piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
A67-A67 (2021-03-22 16:55:11+00:00): Er is een derde mogelijkheid voor de wegclassificatie, die het beste lijkt aan te sluiten bij de bewegwijzering en uitbouwstatus van de wegen in Uithoorn. Daarbij blijven de Zijdelweg en de  Koningin Maximalaan ten westen van de Zijdelweg secundaire wegen en wordt de Koningin Maximalaan ten oosten van de Zijdelweg een tertiaire weg. Zo wordt het duidelijker dat de route door het centrum geen doorgaande functie meer heeft.
A67-A67 (2021-03-25 14:36:53+00:00): Ik heb deze derde mogelijkheid uitgevoerd en het oostelijke deel van de Koningin Maximalaan en de route door Amstelhoek omgezet naar tertiare weg. Zowel de bewegwijzering en de bochtige zone-30-weg door Amstelhoek geven aan dat dit geen doorgaande weg meer is. Daarnaast wordt de weg dit jaar in het centrum van Uithoorn heringericht, waardoor het ook daar minder aantrekkelijk wordt voor doorgaand verkeer.
Supaplex030 (2021-03-23 19:46:34+00:00): Hey, this street has not yet been renamed - the renaming will take place in the next few months. The future name is already noted as "proposed:name". As soon as the renaming has finally taken place (the new street name can be read on signs), we will update the street name. Until then, I have reverted this changeset.
amanura (2021-03-24 04:44:52+00:00): Hi ,
Thankyou for looking into our edit and explaining us the actual ground scenario.
Regards,
Amanura
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:38:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
Baloo Uriza (2021-03-22 15:31:42+00:00): These really do look like household driveways.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101487480
sreejam (2021-03-23 10:02:11+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for letting me know about the incorrect road classification. I've rectified the same and have made the changes in the changeset #(101562776).
Looking forward to learn from you.

Regards,
sreejam.
Stereo (2021-03-23 12:46:02+00:00): Hi B-Rabbit! Did you actually survey this on the ground? It was my impression that at least some of the machines would be kept for tickets for the greater region.
B-Rabbit (2021-03-24 06:05:07+00:00): Hi Stereo. No, I did not survey this on the ground but I work for the company which operated the TVM's. The Verkéiersverbond stopped operation of their TVM's by end of 2020 and soon after that all of them were dismounted. The LuxTram TVM's were also dismounted (they stopped operation a lot earlier than the Verkéiersverbond ones) but I have no exact date when that happened.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:40:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
mego_map (2021-03-22 14:29:13+00:00): Hello sherifmgalal,
Please note that the neighbourhood "Al Andalus Family Housing" you change it wrong, and also you did snaped with some roads and you did a wrong cut in the highway , please correct it as it was before you touch it, and if you couldn't let me knew, I can help you in these.

Regards,
mego_map
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:39:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
datendelphin (2021-04-03 11:33:27+00:00): Please stop converting it like this.
* There is no highway=platform.
* The bus_stop should be besides the road.
* The platform should be a node.
sovereign_ch (2021-04-03 12:20:18+00:00): Das stimmt nicht, das ist _eine_ mögliche Variante, die bestenfalls für "Null-Infrastruktur"-Haltestellen zu bevorzugen ist. Sie aber weder in Zürich, Basel oder Bern der Standard, wo Busse selbstverständlich auch an Tramhaltestellen halten, welche ebenso erfasst werden. Und der gesamte Kanton Glarus wurde bereits 2012 so getaggt, auch an Stellen, wo es selbst für mich nicht nachvollziehbar ist. Also hör bitte auf mir, und anderen Schweizer Mappern, die dies schon seit Jahren so handhaben, vorschreiben welche tags sie zu verwenden haben. Dankeschön.
datendelphin (2021-04-03 13:07:56+00:00): Was für eine Unterstellung. Sogar mit Dankeschön. Du bist schon einer der unangenehmsten Zeitgenossen auf OpenStreetMap. Ich schreibe nichts vor. Im gegenteil, hier ist ja ein changeset, dass genau das vorschreiben versucht. Eine Haltestelle, die anders gemappt ist, und unbedingt verschlechtert werden muss.
Die Probleme existieren. Auch wenn das im 2012 schon mal so gemacht wurde, ist es immer noch ein Problem. Probleme ausweiten machts doch auch nicht besser.
!bm (2021-03-22 13:45:00+00:00): Hallo friedrichshainer,

