piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ij_ (2015-03-14 20:13:15+00:00): Yes, I sort of knew that for cleanup but I was just entirely surprised by the effect,
that is, ways which I definately find still useful (even for couple of
years) were removed because of such "housekeeping task".

I don't understand what you mean, your claim contradicts what you did. You
removed this way:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/183967962/history

How does it now prevent remapping it?

This is not for history maps or for such. You misunderstood the concept
completely if you think we're leaving them for such use.

Once all the history information is trivially accessable in the
all the major editors, then maybe it helps to prevent remapiing but even
then it's a big maybe that remapping would be prevented as it would be
very likely that no visual clue is available without accessing the history   
information first using that history interface no matter how trivial it   
would be.

Are you serious about the bloat thing? Bloat because of keeping demolished/removed features
with was:* prefix is so negligible that it's hardly worth to even mention.
Besides, was:* is clearly distinct from normal namespace, so you pollution
argument doesn't make much sense to me either!

What old_* was included, I'm yet to find them but I'm certainly
interested in seeing if old_name=* in particular was affected?

In addition, it is unfortunate that such "housekeeping" tasks seem to be
higher prioritized here that ease of mappers tracking changes in a easy
to access manner (history only objects definately aren't easy for an 
ordinary mapper to look into).

To reiterate my point:
You removed a recently removed ways completely so that they don't
appear anymore in the editor. I've had a case where people have redrawn a
parking area from old imagery (it's very hard/time-consuming to prove/find
these incorrect redrawings and therefore any measure to avoid). I'd want
to avoid that. Also, I've benefitted many times from was: prefixed details
others have left around (mainly with traffic_signs that were recently
removed, if there wouldn't have been was: I might have added stale data back from old videos as processing them takes more time than I have for inputting all of them!).
ij_ (2015-03-14 20:14:11+00:00): And, I'm not against the cleaning itself, it's certainly useful!

I just find removing at least was:* very careless practice.
ij_ (2015-03-14 20:21:30+00:00): I just checked Bing imagery. The old route is still very much visible there so I think that a correspoding way with was:* should definately appear in OSM DB too other than in history only! How do you think that somebody looking there would know it's gone now? Finding such changes concerning that little spot from history is way too tedious process with the current tools, so mappers definately wouldn't spend their time on that unfortunately.
ij_ (2015-03-14 20:27:20+00:00): Adding some free format note=* (which you have kept) instead of very simple and obvious was:* seems very useless, IHMO.
flohoff (2015-03-14 20:28:24+00:00): Please - dont abuse tags for preserving history. We have more than 55000 different tags also because of this. This uses memory and disk space for all consumers although this way serves no purpose than to tell others a feature has disappeared.

I buy the argument of preventing to remap a certain feature. So revert this changeset and put only notes on all ways telling people this feature has vanished. But dont drag all this historic stuff through ages of osm.

Every sensible mapper can press ctrl-h on any feature and have a look at the history.

Flo
ij_ (2015-03-14 20:41:23+00:00): I've removed plenty of was:*=* ways once they are not needed anymore or do more harm than good for mappers so please don't try to argue that I'd be using them for history preserving! :-)

Does ctrl-h access removed ways like the 183967962? AFAIK it doesn't and there isn't such service at all in OSM ecosystem which would allow easy access to historical objects (not to speak of that appearing visually in the editor)!

Notes are much less obviously that was:*=*, IMHO, as serves as a dedicated note about this particular case where something was removed from ground (it's easy to find later and therefore easier to remove too when not needed anymore! You seemed to have proved even that easy to find point by finding them yourself using some automation! :-)).

But I can certainly compromise with you and try to leave only was:highway=* instead of the 3-8 tags but I think such cleanup would still be applied incorrectly to them (as there was "only six" like you said).
flohoff (2015-03-14 20:48:52+00:00): You dont get the point. If there had been a note saying "Dont remap this feature - its gone" it would have stayed in place. There was a feature saying "i once was a cycleway and was lit". History said somebody changes it to hold this state 10 Months ago. 

