piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
tux67 (2021-07-07 06:28:39+00:00): Hallo FF-11,

die Gebäudeumrisse waren nach ALKIS gemappt. Ob das leicht falsch oder leicht richtig ist, sei mal dahingestellt. Auf jeden Fall hast du hier Römerkuppe 2-10 gelöscht. 
Da auch das wieder (siehe Kommentar zu CS 107515656) ohne Angabe von Quellen geschehen ist und die Gebäude auf den aktuellen Luftbildquellen noch sichtbar sind, habe ich den Änderungssatz erstmal zurückgesetzt.
Gruß
tux67
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107518703
wonderb0lt (2021-07-08 11:07:51+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetmap! I see you are using StreetComplete - a great way to get into mapping your city! You've got a lot of work ahead of you in Dreieichenhain! Thanks for improving the map, and feel free to reaceh out if you have any questions!
SafetyIng (2021-07-07 11:20:05+00:00): Welche Korrekturen wurden denn vorgenommen?
Vielleicht in Zukunft bitte bessere Kommentare hinterlassen: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
YouDid18 (2021-07-07 18:04:28+00:00): Ich schreibe kein Buch über die Änderungen...! Einfach mal hinnehmen und gut.

Ich wohne in diesem Areal und habe zu Anfang, wo die Luftbilder noch uralt waren (zur Erklärung: wir wohnen hier schon seit 5,5 Jahren und osm hat es nun endlich mal geschafft die mindestens 7 Jahre alten Luftbilder zu aktualisieren), anhand eines Lageplans von unserer Genossenschaft die Gebäude und Wege eingetragen. Wo ich das an Weihnachten 2019 gemacht hatte, musste ich mir auch schon anhören, warum ich einfach so iwas in die Karte zeichne... man sieht ja auf den Luftbildern nix - nur einen ehemaligen Sportplatz und keine Wohnbebauung.
Natürlich bekommt man das nicht so genau hin, wie als wenn man Bilder zur Verfügung hat. Nun sind diese ja endlich mal da und ich habe einfach nur die Häuserumringe und Wege aktualisiert. Was ist daran bitte verkehrt?!
SafetyIng (2021-07-07 19:45:06+00:00): Hey, es tut mir leid, wenn du bisher eher negative Erfahrungen gemacht hast. Eigentlich wird versucht ein sachlicher Umgangston hier zu pflegen.

Zu den Hintergründen meines Kommentares. Dein Changesetkommentar "Korrekturen mit bereitgestellten Luftbildern" ist leider nichts sagend. Z.B. wäre "Gebäude nach Luftbild angepasst, Hauseingänge hinzugefügt" Besser. Es muss kein Roman sein, aber so erkennt man von außen gleich, was hier gemacht wurde. Ich hoffe, das ist so klarer? 
Wir haben als OSM-Community uns nunmal bestimmten Regeln unterworfen, und eine davon ist die klare Bezeichnung von Änderungssätzen. 

Es freut mich, wenn in Magdeburg und Umgebung mehr Leute mithelfen die Karte aktuell zu halten! Und da möchte ich dann auch noch mal ermutigen, vielleicht noch mehr mitzuhelfen! Bei Fragen, kannst du dich sonst auch gerne an mich mit wenden.

Ansonsten hätte ich nur eine fachliche Anmerkung: Es ist gut, dass du die Adressen an den Hauseingängen gemappt hast. Da Adressdaten nur einmal in OSM vorkommen sollten, wäre es dann aber auch notwendig, die Daten dann von de Hausumrissen zu entfernen, damit diese nicht gedoppelt sind.

Grüße
Robin
Cristoffs (2021-07-07 15:34:54+00:00): W tym miejscu nie ma Parku
Cristoffs (2021-07-07 15:36:25+00:00): Dodawanie nieistniejących obiektów spowoduje Twój ban
fkv (2021-07-06 22:03:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 107523075 where the changeset comment is: 107519138 rueckgaengig; es ist absurd, sich bei so einem Edit auf eine Diskussion zu berufen, in der sich nicht mal die Mehrheit dafuer ausgesprochen hat
jqngarcia (2021-11-01 18:01:22+00:00): Buenos Días,  cuidado al modificar calles afecta a las líneas de autobús que están mapeadas, si editas zona urbana descarga el plugins de JOSM sobre PTV2

