piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-10 21:21:33+00:00): As of 12/2021 we have been developing a bridge model for real world business to enter the web3 eCommerce space. The website is raw but has been populated with local graphic and traditional artists and vendors that will provide both metaverse professionals and Main Street shoppers have a place to find specific and exclusive art and collectibles.
ZeLonewolf (2022-05-10 21:23:00+00:00): I did look at the website, and it had no indication of a physical address. I've also reviewed imagery of the streetfront, and there is no indication of a storefront.  So I ask again, how is an independent observer able to verify this POI?
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-10 21:23:33+00:00): There is another such tag just 2 homes down with A1 deli owners, which I’m sure you don’t know like I do, that hasn’t been bothered because they too will be selling on web3 out of that location.
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-10 21:27:07+00:00): Sorry is a physical address easily visible. Since when does a on the ground eye witness needed to verify business. If you were a local you’d know that many of these business are located with in another business that doesn't clearly show other businesses within the building. Again how are you put in charge of this area and not know anything of the area?
Eiim (2022-05-10 21:56:29+00:00): Brian (ZeLonewolf) is not in charge of any area, indeed, no single person is, but rather the community as a whole works to enforce its standards. In this case, the principle at issue seems to be verifiability (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Verifiability), as well as what constitutes a shop. The basic question at issue seems to be: if I went to this location right now, could I walk in to a shop named "BUCXplorers" and buy something? 

The linked website (https://www.boreduplander.club/, although I would recommend changing that to the BUCXplorers page specifically if that is the page about this location) doesn't mention a physical location, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one doesn't exist, especially if this is a new shop and they wouldn't have bothered to update their website.

It's also not clear from the website what one would buy here. It looks like it might be a design studio? In that case, `office=graphic_design` might be more appropriate than `shop=yes`.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-10 22:49:00+00:00): Where https://www.boreduplander.club/ website mentions this specific shop?

It seems not doing this at all, in such case it should be removed.

Also, what exactly can passerby buy at this location? shop=yes you used is hopelessly generic.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-10 22:49:54+00:00): There is https://www.boreduplander.club/shop subpage but it shows an error message right now.
Natfoot (2022-05-11 02:39:22+00:00): @theMETAVERSr "Since when does a on the ground eye witness needed to verify business." This is actually the hole point to Open Street Map you might be thinking of Google Maps, where fraudulent POI's are common.  
The key to Open Street Map is that the data collected needs to be something that can be collected by visiting the place. If the data can not be collected this way it enters a gray area where data can be removed.  I have railroad data that gets removed as it is in this gray area, for a lot of people.   
If you can not verify that the location exists; then it may be removed for the time being until it can be confirmed.
theMETAVERSr (2022-05-16 20:01:26+00:00): I live right next door and am helping with the set up of the business with business owner. Do I not count as eye witness account? 

Please help me understand why wrong or missing info is valued more than correct info? thanks
ZeLonewolf (2022-05-16 20:07:30+00:00): OpenStreetMap is not a business directory, it's a geographic database of the observable world.  A business that someone operates out of their home is not a "shop".  We do not map businesses without some kind of observable presence.  Otherwise, the next mapper walking down the street would observe that there is no business there and remove it.  This is a very basic principal of OpenStreetMap.

You can read more about the principle of verifiability here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability

This means that some things will not be mapped, and that's okay.  Otherwise we would have people adding all sorts of nonsense "because they say so" and that's not acceptable for a project that aims to collect facts.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-16 22:34:05+00:00): Also, shop=outpost has a specific meaning: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=outpost

If something cannot be visited by public, then it is not a shop=outpost
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-16 22:34:24+00:00): (this applies to shops in general)
drivec (2022-05-11 02:16:31+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
ScottWalkerAU (2022-05-09 03:48:48+00:00): Hi & welcome

