piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
mavl (2018-12-25 19:56:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
Hjart (2017-11-11 11:39:50+00:00): As far as I'm aware (I'm fairly familiar wth the area) this bridge isn't an attraction in itself, so I have removed the tag.
mavl (2018-12-25 21:38:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:16:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
naoliv (2017-11-11 10:48:53+00:00): Rafael, bem vindo ao OpenStreetMap.
O que você quis representar aqui?
freebeer (2018-05-04 06:13:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 58668281 where the changeset comment is: Clean maps.me private residences spam for GDPR and Notes spring-clean
Gwenj (2018-09-23 19:26:57+00:00): Bonsoir,
Je vous contacte afin de comprendre la raison pour laquelle vous avez renommé le chemin suivant :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/206651827
« © » n’est pas un nom très explicite…
Merci d’avance pour votre réponse.
Klumbumbus (2017-11-11 12:26:21+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. I checked your changeset due to your request. Acconding to their website the restaurant closed in 2015, so it is fine to delete it. However for POIs which closed just recently it is usually better to not delete the whole node but to remove its tags and add a tag e.g. "note=the restaurant closed in october 2017". This prevents other users to add it again as they may did not notice it closed. The same counts for demolished buildings which are still visible on aerial imagery. Keep the outline, remove the tags and add a note tag.
Bye
Klumbumbus
eggie (2017-11-11 11:56:35+00:00): please add info at the adressnode .. not at the buidling. The name of the building is not "Amsterdamsche Fijnhouthandel"
it's the name of the company.
Please reply..
kdehairy (2017-11-11 13:37:39+00:00): The building *is* the company. The whole thing is one lumberyard belonging to that company.

Do you still see that I need to use the address note for it?
eggie (2017-11-11 13:55:58+00:00): I understand... but we have consensus inthe Dutch community that we tag on the addressnodes. All the info is at address-node nr 14. 
It's also in the data from OSM. The rendering depends .... \the renderer of the map decides what is rendering. Churchers, casstles are names at the building itself.
Here it is fonf in the data at nr 14. http://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Amsterdamsche%20Fijnhouthandel#map=19/52.39938/4.87556
eggie (2017-11-11 14:01:43+00:00): I mean "found"..ofcourse
This was my edit http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=53689029
If you wish to discus the consensus you are welcome at the OSM forum 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12
kdehairy (2017-11-11 16:21:05+00:00): Thanks for the explanation. It makes sense now.
eggie (2017-11-11 16:59:13+00:00): :)  Enjoy mapping! Thanks for your reply..
eggie (2017-11-11 12:04:15+00:00): info migrated to addressnode
eggie (2017-11-11 14:09:12+00:00): The problem was also that nr 14 was twice in the osm data. 
All addresses are imported from the Dutch kadaster in the Netherlands. That makes mapping a bit different from other countries. 
Try to find your company with the search option and you will see it's in the database.
literan (2017-11-11 12:07:25+00:00): Здравствуйте. Будьте, пожалуйста, аккуратнее. Вы здесь прилепили (сделали общую точку) у наземной дорожки с линией метро, которая расположена под землей http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=53687759
ynx (2017-11-11 13:24:27+00:00): По-моему, я её как раз разъединил.  Или вы о какой-то другой точке?
literan (2017-11-11 14:48:58+00:00): я об этой точке https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/949578154/history - это я ее отсоединил после того как написал вам.
ynx (2017-11-11 15:07:50+00:00): Так она не менялась в это пакете правок. Или менялась и что-то неправильно работает? О_о
literan (2017-11-11 16:25:44+00:00): она не менялась, т.к. я отсоединил от этого узла новую точку, принадлежащую линии метро, и ее удалил :-)
mavl (2018-12-25 21:23:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:01:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:09:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:49:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:59:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
hrmmhahmhm (2017-11-14 16:03:57+00:00): Hej Hjart, Du bedes venligst reverte dette changeset, da dine ændringer af Kongens Nytorv ikke afspejler virkeligheden, men nogle allerede uddaterede luftfotos.
hrmmhahmhm (2017-11-14 16:05:02+00:00): Se bl.a. gps traces fra 5. november på samme sted.
Hjart (2017-11-14 16:22:12+00:00): Ok, du har ret. Jeg glemte tydeligvis at checke historikken her (hvilket jeg ellers altid gør).
Hjart (2017-11-14 16:34:16+00:00): Jeg lavede et større antal andre ændringer, som jeg vil være lidt ked af at rulle tilbage og har derfor indtil videre kun justeret vejen tilbage efter gps-sporet: http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/53776167
mbethke (2017-11-15 15:42:06+00:00): Hi,
are you sure you just wanted to map five car rentals? They don't look anything like that and the names sound like you meant villages?
mavl (2018-12-25 21:10:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:53:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:32:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 19:31:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
radha_madanu (2019-04-16 03:31:54+00:00): Hi  Endang_p,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Bandung, I have come across ways
"way 539817999
way 539815424
way 539816611
way 539815420
way 536766767
way 539816605
way 539818013
way 539815422
way 539815423
way 536766762
way 539815418
way 682823749
way 539815419" classified as 'Unclassified'. However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, entire area seems to be 'Residential'.
Please look into this and share your observations


