefer dedicated cycle infrastructure over regular public roads, at least if the routing algorithm is the implementer's own code. (Bearing in mind enforcement of such law is exceedingly rare.) Additionally, there's no obvious responsibility to tag every detail as such unless the data is misleading or inaccurate otherwise.

I think I'll leave things at that.
Falsernet (2021-09-24 01:57:01+00:00): I reread this discussion to put things into perspective and just noticed that you never addressed mapping pelican crossings as zebra when they were originally mapped as pelican. That's something one can objectively say is inaccurate. Though in fairness you never explicitly claimed to hold accuracy as a principle.
Anton Khorev (2021-09-27 18:03:35+00:00): I see that in July Pete Owens also considered that sidewalks are better represented as separate ways here. See for example
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/964452555
, this section is separated not just by a kerb. So I guess they are actually better therefore I restored them.

In most of the cases someone who is not interested in sidewalks can just ignore them. That's not going to work when they are shared cycleways, but why is it not considered to be important information for cyclists?

Anton Khorev  
Data Working Group
Falsernet (2021-09-27 18:06:52+00:00): Cheers Anton
wielandb (2021-08-10 20:32:30+00:00): Hey :),

could you explain what the tags 
payment:scam=yes
and
second_hand=scam
mean?
Thelema (2021-08-13 21:46:28+00:00): yes this car dealership has been involved in recurrent illegal operations, like buying used cars but not paying the money to the sellers; double charging buyers; selling stolen cars; among other activities, and to this day continues its illegal operations
ivanbranco (2021-09-12 06:27:33+00:00): We don't tag illegal activities. We don't go around putting rats emoji in POI names. I'm gonna revert the obvious wrong tags, I hope somebody else will fix the rest.
Thelema (2021-09-17 01:16:17+00:00): Thank you Ivan, I was about to revert the changes. They served well for the time being, we acomplished to get a successful response from the car brand and all problems seems to be fixed now. Thx! 👍
nevw (2021-08-04 03:46:51+00:00): Hi
in this changeset, I think you may have accidentally shifted an address node on Halford St to the park.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=109118446&zoom=18&lat=-27.44275&lon=153.04293&layers=B0TTTFT
nevw (2021-08-09 06:11:51+00:00): no response, corrected accidentally shifted node myself to correct location.
DressyPear4 (2021-08-04 15:50:30+00:00): Por que isso não seria um campo de futebol?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109118686
adiatmad (2021-08-04 02:47:41+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM! Hope you are doing well.
What is the meaning name=bldg ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109118769
DressyPear4 (2021-08-05 09:41:51+00:00): Olá, não adicione informações pessoais no mapa
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109118993
Warin61 (2022-06-10 01:34:08+00:00): Hi,
The name tag is for names only, not descriptions like 'bush rough'. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
user_5359 (2021-08-04 08:42:19+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice a address is a name.
bob3bob3 (2021-10-05 03:46:16+00:00): Gday. Just advising that I have done some extensive updates on "The Lake" campground and surrounds. Gimee a shout if you disagree on any of it.. Cheers.
BigBirdy (2021-10-05 05:38:20+00:00): Thanks for the update, always good to see more detail being added. 
Stephen.
julcnx (2021-08-04 04:24:56+00:00): Please make smaller change subsets.  Each changeset should be within a small geographical area (e.g. 100km max), so it's easier for others to review changes.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109120188
vermiceli (2021-08-04 03:54:31+00:00): Source: https://princetonwjhcs.org/heritage-tour/
Rizki IRM-ED (2022-12-14 06:22:09+00:00): Hi sramadhanipr. Your edit looks awesome, but I improve water body (id 970256788) due crossing with building. If you have any other suggestion, please let me know (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30208/task/142908835). Thank you.
Supaplex030 (2021-08-04 13:29:53+00:00): Die vorhin erwähnte "barrier=parking_lane" kannst du dir ja mal in den anderen Kiezen ansehen, ob es evtl. hier eine passende Alternative wäre zur Löschung (schließlich würde man ohne Rollstuhl etc. ja schon einfach über die Straße gehen und zwischen den parkenden Autos hindurch): http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1a0M
mueschel (2021-08-08 14:10:59+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM!
Could you explain the meaning of these keys? They are not common, documented ones:
service:bicycle:bike = yes
  service:bicycle:bike_kitchen

Thanks!
camiv (2021-08-10 12:23:35+00:00): hey!
A bike kitchen is a place where people learn how to fix their bike by themself. It's a workshop where you can find tools and bike components (for a cheap price, because 2nd hand most of the time) and volonteer (with some mechanical knowledge) will help u to fix your bike if you need advices :)  
Does this explaination answer ur question?
mueschel (2021-08-10 13:01:08+00:00): Thanks for the explanation.

