piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
osmalpe (2022-04-15 09:32:59+00:00): Der Namen "unbenannte Lacke"" ist angelehnt an die "unbenanntes Gerinne" der basemap.at Karten. z.B.: https://basemap.at/bmapp/index.html#{%22center%22:[1882673.8644882133,6198199.689154332],%22zoom%22:17.890692809777804,%22rotation%22:0,%22layers%22:%221000000000%22}
Soweit die Daten zugänglich sind, sollen die "unbenannte Lacke"" in einen historischen Namen transferiert werden.
Ebenfalls sollen die Punkte nach dem DHM in Flächen umgewandelt werden.
Ich fände es gut, wenn auch Lacken (noch) ohne Namen in OSM aufschienen, da die Lacken für den Seewinkel eine zentrale Rolle spielen, vor allem im Kontext des Lackensterbens und des damit einhergehenden Informationsverlustes über die Vielzahl der ehemaligen Lacken.
Aber das braucht alles seine Zeit.
Könnte wer von euch bitte alle folgenden Einträge mit salt=yes taggen? Ich habe die Abfrage noch nicht für die Overpass API hinbekommen.
geocodeArea=Seewinkel
  für node, way, relation
    "place"   = "locality", "source" vorhanden
    "natural" = "heath|wetland", "name" vorhanden, "source" vorhanden
    "natural" = "water", "salt"='yes', "source" vorhanden
    "natural" = "water", "intermittent"='yes', "source" vorhanden
    ~"^name"~"Lake$|lake$|Lacke$|lacke$|Lacken$|lacken$"
"name" nicht "(Salpeter Siederei|Wurf|Rohrschlag|Burgstallwiesen|Große Werd|Lee Äcker|Wallerner Äcker|Roßgärten|Anten Seefelder|Schafstall|Schandles Grund|Figuren|Landhübel|Kirchenäcker|Neudegg|Zwikisch|Dornwiesen|Unterillmitz|Winkel|Rückhaltebecken)"
| ist ein oder
osmalpe (2022-04-19 20:47:59+00:00): Händisch erledigt
user_5359 (2022-04-20 05:20:47+00:00): Ups! Über Ostern nicht genügend Zeit gefunden. Sorry.
osmalpe (2022-04-20 07:07:38+00:00): War mühsam, aber jetzt sollte es passen.
Wie bekomme ich Konturlinien aus spatialite nach OSM? Beim speichern in QGIS als GPX bekomme ich die Meldung: 0 points parsed ok. Do they all have lat,lng,alt,timestamp?
Gibt es eine einfache Lösung? Ich würde gerne die Lacken nach dem DHM ausrichten, nicht nach dem aktuellen Bewuchs. Händisches nachzeichnen ist keine Option, da die Daten bereits vorhanden sind, Merkaartor muß auch nicht sein.
Vonter (2022-04-02 06:51:56+00:00): Changeset comment should have been Blue Line
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
Hans Thompson (2022-04-02 16:06:47+00:00): that's a whole bunch of nice edits.
tastrax (2022-04-02 07:15:40+00:00): Indigenous place names should be tagged as per the Australian tagging guidelines using the appropriate language code. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines#How_to_map_Aboriginal_.26_Torres_Strait_Islander_place_names
TheSwavu (2022-04-03 02:45:40+00:00): Two problems:

1. Alt-name should go on the place node for the town. This is the suburb of Alice Springs which is not the same thing.

2. There is no reference to Alice Springs being called "Mbwana" other than Wikipedia and a whole bunch of websites that copy their data from Wikipedia.

I have moved Mparntwe to the town'sm place node.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:11:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
tastrax (2022-04-02 07:12:24+00:00): What is the source for this street name?
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 20:04:46+00:00): Property records
tastrax (2022-04-04 22:45:28+00:00): Please point us to the website that you used so we can identify if the licence for the data is compatible with OpenStreetMap.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
tastrax (2022-04-02 07:11:50+00:00): What is the source for this street name?
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 18:41:52+00:00): Local data
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 18:53:51+00:00): Hello,
What do you mean by "local data"?
Where did you get it from
Best Regards,
Andy
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 20:05:33+00:00): NT Government, Road Network
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 20:08:20+00:00): Please be more clear.  At what URL did you read this information and under what licence was it made available to you.
tastrax (2022-04-04 22:51:17+00:00): Please point us to the website that you used so we can identify if the licence for the data is compatible with OpenStreetMap.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
Il mappatore pazzo (2022-04-02 11:26:23+00:00): Please make smaller edits that don’t take up too much space. (Save edits more often otherwise it creates a rectangle that starts in Netherlans and ends in Australia :D)
ivanatora (2022-04-03 14:24:17+00:00): Please, commit changes on a smaller scale.
DP24PH (2022-04-04 23:00:35+00:00): It appears that this changeset boundaries are encroaching the entire Republic of the Philippines. Kindly reduce your changeset boundary into per country basis.