Thanks in advance.
mavl (2018-12-25 20:15:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
archie (2017-11-11 16:07:52+00:00): Det var en dålig idé att göra om småbåtshamnar till områden. Jag har använt mycket tid på att omvandla just åt andra hållet här på västkusten. Om du kollar på hjälpsidorna så är större delen av marinorna på en nod. Att göra som du ställer till det i t ex http://map.openseamap.org/. Nu skymmer  symbolen för marinan i det ena fallet ett grund och i det andra fallet en hamnkran. Å andra sidan har områdestaggningen överhuvudtaget ingen inverkan på huvudsidan (www.openstreetmap). V v ställ inte till det. Marinorna på västkusten är i ett utmärkt skick på osm! Jag har hållit på med allt som har att göra med sjöfarten här på västkusten i några år.
archie (2017-11-11 17:15:28+00:00): Varför har du flyttat seamark-noden för fiskhamnen i Marstrand?
EdTre (2017-11-14 19:58:45+00:00): Ja du, tack för informationen. Jag kommer nog försöka stanna mer på inlandet i framtiden.
Jag kommer faktiskt inte ihåg varför jag flyttade fiskhamnsnoden.
Grillo (2017-11-19 00:23:14+00:00): Jag måste säga att jag blir lite bekymrad av kommentaren till det här changesetet. Det är taggningen som spelar roll, inte renderingen. Normalt är mer detaljerad data bättre än mindre detaljerad. När det kommer till om något karteras som noder eller ytor är det förstnämnda främst när en noggrannare kartering inte genomförts än. Det blir därför något märkligt att klaga, dessutom med en så pass hård ton, på de som försöker förbättra kartan. Var vänlig återställ inte till en mindre noggrann kartering bara för att detta matchar hur kartan ser ut i en viss rendering och vänligen bemöt medkarterare med respekt.

Detta bör vara grundläggande för alla som använder Openstreetmap: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
archie (2017-11-19 02:08:39+00:00): Jag vet om att det inte är för renderingen taggningen sker, även om det är en något väl kategorisk princip. Men att dra en linje runt en hamn är lite väl godtyckligt snarare än en förbättring. Gränserna för en åker är uppenbara, men för en marina? Den gränsdragningen som skedde här var helt godtyckligt och groteskt. För båtuppläggning (på land) finns det fina tagset amenity=boat_storage. Avslutningsvis; det bästa sättet att tagga en marina är på en nod. Om du kollar så ser du att de flesta marinor har taggats på just en nod och denna sätts med fördel helst vid infarten till hamnen. Det har säkert med att göra att det för en taggare måste framstå som högst osäkert var gränsen mellan marinan och icke-marinan går. Sålunda är en gränsdragning ingen förbättring när det redan finns en nod enligt ovan.
Grillo (2017-11-19 20:28:39+00:00): Det kan förstås vara svårt att veta den exakta gränsen om man inte har varit där och tittat själv. Har man varit det ser jag dock inget fel i att följa beskrivningen på wikin, nämligen att yttaggningen ska täcka hela marinans faciliteter: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dmarina Här är ett bra exempel som du själv redigerat utan att göra om det till en nod: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/240474723