I see you're using the web editor (known as iD) - you can square corners of a shape by pressing "Q" when you have it selected
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120725047
drivec (2022-05-11 02:16:23+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
KE SOCHAI (2022-05-09 04:06:21+00:00): KE SOCHAI
drivec (2022-05-11 02:16:26+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and traces.
eggie (2022-08-09 05:23:38+00:00): Beste RS   Mijn advies zou zijn om niet het wegennet vast te maken aan de landuse=residential van Etten Leur..  Maar wellicht was dit al het geval.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-08-09 07:11:30+00:00): Denk dat het in deze changeset is gebeurd, maar dat is allemaal niet meer terug te draaien.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/51823567

Daar krijg je echt ellende van als er een beetje met de wegen wordt geschoven. Alles komt mee. 
MVG
eggie
GeoMechain (2022-11-01 08:47:40+00:00): What is it? A shop?
limes11 (2022-05-20 18:45:38+00:00): Hi 

du hast den Weg nicht als privat bezeichnet, sondern komplett gesperrt. 

Existiert denn hier ein erkennbarer Weg? Ist er zusätzlich klar erkenntlich gesperrt? Mitten durch Wiesen und Wald sind solche Wege normalerweise nicht gesperrt. 

Wenn hier überhaupt kein Weg mehr existiert, dann sollte dies anders zum Ausdruck gebracht werden, z.B. durch abandoned:highway=path

VG Limes
Hozerjones (2022-05-20 19:55:43+00:00): Es handelt sich um einen Privatweg. Der Zugang für die Allgemeinheit ist nicht mehr erlaubt.
access=private wäre daher korrekt
VigilantPenguin (2022-05-09 16:07:15+00:00): Hello! I've never seen any signage other than "Northgate North" (no "Mall" and no parking-specific naming) here. Perhaps it would be more accurate to add a "landuse=commercial" area around both buildings, add a "name=Northgate North" tag and remove the names from the two buildings?
Cy R (2022-05-09 16:24:51+00:00): You're right, of course. I went back and forth about whether to include "mall" in the name. I like your recommendation much more. Still learning how to tag things properly, so I'll see if I can manage to give your suggestion a go. Would you draw the area "hugging" the buildings? Or pad it with some offset around them? Thanks for the review.
Cy R (2022-05-09 16:30:08+00:00): While I have your eyes... I couldn't figure out how to drop the multipolygon relation from the west building without deleting the feature and killing the change history. Any way to do this without making a new area? Just wanted to clean that up. Maybe I need to learn how to use JOSM at this point...
VigilantPenguin (2022-05-09 16:32:19+00:00): No problem, thanks for all the mapping you're doing! And I should correct myself, I'd probably do "landuse=retail" rather than commercial. For drawing landuse areas I typically place the edge at the start of the surrounding sidewalk (when present, otherwise I use the edge of the surrounding roadway). In this case since building is basically flush with the sidewalk I'd say it's fine to use the building outlines.
VigilantPenguin (2022-05-09 16:38:40+00:00): And for your 2nd comment: I do find JOSM easier for working with larger relations, but I think this is fine as-is right now. As far as I am aware there's no way to transfer the history of a relation object to a way object. If you want to you could cut and paste the tags from the relation to the way to clean it up but I don't think that's all that necessary!
Cy R (2022-05-09 18:33:46+00:00): Heh, I'll leave the relation alone, then...too little to fuss about :) I applied your suggestions in changeset 120761250. Thanks again for the advice!
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:12:01+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351469
bernardo60 (2023-09-27 04:39:42+00:00): I wonder why you changed from path to track. This is less than 2m wide, impossible for a car to pass. I change back to path. I went there today on my bike.
bernardo60 (2023-09-27 04:43:40+00:00): If someone used the tag "path" based on a survey, you should not retag it as "track", without consulting that person. Thanks for your understanding.
danieldegroot2 (2022-05-10 18:43:16+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1058442952/history

Are you sure this way's width is 25 meters?

