piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
salat99 (2020-02-16 15:46:19+00:00): Aha, also MUß ein NORMALER NUTZER mindestens ein anderes Tool/andere URL kennen, um die entsprechende "Packstation" in der Karte zu finden, da über die OSM-Suche diese nicht gefunden wird (wenn der Name-Tag fehlt - einfach mal ausprobieren hilft)!? *kopfschüttel*
Also wenn dem so ist, dann korrigieren Sie bitte auch all die anderen Eintragungen zu Packstationen mit dem Name-Tag "Packstation"||"DHL Packstation", welche seit mehreren JAHREN (!) diesen Tag besitzen...
Sollten Sie dieses nicht machen, dann werde ich mich an eine Usergruppe wenden und mich über Sie beschwerden, da Sie offensichtlich GEGEN den Gedanken der freien Nutzung von OSM (und ich meine OHNE irgendwelche dubiosen Scripte oder Tools nutzen zu müssen) agieren, und Suchergebnisse in OSM einschränken.
user_5359 (2020-02-16 16:15:17+00:00): „Du musst noch sehr viel lernen, mein sehr junger Padawan.“
— Obi-Wan Kenobi zu Anakin Skywalker 
Quelle: Star Wars Saga 

Es steht Dir frei, Dich mit Deinem Anliegen an die zentralen Kommunikationskanäle zu wenden: https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/DE:Contact. Ich persönlich würde das deutsche Forum https://forum.osm.org/viewforum.php?id=14 bevorzugen, da ich dort manchmal mit lese.

Wenn Du der Meinung bist, dass dies Vandalismus (  https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/DE:Vandalismus) ist, dann empfehle ich Dir auch die Seite https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/DE:Data_working_group zu lesen, dort findest Du auch eine Email-Adresse an der Du Dein Protest richten kannst (falls es danach noch nötig sein sollte).
AndersAndersson (2020-02-16 18:29:49+00:00): Hej och välkommen till OSM!
Om skoterlederna inte används som stigar sommartid så ska dom inte vara highway=path.
Jag vet inte hur de skoterleder du lagt till är, men jag ville bara nämna det.
WoodWoseWulf (2020-02-16 22:57:48+00:00): Hi again U2429POP,

This is the second comment I am posting about the footways you are adding. 

Many of the footways you are adding obviously do not exist due to their impossible angles or the fact that they pass through obstacles such as buildings or fences. 

Some of the other footways you are adding are already on the map and don't need to be duplicated.

You are also frequently using footways incorrectly. One such example is that you are using them to show the divisions of parking bays in parking lots, this is not the correct usage for this tag.

Please only add real features to OSM. You are welcome to add real paths and sidewalks, but your pretend ones will be removed.

If you need help, please feel free to reach out. It is easier for the OSM community to help teach you how to map correctly rather than having to follow you around and clean up or revert your edits.
mbethke (2020-02-17 05:11:04+00:00): Hi Emil,
I think you're overdoing it as bit here. Not every area that has a handful of trees growing on it (it's literally five of them in front of the Forestry department - if I can still trust Bing and they haven't cut down any of them yet) is a forest. Same with the gardens. If you have a look there, it doesn't seem much like a garden, does it? Like around That Dam...?
I've turned two of these forests into a bunch of individual trees. If you *really* want to do detail, go ahead ;)

cheers,
Matthias
Emilkhon (2020-02-17 13:28:14+00:00): ok, i understand.
pangoSE (2020-02-16 15:07:10+00:00): Tack för detta! Välkommen till OSM. Vad är källan till vindskyddet här?
Om du bor i närheten får du väldigt gärna ta en bild av det med Mapillary
dvdhoven (2020-02-16 14:50:02+00:00): Knooppunten krijgen nooit een naam. Alleen een rwn_ref met een nummer.
En verder kun je met ID beter geen routes bewerken of maken. Daar is die tool niet geschikt voor. Als je met routes aan de gang wilt, zul je moeten overschakelen naar JOSM,
Ook moeten knooppunten en knooppuntroutes lid worden gemaakt van een netwerk, in dit geval Wandelnetwerk Veluwe, wat geloof ik, nog niet bestaat. Dus dat zal aanmaken en ik zal de routes lid maken en de namen verwijderen

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
archie (2020-02-16 14:10:48+00:00): You changed the mp #5179991 for Liseberg (with name=Liseberg). You allso changed  the mp #1639988, pedestrian. The last mentioned mp allso has the name=Liseberg. Now, wouldn't it be sensible, when you are at it, to delete the name-tag from mp #1639988. There might be an inflation of name=Liseberg otherwise.
rskedgell (2020-02-16 13:48:51+00:00): Please could you explain why you believe that the natural=wood tag no longer applies to the Parkland Walk LNR? That area has been predominantly woodland every time I have walked, run, or cycled through it.