- We do have "service:bicycle:diy" for a place where you can to the work yourself. I think this is the key that should be used instead.

- OSM doesn't use the term "bike" because it's ambiguous - it's unclear if it means bicycles of motorcycles.
Mudumala (2022-04-29 09:01:05+00:00): Thanks for the edit
Russ McD (2022-01-31 01:49:33+00:00): Dear rat_lorand-grab ..... 
Way 970267043 : I understand your desperation to add detail for Grab, but you are messing up good data. 
This way has a small island, leading to a painted area.
You have drawn it way too long, which means heading north on the 3087, you can not turn left into the Petrol station - in reality you can.  We do not treat painted areas in Thailand as physical barriers.
You have also messed up the one way direction - we drive on the left in Thailand. Do you live here or are you armchair plotting from India ?
I have fixed your mistakes, but please be more careful when playing with our map.
Russ.
Russ McD (2022-01-31 02:07:50+00:00): It seems like Way 970267042 also has the one way direction incorrect.  This should be blatantly obvious if you checked your edits.  Its no wonder my GPS did not route correctly in this area.
Please be more careful.
rat_lorand_grab (2022-02-02 14:03:03+00:00): Hello. Thanks for correcting them! I have reviewed my changesets in that area and I identified what I wrongly edited (13.6263906, 99.6144614), (13.6168728, 99.6389422).
Looking at the intersection, I believe that w970267044 w1026253787 should be oneways too.
Thanks for your feedback!
Lorand
Mudumala (2022-04-29 08:58:54+00:00): Thanks for the edits
mavl (2021-08-05 15:42:41+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок удалил здание и добавил вместо него другое здание с испорченным адресом.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/293876497/history  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/970269250/history
tlconrd (2021-08-04 05:48:02+00:00): http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20200715/Item_10.pdf
tlconrd (2021-08-04 05:48:26+00:00): http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20200715/20200715_soa.pdf
tastrax (2021-08-11 06:55:24+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
Harel M (2022-11-30 12:12:39+00:00): Hi, thanks for taking the time to map this area!
Please note that access tag should not be places on way but rather on points to indicate a place where the access has changed using barrier tag. Also note that footway is only for hiking, there's no other tags that needs to be added, same goes for path.
I've fixed some of the ways but I think you'd know better which ways have these tags that need to be removed.
Thanks!!
julcnx (2021-08-09 01:52:41+00:00): FYI. Please kindly refrain from changing highway classifications and see guidelines for new additions https://github.com/GRABOSM/Grab-Data/issues/96#issuecomment-894739078
vulasala (2021-08-30 12:22:44+00:00): Hi Cmoffroad,

Thanks for flagging and making the changes. We have changed the road to residential as it was leading to multiple residential rooftops. But thanks for sharing the guidelines it helps us for mapping. 

Thank you Happy Mapping
Jayasree.
tlconrd (2021-08-04 06:17:04+00:00): http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20200715/20200715_soa.pdf
tlconrd (2021-08-04 06:28:34+00:00): http://www.sbcounty.gov/uploads/LAFCO/AgendaNotices/20200715/Item_09.pdf

LAFCO 3239
mueschel (2021-08-08 14:29:02+00:00): Hi,
could you check this way, something went wrong with the name tags:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/307345318
ivanbranco (2021-09-15 15:01:56+00:00): name:ערבית=*
that word seems to be "arabic" (so it should be name:ar=*) but the value is hebrew?