DP24
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:07:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-16 03:04:03+00:00): Not true, this is not a safeway anymore, I Visited this store a few weeks ago and it is indeed a FreshCo, Shell and Needs Convenience
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:10:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
haavee (2022-04-02 14:23:40+00:00): Bitte das geänderte landuse=residential kontrollieren! Siehe https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1hle und diesen Weg: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/141986593
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:10:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:11:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:07:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse (2022-04-02 08:33:45+00:00): Hello again Mikhail1412,
What was the source of names used in this changeset?  If it was local survey, please say so.  If if was something else, please say what it was.
Best Regards,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group 
(asking because of unanswered questions at http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2055614 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Mikhail1412/blocks ).
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:11:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
lyctkel (2022-06-19 18:14:46+00:00): 亲爱的JOSIE666。
我目前正在调查openstreetmap中很少使用的对象。我发现https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/517705139。它使用建筑=重庆幼儿师范高等专科学校梨园校区。这在openstreetmap数据库中只使用了一次，并不符合建筑物的通常用途。我想你是指运动场的名称。
在这种情况下，name=重庆幼儿师范高等专科学校梨园校区是更好的选择。
你可以省略building=。

你可以在这里找到更多信息。
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Key:building 或 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:Key:building
致以最良好的问候，并祝您在测绘中获得乐趣。
Lyctkel


后记：请原谅我的中文。这是一个机器翻译，对你来说可能听起来很可笑。

通过www.DeepL.com/Translator（免费版）翻译
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-11-07 16:03:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128599619 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some changes made by osmose.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/128063226 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:11:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:10:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:10:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:10:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:08:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
kempelen (2022-04-25 17:49:19+00:00): Zsolt, légyzsi a MAXAR-hoz ne pozícionálj semmit, annak XAR az eltolása. A Fömivel be lehet lőni, hogy mi a jó eltolás nagyjából, aztán a Maxart odatolni és csak utána kezdeni rajzolni. Ilyenkor mit lehet tenni, 3171 pontot és 336 vonalat kijelölök és eltolom 10 méterrel, hogy jó helyen legyen? :-(
https://www.osmtippek.hu/josm/beallitasok/muholdkep/
kempelen (2022-04-25 17:53:55+00:00): Egyébként most a BING és egész jó a környéken, csak a Maxar szar és ahogy látom sokmindent áttoltál ahhoz. :-(
gscscnd (2022-04-02 15:05:18+00:00): Z dawnego mostu i ulicy trzeba jeszcze usunąć tagi layer.
irik (2022-04-02 15:10:15+00:00): Okej, usunięte. Dzięki za cynk.
SherbetS (2022-11-21 01:04:01+00:00): zluuzki,

why do your landuse boundaries have blocky boundaries? in the files I've generated I don't have landuse objects split into cubes.
legofahrrad (2022-04-23 12:45:54+00:00): Moin und willkommen bei OpenStreetMap!

Bitte beachte, dass es für bestimmte Eigenschaften gewisse Schemata gibt, wie Werte eingetragen werden. Bei dem Arzt, den du ergänzt hast, fallen mir zwei Dinge auf:
1. "level=EG" → Bei OSM wird das Geschoss nur mit Zahlen angegeben, also "level=0" bei POIs, die sich im EG befinden.
2. Öffnungszeiten müssen eine bestimmte Syntax befolgen. Es gibt auch gute Tools, die die Öffnungszeiten in die OSM-Syntax umwandeln können.

Generell empfehle ich dir nochmal z. B. diesen Wiki-Artikel zu lesen: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice
Das ist nicht böse gemeint, sondern soll Anfängern den Einstieg erleichtern!

Ich kann dir auch noch die App "StreetComplete" empfehlen, damit lassen sich unterwegs super einfach Infos zu OSM hinzufügen.

Beste Grüße, legofahrrad
PS: Bei Fragen gerne melden! ;)
Viel Spaß beim weiteren Mappen!
sneike (2022-05-01 09:25:17+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che hai cancellato le footway delle strisce pedonali ed hai aggiunto i singoli nodi. Purtroppo in questo modo il routing a piedi non funziona come dovrebbe, ad esempio per andare dal supermercato Sisa, all'ufficio postali ti fa fare il giro delle macchine invece nella realtà salendo le scalette ed attraversando la strada si è già arrivati. Penso sia il caso di ripristinare le footway per il crossing. Che ne pensi? Grazie
dsaneus (2022-04-11 08:45:10+00:00): Hola.

