piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SherbetS (2021-09-01 14:26:37+00:00): Hello NikkiAnderson,

when you add a square building, you can press Q in the editor to automatically square the building.
rab (2021-09-01 14:34:18+00:00): Hi,
the downloaded area was to small!
So this road was not included in to your local dataset.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/908383116#map=14/-14.9743/28.1515
noelbov (2021-09-01 21:02:56+00:00): Wat heb je nou precies verbeterd aan welk fietspad?
Er zijn intussen een aantal fouten door jouw tussenkomst geïntroduceerd: zie o.a. -  https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/route/6467
- https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/route/10966438 
- https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/cycling/be/facts/NetworkExtraMemberNode 
Gelieve na posting je bijdrage(n) te checken op eventuele fouten via 'Feiten' op https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/nl/analysis/cycling/be/networks of https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/nl/analysis/hiking/be/networks

Bestaat het 2-de fietsknooppunt 46 niet meer en wat met fietsroute 11-46, 46-99 en 46-51 ?

Dank u en vriendelijke groeten
Roeckx (2021-09-02 17:41:07+00:00): Dag noelbov,

Door de werken rondom het knooppunt "Waaslandhaven-Oost" zijn enkele fietspaden wat verlegd.

Tijdens deze edit viel me op dat de "sint-annekesroute" niet meer klopte, deze was onderbroken.

Tijdens de edit heb ik blijkbaar per ongeluk het 2e knooppunt 46 verwijdert zoals u zei.

Mijn excuses hiervoor.
Ik heb het knooppunt terug aangepast en nu lijken de fouten er uit te zijn?

Bedankt voor de comment, ik leer weer bij en zal hier in de toekomst beter op letten.
Frans S (2021-09-02 10:52:11+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 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
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/110571299
Frans S (2021-09-02 10:51:23+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
This is a building only project !
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110571318
gscholz (2021-09-18 05:58:05+00:00): Hi Raphaelkaart,
your recent edits have created a huge amount of errors in the OSM database regarding not connected roads (red dots):

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-39.33566&lat=-8.02292&zoom=9&overlays=duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges_areas,snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_6

As you may know, these roads cannot be used by routing software. Can you please fix this?

As this seems to be a systematical error, can you please re-think your editing process how to avoid this error?
Kind Regards
Guido
Raphaelkaart (2021-09-19 21:16:09+00:00): Hello,
Good Morning!

I fixed the Roads that were wrongly mapped by min to paths and made the connection of some roads that were not connected.

Yours sincerely,

Raphaelkaart
Ltrlg (2021-09-01 15:02:46+00:00): The building https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978457085 does not have this shape. Prefer simple shapes or leaving the task to someone else rather than integrating bad data.

Less important (but not to be neglected), HotOSM task's instructions include a sentence about squaring buildings, which would have been the obvious correct choice for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978457088, but was not done. If you haven’t already, please read the instructions.
DressyPear4 (2021-09-01 16:58:59+00:00): Olá, essa edição foi removida.
Não faça edições fictícias, se é por causa do pokemon veja aqui
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/tag/pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt
rah_em (2021-09-02 06:18:28+00:00): Hi Florence Major, 
I have deleted the isolated and untagged highways. Kindly refer these ways way 978458596, way 978458597, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110597373
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110572143
gscholz (2021-09-04 06:28:46+00:00): Hi Gustavo,
your recent changesets have aded several errors to the OSM database regarding overlapping ways:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-47.94229&lat=-15.70434&zoom=11&overlays=duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges_areas

My impression is that you are not familiar with the concept of hiking/walking routes:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walking_Routes

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido
Dave Venables (2021-09-01 15:18:10+00:00): Address available from Companies House https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13037776 and location from note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2830993 and bing aerial images for building position
Dave Venables (2021-09-01 15:36:17+00:00): Postcode also available from code-point open centroid
JassKurn (2021-09-03 16:40:14+00:00): Hi, There are a few problems with this changeset. You've made changes  which have a major impact without a changeset explanation or a source. Many of the change in this changeset can not be made without some sort of "on ground" data. So your changeset, is missing a source for the changes, and the changeset comment should state or help with understanding why the changes were made. 