auch hier: der gleiche, nichtssagende Änderungssatzkommentar "#" wie in Cs 101485650, Anm dazu s ebd.[1]

Der Kindergarten war schon als umgebende way [2] erfasst. Beachte bitte OSM-Grundlagen – ganz allgemein[3] und im konkreten Fall: Ein Feature, ein Element [4].

Ein Blick ins Wiki kann zudem nie schaden – das Gebäude war einmal, wie old_name=* nahelegt, eine Direktorenvilla, wurde also nicht als Kindergarten erbaut. Siehe dazu Def./Doku von building=* bzw building:use=*.

Fehler entsprechend korrigiert in [5].

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101485650
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/640761224
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
[5] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101508717

--besteGrüße!bm
friedrichshainer (2021-03-22 17:50:18+00:00): nun ist es kein Wohnhaus mehr, eine Eintragung des Erbauungszustands erscheint mir sinnlos, die Ställe des Zentralen Vieh-und Schlachthofs sind als solche auch nicht gekennzeichnet.
!bm (2021-03-22 19:48:30+00:00): Hallo friedrichshainer,

schön, dass du zur Abwechslung einmal auf Änderungssätze reagierst – allerdings war und ist mir hier nicht an deiner uninformierten, von OSM-Tagging-Fakten offensichtlich unbeeindruckten Meinung gelegen. Nicht ohne Grund habe ich dich auf die Wiki-Dokumentation zu building=* vs building:use=* hingewiesen. 

--besteGrüße!bm
datendelphin (2021-04-03 11:34:22+00:00): Please stop converting it like this.
* There is no highway=platform.
* The bus_stop should be besides the road.
* The platform should be a node.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:52:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
frosm (2021-03-23 08:18:22+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:France/bienvenue
Si une rue est marquée comme publique alors qu'elle est privée, la bonne solution est de la renseignée comme privée et non pas de l'effacer.
C'est d'autant plus nécessaire que sinon un autre utilisateur la rajoutera, sans l'information privé et le cycle recommencera
Bonne continuation
OGI2B (2021-03-23 09:47:35+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour la précision; je modifie. C'est une impasse privée.
Merci!
marc__marc (2024-09-09 16:44:16+00:00): Bonjour,
quel est la source de cette limitation ? je ne trouve pas le panneau
Cordialement,
Marc
Vincentdesgms (2024-09-10 08:05:23+00:00): Bonjour, aux deux entrées de la rue de la Tuilerie, en venant de la rue d'Ippling, se trouve un panneau de limitation à 3,5 t avec un panonceau "Sauf Bus". Les bus scolaires et ceux de la ligne Cabus n°9 passent là.
Cordialement,
Vincent
marc__marc (2024-09-10 16:56:10+00:00): Merci
Puxan (2021-03-22 15:46:51+00:00): Es verdad. El ayuntamiento votó hace unos días pasar al nombre únicamente en catalán pero aún está en período de enmiendas por lo que aún se mantiene el nombre bilingüe hasta que haya una decisión en firme.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101490876
olo81 (2021-03-29 09:35:28+00:00): zdublowane nazwy
C2oc4 (2021-04-06 06:26:44+00:00): Witaj Olo. Chodzi Ci o teren parafii i kościół?
olo81 (2021-04-06 23:18:41+00:00): tak, nazwa terenu parafii powinna iść do tagu operator=*
miejsc kture nie mają nazwy nie nazywamy https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Nazwy