Regards,

Daniel
Atakua (2022-05-11 05:45:47+00:00): No, it should be centimeters. Fixed now.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-29 04:52:23+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153317417
nevw (2022-05-09 06:49:15+00:00): Hi
I expect ‘ Orgy House of Watson’ name to be vandalism and is removed.
puchaczowsky (2022-05-09 20:59:30+00:00): Nie zostawiaj tagu constructon, gdy droga jest już wybudowana, ponieważ on blokuje routingi/nawigacje.
Błędnie oznaczone drogi: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eUJ
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-29 04:52:24+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153317417
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-29 05:04:49+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153317566
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-30 00:12:02+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153351469
CapitaineMoustache (2023-05-27 13:11:48+00:00): Beware, sometimes imagery can be tricky! I know this place and I've seen it by myself, these two roads are not connected, a fence close the landfill so you can't go this way.

Have a nice day! ;)
CapitaineMoustache (2023-05-27 13:14:50+00:00): You can see that on Mapillary (it's my own pictures :) : https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=471858470700628
Lejun (2022-05-09 09:53:28+00:00): Salut et merci de la contribution. Pas de soucis particulier si ce n’est l’utilisation de la clé name (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9725994309). Je pense que la clé description serait plus appropriée.
oongiw (2022-05-09 19:31:39+00:00): Corrigé dans le changeset 120763002.
joost schouppe (2022-08-09 06:23:44+00:00): Hi Antoine,
We only split highways up into separate ways when there is an actual physical barrier between the two directions. On most of the N27 you worked here, that is not the case.
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:12:09+00:00): Salut et merci de l’ajout. Simple détail, il est bien question d’une piste cyclable (highway=cycleway) ou bien c’est un aménagement sur trottoir (highway=path avec foot=designated, bicycle=designated et segregated=yes/no) ?
marc landers (2022-05-09 10:37:48+00:00): Salut, oui il s 'agit bien d une piste cyclable.
Lejun (2022-05-09 10:55:27+00:00): Ça roule, merci !
canfe (2022-05-10 17:36:28+00:00): Sarebbe meglio separare i tag. Il building coi sui tag (difficilmente si sposta il building...) e poi il bar (taggato correttamente come cafe, bravo) coi suoi.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730094
canfe (2022-05-10 17:38:14+00:00): Non bisogna mettere l'ovvio anche se ID lo propone.
E' ovvio che su una track si possa andare a piedi o a cavallo. Vanno messi se NON si può andare.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730234
canfe (2022-05-10 17:39:59+00:00): Non è tutto un pitch. Quello mappato è un'aera sportiva, con DENTRO un pitch.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730389
pyram (2022-05-26 13:34:59+00:00): Hallo MelissaVAG,

schön, dass Du bei OSM mitmachst.
Ich habe jetzt gesehen, dass Du bei den Radstationen die Namen mit "VAG_Rad-Station" ergänzt hast.
Wichtiges Grundprinzip ist aber, dass wir genau das mappen, was vor Ort ersichtlich ist. Das erscheint mir eher eine Beschreibung (wie "Radweg") als ein Namensbestandteil zu sein. Das "VAG_Rad" ist außerdem in "brand" schon eingetragen.
Ich hatte erst neulich eine solche Station ergänzt ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9652999129/history ) und würde daher den Stand wieder auf das zurücksetzen, was vorher und vor Ort war.

Gruß
pyram
canfe (2022-05-10 17:41:10+00:00): Dal numero di piante e dalle immagini aeree è davvero un parco giochi o è un pack??
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730457
literan (2022-05-09 09:45:57+00:00): дубль вообще-то добавили. Будьте внимательнее, пожалуйста

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9272767917
literan (2022-05-09 09:47:53+00:00): подскажите, каков источник границ площади?
Timur Rossolov (2022-05-13 05:34:57+00:00): Границы площади я брал с Яндекс. Карт.
literan (2022-05-13 13:14:04+00:00): а все прочие правки, начиная с этой https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120676098