He visto que has editado la relación de la LAV Murcia-Almería, incluyendo los tags relativos al ancho de vía, electrificación, etc. en los parámetros de la relación.
Esto es incorrecto, puesto que esos tags ya están incluidos en las vías que forman la relación. Tal y como se explica en la wiki, duplicar los tags en las vías y la relación causa problemas en el renderizado del mapa: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Drailway

Has modificado también el ancho de una de las dos vías entre Murcia y Nonduermas, algo igualmente incorrecto. En ese tramo, la vía lado mar tendrá ancho mixto, para permitir la continuidad de la Línea Chinchilla-Cartagena.

He corregido los cambios para restablecer la situación previa.

Un saludo!
~dsaneus
rubinos (2022-04-11 18:13:22+00:00): Gracias por la explicación y perdón!
eggie (2022-04-02 10:46:32+00:00): Dag fosmanl... Dit is toch niet Touwslager 10 in Nieuwkuijk

Dit gaat niet helpen.
Ga naar de nieuwe locatie en tag daar de gegevens op bij.  Laat daarbij het oude adres intact svp.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=119228859

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-04-02 10:48:26+00:00): Reverted by changeset #119230331
eggie (2022-04-02 10:52:19+00:00): Adres hersteld
BCNorwich (2022-04-03 06:57:52+00:00): Hi, Please be aware that grass areas wouldn't extend to the centerline of unclassified highways, therefore grass should not be joined to road lines. It also makes for difficulties in later amendments.

Regards Bernard
BCNorwich (2022-04-03 07:00:18+00:00): Correction areas, including residential areas, ought not be joined to highways for the above reasons.
BCNorwich (2022-04-03 07:04:36+00:00): Sorry, lastly please try not to upload duplicated sections of the highway, I've just removed four.

Regards Bernard.
pitfire (2022-04-03 10:50:49+00:00): Immer noch nicht erkennbar ist, wo der Weg "Weg: 998217805" hin führt.
Der kann keine Verbindung zum Dach haben und auch nicht zum unter dem Dach liegenden "Weg: 996461232". Ist mit dem Luftbild nicht zu erkennen.
KöWiMM (2022-04-03 11:46:39+00:00): Warum kann der Weg keine Verbindung zur Tunneldurchfahrt 996461232 haben? Natürlich kann man das nicht auf einem Luftbild erkennen.
pitfire (2022-04-03 12:35:39+00:00): Ok, muß evtl. vor Ort mal überprüft werden.
SomeoneElse (2022-04-03 18:10:10+00:00): Hello misganaw1493 and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=119229656 you've tried to add a forest called "eucalyptus".  If its actually a forest that contains eucalyptus trees, then you don't want to use the name "eucalyptus", you want to use the tag "genus=Eucalyptus" so that a search like https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1hmU will find it.
This is why someone previously commented on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119097970 with some links for you to read.
Best Regards,
Andy
maraf24 (2023-03-05 22:05:08+00:00): Po zmianach ddr nie zgadza się z tym, co jest w terenie.
Dinn0 (2022-04-02 10:39:38+00:00): It‘s a supermarket, not a water fountain…
ivanbranco (2022-04-02 11:38:21+00:00): Ciao Flavio,

mi sembrava corretto prima, dalle foto satellitari non sembrano essere due edifici separati fisicamente, inoltre in Italia i civici li mappiamo come un nodo indipendente in corrispondenza dell'ingresso/numerino, non come tag dell'intero edificio.

Ivan
eggie (2022-04-02 10:51:32+00:00): En waar is nu het oude adres 20a?

Svp niet schuiven met de kaart in edit modus. Tag gewoon svp op het nieuwe adres bij. Daar is toch een adresnode
eggie (2022-04-02 11:11:39+00:00): De winkel heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.. 
Het oude adres weer hersteld.
MVG
eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:34:47+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 .
maraf24 (2023-02-19 15:43:33+00:00): Owsiana to nie jest residential.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:33:21+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 12:35:25+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 .
abakus_uploader (2022-04-02 22:30:42+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!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-06 12:35:30+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 .
ivanbranco (2022-04-02 11:57:18+00:00): Hi yusufmert,

here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1047403515/history
you created a duplicate of:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/56132862/history

Now there are two universities in the OSM database, while the reality is that the university is only one, please remember this principle: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

You should have deleted all the tags from the building (except from building=yes of course) to avoid duplication.

Good mapping, Ivan
ivanbranco (2022-04-02 12:16:41+00:00): I fixed it