You removed the one-way from "Iron Bridge" way, without source or explanation. You changed the maxweight tag without a source.What was your source for these two changes? It should be stated or at least implied in the changeset.

I was confident you'd made a mistake with your edit, but with no source and only a brief changeset comment, you reduced the ability to spot and fix the mistake.

Please see the following guide  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments.

You've also made major changes around the bus station area without source or explanation. 

I've fixed the Iron Bridge edit, and will check and fix the edits around the Bus Station later.
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-04 01:52:40+00:00): Hi, the sources I use are mainly Google Street View and personal experience. I've added restrictions from signage and the latest street view images (checking it is up to date of course). If anything is incorrect I apologise.
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 14:10:58+00:00): > Hi, the sources I use are mainly Google Street View

For the avoidance of doubt - we can't use Google Street View or other Google products as a source in OSM because Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here.

Can you let us know which changesets of yours have relied on Google as a source?  We'll need to revert/redact those changes.  You can comment here or email data@osmfoundation.org .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 20:11:23+00:00): I don't solely use Street View for my edits, but a combination of sources to ensure the mapping is correct.
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 20:15:40+00:00): Sure, but we'll need to know which edits you used Google Street View for _at all_ .
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 20:43:15+00:00): Well pretty much all of my edits are to places I have been, so I use my own experience for those alone. For this particular edit I used street view to check I was correct, as I have done a few times in the past. Similarly with mapillary - these I use to assist my memory and personal pictures, not directly map from. I would have to go back through all 2,000 of my edits to try and locate maybe like 30 edits?
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 20:44:13+00:00): Sorry, was trying to comment but you had blocked me
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 20:47:36+00:00): > I would have to go back through all 2,000 of my edits to try and locate maybe like 30 edits?

If you have only used Google on some edits then yes, it will make sense to let us know on which edits that was.  If you don't we'll have to assume that all previous edits are affected.
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 20:49:49+00:00): Is there any way of easily seeing all of my edits at once?
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 20:53:18+00:00): Is there anywhere that also states banned sources? I can't find a list on the wiki
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 20:58:38+00:00): I can't think of a really easy way beyond simply navigating through them at osm.org - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quality_assurance has some, and in addition to those in with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Revert_scripts is a "download all changesets by a user" script (but you'd need to use something else to process/visualise them).
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 21:01:02+00:00): > Is there anywhere that also states banned sources?

There is no "list of banned sources" since that is the wrong way around - we can only use sources whose licences explicitly allow us to.

Google is explicitly mentioned at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Legal_FAQ#Can_I_trace_data_from_Google_Maps.2FNokia_Maps.2F....3F
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-06 21:03:34+00:00): Thanks for that, is it okay to send a list sometime in the week of changesets to revert?
SomeoneElse (2021-09-06 21:06:02+00:00): If you can do that before doing any other mapping that'd be great.
HirschKauz (2021-09-01 16:11:42+00:00): Hi f4m8!  2 small things:  
1. [building]=[garages] plural ist described here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dgarages  Maybe you meant [building]=[garage] (singular)  
2. Are you sure this is a garage? How could a car come here? Have you thought of [building]=[allotment_house]? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dallotment_house  
;-) Greets and Happy mapping, HirschKauz
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110573188
f4m8 (2021-09-03 06:58:22+00:00): Hello HirschKauz,

1. thanks for the advice. I will change 
    that by this weekend
2. Yes, i'm sure because of knowlege