kolejna sprawa że to landuse jest bardzo niechlujne dodane, przylegające obszary ze sobą łączymy, staramy się by nie przecinały budynków.
olo81 (2021-04-06 23:19:01+00:00): które*
C2oc4 (2021-04-08 07:06:01+00:00): czyli co? mam usunąć teren parafii ?
olo81 (2021-04-08 14:22:06+00:00): tego nie napisałem
C2oc4 (2021-04-09 04:58:59+00:00): obszar poprawiłem
olo81 (2021-04-09 14:00:34+00:00): jeszcze właził na budynki, poprawiłem i przeniosłem nazwe parafii pod tag operator=*
C2oc4 (2021-04-10 06:07:15+00:00): Operator ? i tak każdą ?
olo81 (2021-04-10 06:29:01+00:00): Nazwa kościoła już jest przypięta pod budynek. Obszar parafii nie ma nazwy, po prostu parafia zarządza tym terenem. 
Czy każdą zmieniać? To zależy, czy jest kościół na terenie czy coś innego.
C2oc4 (2021-04-10 13:23:23+00:00): dobra to przystępuje to powolnej zmiany
Jez Nicholson (2022-04-06 09:38:10+00:00): Just playing Devil's advocate, but isn't a recycling container that only accepts waste what we would call a 'waste_bin'?

Regards, Jez
Leonard Ehrenfried (2021-03-23 12:47:01+00:00): Hallo, ich glaube da ist beim way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/920697903 ein kleiner Fehler passiert, oder?
MikeN (2021-03-22 11:13:36+00:00): Hi,   Why was this changed to Richmond but is really in another city?    Why was address and extended tagging information removed?
Baloo Uriza (2021-03-22 15:29:50+00:00): Looks like a house at the end of that, the original tags seem to apply.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101492068
sreejam (2021-03-23 10:04:48+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for letting me know about the incorrect road classification. I've rectified the same and have made the changes in the changeset #(101562983).
Looking forward to learn from you.

Regards,
sreejam.
wambag (2021-03-22 10:22:47+00:00): This had been changed 2 or 3 years ago along with a number of other ways in Somerville and Cambridge. Although most of the changes were sound, there are a number in question IMHO. Broadway is given a functional classification by MassDOT as an "urban principal arterial" and is the main road connecting Sullivan Sq. with Magoun/Ball/Powderhouse Sq. in north Somerville. It also forms a continuous thoroughfare from Arlington to Charlestown. A majority of this length was tagged secondary but with seemingly random tertiary segments, this being one of those.
literan (2021-03-22 15:32:25+00:00): добрый день. Не надо дублировать площадные паркинги точками. Или добавляете точку, или рисуете полигон. Один объект на местности - один объект в базе
polacio (2021-03-22 16:11:39+00:00): поправил
SomeoneElse (2021-03-22 12:17:04+00:00): Hello,
For more information on how OpenStreetMap maps disputed territories, please read https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf .  If you believe that that approach is wrong you're welcome to discuss it on one of the international mailing lists.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2021-03-22 12:17:08+00:00): Привет,
Для получения дополнительной информации о том, как OpenStreetMap отображает спорные территории, прочтите https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf. Если вы считаете, что такой подход неверен, вы можете обсудить его в одном из международных списков рассылки.
С уважением,
Энди Таунсенд, от имени рабочей группы OSM по данным.
tomczk (2021-03-22 17:08:48+00:00): Cześć, dla adresów bez ulicy powinno się używać addr:place dla miejscowości i addr:housenumber dla numeru porządkowego. W tej chwili tag addr:city jest zbędny, bo informacja o miejscowości już jest w addr:place, więc można go usunąć.
ivanbranco (2022-01-07 20:58:20+00:00): Hi turankaya74,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8548605384/history

I found an invalid place value here. Could you check it out please?
Vinber (2021-03-29 07:05:32+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour votre contribution.
Si c'est un cours SNT, veuillez faire suivre ceci à votre enseignant-e svp : https://dane.ac-lyon.fr/spip/bonnes-pratiques-osm-en-snt