по внесению площадей, вы тоже с Яндекс.карт брали?
Timur Rossolov (2022-05-13 17:21:38+00:00): Да, Яндекс.Карты использую для внесения правок. По границам Преображенской площади можете попробовать брать альтернативные источники.
literan (2022-05-17 20:14:52+00:00): Тимур, к сожалению, вы использовали данные из запрещенного использования. OSM это проект открытых данных, он наполняется только из источников, которые напрямую дали разрешение на это, либо путем личного сбора данных.
Подробнее см. https://www.openstreetmap.org/copyright

Ваши правки придется откатить
Timur Rossolov (2023-05-08 14:32:00+00:00): Кроме этого, остаётся вопрос о границах площади, так как она включает в себя Преображенскую застав и её название не отображается отдельно.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:35:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
nyampire (2022-05-12 07:58:46+00:00): OSMへようこそ、編集ありがとうございます。
建物名称の追加は、行っていただいた方式で大丈夫です。これからもぜひ、編集を続けてください！
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730670
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-09 07:20:54+00:00): First, welcome to OSM.

Second, what source did you use to verify the information or get the information to the map?
WinterLeifAeric (2022-05-09 07:29:27+00:00): A combination of google maps and memory, I live and travel near most of the places I made changes to
CurlingMan13 (2022-05-09 08:05:02+00:00): Google Maps is not an acceptable source. I know, it's tricky. But here are a couple links to read up on:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#Can_I_trace_data_from_Google_Maps.2FVirtual_Earth.2FOrdnance_Survey.2F....3F

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Potential_Datasources

I've even had it where Google Maps gets it wrong! But due to copyright issues, Google can not be used as a source for OSM. Probably the easiest way to contribute when out and about is an app called StreetComplete. It allows info to be directly added when on foot visiting businesses, etc.  Since you seem to travel the area, I highly recommend this app.  You can add street type info, addresses, hours, access info, roof shape and a whole ton of other info!

If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out. I would be happy to answer any you have or get you in contact with the right people.
canfe (2022-05-10 17:41:51+00:00): Davvero c'è un DIVIETO per i cavalli??
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730783
nyampire (2022-05-12 08:03:04+00:00): 編集ありがとうございます。
変更セットのレビューを行いました。
nameタグは、その建物等の名称を示すものなので、「住宅を追加」等のメモは残さないようにしましょう。
また、五角形のオブジェクトに artworkとついていますが、これはどういうものでしょうか。
もし詳しく知っているけれどもタグがわからない、という場合、 descriptionタグなどで詳細を残しておくと後で編集するかたの役に立ちます。ぜひ使ってみてください。
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:35:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
nyampire (2022-05-12 08:07:34+00:00): OSMへようこそ、変更セットのレビューを行いました。

基本的によく描けていると思うのですが、歩道のデータが、建物など他の地物と重なってしまっているようです。
道路のデータは、他の地物と重ならないように描くのがポイントです。ぜひ次は気をつけてみてください。
今回は、私の方で直しておきます。
Happy Mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:36:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
canfe (2022-05-10 17:43:10+00:00): Non penso sia un pitch, ma un'area sportiva con dentro più cose. Si può migliorare. Coraggio.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120730994
nyampire (2022-05-13 02:23:06+00:00): OSMへようこそ！レビューしました。
とてもよく描けていると思いますが、一部の建物に不思議な突起があるようです。基本的に建物はほとんどが四角形を中心に建てられていますので、明らかにそうと分かる場合以外、なるべく建物は四角形を中心に描くとよいかな、と思っています。
次に編集する際には、試してみてください。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731194
nyampire (2022-05-13 02:26:21+00:00): OSMへようこそ！編集をレビューしました。
基本的に、建物は四角形から成り立っていることがほとんどですので、ポリゴンを描いた後、右クリックのメニューから「直交化」を行うことをおすすめします。

