piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2022-04-10 11:25:15+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are rather inaccurate  and not in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
Buildings should be tagged as building=yes.
Don't add tag names.
A: buildings not always accurately drawn.Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395021
igorseno (2022-04-11 08:23:14+00:00): There is no passage there, building driveway with parking.
Coltrain (2022-04-20 15:02:36+00:00): Thank you for letting me know. In satellite imagery, it looked like vehicles could possibly pass through here. I appreciate your help.
L'imaginaire (2023-01-08 19:06:45+00:00): You changed this from ferry to bridge, but it is not a bridge. It is a self-operated ferry, similar to this one: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Ferry-foot.jpg, so route=ferry seems right to me here. We could add self_service=yes.

Do you agree to revert your change? Or do you have any other arguments?
L'imaginaire (2023-02-17 20:28:07+00:00): I've (partially) reverted the changeset as there was no reaction to my question.
Frans S (2022-04-07 10:12:58+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Important ! Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395173
Frans S (2022-04-18 08:10:28+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
This is a building only project. 
You may adjust existing highways but use the correct tag please.  Take a look to the widht and connection where it leads to. Here you mapped a path ( not neccesary here, that short) and tagged is as a residential road. See the wiki about highways africa hot to tag them
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395246
Frans S (2022-04-07 10:35:33+00:00): Hello. We welcome you as a new mapper. But, please do not validate tasks since you have no experience and leave a lot of issues unsolved.
Stick to mapping only.
Best regards and keep mapping
Frans S (2022-04-21 10:25:02+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions)
E: Rectangular Buildings not squared.They are mostly strickt rectangular.
Please just tag a building as building=yes. No additional naming.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395575
Frans S (2022-04-20 08:53:12+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:

A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions)
D: nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or  or crossing roads as well.
E: Rectangular Buildings not squared.They are mostly strickt rectangular.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395711
martien-176 (2022-04-06 18:34:06+00:00): Hi, welcome to HOT. You asked for a review. You mapped a lake here. Although the tracing is ok it is better to stick to buildings here in this project. This makes validation easier and will help the project be finished earlier (it is an urgent project meant to be finished within a week). Thanks and please keep mapping. Regards, Martien, HOT global validator.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119395944
Friendly_Ghost (2023-06-12 19:41:38+00:00): Hi there. What is Mississippi 811, Inc? The object you mapped here is missing a main feature tag, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Map_Features for options.
sanchi (2022-04-06 17:50:39+00:00): Buenas
Revierto esta edición según la wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capacity
Y esta imagen de la wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Tagschemaparking_vialibera.jpg
En capacity va el número total de plazas incluidas las de discapacitados. Por lo que la cantidad antigua sería la correcta.
Saludos.
Jesús Gómez (2022-04-06 17:57:30+00:00): Correcto. Error mío.
Saludos
skquinn (2023-06-05 00:52:07+00:00): Why was the Gus S. Wortham Memorial Fountain tagged as a recycling container in this changeset (since reverted)?
SekeRob (2022-04-06 17:57:57+00:00): Hi, Benvenuto da OSM,

From Doetichem's cops office to Algiers and Malta, cool doing that in your first edit set. The idea though is that you do edit on a local area, save them and move on to the next locale, do the deed, save, move on to the next locale and so on. Great to have, not great to get this listed in my local history and having to ask the question: Does this affect MY area of mapping in any way?

Thanks for your consideration in the second and subsequent edits

ciao from Italy.
MiniCrabThe4th (2022-04-06 18:07:29+00:00): Hello there, could you please elaborate on the following question:' Does this affect MY area of mapping in any way?' With kind regards,
SekeRob (2022-04-06 18:20:18+00:00): It means that no none can see from your edit set up front if you made edits in any other mappers regular mapping zone. Also these big edit area sets stick to the top of the local history view for days. Bad practise.

2 Wikis
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

ciao again
martien-176 (2022-04-06 18:22:17+00:00): Hi, welcome to HOT. These buildings look good as to shape (square corners) and position. Well done and thanks. Please keep mapping. Regards, Martien, HOT global validator.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119397594
Kovoschiz (2022-04-07 15:14:13+00:00): 1. Please don't draw such a large `landuse=`. There are already individual ones inside. This is meaningless. 
2. Please don't attach areas to roads. This makes editing difficult, and doesn't reflect reality. 
Don't upload your own data to online for personal purposes. Stay offline, or use other software.
pio2_122 (2022-04-06 21:14:21+00:00): Skąd pochodzą dane odnośnie numerów telefonów do poszczególnych urzędów?