Also your change of highway=cycleway to highway=path seems rather arbitrary and at odds with how cycle routes in London are generally tagged. It coud arguably benefit from the addition of a smoothness=* tag, which I may add next time I go there.
vogelfreier (2020-02-17 17:31:31+00:00): Hello, even in the term as a park landscape, trees are part of it. Because if the area is considered natural=wood, this means that no intervention would have been made there. Since when has the railway line been shut down? It was recorded about 11 years ago, was it 1 or 2 tracks, so there must have been hardly any trees along the track at that time, which will have grown only in the last few years. Especially since the very close residential area still takes up space.
What bothers me is, if this is really a boundry=protected_area.

Why should you in London have different rules for creating cycle paths? Because as soon as it was created, it was created as a pure bicycle path, despite the common use for cyclists and pedestrians -> because this term highway=cycelway means for me: oops, here comes the cyclist and you pedestrians jump to the side. Whereby the change in highway=path sounds more harmonic to me and I have used this value so far as it is output via JOSM.
Good evening from Germany, Rüdiger

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
rskedgell (2020-02-17 19:49:12+00:00): While a leisure=park may indeed contain trees, it does not imply that it is actually woodland, which this is. I might choose to run through an urban park (typically more grass than trees) in poor light conditions, but not through woodland.

This objject would probably be better tagged as leisure=nature_reserve (describing its status), together with natural=wood (describing its physical characteristics). It may also be better as a 3 part multipolygon relationship, since Northwood Road is not part of the nature reserve.

Your assumption about tree growth is based on flawed assumptions. The trees are mostly to the sides of the former track bed, but as the track was actually lifted in 1972, quite a lot of growth has taken place since then, as Mapillary imagery quite clearly shows.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkland_Walk
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.5754411&lng=-0.1403424&z=17&pKey=lDWUQpKtDz-35D7UyMtwZA&focus=photo

You say that are bothered about whether it is really a boundary=protected_area. The fact that the name contains the legal designation "Local Nature Reserve" perhaps provides a hint. These were established by Part III of the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. There are also signs and information boards which would have clearly visible to the mapper who tagged it as such.

While a route for cycles and pedestrians obviously can be tagged as highway=path with access tags, "duck tagging" is the prevalent style. In GB, a pure cycleway would be highway=cycleway + foot=no, or part of a highway=cycleway + segregated=yes. A highway=cycleway + segregated=no is always a shared space in which the meaning " oops, here comes the cyclist and you pedestrians jump to the side" is quite incorrect: pedestrians have priority.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Classic_vs_Alternative_tagging_schemes_in_use_in_the_United_Kingdom
rskedgell (2020-02-17 20:21:20+00:00): I have aggregated the disjoint parts of the Parkland Walk Local Nature Reserve into a boundary relation. The members tagged as natural=wood can be verified as such with reference to available imagery.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81135073
Saeed SJ (2020-02-23 08:11:40+00:00): دوست عزیز میشه لطف کنید توضیح بدید دلیل ریورت کردن ادیت های من و همکارانم چیست؟؟
SomeoneElse (2020-02-27 23:55:44+00:00): Hello pilsa,
Please answer the questions that other mappers have asked, including "why have you reverted this" above.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
SomeoneElse (2020-02-27 23:55:51+00:00): سلام پلاسا
لطفاً به سؤالاتی که سایر نقشه نویسان پرسیده اند ، از جمله "چرا این کار را برگردانده اید" در بالا پاسخ دهید.
با احترام،
اندی تاونزند ، به نمایندگی از گروه کاری داده OSM.
user_5359 (2020-02-16 14:56:07+00:00): Hello! Short hint: Don't use highway=driveway (it isn't visible on the map). Use highway=service and service=driveway instead.
MaestroGlanz (2020-02-20 13:19:10+00:00): Please undo the changes of the self intersecting polygons. Do not just blindly "correct issues". The "self intersecting" polygon was almost rendered correctly (the reason for the error is another one). You can change it, but then change it to a multipolygon.
MaestroGlanz (2020-02-20 13:19:43+00:00): This refers to all the self intersections you "fixed" lately.
OttawaHiking (2020-02-20 22:49:47+00:00): First of all, thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap, a joint-effort project. Second, please don’t assume that someone was correcting the errors pointed out by an OSM quality assurance tool (in this case, OSM Inspector) ”blindly”. I was not. Third, the closed ways that I corrected had repeated segments. I did notice that on the OSM map they were rendered as desired, but it does not mean that all other applications that use OSM data would be able to process them. OSM Inspector did not validate them as proper. Therefore, I chose to improve them by removing the repeated segments and adding inner rings. Fourth, I did create multipolygons (in this changeset, relation 10717394 that consists of one outer and three inner rings) fully in line with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon I’m not sure I understand the specific issues you are facing with them.
MaestroGlanz (2020-02-21 15:47:01+00:00): It indeed was not your fault. If I access this polygon via the link from OSMose (ID edit), it appears as a line without tags and being not a member of any relation. Therefore I assumed, that you created a problem here. If I load it via URL and the edit button, it is correct. 
I disagree about the validity of the original polygons and opened an issue on the OSMose backend github. It should be discussed there
eggie (2020-02-16 16:01:46+00:00): PB bericht gestuurd
gscscnd (2020-02-16 16:04:00+00:00): Czy słup <https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3495398509> przechodzi w rzeczywistości przez środek ulicy <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/105472199>, czy trafił na nią przypadkowo? Czy narysowane budynki są w rzeczywistości takie „krzywe”?
ianlopez1115 (2020-02-16 13:57:54+00:00): [Victorias] add cellsite, footways, convenience store and barangay halls, modify access restrictions
user_5359 (2020-02-16 15:09:23+00:00): Hallo! Ich habe über das ESRI-Luftbild noch zwei Straßen eingezeichnet: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/81073444. Hoffentlich hilft das.
gscholz (2020-03-01 18:33:14+00:00): Hi Laverock,
your recent changesets have destroyed several boundary relations:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-39.38462&lat=-13.31877&zoom=10