また、特に高層の建物は、屋根の部分で形をとったあと、建物が地面に接する場所に移動させるほうがよいです。
次に編集する際には試してみてください。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731268
nyampire (2022-05-13 02:14:47+00:00): OSMへようこそ！
変更セットをレビューしました。基本的によくできていると思うのですが、建物については、なるべく四角に準じた形で描くこと（iDエディタでは、右クリックすると、直交化、という選択肢がでてきます。実際の建物も、基本的には建物の角が直角です）と、建物の屋根の部分を描くのではなく、地面に接するところを描くと良いと思います。
次に編集するときにはぜひ試してみてください。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731285
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:34:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
Larmax (2022-05-09 08:08:13+00:00): Hi, Roads with the tag highway=residential are meant for public streets. Highway=service + service=driveway is used for driveways like the one in question
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
nyampire (2022-05-12 07:57:06+00:00): OSMへようこそ、編集ありがとうございます。
一連の変更セットのレビューを行いました。公園など、とてもよく描けています。素晴らしい！
1つだけ、building=apartmentsのタグがついたこちらのオブジェクトは、集合住宅の敷地に対してではなく、建物自体を表現するものになっていると、さらによいと思います。
これからもぜひ、編集を続けてください。Happy Mapping！
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731579
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
nyampire (2022-05-13 02:35:19+00:00): OSMへようこそ！変更セットをレビューしました。
よく描けていると思うのですが、バス停の位置が大きく動いています。たぶんこの位置には無いと思いますので、元の位置に戻しておきます。
次の編集の際には、気をつけてみてください。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731686
canfe (2022-05-10 17:44:26+00:00): Mi sa che forse c'è un tag indoor o giù di lì.
Perché sembra coperto.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731780
Josef73 (2022-07-01 19:52:43+00:00): Can you specify the value of the tag opening_hours ?
Nakaner (2022-05-15 19:33:32+00:00): Hallo,

MitteloberrheinischerWaldameisenschreck hat diesen Änderungssatz zurecht rückgängig gemacht. Die Wege waren korrekt getaggt.

Stand August 2021 waren das Geh- und Radwege (getrennt) die halb dunkel halb hell gepflastert waren. Daraus ergibt sich ein Radfahrrecht, aber mangels Zeichen 241 noch keine Benutzungspflicht. Zwischenzeitlich hat die Stadtverwaltung zur Klarstellung Piktogramme markieren lassen, die ein Fahrrad darstellen.

MitteloberrheinischerWaldameisenschreck schrieb hierzu:

> Es sind weiterhin angelegte und damit designierte = designated Radwege, wenn auch ohne Benutzungspflicht nach § 2 Abs. 4 Satz 3, izwischen sogar mit Bodenpiktogrammen 

Gemeint ist die StVO.

Spätestens beim inhaltlichen Widerspruch aus Note (https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3147748 bzw. https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3147724) und dem note=*-Tag am Weg, hättest du erkennen müssen, dass hier einer der Beteiligten StVO-Wissenslücken hat. Eine Rückfrage bei den Beteiligten wäre angezeigt gewesen.

Ich möchte dich bitten, beim ortsunkundigen Abarbeiten von Notes äußerstes Vorsicht walten zu lassen.

Viele Grüße

Michael
canfe (2022-05-10 17:45:44+00:00): Hospital??
Ti curano? davvero?
O son "doctors"?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120731863
canfe (2022-05-31 17:46:03+00:00): Messo come clinic.
Se però in futuro continuerai a mappare ma non rispondere, mi riservo di segnalarti al DWG.
nyampire (2022-05-13 02:49:06+00:00): OSMへようこそ！変更セットをレビューしました。
よく描けていると思いますが、1つ、道路をドラッグしたまま変な位置に伸ばしてしまっているようです。
変更セットを保存する前に、いちど確認をしてからアップロードするとよいかな、と思います。
今回は私が直しておきますので、次は気をつけてみてください。
Happy Mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120732105
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:34:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:35:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:35:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122022118 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint t the DWG, reverting some name removals and other dubious changes in Iraq.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6046 .