Pytam, ponieważ już w kilku przypadkach zauważyłem, że zmieniane/dodawane numery nie pokrywają się z tymi, które widnieją na oficjalnych stronach danych urzędów. W tym przypadku numer, który widnieje na stronie internetowej i był wcześniej w OSM (+48 94 372 62 00) został zastąpiony na taki, którego na ww. nie znalazłem (+48 943755031).
NieWnen (2022-04-27 15:55:05+00:00): Nazwy opisowe. To nie powinno trafiać do tagu name.
BCNorwich (2022-04-07 09:13:43+00:00): Hi, Is there really a tunnel under the bridge Way: 1049686874, seems a bit strange to have booth?

Regards Bernard.
ALu68 (2022-04-06 23:01:04+00:00): Why is that a building?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1049688783
The Orkney Map (2022-04-07 09:56:53+00:00): I have altered the land use to port and included an amenity tag - ferry_terminal. I can't see another suitable tag. What do you suggest?
ALu68 (2022-04-08 06:32:15+00:00): The tag:amenity=ferry_terminal should used only at the location where the ferry route starts. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dferry_terminal

I would use parking for the vehicle waiting area and service roads - a good example is Dover: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/51.12530/1.33411
MxxCon (2022-04-07 02:29:58+00:00): Hello.
Instead of outright deleting a node, it's better to use lifecycle prefix as documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix or at least just delete biz-specific info and left it as an address node. This way address will still be searchable and history of this object will be preserved.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119398334
pesec (2022-04-07 11:22:07+00:00): Добрый день.
В данном пакете правок вы не учли выравнивание спутниковых снимков и допустили наложение дорог на жилые дома при смещении, что не верно.
Будьте внимательнее при редактировании.
Данный пакет правок будет отменен.
silversurfer83 (2022-04-07 15:40:53+00:00): Gude :)
Wenn Trafohäuschen begehbar sind, kannst du statt building=yes auch building=service setzen. Guck dir aber ruhig vorher diese Seite (ganz unten sind Beispiele) an https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:power%3Dsubstation

Weiter frohes mappen
pio2_122 (2022-04-06 21:18:52+00:00): Urząd Miejski nie zajmuje całego budynku, mieści się tam jeszcze posterunek policji. Dlaczego więc tagi POI urzędu zostały przeniesione z punktu do całego obrysu budynku?
ptarac (2022-04-06 21:45:27+00:00): Z mojej wiedzy wynika, że właściwie cały budynek zajmuje UM w Mielnie. Policja ma nowy komisariat.
Pomieszczenia po posterunku przejął magistrat.
Z informacji ustnych wiem, że budynku gminy jeszcze w 2021r. były jakieś pomieszczenia/biura policji. Planuje rozpoznać temat i postąpić zgodnie z uzyskanymi informacjami.
Póki co postanowiłem zostawić ten posterunek jako pkt., a tagi POI urzędu przeniosłem na obrys budynku.
Informacje na ten temat nowego komisariatu można, znaleźć w internecie.
pio2_122 (2022-04-06 22:25:30+00:00): Rzeczywiście. Dzięki za wyjaśnienia.

Moje pytanie wynikało z tego, że niedawno (pod koniec stycznia tego roku) uzupełniałem i weryfikowałem tagowanie komisariatu w tej miejscowości po edycji innego usera - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/828418386. Nie zauważyłem jednak, że stara siedziba wciąż była oznaczona w OSM. Przez to pomyliłem teraz te dwie lokalizacje i zadałem to pytanie :P
ptarac (2022-04-07 16:42:09+00:00): O nawet "mój osobisty" nadzorca popełnia błędy :P.
Wnioskuje że moje wyjaśnienia zostały przyjęte :D.
A już na poważnie to właśnie usuwam posterunek. W Mielnie jest już tylko komisariat.
gendy54 (2022-04-06 19:06:58+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour cette modification. J'ai modifié les tags pour cartographier correctement le coté privé.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119399451
Frans S (2022-04-08 10:43:42+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119399515
maciek-szn (2022-04-06 19:25:19+00:00): Zmieniłeś prawidłową wartość atrybutu website na błędną. Dlaczego?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119399638
ptarac (2022-04-06 19:36:27+00:00): Mam wątpliwość czy www.szczecin.pl, który przekierowuje na https://www.szczecin.eu/pl jest błędną wartością...
maciek-szn (2022-04-07 05:39:11+00:00): Jest - choćby z powodu tego, że usunąłeś protokół z adresu ("https://"). A jaki jest sens zmiany prawidłowego adresu na inny, który jest tylko przekierowaniem?
ptarac (2022-04-07 16:48:18+00:00): Skoro tak to poprawiam.
Trevor_1 (2022-04-12 22:20:07+00:00): Please stop over-classifying highways. I've seen multiple discontinuous primary and secondary stubs, and many of these highways didn't need to be changed.
txemt (2022-04-12 22:23:17+00:00): I have asked you nicely that you stop harassing me. I have asked that you stop talking to me and following me around OSM. I was dead serious when I told you that in Slack and I'm dead serious on the actions I have already taken. PLEASE STOP HARASSING ME!!!!!
Allison P (2022-04-12 22:55:00+00:00): txemt, this is not harassment. You simply cannot request that a user stop giving feedback on your edits. If you don't wish to be contacted about your edits, you must not edit at all. It doesn't matter how nice you are about it. You are overreacting, and this may, ironically, result in *you* getting blocked.
ZeLonewolf (2022-04-13 16:43:01+00:00): The reason for the disagreement on display here, is that mappers working in Louisiana have not yet formed a consensus on how highway classifications should be applied, consistent with:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance

Both txemt and 1T_money (and other locals) have been involved in discussions on Slack in #local-louisiana to hash out classification guidance for Louisiana.  As part of these discussions, A Flappy Civic and txemt have collaborated on the following draft (according to the link above) guideline:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Louisiana/Highway_Classification

The Slack discussions have stalled, largely over disagreements about what role FHA functional classifications should have in determining highway classification values.  Thus, we are in a situation where the mappers involved have (a) discussed and are intimately aware of the issue and (b) have not come to an agreement on how to tag.

Given this state of affairs, unilateral edits to change highway classification, particularly by the mappers which have been in active discussions over the issue, are tantamount to edit warring.  Agreements on how to classify highways should be made through discussion and consensus in community fora (Slack, mailing list, Discourse, wiki talk page, etc), and NOT via unilateral edits to the map.

Additionally, this edit and others like it have vague descriptions like "updated tags".  Given the high level of attention to US highway classification tagging in the US (thousands of Slack messages, multiple email threads, several presentations at State of the Map US), such vague descriptions may give others the impression that the author may be trying to hide classification changes amongst more minor edits.  It would be better to note the source and rationale for such changes.

In short, I would encourage the local community of mappers to continue forging ahead on establishing agreements on how to classify roads, and avoid making classification changes which are known to be controversial.
woodpeck (2022-06-09 09:30:30+00:00): ZeLoneWolf, thank you (belatedly) for summing up the discussion here.
DiogoBaptista98 (2022-04-07 04:03:03+00:00): Olá, esta edição apresenta um problema de incorreção de interseções, peço que seja corrigido, obrigado.
bxl-forever (2022-04-07 09:33:36+00:00): This is a good example of the need to map cycleways and footways separately, when some tags apply to one and not the other. ;-)

width=1.4 is ambiguous on infrastructure that is open to several modes of transport.
Thierry1030 (2022-04-08 22:30:27+00:00): elegant solution from Pietervdv :-) cycleway:width=* + sidewalk:width=*
-> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33808940
bxl-forever (2022-04-08 22:53:47+00:00): Nice!
marczoutendijk (2022-04-07 08:16:20+00:00): Why don't you explain this edit with a good changeset comment?
It's easy to do "added restaurant"
brianboru (2022-04-13 11:12:33+00:00): Hi Ryan

busway reallly not appropriate and it doesn't render as a highway, so I've amended it to an unclassified road with suitable access restrictions to make it bus only ( will need a survey for bicycle and taxi access)
user_5359 (2022-04-07 06:09:40+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For a better description of your object have a look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:club
SomeoneElse (2022-04-07 14:28:19+00:00): Re https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119400601 ,

It is not OK to revert another user's changeset if that was made in good faith, without any sort of discussion with that user.

Did you have any sort of discussion where they said it was OK for you to revert it?
SHARCRASH (2022-04-08 18:17:19+00:00): It is OK when most of the elements are wrong. The contributor even displaced the country's borderland. Even if it's just a few meters, i find this being a serious mistake. Though as i said in my changeset, it was not a full revert, i kept the tag changes and some railway network enhancements. There are still some errors from previous contributors dating from 2014 (name mistake). I already dedicate my time in correcting many errors, so it's legit i try to use the easiest method to restore accurate data.

Even if i used the revert, it doesn't mean I'm in conflict with the contributor. I do have faith and realise his edits were done with good intent. Though the mistakes were done and someone needed to correct them.

I warned him, explained him how I identified the errors and informed him of more precise sources in our country.

It's funny how once again when we compare the efforts of moderation done over me with the ones done over tomolobla, the DWG didn't care that he lied to me in saying that the features didn't exit anymore and didn't care about much data being deleted, whereas i told woodpeck that they do and i've proven they do exist. He was just so full of himself to admit he was wrong afterwards i presented him the proofs. On your side, you let yourself being influenced by past moderation from a moderator who possibly has some qualities but has also big flaws, doesn't admit them and couldn't present a conclusion with an investigation although there are two DWG members in Luxembourg.
SomeoneElse (2022-04-08 18:26:20+00:00): Re "I warned him", how exactly did you do that.
Also - please try to reply with a simple factual answer that doesn't include any ad-hominem attacks on other OSM community members, whether they be DWG members or not.
SHARCRASH (2022-04-14 16:51:23+00:00): My comment was as simple as possible in order to defend myself and totally factual. I described facts that happened and there is data to prove it. I didn't write all that text by pure masochism. 

So, don't tell me how i should express myself, as long as i don't insult people freely and/or i don't lie. I'm not that kind of person. I have the right to express myself as i see fit since I am concerned.
SomeoneElse (2022-04-16 09:56:40+00:00): I asked 2 questions and haven't had an answer yet.  They were:
"Did you have any sort of discussion where they said it was OK for you to revert it?"
and
"Re 'I warned him', how exactly did you do that?"
SHARCRASH (2022-04-16 10:59:19+00:00): Yes you had answer, read my previous comment. What you're doing is harassment or do you have a short term memory? If this is the case, it's common behaviour to read what has been discussed already. Apparently you don't want, you keep contacting me and repeating, hence harassment! This is becoming a serious matter, Andy!

How: via message... obviously!
SomeoneElse (2022-04-16 12:11:05+00:00): "How: via message... obviously!"
Thanks, but that's absolutely not obvious.  There are dozens of ways that OSM mappers can discuss things, and an OSM private message is just one.
I'd actually suggest changeset disccussion comments (like this one) is a better option because it means other people familiar with the area can comment too.
SHARCRASH (2022-04-16 12:20:11+00:00): I agree it is better to contact on changesets but it's not forbidden to contact via private message and it's not forbidden for any contributor to revert a changeset if the data has been tampered!
SomeoneElse (2022-04-06 19:24:28+00:00): I used https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1hsj as a source to trim a spur off too.
cytryn (2022-04-07 20:13:53+00:00): W rzeczywistości apteka znajduje się w budynku obok: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1016191733 i była tam już wcześniej oznaczona. Dodany punkt dublował już istniejący dlatego scaliłem informacje z obu obiektów i usunąłem zdublowany punkt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119442748)
Frans S (2022-04-21 14:57:32+00:00): Hello. Please be more accurate during your mappings.
Lots of buildings here crosses paths and are connected to other objects

You must seen the warnings on the Issue triangle of iDeditor. 
You ought to solve these issues before you upload your work.
Now you leave a lot of work to validators.
Best regards
GinaroZ (2022-04-06 20:52:35+00:00): Perhaps it joins up with this track? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1049727196
sander79 (2022-04-08 10:36:26+00:00): wil je aub geen voetpaden toevoegen die direct naast een straat liggen. Gebruik daarvoor de tag sidewalk
Jordan Mann (2022-04-08 11:39:16+00:00): Sander, is there a reason for this? Generally I would follow OpenSidewalks (https://www.opensidewalks.com/) guidelines for footways as it allows adding far more detail, especially useful for accessibility purposes. But if this is a regional preference or some other reason I'm happy to change my update. I haven't had a lot of experience mapping in the Netherlands so some information would be helpful!
bxl-forever (2022-04-06 23:31:29+00:00): Hello,
Thanks for this.
The start_date tag looks a bit weird.  Could you please check again?  The best format for a date is YYYY-MM-DD.
Thierry1030 (2024-12-25 16:00:40+00:00): Beste,
Komt u binnen afzienbare tijd langs dit pad? Zou het mogelijk zijn om hier foto's van te nemen? Is het pad nog bruikbaar als voetganger? Alvast bedankt voor het antwoord.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4562540
Denyve (2025-01-02 15:07:23+00:00): Hallo,
Ik ben er al een tijd niet meer langs geweest, maar ik herinner me nog dat het ook te voet niet meer begaanbaar was wegens omgevallen bomen.  Ik kan echter geen uitspraak doen over de huidige toestand, sorry.
Thierry1030 (2025-01-02 20:19:08+00:00): ok dank voor de uitleg
luin132 (2022-04-06 19:35:14+00:00): I meant to say source: INEGI:MGN:06-2018
Leo Slager (2022-04-06 20:07:02+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
flohoff (2022-09-03 21:23:38+00:00): Moin,
das mit dem "name" hilft nichts. Wichtig bei OSM ist das objekte klassifiziert werden. D.h. sie brauchen einen "typ" der beschreibt WAS das ist - Also z.b. ein "Hotel" oder eine "Pension" - Nur der name ist jetzt so als würde das Gebäude so heissen. Z.b. wie die "Villa Vogelsang" in Essen.

Flo