Can you please fix this?

I found your changlog comments do not rely explain what you are doing. Those comments are meant to explain for other OSM contributors what is going on in this changeset so they can easily understand why this change happened.

As you are using Potlatch as your OSM editor you have a high risk of destroying relations. Please do not work on relations using Potlatch, use JOSM instead as you will get warning messages if to are going to destroy items in the OSM database.
Guido
FvGordon (2020-03-01 20:47:31+00:00):  I have removed the duplicate boundary on a duplicate river, which had less nodes than the new river drawn by you and corrected the boundaries (segments were not connected, missing outer role identifiers in relations).
gscholz (2020-03-03 07:37:12+00:00): Hi FvGordon,
sorry for bothering you, but why did you answer a changelog comment directed to user Laverock?
Guido
FvGordon (2020-03-03 17:59:57+00:00): I wanted to tell Laverock, that I have repaired the boundary relations.
MKnight (2020-02-16 16:55:39+00:00): Moin, bei n6844023119 hast Du ein falsch gesetztes Semikolon übersehen, ich habe es korrigiert.
thetornado76 (2020-02-16 18:51:19+00:00): Vielen Dank für die Korrektur!
MKnight (2020-02-16 20:06:37+00:00): Moin,
ich sehe gerade, dass Du die Änderungen deutschlandweit machst. 
Ich habe noch 2 Stichproben gemacht, und gesehen, dass der selbe Fehler auch noch weitere Male auftaucht.
Ein willkürliches Beispiel:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/177512278

Kümmerst Du Dich darum?
Ansonsten würde ich morgen nochmal schauen. Mir fällt leider keine automatisierte Abfrage auf solche Fehler ein.
thetornado76 (2020-02-16 20:24:38+00:00): Ich hatte mich hauptsächlich auf die deutsche Schreibweise bei den Wochentagen konzentriert und diese korrigiert. Auf , und ; werde ich aber jetzt auch nochmal ein Auge extra haben.
Danke für den Hinweis

Oben genanntes Beispiel habe ich korrigiert.
stefanct (2022-09-05 17:31:26+00:00): Don't add names to things that don't have a name - like this chapel.
Britzz (2020-04-12 20:59:40+00:00): Bienvenue dans OpenStreetMap.
Pour bien démarrer : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:WikiProject_France/bienvenue
N'hésitez pas à répondre, poser des questions, ... via ces commentaires ou les autres canaux de discussion (cf. lien supra
Par ailleurs, vous aviez "souhaité que quelqu'un vérifie vos modifications" : c'est fait, c'est OK
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/81072002
Nakaner (2020-02-16 19:39:06+00:00): Hallo wsoroe,

warum hast du in diesem Änderungssatz an mehreren Bahnsteigen in und um Hamburg die operator=*-Tags gelöscht? Du begründest deine Löschung nämlich mit der Abwesenheit von name=*, welches du selbst erst vor fünf Tagen gelöscht hast. Ist diese Begründung nicht ein wenig hanebüchen?

Viele Grüße

Michael
user_5359 (2020-02-16 14:59:53+00:00): Hello! Bitte lies mal https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:psv, der Wert psv entfällt auch das Taxi an sich. Auch die Nutzung von conditional ist nicht ganz korrekt, da die Bedingung fehlt.
frosm (2020-04-07 22:13:11+00:00): Bonjour,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7216543363
le nom n'est pas le même que celui du siteweb
Pikse (2020-12-14 15:19:08+00:00): Siin on millegipärast Tarna tänavast alles jäänud vaid Nurkliku tänavaga ristuv sirge. Tegelikult ulatub see teises otsas Kõrgepinge tänavani[1].