On the premises that OSM maps existing features one can observe on the ground this is already broken. It didnt even say why or when the state it once described disappered. 

So the semantics of the ways removal stayed the same. 

Other ways in other changesets i removed which held a note with information i could not understand e.g. most likely about the feature disappeared the feature AND the information of it disapperance stayed. So only redundant information which in the first place should have stayed in the technical history were cleaned. 

So the question to ask is: If there is something this way should have told other mappers e.g. "Dont remap me" why wasnt this on the way? 

Flo
ij_ (2015-03-14 21:04:43+00:00): But that information was there, even you acknowledge above that you understood what was:* meant! If something is "was", obviously a sane mapper shouldn't remap that or do you disagree with that interpretation? ;-) So I don't understand why you think additional note=* would have been needed, it seems stubborn attitude at best if you say one is *required* add note=* even though was:*= would clearly be enough and even more precise what is/was going on there (e.g., easier non-Finns as it's easy to understand without much language skills)!!!

And besides, additional note is also here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/22421235 but that's no longer accessable from JOSM because you removed the way now (try with ctrl-h, do you see it or not?). The changeset comment is in Finnish but I'll translate that you: "camoflaged to look like normal ground already" (along these lines, no exact translation I know for the particular Finnish word hacky "terrainified already" would be the closest perhaps).
ij_ (2015-03-14 22:40:15+00:00): I reverted this and few others where I think you certainly shouldn't have touched the ways to begin with (not all touching Finland though since I don't have time to go through enough object given my limited time). But the other suggestion about adding note=*, I didn't do since I think that is entirely useless and removing was:*=* like you suggest is plain wrong because it would make our local, more correctly timed housekeeping radar to perform worse due to noise and free-format in note=* value space, although obviously it would certainly hide them under you non-local housekeeping radar too.

Unfortunately I expect this "fixing" to reoccur again and again after some time by somebody else unless the taginfo process gets more clear guidelines according the mechanical edit policy (it's using massively computer search to locate objects in question and thus IMHO it falls under mechanical edits policy).
stephankn (2020-12-09 10:06:47+00:00): you added a Buddha statue on a hill without further tags. Can you please re-visit node 3398595486 and add further details, like a name?
Jojo4u (2015-03-24 17:34:47+00:00): Der Zugang vom Kurt-Georg-Kiesinger-Platz zum Nordeingang ist aber frei, den hattest du mit gesperrt. Ist korrigiert.

LG Joachim
bigbug21 (2015-03-24 18:25:56+00:00): Danke!
tosky (2015-03-14 19:42:25+00:00): Area o edificio? Se edificio, building=yes è più appropriato, landuse è per le aree.
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:landuse
Durko_freemap (2015-03-16 12:53:57+00:00): Zdravim barney, Vami zakreslenu cast cesty som musel vymazat pretoze uz predtym tam bola cesta zakreslena a islo o zdvojenie. Zakreslujte prosim len veci, ktore este v mape niesu. resp. mente len parametre cesty.
Dakujem.  http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=19.27782&lat=49.07190&zoom=16&opacity=0.97
Hjart (2015-03-15 06:12:29+00:00): Der var allerede angivet på Krogholmvej at der er cykelbaner på begge sider (ved hjælp af cycleway=track), så det er lidt dobbeltkonfekt at lave separate baner. På cykelkortet kommer der nu til at være dobbelte cykelbaner, hvilket måske nok ser lidt underligt ud.

Det kan anbefales at læse Claus Hindsgauls cykelstivejledning: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Da:Cykelstivejledning

Ellers velkommen til vores projekt og god fornøjelse med det.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-19 13:33:51+00:00): You've removed a "min_hight" tag from http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/312900230/history but presumably what they actually meant was "min_height"?
Bryce C Nesbitt (2015-03-19 19:49:06+00:00): Height and Min Height were set to the same value 228 meters, which was clearly wrong.