Salud y Mapas, JQN
TommyLanez (2021-11-02 22:18:28+00:00): Hola jqngarcia, gracias por comunicarte. Seré cauteloso con las rutas de autobús en el futuro.
Ser9ei (2021-07-07 09:37:01+00:00): А зачем вы убрали окончание. На карте наименования нанесены с окончаниями. Тем более там указан источник: rgis. Удаляйте тогда источник и вносите свой, потому что в rgis - 5-я линия.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107519205
iWowik (2021-07-07 10:52:59+00:00): А само MAPS.ME не могло отрезать?
fkv (2021-09-12 10:13:20+00:00): This changeset along with many others (107519354, 107519614, 107519790, 107519853, 107519924, 107519957, 107519998, 107520044, 107520081, 107520126, 107520191, 107520214, 107520240, 107520278, 107520316, 107520330, 107520435, 107520499, 107520534, 107520553, 107520571, 107520589, 107520631, 107520645, 107520667, 107520747, 107520771, 107520799, 107520823, 107520830, 107520850, 107520893, 107520923, 107706137, 107706237, 107706318, 107706446, 107706549, 107706614, 107706705, 107706840, 107706895, 107758579) has multiple issues. The extent of these changes made me hurry up contacting the DWG for a revert. Unfortunately, the DWG member who took this over backed out quickly and didn't respond to my latest email. I hope he is well.
One of the issues is that you deleted objects that I had carefully mapped, without even asking me, e.g. way 496237198 (a path that is visible even on aerial images), node 1446279919 (a memorial), way 131409550 (the Kaleidoskop) and some picnic sites. You also deleted single tags, e.g. leisure=* and description=* on way 496237197.
But the worst part of these edits is that you did a mass edit with 42 changesets, changing highway=path to highway=via ferrata and deleting sport=via_ferrata. This is clearly a semi-automated mass edit, and as such violates the automated edits code of conduct (also known as mechanical edits policy) which requires a dedicated account, a wiki page, and on top of that all a proper discussion within the community (typically in a mailing list) BEFORE the edit is done. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct#Document_and_discuss_your_plansWhile most tags are generally accepted by all mappers (e.g. nobody will disagree on highway=motorway for an Autobahn), some are controversial. I bet you'll understand that everyone changing all the tags to his own likes would quickly lead to huge edit wars.
highway=via_ferrata is such a controversial tag. Feel free to use it when you are the first to map a ferrata, but please accept that many other mappers have good reasons to NOT use that tag. Don't try to use mass edits to enforce your personal tagging taste upon others.
I am always open for tagging debates. Feel free to contact me via PM or in the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Proposed_features/via_ferrata) to discuss why you like higway=via_ferrata and why I don't. But whatever the outcome of such a debate is, it won't justify the automated edits. And there's simply no time for lengthy discusssions before doing the reverts, because they get increasingly difficult when other users edit the objects in the meantime. That's why I would very much appreciate if you could tell the DWG that you are ok with the reverts.
m3h4 (2021-09-16 07:19:34+00:00): You are refering to many changesets and claim different issues as problems, which makes replying a bit hard and confusing.

1) edits around Schneeberg/Rax:
Just a quick question: Have you been up there lately? 

At least at Bergstation Schneeberg quite a lot has changed. You can have a look at the offical Salamanderbahn webpage, where e.g. the last (5th) pic on their home site gives you an impression: https://www.schneebergbahn.at/
The Kaleidoskop is not there anymore, but instead a bigger playground. 

In that regard, I tried to update the data to reflect the current situation. I am happy if anyone can help to improve the map. And if there is a mistake, I won't be offended if anyone changes it. I am confident that our OSM edits won't result in a war. After all, we (in central Europe) can be quite lucky to have been war-free for a few centuries now ;)

As e.g. with way 496237197 it really seems that I made a mistake there. Don't know how that happened - sorry.



2) concerning the via ferratas:
There actually is a wiki page for highway=via_ferrata:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dvia_ferrata

"Use highway=via_ferrata to represent a via ferrata ('steel path'; in German speaking countries: Klettersteig) for traversing a mountainside." - sounds like a very clear instruction. With this, the logical conclusion for me was to update the map. Many of them were already tagged with via_ferrata_scale=*, which is recommended as a useful combination.
fkv (2021-09-16 09:43:37+00:00): 1) Kaleidoskop - ok. Other deletions: As those are few, we could manually undelete them. It appears that you replaced some picnic sites with leisure=outdoor_seating, an action which is similar in spirit as (2). I don't generally oppose that tag, but it seems insufficiently distinguished from similar tags (see my comment in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:leisure%3Doutdoor_seating#Why_do_we_need_this_tag.3F) and probably not a valid replacement when the information where the individual tables are gets lost.