Bonne journée
Vinber (2021-03-29 07:05:39+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour votre contribution.
Si c'est un cours SNT, veuillez faire suivre ceci à votre enseignant-e svp : https://dane.ac-lyon.fr/spip/bonnes-pratiques-osm-en-snt

Bonne journée
user_2008655 (2021-11-26 12:15:45+00:00): name=Forest???
osmviborg (2021-03-22 10:36:33+00:00): Hej. I DK tagger vi ikke bygninger og områder med adresser.
Leonard Ehrenfried (2021-03-23 12:37:43+00:00): Hi, i think there is a typo in the key for the nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8548692520 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8548645514 isn't it?
parsd51 (2021-03-23 12:43:58+00:00): Hi

Thanks for your observations, you’re right.
I’ll correct it.

Greetings
parsd51
Timmy_Tesseract (2021-04-21 12:05:57+00:00): Hello Zaculeu. Not every airport has gates and fences. This one does not only serve as a roadway for traffic heading to Punta Maria, it's also completely open for anyone from playing kids to bikers to people practicing how to drive ;)

I've removed the non-existent access restrictions for you. Have a nice day!
Zaculeu (2021-04-23 00:08:57+00:00): Hi Timmy_Tesseract, Thank you for providing your local knowledge here and updating the gates! I also noticed the additional road changes near the airport’s terminal, and it appears way 933314495 may be crossing a barrier to access the airport’s apron. It might be better to end the entrance road at node 8651261092, but I wasn’t sure if you’re able to confirm this or not. Please let me know what you think and thanks again for looking into this.
Timmy_Tesseract (2021-04-24 06:09:30+00:00): Thanks for pointing this out. I've removed the problematic way. I also noticed that ending the service road at the outline of the apron resulted in a validation error. I connected it directly to the taxiway instead (as the whole surface area of the aeroway can be accessed through this road). Could you have another look to doublecheck if this conforms with conventions?
Zaculeu (2021-04-27 01:17:47+00:00): Hi Timmy_Tesseract, Thank you for updating this area. For the road connection, it’s best practice to try to never connect roads to the runway or taxiway at airports, to avoid routing people into possibly dangerous areas. This airport is challenging because the tertiary will need to pass through here, but I would recommend ending the service entrance road right before the edge of the airplane apron, near node 8651261092.
Timmy_Tesseract (2021-05-03 08:26:33+00:00): This is really a tricky case. I've now disconnected all roads from the aeroways and solved the issue with a separate unclassified way running parallel to the runway to preserve routability. Thanks again for the heads-up!
Zaculeu (2021-05-03 23:59:29+00:00): Thank you for looking into this further!
eggie (2021-03-22 11:21:35+00:00): Dag Wobest

Je edits http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=101495990

In OASM taggen we juist op de adresnodes en dus niet op de gebouwomtrek. 
De adresnodes komen uit de BAG... Die importeren we mee met de import van cde gebouwen.
Wanneer er meer bedrijven zitten op een adres dan wordt het soms schipperen. 
Ik zal in ieder geval het adres weer even herstellen.
Dat doe ik even met copy past
Mapse eggie
eggie (2021-03-22 11:27:18+00:00): Vivant even gekoppeld aan de adresnode 55..
Het postagentschap heeft even geen adres, maar is natuurlijk wel vindbaar.
Soomige mappers zetten gewoon twee identieke adressen. Consensus is er niet en de goede oplossing ook niet. 
Er is ooit gekeken of je die bedrijven in een relatie  kunt zetten tot de adresnode, maar bij een zoekslag werkt dat toch niet en is hopeloos ingewikkeld voor starters.
Het is nu 'correct'.