I looked at photos of the building, and it seems like the mapper was trying to create two towers starting at 228 meters.

The 228m/228m would render silly on a 3D map, and thus to keep things simple I removed both the bad data and tag.  Had I renamed the tag, the data was broken.
Bryce C Nesbitt (2015-03-19 20:09:42+00:00): Mechanically changing the tag would have placed a 228 meter spire on top the building.  Deleting the tag means the spire tops out at 228 meters, and thus is correct.
Bryce C Nesbitt (2015-03-19 20:14:01+00:00): Blindly fixing the tag spelling as you suggest would have placed a 228 meter spire on top of the building. Deleting the tag means the spire tops out at 228 meters, and thus is is correct.  It's important to evaluate each node and determine what correct modern tagging would be, not just fix typos.
mrlanduse (2018-10-25 13:05:19+00:00): Ain't this https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/322170462 the Touro College of Dental Medicine and not IBM Research?
sivan00 (2018-10-25 13:12:15+00:00): When I worked at IBM research few years ago there was a large IBM research lab there.
It may have changed since then, but I'm not sure.
nesol (2015-03-15 16:33:19+00:00): Bitte nicht das building tag von Gebäuden löschen, so wie bei der Schule in Stams.
Wenn dann bitte building=yes auf building=school ändern.
Siehe:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building
Wenn das building Tag gelöscht wird, fällt es auch auf der Gebäudeauswertung raus:
http://thomaskonrad.at/2014/08/analyse-der-openstreetmap-gebaudeabdeckung-in-osterreich/
Paschberg (2015-03-15 17:43:16+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, nesol.
Ich hoffe so ist es nun richtig.
Ein ambitioniertes Projekt. Da möchte ich natürlich die Tiroler Leistunge nicht drücken.
lg paschberg
naoliv (2015-03-14 23:13:43+00:00): Clyaton, esse trecho está duplicado agora?
Clayton Pereira (2015-03-15 19:35:25+00:00): Sim, de Bauru até piratininga! Ainda falta colocar a via paralela, pra virar motorway!
naoliv (2015-03-14 23:17:24+00:00): Clayton, precisa ter mais cuidado ao mudar a rodovia para motorway porque ela vira mão única.
Clayton Pereira (2015-03-15 19:33:16+00:00): Coloquei a via paralela e corrigi as conexões! Ainda falta revisar e ajustas as passagens de retorno! Ainda estou aprendendo a usar as funções, mas trabalho só no browser...
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-03-15 00:00:45+00:00): Hej
Fajnie, że edytujesz OSM, jednak w celu niepopełniania błędów, prosiłbym o zapoznanie się z tym tematem na forum: http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632
jotpe (2015-03-15 20:09:50+00:00): Klasse!
*Martin* (2015-03-15 16:32:41+00:00): Jednosmerna MAXI pizza ;-)
ozDino (2015-03-16 09:29:11+00:00): To som si nevšimol, že do všetkých úprav mi OSM alebo prehliadač vkladá jednu a tú istú poznámku. Až syn ma na to upozornil, keď som uložil poslednú úpravu :)
*Martin* (2015-03-16 12:03:40+00:00): Vdaka. A kazda uprava mala mat strucny popis ktory by nemal byt prazdny.
*Martin* (2015-03-16 12:05:55+00:00): Ties by sa mal uvadzat zdroj, tag source, bud na kazdom elemente zvlast, alebo na celom changesete (uprave). Vid. http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:source

Inac pre serioznejsie mapovanie silno odporucam prejst z editora iD na JOSM.

V pripade otazok kludne piste na forum slovenskej komunity OSM som_sk@googlegroups.com.