best
f4m8
HirschKauz (2021-09-03 09:06:02+00:00): fine :-)  
txh for your answer
Frans S (2021-09-02 10:49:49+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped. 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
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/110573367
Asteliks (2023-02-22 11:51:37+00:00): Mamy 2 opcje na oznaczenie tablic odjazdów według wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:departures_board 
i 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:passenger_information_display
Claudev8 (2021-09-01 15:23:08+00:00): Ho inserito un pezzo di sentiero dividendo la strada agricola, perché la caduta di un albero sostanzialmente impedisce il passaggio di un veicolo - mentre rimane percorribile il tratto a piedi (con qualche difficoltà)
mariotomo (2021-09-01 15:55:07+00:00): hola, gracias por revisar los datos OSM. no entendí la revisión que hiciste, sólo cambiaste el nombre del río? … pregunto, pues en el comentario mencionaste algo sobre un sentido incorrecto del flujo, que no reconozco.  vives en la zona?  sería genial tener más editores cerca de David!
mariotomo (2021-09-01 19:50:38+00:00): (he visto que tienes más mejoras al flujo de aguas, gracias por la atención al detalle!)
Claudev8 (2021-09-01 15:27:31+00:00): A parte la modifica della superficie del sentiero, per la mappatura di questo segmento ho inserito un pezzo di sentiero dividendo la strada agricola, perché la caduta di un albero e la crescita di vegetazione sostanzialmente impedisce il passaggio di un veicolo - mentre rimane percorribile il tratto a piedi (con qualche difficoltà).
Mi chiedo se sia il modo giusto di mappare questo tipo di ostacoli su strada agricola, oppure ci sono modi migliori per gli ostacoli su strada.
julcnx (2021-09-02 11:40:53+00:00): Hi! I am curious what is OSMI router? and what was the exact problem?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110574102
ratrun (2021-09-02 16:54:20+00:00): See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing for a description what OSMI is.
The problem was unconnected nodes.
julcnx (2021-09-02 17:01:26+00:00): Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110574102
Andrea Musuruane (2021-09-02 08:33:53+00:00): Ciao. I tag bicycle=yes, foot=yes, horse=yes e motor_vehicle	yessono di default su una track, quindi è inutile inserirli: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Italy Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110575506
maro21 (2021-09-01 18:00:54+00:00): Skąd pochodzi ta nazwa ulicy?
Paul Berry (2022-01-09 15:05:59+00:00): Changeset comment should have been: "NR11/NR12/NR13: Post box/defibrillator box survey."
chroniz (2021-09-02 18:53:29+00:00): Hei, mikä on peruste tämän polun MTB-luokituksen muuttamiselle? Vaikka polku on leveä eikä sisällä esteitä, on harjuhiekka tässä paikoiteillen todella pehmeää eikä kapeilla maastorenkailla ole kovin helposti ajettavissa.
chroniz (2021-09-02 18:54:29+00:00): Edellinen kommenttini koskee siis polkua 638660885
ajmannisto (2021-09-02 19:06:23+00:00): Moi.
Olet oikeassa että on siinä se 10-15 metrin osuus sitä pehmeää. Muutoin nykyisin oikeastaan hiekkatietä runsaan käytön vuoksi ja sieltä "huipulta" on muuttunut koko uran sijainti soranoton vuoksi ja on nykyisin helpompaa pohjaa. Itse pidän kovin helppona. 