Mapse
eggie
Tomas Straupis (2021-03-22 11:32:37+00:00): Negali poligonai taip belekaip dengti, kirsti vienas kitą, bent kažkiek tvarkos turėtų būti žymėjime: https://blog.openmap.lt/2017/10/30/topologijos-taisykles/
Sandal man (2023-06-04 09:45:20+00:00): Removed fixme.
Change to Animal keeping
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Danimal_keeping
Nic727 (2021-03-27 16:06:43+00:00): Hi, According to https://kort.lmi.is/, it's not all bare_rock and scree. It's mostly natural=tundra (moss and low grass) in that area.

I also have a suggestion of using natural=lava_field and active=yes for the lava around the volcano and natural=lava_field and active=no for the inactive lava field of Iceland. I'm ready to propose that on the wiki if you think it could be a good idea, because geological=lava_field is a bit weird since it's not really a geological site.
Tómas Ingi (2021-03-27 16:15:36+00:00): Hi,

That's true; there is a considerable amount of vegetation both on the mountain and in some of the surrounding lava fields. I've read a bit about how to map this type of land cover (mosses, dwarf shrubs, etc.), and as far as I'm aware the most widely-accepted tag which describes it is natural=fell. It has a long history of being denied rendering by OSM Carto, but it is apparently still relatively widely used and describes this area very well.

As for the lava field tags, that's something I haven't looked into very much – I just noticed that the geological tag was being used for lava fields in Iceland and copied that. Perhaps @Ben97 knows more about this. Otherwise I'm open to using your suggested tags.
Nic727 (2021-03-27 18:59:52+00:00): Alright. I tried to edit that area for fell... There is something weird about the peninsula, because all areas between the lava field are linked together, so if I change this area, it will change a lot more. I would need to unlink them in some way or start from scratch... However, when I will have time in the future, maybe I will ask if we can use data to import from https://en.ni.is/resources/publications/maps/vegetation-maps to have a detailed Iceland map. Currently it's weirdly made. Also, how can I contact Ben97?
Tómas Ingi (2021-03-28 13:12:47+00:00): You can contact Ben at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Ben97
osmviborg (2021-03-22 10:54:58+00:00): Hej igen. Undlad venligst at redigere adresse- punkterne. Opret i stedet dedikerede POI'er.
axelr (2021-03-22 15:55:38+00:00): Besten Dank, aber das war eigentlich unser Musterfehler für https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/8415
ToniE (2021-03-22 16:08:17+00:00): Oops! Sorry. Hoffe die finden den Fehler.
eggie (2021-03-22 11:14:58+00:00): Top!
tiptracks (2021-03-23 09:53:12+00:00): Hoi Martien,

Ik zie dat je de wetland ten westen van het Noordlaarderbos (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12476750) de naam 'Westerd' hebt meegegeven. Deze benaming kwam mij niet bekend voor, waar is deze op gebaseerd? 

Op de naam 'Westert' (dus met een t) vind ik wel een paar referenties op Google, maar gebruikelijker hier is de benaming 'Westerlanden'. Zie topotijdreis.nl en https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Westerlanden_en_Besloten_Venen

Hoe zie jij dit?
martiensch (2021-03-23 12:57:16+00:00): Hoi tiptracks,

Ik had Westerd overgenomen van PDOK. Misschien heeft het kadaster een typefout gemaakt.

Westerlanden is inderdaad beter, net ten zuiden is er een uitkijkpunt dat ook zo heet. Jouw referentie naar het waterschap is ook een goede.
Als ik naar https://waarneming.nl/locations/27948/ kijk, lijkt het westelijk deel van de natte landen daar ook Westerlanden te zijn. Die zal ik ook meenemen.

Groeten,

Martien
martiensch (2021-03-23 12:59:17+00:00): ik zal de grenzen van de polygonen ook nog eens nalopen, ik zie wat overlappend water en moeras...
tiptracks (2021-03-23 13:23:09+00:00): Top!