Vdaka :-)
tosky (2015-03-14 22:55:45+00:00): È davvero un telefono di emergenza chiamato Savona? / Is it really an emergency phone called Savona?
stevebeer (2015-05-01 02:51:17+00:00): Best Wsuijker, ter info: de terminal van Eindhoven Airport staat nog op de taxibaan.
adas (2015-03-16 08:07:24+00:00): Czemu tu jest wstawione "Bydgoszcz Błonie". To się tak nazywa? A nie Białe Błota?
Lancer77 (2015-03-16 16:37:01+00:00): Tak, takie są tablice przy drodze
no inaczej bym nie zmieniał
wvdp (2015-03-15 01:15:21+00:00): reaction on: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/25672210
Thomas8122 (2015-03-15 09:55:02+00:00): Wenn das eine Fußgängerzone https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/27023052 (pedestrian) ist, wieso gibt es da einen Parkplatz?
Nagesh_Blr (2015-03-15 03:59:46+00:00): This major road was depicted as a single road. As a result, the turn-restrictions along the road (e.g. no U-turn) were hidden.
Now I have added the other side. 

Please check out the median breaks (now converted in secondary links), and add more as needed.

Also please add turn restrictions art different junctions along the road.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-15 10:12:46+00:00): If you're fixing typos you might perhaps want to look at the value of the tag on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/286443113/history - it's likely that the "smarsh" here is just a typo for "marsh".  The Bing imagery suggests that it's similar to the "wetland=marsh" the other side of the river.

Also, would it be possibly to use geographically smaller changesets?  This has only 4 objects in it but is worldwide.  It's difficult for a local mapper to tell from the history list whether there are any chnges in their area when a changeset is so big.
SomeoneElse (2015-04-16 08:43:38+00:00): Was the removal of the landuse=grass tag from http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/305829722/history accidental?
mtmail (2015-04-16 08:49:53+00:00): Yes. I must have mixed up landcover=grass vs landuse=grass. Since the landuse wiki page even has a photo of a roundabout it should also apply http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=grass. I'm adding it now
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-02 14:34:56+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1140669879/history has access:foot = yes that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would using foot access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot ) be fitting at least equally well?
kicune (2024-04-02 19:26:31+00:00): I guess... yes? See for yourself: https://photos.app.goo.gl/LNDmPC1rupJuaD2h7
But please be advised that this is was almost 10 years ago...
emacsen (2015-03-15 11:30:20+00:00): What "additions and corrections" were you making here? These seem to be worldwide.
msdess (2015-03-15 11:34:48+00:00): just a few buildings and tracks/highways via bing. random places.
Jotam (2015-04-04 09:37:55+00:00): According to my knowledge, there is currently no "Brood" bakery shop in the Oasis mall in Kampala. I mapped the one at the entrance gate of Garden City. But there is no Brood next to Cafe Javas as you suggested. Where did you get this information from?
Jan van Bekkum (2015-04-04 09:52:49+00:00): We were in Kampala in June 2014. At the time we bought bread there. The shop is next to the entrance gate to the mall. You can see it from outside the fence, but the entrance is inside.
Jotam (2015-04-04 11:33:14+00:00): What you mean is indeed the "Brood" shop in GARDEN CITY (see here: http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3363897385). I currently live in the Kampala area and I buy bread there every time I'm in the city centre.

In OASIS MALL however, there is no Brood bakery. Particularly not next to Cafe Javas, as Javas marks the end of the entire building.

I took the liberty of deleting the false "Brood" bakery.