2) The existence of a wiki page for a certain tag exists does not imply that everybody has to use that tag. The only purpose of a tag page is to document the meaning of the tag. There are often several equivalent options how to tag a feature/property. In this particular case, higway=path + via_ferrata_scale=*, possibly in conjunction with a route relation, is at least equivalent to highway=via_ferrata, and sport=via_ferrata (a tag that you deleted) adds additional information (that the ferrata is used for sports rather than for slope protection maintainance, military etc.). There has been a proposal for highway=via_ferrata, but it is still in "RFC" state (request for comment, and I left plenty of comments there about the unresolved issues of that tag). Even if it were approved by voting (what I hope will never happen), any mass edits would still need to conform to the automated edits code of conduct.
fkv (2021-09-16 10:03:59+00:00): PS: What I forgot to mention is that everybody can create or manipulate wiki pages. To see how reliable a page is, you need to check the edit history of the tag, the Talk (discussion) page, the reference to the proposal (if one exists) and the usage stats (in absolute numbers and compared to alternative tagging). Interestingly enough, the proposal for highway=via_ferrata says "Proposed by: Kaspi", but when you check the edit history, you'll find that all that Kaspi ever proposed was a sport=via_ferrata tag and via_ferrata=* subtags.
edvac (2021-09-16 10:34:55+00:00): Dear m3h4:
After all these reasoning by fkv, is it ok for you if we revert those highway=via_ferrata to the previous tagging, so we can close this issue?

Rafael Avila Coya, on behalf of the DWG.
m3h4 (2021-09-19 20:24:14+00:00): Dear Rafael, 
please go ahead with the reverts, it seems to be the better option now. If you two need help with the reverts/edits, let me know. 


to the discussion:
I tried to read up on the various links posted (and all kinds of other links leading me around the wiki et al). I still have some questions and I do not understand all the arguments. However, I do not have time nor energy right now to go deeper into this whole via ferrata topic. Maybe I will catch up later. Once the reverts are done, I will take a break from editing OSM as I have lost motivation to contribute right now. 

I do have some immediate questions thought, as I do want to understand how to properly tag stuff. How do I see if a wiki page is in RFC state or if a tag has been approved? Quick and easy without reading up on all the previous discussion that has lead to the final approval. 

If a tagging scheme get's updated and approved (that's what I thought has happened with via ferratas), is it then allowed to update the map? I do not want to join a mailing list, that is to say. Is there another way for discussing that? At the wiki talk/discussion pages then?

Yes, I deleted sports=via_ferrata as it was not recommended to be used and the tag is not used a lot. It probably doesn't hurt to have it along - I see that. 

outdoor_seating area was said to be for commercial outdoor seating places, in contrast to, I thought, picnic sites/tables, which I understand from its name to be for food you brought yourself. The tables up at the Bergstation Rax, looked as if they belonged to the food establishment there. Sorry, for changing that. 

Is everything for the reverts/edits cleared up now? Let me know if you need help. 

Cheers
edvac (2021-09-21 08:53:56+00:00): Dear fkv and m3h4:

I fully reverted back the changes to what we had at the beginning:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111483153

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111483264

I will close this ticket, but you can open it again if you need so.

Rafael, on behalf of the DWG.
AjBelnuovo (2021-10-29 01:18:09+00:00): A rua Acrísio Garcez vindo da avenida São João Batista , não ficou sem saída ?
wille (2021-10-29 09:48:46+00:00): Obrigado pela observação, AjBelnuovo. Fiz a correção da tag oneway.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107519466
Reza_koulivand (2021-07-07 08:02:59+00:00): سلام،
تگ آبادی های کوچک(زیر ۱۵۰ نفر): hamlet
تگ روستا(بالای ۱۵۰ نفر): Village
تگ شهرک و محله: neighborhood
تگ شهر‌های زیر ۱۰۰هزار نفر: town
تگ مراکز استان‌ها و یا شهر‌های بالای ۱۰۰هزار نفر: city
Reza_koulivand (2021-07-07 08:04:54+00:00): شما تگ "شهرک شهید محمد بروجردی" رو به Town تغییر دادین
kartonage (2021-07-07 06:43:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully due to it being vandalism.
neo-plan (2021-07-06 22:18:43+00:00): Если уж дурачиться до конца, а не перерисовывать карту Яндекса, то здесь только мемориал Победы всегда был и всё. Сквер, площадь, парк - это лишь окружение мемориала. Каждый называет как хочет!
neo-plan (2021-07-06 22:21:10+00:00): Хотя нет! Откачу! На офиц. сайте администрации сказано, что всё-таки площадь! Была образована в 1965 году с открытием этого мемориала!
http://www.reutov.net/city/names/streets/
neo-plan (2021-07-20 23:41:42+00:00): Если чего и не существует, то это официального названия этому скверу.
DressyPear4 (2021-07-07 00:52:44+00:00): Tudo vai virar praça ou jardim nesse local?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107520112
alester (2021-07-07 02:13:35+00:00): I don't understand why you make such changes in order to fix minor issues. I reverted this changeset and then only had to remove one way from a relation to fix the issue. If you're going to police the world for these types of issues, please take the time to fix them properly.
kartler175 (2021-07-09 15:38:27+00:00): "Relations of type multipolygon are used to represent complex areas with holes inside or consisting of multiple disjoint areas. Simple areas are mapped in OSM by creating a closed way ..." (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon).