Overigens zag ik later ook op topotijdreis dat de naam in 2018 ineens verandert van 'Westerlanden' naar 'Westerd of Westerlanden'. Waar dat ineens vandaan komt? Misschien kun je 'Westerd' en/of 'Westert' nog handhaven als alt_name.

Goed bezig, succes verder!
BaboucheVerte (2023-03-22 06:38:46+00:00): Why did you put name=Zone 1 for way 134987851 ? It seems the zone 1 is on the other side of the fort.
ToniE (2021-03-23 09:07:03+00:00): Hallo 915

Oops! der "Wanderweg" (?) ist zu einer Fähre (route=ferry) mutiert.
Sicherlich ein Versehen.

VG
Toni
eggie (2021-03-22 11:47:29+00:00): Top!
blackboxlogic (2021-03-29 02:38:51+00:00): Hi, I see that you removed the boundary tag from Limington... Could you please explain why? Regarding Relation 2021655.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101499035
blackboxlogic (2021-03-30 01:24:37+00:00): I've put it back, presuming you removed it by mistake. If that's not the case, let's chat. Have a nice day.
abg521 (2021-04-07 20:53:31+00:00): Thanks for fixing. I somehow broke it and couldn't figure out what happened. I was adding some trails in the area.
blackboxlogic (2021-04-07 21:06:41+00:00): This might be helpful. A way for you to review what you've done if you're ever not sure:
https://osmcha.org/?filters=%7B%22users%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22abg521%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22abg521%22%7D%5D%2C%22date__gte%22%3A%5B%7B%22label%22%3A%22%22%2C%22value%22%3A%22%22%7D%5D%7D
ameziol (2022-11-11 13:42:33+00:00): hej, jakie masz źródło na nazwę kolonia trzeci szyb? nigdzie w internecie nie mogę tego znaleźć, w prng na geoportalu też nic nie ma o takiej nazwie
StephaneP (2021-05-20 16:07:56+00:00): Bonjour "Ville de Villejuif" !

Vous avez ajouté un contresens cyclable sur la rue condorcet : https://www.osm.org/way/139640960
Les tags actuels font que les cyclistes à contresens doivent rouler du côté gauche de la voie (lorsqu'ils vont du nord vers le sud). Vu ce que je vois sur l'imagerie aérienne, c'est assez surprenant que ça soit du côté où les voitures se garent.

Vous pouvez me confirmer ?
Au passage, est-ce bien une vraie bande cyclable ?
Si vous voulez en savoir plus sur la façon de représenter les différents aménagements cyclables, il y a un résumé ici : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle

Stéphane de Carto'Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
StephaneP (2021-05-20 16:10:21+00:00): J'ai les mêmes questions pour la rue Émile Zola : https://www.osm.org/way/223993377

A très bientôt
highflyer74 (2021-05-09 13:01:59+00:00): Moin!

In diesem Änderungssatz wurden ein paar Unis angepasst. In Bremerhaven kommt es dadurch zu Problemen:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=8.58270&lat=53.53963&zoom=18

Der Grund ist, dass Du die Relation von type=site auf type=multipolygon geändert hast. Gleichzeitig gibt es jetzt ein Tag site=site, was auch keinen Sinn ergibt.

Ich vermute, dass Du Dich schlichtweg vertippt hast. Vielleicht könntest Du Dich einmal kurz hier melden, damit wir gemeinsam das Problem lösen können.

Generell empfiehlt es sich nicht, mit dem Editor iD Relationen zu bearbeiten. Mache dies lieber mit JOSM, denn dieser geht sehr viel besser mit Relationen um und beschädigt sie nicht so leicht.

Viele Grüße!
xkillah (2021-03-28 10:38:27+00:00): То есть все теги, которые вам не нравятся, сразу считаются вандальными?
mueschel (2021-03-27 11:39:36+00:00): Hi, this node got some numbers as tags, are these supposed to be in route_ref? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/502414740
brianboru (2021-03-27 15:39:17+00:00): Thanks  I have no idea what I was doing here - finger trouble I guess. Fixed