Many greetings and happy Easter from Uganda, Jotam
Jan van Bekkum (2015-04-04 11:50:20+00:00): Hi Jotam,

You are right. OK to delete the one I created. I somehow mixed up mu GPS tracks

Greetings from the Netherlands

Jan
saintam1 (2015-03-15 09:37:16+00:00): Hi Veso! In changeset 29442370 I removed your previous note about the roundabout not being round, because it got "circularlized" in changeset 29438718, and I thought it now looks more or less like a circle. I broke it up into two, so that bus routes could be properly marked -- is that what's bothering you?
Veso (2015-03-15 10:53:41+00:00): Hi, the actual shape of the temporary roads is not circle, even now the temporary traffic route is using the permanent roundabout in its south-eastern section and there the temporary roundabout is blocked by the bridge scaffolding and don't exist anymore. I know that the split is required for bus routes relations and I have no objections on this.
saintam1 (2015-03-15 13:44:50+00:00): I see! I thought you were referring to the shape as it was drawn. OK, someone will need to redraw this. I don't expect to go there soon so I probably won't be the one to do it. Thanks.
Veso (2015-03-15 13:56:49+00:00): Yup. The geometric shape is far from circle also.
li22943035 (2015-03-15 08:45:18+00:00): Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China an increase in short.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-19 14:16:15+00:00): There seems to be some duplication here, for example:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3399409731
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3384171074/history
jotpe (2015-03-15 20:13:28+00:00): Wenn ich mich recht entsinne, war die Bushaltestelle vor der Handswerkskammer Bussteig E.
Weide (2015-03-15 21:29:11+00:00): Hmm, IIRC war die von mir aus der Relation entfernte bei der Straßenbahn und hatte keine Steignummer und auch sonst keine Tags.
rempshaener (2023-01-16 21:09:14+00:00): Hallo,
auch wenn diese Änderung schon sehr lange zurückliegt, hätte ich dazu eine Frage.
Du hast hier Gemarkungen mit admin_level 11 gepflegt. Mir ist bislang nicht aufgefallen, dass wir Gemarkungen in OSM überhaupt pflegen. Zumindest nicht mit diesem Tagging. Problematisch finde ich, dass die Gemarkungen teilweise überhaupt nicht geläufig sind, aber z.B. in Nominatim ausgewertet werden.
Erinnerst du dich noch, wozu du diese Daten gepflegt hast?
Viele Grüße
berndw (2023-01-17 08:29:43+00:00): Ich habe die Daten erfasst,  weil die Grenzen im ALKIS verfügbar waren, Level 11 wurde gewählt,  weil nur bis 10 für admin_level relevant ist und deswegen auch nicht für Nomatim.

Für Nomatim arbeite ich nie, aber meine Arbeiten können jederzeit angepasst werden, falls jemand das machen möchte.
rempshaener (2023-01-18 19:12:57+00:00): Hallo,
es freut mich, dass du für eine Anpassung offen wärst.
Die Gemarkung hat mit Verwaltungseinheiten eigentlich nichts zu tun, sie ist eine Zusammenfassung von Grundstücken im Liegenschaftskataster. Letztlich stehen Stadt- und Ortsteile oder statistische Bezirke auf der gleichen Ebene wie die Gemarkung. Erstere ist eine Verwaltungs-, letztere eine Katastereinheit. Sie können deckungsgleich, sind es jedoch häufig nicht. Mir geht es dabei auch weniger um Nominatim (wo auch admin_level 11 ausgewertet wird), sondern um die Tatsache, dass es eine boundary eigener Art ist. Entweder es findet sich ein anderes Tagging für “Kataster” bzw. genauer “Gemarkung”, also so etwas wie boundary=gemarkung (natürlich irgendwie anders) - oder die boundaries wären m.E. zu löschen.
Das würde ich zumindest für die Gemeinde Lindlar machen. Damit wärst du einverstanden…?
Viele Grüße
berndw (2023-01-19 16:40:55+00:00): Wie ich schrieb,  von mir erfasste Daten können jederzeit korrigiert werden.
mueschel (2015-03-16 20:57:13+00:00): Hallo Cachi1234,
bist du dir bei zwei der Wegen sicher, dass die linken Spuren mit slight_left markiert sind? Üblicherweise sind es in diesem Fall gerade Pfeile auf den Wegweisern, nur für die rechte Spur ein slight_right.
Bei einem der Wege hast du "direction" mit "destination" verwechselt. Vielleicht möchtest du das noch korrigieren.
Gruß, mueschel
Cachi1234 (2015-03-17 16:22:07+00:00): Hallo mueschel