Mapping simple areas as closed ring ways need less ways and relations, the areas are more clearly laid out and more robust against the incidence of issues.

So I don't understand why you make simple structures complex by deconstructing simple closed ways to small snippets an then pack the snippets into a multipolygon relation to enable potential users to reconstruct simple closed rings which are required anyway for rendering and area calculations.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-07-06 21:35:05+00:00): Hello,

The correct way to mark buildings is with the building key. So to add a building you'd use tags like building=yes or building=house as appropriate.

Also, please do not add parks over private residential yards. This is not the correct usage of this tag. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-07-06 21:37:49+00:00): Another question: do you have any information about this other Remy park you added? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/945231376
I can't find any information on it.
Lee Carré (2021-07-06 22:36:45+00:00): STRIVE?
Jèrriais janne (2021-07-07 11:40:50+00:00): Strive is the new elite sports centre next to the Bowling club. I just did a rough outline based on a recent nosey at the site and the submitted planning application.
Jèrriais janne (2021-07-07 11:41:17+00:00): *Rugby Club

Got myself confused between "Rugby club" and "bowling alley"
Lee Carré (2021-07-31 02:18:46+00:00): Ah, I hadn't heard the news (or the brand name, before).

Added to my to-survey list 🙂.
Lee Carré (2021-07-31 02:21:14+00:00): “Got myself confused between "Rugby club" and "bowling alley"”
Meh, they're practically the same thing; I recall all the revamp work being done at the same time, with some sort of sponsorship deal. Building colour-scheme matches, too.
tux67 (2021-07-07 06:47:57+00:00): Die Einbahnstraße ist hier korrekt.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107521100
tux67 (2021-07-07 06:49:09+00:00): Die Einbahnstraße ist hier korrekt.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107521100
archpdx (2021-07-06 23:32:30+00:00): Hi,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! After looking at street-level imagery it seems that this intersection is a 'mini-roundabout'. Unlike roundabout ways, mini-roundabouts can be used on nodes and should also fix the navigational error you mentioned in your changeset comment. I've changed the traffic island node you created to this.

-archpdx
Jeffrey Yasskin (2021-07-07 00:10:28+00:00): Thanks! I'd excluded 'mini-roundabout' because its wiki page says "the middle can be traversed by vehicles", and this type has a tree in the middle, but I'm happy to use that instead for future changes.
pdxrider (2021-07-07 17:24:18+00:00): Hi everyone,

Jeffrey is correct on interpreting the meaning of mini-roundabout. Since these islands can't be traversed by vehicles (in other words, going straight through a painted island) and instead are physical islands, mini-roundabout is not appropriate. I suggest restoring the circular ways and tagging them with junction=circular (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Dcircular) instead, so it can be shown as a circular junction without calling it a roundabout. (solution stolen from (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102013909), I'm not the only one here). Hope this helps.
archpdx (2021-07-07 17:42:14+00:00): Hi, thanks for your suggestion. I'll change the 
three intersections that were changed to junction=circular ways.
Jeffrey Yasskin (2021-07-07 17:58:58+00:00): I think I was right with traffic_calming=island. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:traffic_calming%3Disland#How_to_map shows an example photo that looks very similar to the intersections along Salmon. There's no circular flow of traffic here, or circular shape to the roadway, just a circular shape to the island. Minh's comment in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/102013909, that they want to describe the vegetation within the island, seems like a general problem for islands, but I don't see it mentioned in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:traffic_calming%3Disland. I'll bring it up there.