I see you uploaded other changesets after mueschel comment, but never replied. I will delete the tag if no explanation is given.
mike140 (2021-08-04 12:48:26+00:00): теги не должны содержать кирилицу, за исключением различных названий, тем более что часть типов сервиса там уже есть на английском
Warin61 (2021-08-19 07:30:03+00:00): Hi,

Roles of coastline in Bass Straight corrected from inner to outer.
Noen (2021-08-04 23:24:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115505243 og https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115505252 endte opp med taggen highway=U. Mente du highway=unclassified?
NKA (2021-08-05 06:14:54+00:00): Ja
DaveF (2021-08-05 17:48:50+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/970300150#map=19/51.55822/0.06804
Is this really pedestrian? There appears to be parking bays.

There can only be one railway=station (node) so I'll convert to building=train_station.
DaveF (2021-08-05 17:49:19+00:00): PS Welcome to OSM
Starrapid87 (2021-08-05 17:58:31+00:00): Hi Dave, Thanks for your help with this.

You're right actually. Its a highway, but doesn't connect to Ilford Hill. Its pedestrian in my head because the only cars that use it are the ones going to park. I'll re-edit it

I was trying to add the new station entrances on.
eggie (2021-08-04 08:09:28+00:00): Mooi.. opgeleverd...
Dan kan dus de regel construction=yes verwijderd worden

Een school taggen we op de adresnode. Dus niet op de gebouwomtrek.
name=...........................
amenity=university

Kijk je nog even?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-08-04 11:56:15+00:00): construction heb ikm verwijderd.
Info verplaatst naar adresnode 
amenity=university toegevoegd aan adresnode.
MVG
eggie
HirschKauz (2021-08-04 08:57:42+00:00): Hoppla!  
Du hast (sicher irrtümlich) den den way 970302607 von Oberaußem bis zum KVB Betriebshof in Köln erstellt. Magst Du den wieder löschen bitte.  
VG, HirschKauz
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109130408
GPSfriend (2021-08-04 21:24:58+00:00): War Fehler. Ist wieder gelöscht. Danke!
mapper999 (2021-08-04 21:07:22+00:00): Hi,
what's the point of this edit? The parking is already marked as area. This service way leads to level -2 which has been closed for some time.
And again Bing is not very helpful for underground roads.
Sofiya_Khilchyk (2021-08-05 08:53:00+00:00): Hi,
I just added entrance point, if it's wrong, correct please.
Thanks for your questions!
mapper999 (2021-08-15 08:35:48+00:00): Thanks for the answer, but I don't think it is much help for osm if you just assume things in order to "fix" problems without any local knowledge. Reverted.
abakus_uploader (2021-08-04 22:31:32+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!
mapper999 (2021-08-04 21:02:32+00:00): Hi,
where did you get the information that these two service ways (level=-1) are entrances to the parking on the ground floor (level=0)? These are covered by the building, so it can't be seen on Bing Aerial Imagery?
Sofiya_Khilchyk (2021-08-05 08:45:32+00:00): Hi, 
yes, it looks like a mistake, but I didn't map these roads, they were already there. I fixed the problem of oneways without an endpoint.
mapper999 (2021-08-15 08:37:58+00:00): Thanks for the answer, but I don't think it is much help for osm if you just assume things in order to "fix" problems without any local knowledge. Reverted.
osmviborg (2021-08-04 08:53:06+00:00): Revertet. Newer aerial photos are available. https://listservices.kortforsyningen.dk/#/map/WMS/orto_foraar_temp
jmty8 (2021-08-05 09:05:44+00:00): Dear osmviborg, Thank you so much for the imagery! I will be more careful.
wkdgs (2021-08-04 13:53:31+00:00): Ich glaube leisure=pitch ist hier der falsche Tag, leisure=fitness_station passt besser.

Der name-Tag ist zudem nur für Eigennamen gedacht. Die Sportart wird hier bereits über den Sport-Tag abgedeckt.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109132404
ChillyDL (2021-08-04 17:54:02+00:00): Hallo wuerfelbecher, du hast gerade den Namen des steinzeitlichen Großsteingrabs in "Hügelgrab" geändert. Ein Hügelgrab ist eine bronzezeitliche Grabstätte und wäre wenn auch eher eine Beschreibung als ein Name - wird das Grab vor Ort wirklich so benannt?
wuerfelbecher (2021-08-05 06:55:53+00:00): Hallo, vor Ort wird das Grab auf allen Karten und Wegweiser als "Hügelgrab" bezeichnet. 
http://www.heimat-mecklenburgische-seenplatte.de/Denkmale/huegelgraeber/gsg-wustrow/gsg-wustrow.htm
http://www.traumziel-mv.de/fileadmin/Assets/Content/Images/Touren/253_am_tollensesee_bei_wustrow/bild17_1000-513.jpg
pitscheplatsch (2021-08-06 09:17:38+00:00): Hi Franklineng, welcome to OSM.