destination ist korrigiert.
zu slight_left: Laut autobahn-bilder.de biegen die beiden linken Spuren leicht nach links ab (was vermutlich daher kommt, dass die Autobahn hier eine Linkskurve beschreibt). Ich schreib die Ausfahrt aber sicherheitshalber nochmals zur Überprüfung aus.
LG
cachi1234
robert (2015-03-15 22:17:28+00:00): Did you mean to remove the name "Miller Way" in this edit? It broke a match with the Ordnance Survey Locator database: http://ris.dev.openstreetmap.org/oslmusicalchairs/map?osl_id=950796
Buckster_uk (2015-03-16 10:28:33+00:00): No sorry it should still be there (Miller Place), just readded.
robert (2015-03-16 19:30:22+00:00): Great stuff
robert (2015-03-16 19:30:52+00:00): (welcome to OSM, keep up the good work)
SomeoneElse (2018-08-08 15:43:26+00:00): Any thoughts on what the designation of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/59244299/history should be really?  There are a couple of "designation=yes" around here...
SK53 (2018-08-08 16:03:23+00:00): Ones where I could see the green sign from the car, but couldn't read the lettering IIRC. One might be able to make a guess from old maps (bridleways usually shown as a double dotted line), or just possibly geograph images (although this one shows pretty much the view I had from the car http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/4047579). We need to persuade Adam2 to come via Gainsborough to Bawtry when he does one of his Mapillary drives.
nyanza (2015-03-17 13:48:33+00:00): The imaginary school and sports pitch is not imaginary. It has existed on the site for 18 months.
hexplore (2015-03-17 19:13:39+00:00): You are completely right. Please see this correction that I just made.

http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/29548376

I've set it as under construction based on the documents I was working from:
http://barclay.web7.devwebsite.co.uk/page/?title=Chestnut+House+Site&pid=110

If that is no longer accurate please update it.
Zbigniew_Cz (2015-03-15 14:10:00+00:00): Odradzam dodawanie foot=no do ronda w sytuacji, kiedy nie ma wyrysowanych chodników wokół ronda. Dodanie foot=no spowoduje, że nawigacja piesza poprowadzi okrężną drogą, w w przypadku pieszych, każdy metr się liczy.
FalconTech (2015-03-15 14:38:42+00:00): Dziękuję za ważną wskazówkę. Poprawiłem.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-16 11:08:48+00:00): Hi - you've removed a tag from http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/53294167/history - was that deliberate?
rbuch703 (2015-03-16 15:05:38+00:00): Yes, it was. Those were extremely rarely-used tags (less then ten instances world-wide) from the http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/reports/similar_keys list. If the data was relevant, I converted it to the corresponding standardized tag. Otherwise, I dropped it.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-16 15:16:19+00:00): Please don't do this - you're removing information from the database.  In this case it was previously clear that you are not allowed to bring a bull into the former bullring, but since your edit that is no longer clear - it just says "access=permissive"
rbuch703 (2015-03-16 15:27:44+00:00): I don't see how that was clear. Since the tag was not standardized (no wiki entry), there was no meaning attached to "bull=no". It could have meant that there are no bulls left, that bulls are numbered, that bulls may not enter, that a bull called "no" resides there, or any other possible meaning. So it really only cluttered the data set without providing any information.
If someone indeed wished to convey the meaning "no bulls allowed" (which was not conveyed using "bull=no"), this information should be given human-readably in a "note" tag.
SomeoneElse (2015-03-16 15:39:37+00:00): I understood perfectly what was meant by the previous tag.  Just because you didn't is not a reason why you should remove it.
rbuch703 (2015-03-16 15:41:57+00:00): How are you sure that the meaning you guessed is indeed the meaning the original author wanted to convey?