Det är egentligen främst tonen mot en mappare som vill väl som jag reagerade emot. Tänk på att Openseamap bara är en separat rendering av Openstreetmap, och inte kan införa regler som går emot de som gäller på Openstreetmap.
pitscheplatsch (2017-11-11 19:40:47+00:00): Hi modal, welcome to OSM. May I know the reason behind adding an already existing building? See http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/539819312
modal (2017-11-21 20:36:47+00:00): Hi pitscheplatsch, it might be that the existing building did not appear on my editor - I never meant to add double information. 
Due to the newbe-probs I had when editing I'm not shure if I deleted and addes stuff, my main goal was merely to adjust the map to the given landscape. 
If s.o. can sleak the drawings it'd be even better.
kreuzschnabel (2017-11-24 13:04:37+00:00): Ich kann mir kaum vorstellen, dass der Hermannsweg in voller Länge (bis fast nach Oberlibbach!) dem Straßenverkehr zur Verfügung steht, zumal er nirgendwo hinführt und mitten im Wald endet. Was war mit der Änderung von track auf unclassified gemeint?
pitscheplatsch (2017-11-24 13:27:49+00:00): @kreuzschnabel Danke für den Hinweis. Ist mir beim 1. Review gar nicht aufgefallen. Auch dies sollte wieder geändert werden.

@modal bekommst du die Änderungen hin?
kreuzschnabel (2017-11-24 15:08:38+00:00): Ich war gerade vor Ort, hatte nichts Besseres zu tun, hat leider geschifft wie Sau :( An dem Waldweg steht kein Verbotsschild dran, aber von der Bauart her ist das eindeutig hw=track. Ist geändert. Wahrscheinlich sollte nur der Bereich am Grillplatz bearbeitet werden, und dem User war nicht bewusst, dass er den gesamten Way dabei ändert. @modal: Nimm’s nicht tragisch, ist ein typischer Anfängerfehler, haben wir alle mal gemacht :) schön, dass du dabei bist! Wenn du da in der Gegend wohnst, können wir uns auch gern mal zusammensetzen.
pitscheplatsch (2017-11-24 15:19:39+00:00): Zum MTB/Gravel'n ist der Weg Top. Bin da hin und wieder auch unterwegs. Oder zumindest spätestens am 1. Mai auf dem Grillplatz ;) Wollte die Änderung jetzt erstmal @modal überlassen.
modal (2017-11-24 20:16:27+00:00): Hallo alle, danke für den Hinweis road=unclassified. Aufgrund von http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:Highway ging ich tatsächlich davon aus, dass die Strecke bis zu den nächsten Orten "unclassified" ist, wollte aber in der Tat nur den unteren Abschnitt ändern, da hier auch Müllwägen usw. fahren. 
In der Vergangenheit hatte ich auch beobachtet, dass Navi-Systeme von LKW für größere Sattelschlepper mit lokalen Zielen diese Route vorschlugen, da andere Routen wg. engen Kurven nicht möglich sind. Die Straße ist nicht zufahrtbeschränkt, und im Falle von Totalsperrungen im Tal (Hochwasser o.Ä.) als Ausweichstrecke geeignet - aber ich kann die üblichen Verwendung auf OSM nicht einschätzen. Verglichen mit internationalen Maßstäben ist die Strecke sicherlich "unclassified" und bei jedem Wetter mit großem Gerät befahrbar (im Gegensatz zu anderen Strecken), aber nach hiesigen Maßstäben eher ein "Waldweg" für Baumtransporte u.Ä.
@kreuzschnabel: hoffe, langfristig nennenswerte Kapazitäten für die Kartenbearbeitung freischaufeln zu können, da könnte ein gemeinsames Arbeiten an den Skills gut tun - komme drauf zurück :)
kreuzschnabel (2017-11-24 21:27:05+00:00): Es ist immer ein bisschen Ermessenssache. Straßen von primary bis unclassified taggen wir nach Verkehrsbedeutung, hw=track steht dem allgemeinen Verkehr nicht mehr zur Verfügung. Ich kann mir kaum vorstellen, dass die Forstverwaltung erfreut wäre, wenn der gesamte Straßenverkehr von Aarbergen zur Hühnerstraße hier durchbrettern würde. Deshalb hab ich mich trotz fehlenden Radieschens für hw=track entschieden. Es gibt aber auch geschotterte Waldwege, die ausdrücklich als allgemeine Durchfahrt verfügbar sind, die sind dann tatsächlich hw=unclassified. Was deine Skills angeht, hilft vielleicht http://einklich.net/osm/osm-tutorial.pdf erstmal weiter :)
eggie (2017-11-11 12:06:12+00:00): Welkom bij OSM per PB verstuurd
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM
eggie (2017-11-11 12:10:47+00:00): Je hebt bij de Lavendelheide een stuk fietspad verwijderd, maar het overgebleven stuk zit nergens aan vast. ....ik kijk even naar de edits.
eggie (2017-11-11 12:17:25+00:00): Het is prima zo.. mits dat fietspad echt niet bestond. Een deel van de Kruipheide heb ik op residential gezet.. Wellicht kan er meer van construction af?
eggie (2017-11-11 12:20:32+00:00): Een deel van de Rivierensingel zit nog geplakt aan het bos en ook de residential zit vastgeplakt.
eggie (2017-11-11 12:26:20+00:00): landuse losgemaakt van wegen. Disconnect landuse from roads.
Je boi (2017-11-14 14:27:27+00:00): @eggie Ik heb het overgebleven fietspad vastgemaakt aan de Lavendelheide. Het stuk fietspad wat ik verwijderd heb bestaat inderdaad niet meer. Mogelijk kan er meer van construction af, maar er wordt in dat gebied nog steeds gebouwd.
eggie (2017-11-14 14:54:59+00:00): Oke.. duidelijk. mapse verder.... genoeg te doen daar. Bedankt voor je reactie.
mavl (2018-12-25 20:54:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
Gallizenae (2020-12-23 23:10:13+00:00): Pfizer has actually become less correct through this changeset, or am I wrong?