Ihan jos rehellisiä ollaan, niin nuo "korjauksia" muutokset on suurimmaksi osin niitä mitä kuvittelen että itse olen väärällä numerolla luokitellut ja korjailen yleensä omiani. Harvoin kosken muiden töihin. Nytkin kuvittelin niin tekeväni. 
Voi se hyvin olla keltainenkin ura👍
Duja (2021-12-29 15:02:01+00:00): Otkud ti ideja da se naselje zove "Ljugovo"? Vrlo je lako naći tačan podatak na Guglu.
s8evq (2021-09-01 20:42:32+00:00): Klopt inderdaad. Dat verkeersbord daar klopt niet. Vroeger stond er halfweg een 'nadar' hekken, zodat het min of meer klopte. Nu niet meer. Trouwens, ik zie dat je vehicle=destination toevoegd, maar er staat toch geen bord? Doe je dit om doorgaand verkeer in de routing tegen te gaan?
fvusser (2021-09-02 07:13:41+00:00): Inderdaad: door het nieuw circulatieplan met trage snelheden wordt er nu Maria-aalter->Bellem gerouteerd via Houtkant-Houtem-weibroekdreef aangezien daar 50-70 mag gereden worden. Ik zie niet direct hoe het beter te doen, met "destination" komt het volgens mij het dichtst in de buurt van de realiteit. Een klein stukje "track" of zo is ook een optie.
s8evq (2021-09-02 07:34:14+00:00): Wat zou je er van denken als we die vehicle=destination er terug van halen, en smoothness=bad. Track kan in principe ook, het voldoet wel aan de definitie "The tag highway=track is used for minor land access roads that are not considered part of the general-purpose road network"
s8evq (2021-09-02 07:37:06+00:00): Ik ben vooral voorzichtig met vehicle=destination, omdat er geen enkel verkeersbord staat in die zin. Dan map je eigenlijk wat het gemeentebestuur in gedachten heeft, maar niet wat er 'on the ground' zichtbaar is.
fvusser (2021-09-02 07:43:45+00:00): ok, let's try it. Heb het even opgezocht, en ik denk dat routers daar rekening mee houden. Is inderdaad correcter volgens de OSM-regels.
Jakka (2021-09-02 07:13:06+00:00): Geen goed idee om wegen, landbouwwegen te schrappen. Die zullen in de toekomst zeker er terug in komen, daar deze fysiek aanwezig zijn en gebruikers dit als herkennings/orientatie punt willen gebruiken. Er zijn tags die de toegang ontzeggen.... waardoor routeplanners deze negeren.
Erin76 (2021-09-03 12:19:31+00:00): ja, inderdaad opletten :(
maicolgalante (2023-09-10 10:32:46+00:00): Ciao Michele, sono passato ieri di lì e la way 34654047 è ormai dismessa, dal momento che hanno creato un nuovo sentiero molto più agibile, già segnato in cartina. Che dici, meglio cancellarla?
micheleOSM3 (2023-09-11 20:14:37+00:00): Ciao Maicol, ti ho scritto in privato.
DressyPear4 (2021-09-02 11:57:21+00:00): Olá, nomes não devem ser adicionados em caixa alta
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110579037
Dodko (2021-09-25 08:41:39+00:00): ten ref:minvskaddress=7102353203 patrí pre orientačné číslo 22
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978508613/history
JJIglesias (2021-09-01 23:28:16+00:00): Por favor respetar las normas de edicion y visitar www.learnosm.org 

Proxima edicion q se vea con su nombre puesto en el nombre del Elemento, no lo voy a corregir simplemente lo voy a borrar.

Gracias
Glassman (2021-09-02 17:31:57+00:00): These look like service roads; I looked at local roads and these were not included. 59th Avenue Southwest is as far north as the city/county maintained roads go.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110579928
woodpeck (2021-09-02 09:20:10+00:00): Hallo hangy, bist Du sicher, dass diese Änderungen korrekt sind im Sinne von "zur Sitaution vor Ort passend"? Ist die Beschilderung/Beschriftung aller dieser Gebäude bereits angepasst? Wir wollen in OSM nämlich nicht das mappen, was in irgendeiner Firmenzentrale beschlossen wird, sondern das, was man vor Ort sieht...
hangy (2021-09-02 18:38:46+00:00): Ich habe natürlich nicht alle Punkte einer manuellen Sichtprüfung unterzogen. Allerdings wurde das Unternehmen zum 01.09. rechtsgültig umfirmiert, sodass die alte Firma nicht mehr existiert.
Meiner Einschätzung nach sollte das auch gelten, falls ein einzelnes Klingelschild noch nicht entsprechend aktualisiert worden sein sollte. Wäre es deiner Meinung nach besser, das auch dann erst später zu ändern, wenn es es die alte Firma nicht mehr gibt?
Tilia_J (2021-09-01 21:09:38+00:00): Revert changeset ivm met verwijderen tracks zonder toelichting: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110585113
Tilia_J (2021-09-01 21:08:20+00:00): Revert changeset ivm vandalisme: compleet verwijderen van gebied (landuse en tracks)
Tilia_J (2021-09-01 21:08:39+00:00): Revert: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110585113
skyper (2022-02-23 15:19:41+00:00): Hi Grauer Elefant
JOSM hat hier übereinanderliegende Knoten entdeckt, zB:
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9054320433
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8695244571
* https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9054320432
Habe es repariert und die Knoten wo anders verwendet. Ist wohl ein Problem von iD, zumindest dass diese Situation keine Warnung erzeugt. Daher bleibt nur vorsichtig zu Arbeiten oder eine bessere Software zu verwenden. Kannst ja auf github ein Issue erstellen, damit iD das auch beanstandet.

Grüße skyper
muchichka_s (2021-09-02 00:07:28+00:00): Приклеювати поля до ліній адміністративних кордонів не дуже хороша ідея. Був один діяч в Виноградівському районі, наніс там кордони, не зовсім правильно, приклеїв до всього - доріг, полів, канав. Потім, щоб це все виправити треба набагато більше часу, ніж нанести ті кордони з нуля. Ще такий діяч був в Ужгородському районі, там вже все було добре нанесено, хіба що можливо зміщення десь було. А він взяв і все поприклеював, і тепер там важко наносити кадастрові межі сіл. Справа в тому, що межі треба наносити з великим масштабуванням, а це зручніше робити в порожньому шарі в JOSM, без лісів, полів, доріг

І до речі: чому такий складний контур поля?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110581931
kapitansup (2021-09-02 05:55:36+00:00): Я поля тут не наносив, лише кілька участків з деревами
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110581931
muchichka_s (2021-09-02 00:08:59+00:00): Дуже сумнівно, що ці руїни мають історичну цінність :)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110582593
kapitansup (2021-09-02 05:58:52+00:00): дякую, виправив назад.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110582593
Tilia_J (2021-09-01 21:09:43+00:00): Revert changeset ivm met verwijderen tracks zonder toelichting: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110585113
Raf_de (2021-09-05 15:56:15+00:00): Hello wajde12,
I've noticed you have been drawing highways and steps that have been floating, or not connecting to any ways. You've also drawn some highways where we can't really see any evidence of their existence. Here are some examples of this,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979318511/history#map=19/31.86534/10.98328
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979404460/history#map=19/31.86534/10.98280 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979318349/history#map=19/31.86712/10.98708
I wanted to bring this to your attention so you can be more careful in your future editing so that the data on OSM can continue being as accurate as possible!
Happy mapping!
-Raf_De
SomeoneElse (2021-09-01 20:06:46+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978530008 has been added as a building here, but it just looks like part of an area of woodland to me?
Best Regards,
Andy
Hanan Tikveša (2021-09-02 20:56:54+00:00): Please stop duplicating ways with different tags.
you are making people confused when you do that.
literan (2021-09-02 16:30:13+00:00): и зачем вы неподходящий тег на границы Москвы повесили? будьте аккуратнее, пожалуйста.
literan (2021-09-02 16:36:04+00:00): да вы вообще этой правкой много покорежили. Например, основной тег с улицы снесли https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/27563427/history

не делайте так больше, а то все ваши правки придется откатывать
clay_c (2022-01-14 05:09:57+00:00): Changeset reverted here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116132921

This train station was not "added" in this changeset—it was deleted elsewhere and this building was retagged to become the train station.
DUGA (2021-09-20 13:35:02+00:00): There is no reason to keep the hotel as an area when hotel buildings are also mapped. When you try to get there, the router may send you behind the building, which is annoying (similar to getting to a residential building but sending you into alley).

Instead, it should be a single node put near the entrance of the hotel. I've corrected your changes since you appear to not be a local there.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/363025564/history#map=19/39.04986/-76.93530
jogemu (2021-09-21 14:21:52+00:00): Thank you for improving my edits. I remember that in the moment I first saw the double area my intuition wanted to change it. But on a closer look I wasn't sure enough that the motel shouldn't be an area to actually correct it.

If I had mapped it I would have split the building so that the south part is seperated like the north part. At least in the imagery both connections seem similar and both parts seem to have the same height but the building part parallel to the street at the entrance is higher. In case you have been there or have more detailed imagery you might know better and I just wanted to know whether you made a conscious decision not to separate it.

Furthermore, I assume not all routers do that but I think some will route you to the buildings node with entrance=main. entrance=yes would allow multiple entrances to be associated with the motel itself and not just a generic building.
Greg_Rose (2021-09-01 21:15:03+00:00): I respect what you're doing, but not how you're doing it.  Way #978055205 was deleted by you an hour ago. Can you revert it back please? 
It's a valid trail - it's the Tunnel Bypass Trail ffs, and you deleted the bypass!
Greg_Rose (2021-09-01 21:54:23+00:00): Disregard - I added it back myself.
tpcolson (2021-09-02 17:55:27+00:00): If it was deleted, it was an error