Just a test or what's the source of your mapping activity? Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
pitscheplatsch (2021-09-10 15:31:50+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/109224680
syntex (2021-09-02 18:21:16+00:00): To jest droga dla samochodów?
raaa (2021-09-03 09:19:24+00:00): Nie. Zakrzaczona ścieżka. Kiedyś polna droga. 4x4 przejedzie.
syntex (2021-09-03 09:27:56+00:00): W takim razie nie jest to highway=service tylko highway=path, highway=track lub highway=footway
wkdgs (2021-08-04 10:36:29+00:00): Sieht alles richtig aus. Die auf openstreetmap.org angezeigten Kartenteile werden nicht immer sofort aktualisiert. Das kann manchmal etwas länger dauern.

https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/178/how-often-does-the-main-mapnik-map-get-updated
skyma (2021-08-04 10:58:22+00:00): Dankeschön! Da schau dann später nochmal.
syntex (2022-03-16 15:03:40+00:00): Garaże to building=public? I po co takie gigantyczne zestawy zmian
bvivi (2021-09-10 15:03:44+00:00): Buongiorno.
Volevo chiederti di verificare la way 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/218250130#map=19/42.61226/14.06554
Nella mappa risulta residenziale a senso unico. A me sembra di ricordare che sia una strada solo per i residenti 

Grazie
pippo6 (2021-09-12 23:11:40+00:00): Ciao, è meglio se lasci una nota, sono lontano e non ricordo i divieti per questa strada dall'aspetto particolare.
pippo6 (2021-09-13 06:13:42+00:00): Ciao, anche nell'elenco da caricare su OSM non ho annotato una restrizione d'accesso, c'è bisogno di una survey.
DaveF (2021-08-04 10:52:16+00:00): Hi
"Bath Student Accommodation" isn't the name of the house. Please don't add it to any other properties.
PT-53 (2021-08-05 06:04:27+00:00): Hallo VersuchsObjekt1,
Du hast diese P-Fläche
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/970321448/history
neu eingezeichnet. Jetzt ist der P allerdings doppelt in OSM enthalten, da Du ja zuvor diesen P-Knoten
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8963782360/history
erstellt hast.
Wenn Du eine P-Fläche einzeichnest, olltest Du den P-Knoten wieder löschen.
Machst Du das noch.

Fragende Grüße

PS:
Für Fragen / Anmerkungen / Rückmeldungen bitte diesen Änderungssatz aufrufen und in das leere Feld unterhalb Diskussion als neuen Kommentar eintragen.
VersuchsObjekt1 (2021-08-05 10:38:57+00:00): Hallo PT-53,
erstmal entschuldige ich mich für die Fehler, die ich gemacht habe. Da ich neu bei OSM bin, war ich noch nicht genau informiert, wie manche Dinge genau funktionieren.
Vielen Dank aber für deinen Hinweis. Ich versuche, es in Zukunft besser zu machen :-)

Grüße,
VersuchsObjekt1
PT-53 (2021-08-05 11:49:21+00:00): Hallo VersuchsObjekt1, 
Danke für die Rückmeldung.

Fehler macht jeder einmal. Das ist überhaupt kein Problem und aus Fehlern bzw. deren Korrektur kann man ja auch lernen.

Hier gibt es noch gute Infos für OSM-Neueinsteiger:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Beginners'_guide
http://einklich.net/temp/osm-tutorial.pdf
Schaus Dir mal an.

Grüße
user_8655426 (2021-08-04 09:42:26+00:00): 坪井町です。
Sulfo (2021-08-18 12:50:57+00:00): Hej Vivi. Arbejder lige ved siden af, så checker op på det i dag ✅