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/438037360
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-09-20 16:07:50+00:00): What is the source of this edit? What is the source of data for this 1693 peaks? Is it OK to add it into OSM?
Nikita Kozlov (2018-10-19 15:11:57+00:00): The source is laos maps of scale 1:50000 and 1:25000 done by webrian, few peaks (around of 50) were manually checked by me during our 7 years of caving expeditions into Laos, the difference between map-assisted positions and GPS are within 3 meters, so from accuracy point of view it is enough. About legality of maps - I have bough 1:25000 map scans in Berlin library (their scans), and share that peak knowledge with community, is that bad or wrong I do not know, but Haven't you been to Laos to check on field or you are just looking for social justice?
Mateusz Konieczny (2018-10-23 20:40:08+00:00): "I have bough 1:25000 map scans in Berlin library (their scans)"

Have you checked copyright status of the maps?

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Out-of-copyright_maps for details.
woodpeck (2018-11-01 17:54:42+00:00): Dear Nikita, I'm with the OSMF Data Working Group dealing with legally problematic data sources. Please understand that any use of a copyrighted source - even with the best intentions or under the assumption that it was legit - has the potential to cause trouble for OpenStreetMap when the rights holders sue us, or maybe just discredit us as "data pirates". We want to respect copyright and only use sources that are either out of copyright, or openly licensed. Now unless those maps that you bought are old enough to be out of copyright, or unless they bear some sort of public domain dedication, then copying data from these maps into OSM is not legal, and we need to remove the data again. Can you tell us exactly which maps you took the data from - when were they published and by whom? And is all data that you contributed in Laos from these sources?
Nikita Kozlov (2018-11-16 09:10:07+00:00): > Have you checked copyright status of the maps?

For 1:50000 - yes, they are AMS maps of 1960's Vietnam War era. See http://www.openstreetmap.la/downloads/?lang=en under Edit tab (TMS URL:
http://www.openstreetmap.la/tms/1.0.0/topomap/{zoom}/{x}/{-y}.png which serves topographic maps for northern Laos. These topographic maps from the 1960ies were made by the US Army Map Service in the scales of 1:200000 and 1:50000. Meanwhile these maps are released to the public domain and available at the University of Texas Libraries)

For 1:25000 they are all from http://staatsbibliothek-berlin.de/fileadmin/user_upload/zentrale_Seiten/kartenabteilung/topo/2k8963.jpg , I ordered scanned copy, then properly geo-referenced them and took peaks from them. 1:25000 maps are from ~1993 year.

So I was thinking that there are no difference between University of Texas Library and Berlin library, because the map data in one way or another is public domain. 

> And is all data that you contributed in Laos from these sources?

No, only peaks are from scanned maps. Again few peaks are GPS. Other my sources is Bing imagery, personal GPS tracks and conversations with locals to name caves properly etc.
mavl (2018-12-25 20:33:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:45:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:14:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:12:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:11:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 21:16:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:56:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
sperlingskauz (2017-11-26 18:10:20+00:00): Hi Ignobilis,

so far, the tag for termite mounds was termite_mound. Why did you create a new tag "termite-mound"? Please correct termite-mound in termite_mound.

Thank you and best regards,
sperlingskauz
Ignobilis (2017-11-28 19:28:32+00:00): Howzit,
It was a typo. Correction applied.
Ignobilis
mavl (2018-12-25 20:49:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:30:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].
mavl (2018-12-25 20:04:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65765733, 65762676, 65758117, 65761081, 65759598, 65754732, 65764253 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage].