piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Warin61 (2018-07-04 01:02:40+00:00): Keep the comments on the changeset - makes it easier for me to track.
Add way 604071145 affected 2 boundaries .. I have fixed them. 
Adding way 604071144 affected 2 boundaries.. I have fixed them. 

Note: in NSW, Australia you can use the NSW LPI Base Map to see where boundaries should be - the purple lines. This also has road names. The vast majority of road names have been done. Boundaries are another matter .. don't go changing the ones in there already, there have been some official changes to boundaries that may not be in the LPI data yet, but as a fix to broken boundaries they should suit. Only if you are local and know the present situation should you change the boundaries. I'd not add new boundaries either .. there are some locals doing that.
Carto'Cité (2018-07-12 14:23:06+00:00): Hello,
The bus stop "Washing Bay" is not in a relation, but there are several relations on the road next to the stop. Have you got more information about this place ?
Thank you,
Axel
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-11 05:14:04+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604080992/history has waterway = brook that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
What you meant by waterway=brook? Is not using https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dstream intentional and wanted here? How waterway=brook differs from waterway=stream in this case?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-11 05:14:46+00:00): OK, between fountains stream and canal are also tricky at best... Less and less sure how to handle it
nereocystis (2024-04-11 16:02:42+00:00): It looks like waterway=brook was deprecated a couple of years after I did this edit.
Looking at this again today, I'm not sure of the correct tag for a small artificial waterway between 2 fountains
nereocystis (2024-04-12 18:06:51+00:00): Agreed. Very confusing.
I looked at the waterway wiki. Nothing really fits. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:waterway#Man_made_waterways
nereocystis (2024-04-12 18:07:51+00:00): Maybe it should just be tagged as fountain, though this doesn't seem quite correct. Maybe there is another amenity which is appropriate, though I can't find it yet.
nereocystis (2024-04-12 18:32:35+00:00): I added a topic on community. Maybe we can get a good answer.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/what-is-tag-for-artificial-stream-between-2-fountains/111744
nereocystis (2024-05-08 04:57:25+00:00): Well, I modified this to 
waterway=stream
anthropogenic=yes
based upon the community discussion above. The answer is not perfect, but it is my best guess on an answer
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-06-17 16:29:49+00:00): Thanks for so much effort to improve it!
wille (2018-07-02 01:08:47+00:00): Hi AmTimy,

Thank you very much for your edits. Remember we are not allowed to use Google Maps data as a source to input data on OpenStreetMap.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60332576
oh ho osm (2018-07-02 00:55:28+00:00): Tagged Plaza as well as added play structures.
Pikse (2021-03-23 20:09:57+00:00): Madeira (r8421421) consists several islands and so it doesn't seem to match wikidata=Q30188 and wikipedia="pt:Ilha da Madeira" that link to individual island (i.e. r1715038).
viloan (2018-07-02 01:12:28+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
muralito (2018-07-02 14:21:10+00:00): Hola Ismael.

Los teléfonos por favor escribirlos en el formato correcto para que por ejemplo se puedan discar directamente de un móvil (por ejemplo en este caso sin / ). Que no haya que interpretar nada, ni / ni -.  Si son mas de un teléfono tenes que poner los números completos separados por punto y coma.
ceyockey (2018-07-02 02:18:30+00:00): According to USGS Topo, Roe Creek extends significantly farther north, but could not confidently map based on Bing imagery
user_5359 (2018-07-02 04:50:48+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604091774. You forgot to add any tag on this way.
user_8466505 (2018-07-02 07:08:16+00:00): I fixed the issue, by the way, it was 378 Hanamaulu St, not 376 Hanamaulu St.
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:48:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065346 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:49:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065367 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:48:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065346 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:48:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065346 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:49:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065367 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:48:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065346 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:49:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065367 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
julcnx (2026-06-16 04:04:49+00:00): Hi, some of the ways tagged `surface=clay` in this changeset appear to be laterite roads. `surface=laterite` was approved on 2026-06-15 and describes this surface more precisely. Would you be comfortable retagging? Happy to do it if you prefer. More info: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:surface=laterite
apm-wa (2018-08-05 15:21:49+00:00): This is not likely a hospital--is it really a hospital, or a clinic (saglyk öýi or поликлинка)?
apm-wa (2018-08-12 12:59:11+00:00): I checked on 12 August 2018 and it is indeed an infectious disease hospital.  I will move it to the exact position based on imagery and tag it with the full name.
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:48:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065346 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:49:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065367 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
SomeoneElse (2018-07-25 18:49:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 61065367 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fantasy edits by CozyCossio reported to the Data Working Group (those that have not already been reverted).
mavl (2018-12-25 00:32:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
Essin (2018-08-03 19:37:04+00:00): It was pointed out in https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1473383 that islands have started to disappear from maps.me, and I suspect that it's because this multipolygon doesn't contain the islands in the Gulf of Bothnia. I'm not sure if it should be considered a data problem or a rendering problem. The multipolygon is terribly bulky as it is...
kocio (2018-08-03 22:56:19+00:00): Interesting, thanks for noticing!

In OSM Carto we treat natural=bay area as the area only for rendering name. The water area is already tagged and we have a different part of code to render it.

In Maps.me they could treat natural=bay area as also water area, which would hide islands, if rendered on top of them.

I would go to the Maps.me and tell them about this problem, so we could discuss it. Please leave the link, as an OSM Carto developer I'm interested in taking part in it.
Essin (2018-08-05 20:57:45+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Dosmankan who originally raised the issue also e-mailed Maps.me about it, so I haven't been involved in the Maps.me side.
kocio (2018-08-05 21:05:34+00:00): OK, thanks for the info.
mariotomo (2020-02-15 18:17:14+00:00): hi.  do you think you could review this edit?  in particular, the border Arraiján-Chorrera, there's two curious things going on there.  you have two identical lines (604099387, 604123678); you added a riverbank polygon (2396657), keeping the two districts apart.
if you could review and correct?
mariotomo (2020-08-09 14:49:44+00:00): you're a very active mapper, could you please also make order where you make mistakes?
mariotomo (2020-08-10 00:22:58+00:00): BTW.  "Geored 507", that's information from the Tommy Guardia.  we can't use that as a source for OSM information, the IGNTG license does not allow it.
pitscheplatsch (2018-07-02 19:02:28+00:00): Hi MICUGR, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several mapped service ways? Thanks.

See https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=60334176
OpenBulls (2018-07-02 20:42:52+00:00): The reason for removal of several service ways is because they are on private residential properties and do not allow any public access/services, misleading users of OSM.

The inclusion of the new service ways/foot paths/areas is public access and new services added to the community by local council.

To be fair, there is more mistakes of incorrect public access. Rather than doing it all in one go I'll review each month.
ralley (2018-07-07 01:07:07+00:00): MICUGR: the correct way to handle private access like this is through the access tags, not by deleting elements.
OpenBulls (2018-07-07 02:14:07+00:00): Thank you ralley for identifying OSM features such as elements and tags. A simple tag update is incorrect for this change set, refer to the OSM wiki on map editing. OSM realise on local knowledge of services and features to be accurate and physically represented. Additionally; if you are disputing this change set, refer to the OSM wiki on disputes.
pitscheplatsch (2018-07-07 05:55:30+00:00): @MICUGR: as already mentioned by ralley, "the correct way to handle private access like this is through the access tags, not by deleting elements"!

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access=private
OpenBulls (2018-07-07 06:31:00+00:00): Thank you for quoting the reference which proves my point for the change. Private access (driveway) elements and tags are to be used to indicate access to a property only (ie from the street).

Once you have reached the properties address, which is legally marked at a letterbox for posted mail, you then need permission from the property owner to use the layout of their property on a mapping service. This is invasion of privacy under the Privacy Act 1993 of New Zealand Law, which OSM content must obey.

OSM is a community driven map service. You need to understand that what you put on a map can have consequences on its final use. Cases are OSM content can be used by professional services such as car navigation that will detect the tag. Free to use services (such as apple store and android play games) are showing access ways as players are allowed to trespass on properties. It is going to become a legal problem for home owners to charge these people if OSM and there community allow this to carry on.
Nakaner-repair (2018-07-07 12:33:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 60488145 where the changeset comment is: Revert changeset 60334176. If a way is not accessible to the public, add the access=private tag and do not delete the way.
Nakaner (2018-07-07 12:35:26+00:00): Hi MICUGR,

I have reverte all your deletions. As other users have already pointed out, deleting private ways is not correct. Please add the tag access=private instead. Any proper application will interprete this tag and exclude these ways from routing. If they don't use the tag and still route over these ways, it is a bug of the application and has to be reported to its developer. Deleting these ways in OSM instead, is no option and it is a matter of time only until the ways are added by someone else because they exist (on satellite imagery).

Please do not confuse the legal term "access" with the access key in the OpenStreetMap database.

Best regards

Michael
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60334176
OpenBulls (2018-07-08 02:45:29+00:00): Great to see remedial action taking place without consideration of the subject in question. Just to let you know I have a response from the developer about drive ways and private property. Firstly; the app developer is not impressed that you insulting them, they switched from Google to OSM because of the element and tag system. Secondly; they responded with making every effort to protect people from incorrect use of the supplied mapping information. However; if an error is present and affects safety, OSM is responsible for making appropriate changes.

And this is the problem, no one wants to take ownership for adding value to a mapping service. Next time you make a change to something ask yourself this simple question; what value am I really adding?

Also, you might want to reference this bad review to change the wiki on use of elements and tags, because your community has a poor level of understanding on how to apply them in practise. Any normal person would go to the physical location first and review what the elements are. Secondly, review wiki on correct procedures then update the map and tag appropriately. Seems OSM has a different way of doing business, not what you know but who you know.
mavl (2018-12-25 00:24:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:37:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:48:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:36:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
user_5359 (2018-07-02 04:46:13+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
bsoto (2018-07-03 04:35:15+00:00): Thanks!
mueschel (2018-07-09 10:43:07+00:00): Hi,
you used tags like these (here and on other roads)
carriageway width, carriagewaycamber, carriagewaywidth, These are no common tags - could you explain what they mean? Maybe we can find a common way to tag those features.

Cheers, Jan
wille (2018-07-02 12:29:07+00:00): Olá,

Muito obrigado por suas contribuições ao OpenStreetMap! Revisei essa edição e percebi apenas um erro. Uma das vias ficou classificada como secondary_link e deveria ser secondary. Já fiz a correção

Caso tenha alguma dúvida, pode entrar em contato comigo.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60335013
mavl (2018-12-25 00:40:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:40:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
abakus_uploader (2018-07-02 22:30:48+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
maraf24 (2018-07-31 08:55:06+00:00): Naprawiłem adres.
mavl (2018-12-24 23:59:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
catdreamer (2018-07-18 07:53:57+00:00): 請問頂天立地石是樹木嗎?
Barb 123456789 (2018-08-03 17:38:53+00:00): tam jezdim
mavl (2018-12-25 00:42:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:01:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:14:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
catdreamer (2018-07-02 08:59:22+00:00): 請問為何新繪一小段蓋在原來的路線上?
台灣郎 (2018-07-03 00:19:22+00:00): 我應該是補繪一條符合目前現況的路線才對，謝謝提醒。
catdreamer (2018-07-03 03:21:05+00:00): 不必補繪,簡單拖移路線即可。請參考資深圖客教學影片https://youtu.be/W5T671h14hk
與ID編輯器指南https://learnosm.org/zh_TW/beginner/id-editor/
台灣郎 (2018-07-03 04:59:24+00:00): 3Q
nyampire (2018-07-02 06:46:35+00:00): レビューしました。
建物を構成するウェイのノードは、他の建物のウェイにくっつけないようにしましょう。
この建物のことです。 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/604144282
Glassman (2018-07-02 14:53:18+00:00): From the aerial imagery, those look like service roads for farm equipment. Nor do they match the imagery. They should also connect to a road. Can you please fix? I'll send you a message with more information to help you get started.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/60337522
suneel-kaw (2018-10-30 18:11:13+00:00): Can you please re-verify the directionality of the link between the two roads? https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?#map=19/36.11450/-115.17063, this should be opposite.
suneel-kaw (2018-10-30 18:17:11+00:00): Nevermind, I got confused.
mavl (2018-12-25 00:43:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
eiger (2018-08-01 15:44:22+00:00): Bonjour, pourquoi avez-vous supprimé la piscine? A-t-elle été détruite?
jmh123 (2018-08-02 05:19:42+00:00): Oui elle à été supprimée l'été dernier
mavl (2018-12-24 23:34:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:07:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:10:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
mavl (2018-12-25 00:41:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
ardhavara (2018-07-03 03:10:34+00:00): test
AkuAnakTimur (2018-07-03 03:37:45+00:00): @user:ardhavara: Your test appears to be successful. Your comment will be notified through an e-mail to @user:reshma6
mavl (2018-12-24 23:38:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 65744804, 65751034, 65750264, 65748673 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, damage - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2400].
DrSpiros (2018-07-02 09:20:33+00:00): Kato Polemidia actually, not mesa Gitonia
bob3bob3 (2021-11-23 04:18:04+00:00): Just an inquisitive question. Why the footpath way around the farm? I just drove past (street imagery) and was checking the road signage/surface. Cheers
ma-rt-in (2018-07-02 14:41:30+00:00): Was ist deine Quelle?
Rezneuk (2018-07-02 14:47:01+00:00): Das Amtsblatt Nr. 26 der VG Thalfang vom 29.06.2018, Punkt der Ortsgemeinde Horath.
ma-rt-in (2018-07-02 14:51:34+00:00): danke.