The main practical effect I'm hoping for is that navigation software stops mentioning these intersections when giving directions, since they aren't that kind of interruption in a driver's experience. Having it say "take the second exit from the circular junction" wouldn't be any better than "take the second exit from the roundabout".
archpdx (2021-07-07 19:32:01+00:00): I don't think traffic islands would be appropriate here as there are signs for right-of-way directing traffic counter-clockwise around the island. The example you pointed out on the traffic island wiki page shows an island without any ROW signage. The wiki page for roundabouts (wiki.osm.org/Tag:junction=roundabout) shows that roundabouts could be used on nodes, which could be a compromise. It might fix your issue and directional tags could be added to the node.
Jeffrey Yasskin (2021-07-11 05:41:16+00:00): Thanks for the discussion. I also double-checked at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Tag:traffic_calming%3Disland#Distinguishing_between_calming_islands_and_circular_junctions and on Slack, and got a wider consensus that these should be marked as traffic circles, so I updated some wiki pages to be clearer about that.
mariotomo (2021-08-04 16:02:34+00:00): Hi Luc Gommans, are you very positively sure this is landuse=forest and not natural=wood?  after all, you've covered all of Cerro Gaital Natural Monument, "protect_class=3". ??
LucGommans (2021-08-04 17:10:52+00:00): feel free to edit if you think the tag should be different, I might very well have selected the wrong forest preset
mariotomo (2021-08-04 20:15:57+00:00): aha, I'll change to natural=wood then.  I hoped you had visited the place personally and could confirm which it is, whether "for harvest" or "natural".
mariotomo (2021-08-04 20:25:42+00:00): In changeset: 109163589 :-)
Noelind (2021-07-07 10:12:14+00:00): Line has been canceled after being suspended for Covid: https://www.thello.com/en/traffic-information-lines-paris-venice-and-marseille-nice-milan/
ezekielf (2021-07-12 22:20:59+00:00): Hey Jeff, thanks for updating this area.  Looks like this building got a little messed up though:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/201655043
The way isn't closed and it looks like the tags got moved to a relation?  I know there has been recent construction in the area so I don't really know what the current state of things is.  If you have on the ground knowledge and can fix it up how it should be that would be great.
habi (2021-07-07 06:55:48+00:00): Ciao Noelind,
Since you requested a review; I suppose the train is running a again, if COVID-19 is over, no?
At least it seems so, according to https://www.thello.com/en/coronavirus-covid-19-measures-and-initiatives/#night, which lists the line as ‘suspended’.
I would not *delete* the relation, but mark it with a lifecycle prefix: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts
Greetings from Switzerland,
Habi
Noelind (2021-07-07 10:10:55+00:00): Hello Habi,

apparently the line was not restored after being suspended, and the last train run on June 30, 2021: https://www.thello.com/en/traffic-information-lines-paris-venice-and-marseille-nice-milan/

Thanks for the lifecycle link, I wanted to check if a specific tag should be used to mark the end date, but it seems clear that OSM does not include historical data, and the Thello seems to be one.

Thanks for the review,
Noelind
habi (2021-07-07 20:25:34+00:00): I didn't know that it's for sure not coming back, what a pity.
In that case I would also have deleted it.
Noelind (2021-07-07 20:28:05+00:00): Yes, it seems that a lot of international rail lines are being canceled in France, I think also the Nice - Geneve has been either canceled or deleted. It's probably due to the rail reform, but we'll know in the next months I guess
clay_c (2021-07-19 21:40:34+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for adding the future Ethan Allen Express station. Unfortunately, this is not a currently operating station, so it should not be tagged as a railway station. Since there is already a node nearby at [1] for a proposed railway station, I'm going to remove the one you added. No hard feelings.

-Clay

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8354910447
muchichka_s (2021-12-16 18:31:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/962057667

Схоже, що кінець, який ближче до села треба видалити
neo-plan (2021-07-07 11:46:45+00:00): Открытие поликлиники запланировано на осень 2021 года.
bxl-forever (2021-07-07 10:53:39+00:00): Thanks for this.
I had to revert some of the changes because the iD editor is not suited for such changes on the map.  You may not have realized this but the editor split the border into lots of tiny chunks—some of them being unnecessary—and you moved the official border, making Brussels bigger and Flanders smaller.  I tried to fix everything I could, while keeping the useful part about the LEZ.
JhowieNitnek (2021-07-07 10:56:32+00:00): Oh I'm sorry I didn't mean to move the border thank you for fixing my mistakes