[1] https://xgis.maaamet.ee/xgis2/page/app/adsavalik
scratera (2020-02-16 15:58:15+00:00): ...ciao ritengo inutile il tag start_date che si mete per indicare la data ti costruzione e non di inserimento in osm
ciao paolo
user_5359 (2020-02-17 18:02:32+00:00): Hello! You add two relation. One of them (...51) hasn't any keys and seems to be a duplicate of the first relation (...50). Please checks this: If you need help: you are welcome!
eggie (2020-02-16 16:43:00+00:00): Beste Herman Reymers... 
De toegangsweg die je hebt verwijderd was gewoon correct getagd met access=private... waarom dan weghalen?
De lijn die ik eerder heb verwijderd was alleen een lijn zonder highwaytags. 
Die is nu wel correct getagd. 
MVG,
Eggie.
Mateusz Konieczny (2020-02-29 13:47:24+00:00): Note that we tag adresses in OSM not using name tag.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Addresses
iWowik (2020-03-02 06:34:12+00:00): kurkliLak!
Приветствую вас в проекте, я тоже заметил, что вы рисуете домики и к тому же вносите их номера в название. Причем номера эти очень странного вида (1п, 3ц) явно содержащие не только номер дома, а еще какой-то его признак.

Скажите пожалуйста, где вы берете адреса для домиков?
Обычно их сложно найти, чтобы понять где на карте какой адрес, нужна карта.
К тому же у различных карт и планов есть правообладатели и без их явного разрешения данные в OSM вносить нельзя.
Целью проекта является сбор данных, свободных от претензий других лиц, поэтому данные, вносимые без разрешения их владельца могут в какой-то момент быть удалены из проекта.
Даже "официальные" данные должны иметь разрешение на внесение в OSM. Так например, Публичная Кадастровая Карта до сих пор такого разрешения не давала.
Leo Slager (2020-02-17 23:37:28+00:00): Dag GreatPier,
Je vraagt om een review:
In NL worden adressen niet op het gebouw getagd.
gebouwen en de adressen worden rechtstreeks geïmporteerd vanuit het Kadaster. De adressen staan dan op een losse adres-node. Bedrijfsgegevens kunnen dan op de adres-node worden bijgevoegd.
je verandert de website in india-way. Maar alle foutieve indiaway aanduidingen laat je staan.
ik verander wat dingen.
OpenStreetMap-KR (2020-02-16 22:28:02+00:00): good
viloan (2020-02-16 15:10:45+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 você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

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!
user_3022894 (2020-04-01 10:26:16+00:00): Hi schmoxxi,
darf ich fragen, welche Luftbilder du verwendest? Mir ist in letzter Zeit aufgefallen, dass viele von dir bearbeitete Objekte eine wahrscheinlich ungenaue Position haben, eventuell wurde dort nicht auf den sog. Versatz geachtet. Am genauesten von der Lage her sind in dieser Region die Esri-Bilder. Doch viele Positionen von Sachen passen da aktuell nicht zu. Viele Grüße, Lukas
viloan (2020-02-16 15:14:04+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 você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

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!
Pawcio (2020-07-27 10:41:11+00:00): Hello. Setting bicycle=no on a crossing=traffic_signals within
highway blocks the highway for bicycles, so I delete bicycle=no
jambamkin (2020-09-11 11:43:08+00:00): Thanks Pawcio, does this crossing specify that bicycles are are allowed to cross here? If it does the tag should be bicycle=yes. If it does not have separate lights for bicycles then the bicycle=no tag is correct
Pawcio (2020-09-11 17:24:01+00:00): I've just checked it wasn't you who set bicycle=no. If crossing sidewalks are not for bicycles then setting bicycle=no is as needed as setting motor_vehicle=no, but making more problems for some routers like Brouter
eggie (2020-02-16 17:02:28+00:00): Review... 
Dag Paul..

Nieuwe winkels kun je het beste op de bestaande adresnodes bijtaggen. 
Wanneer winkels van pand zij gewisseld zal het oude adres achterblijven op de oorspronkelijke plaats en zul je de verplaatste winkel moeten koppelen aan het nieuw BAG adres.. Nu ligt alles een beetje door elkaar.
Kijk je nog even?

MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-02-16 17:02:49+00:00): Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=81074267
even als geheugensteun..
gscholz (2020-02-27 05:36:45+00:00): Hi qualhano,
your recent changeset have added a big amount of errors to the OSM database regarding not connected ways:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-41.62944&lat=-20.80304&zoom=11&overlays=duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges,duplicated_edges_areas,snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_2,unconnected_open_ends_3,unconnected_open_ends_4,unconnected_open_ends_5,unconnected_open_ends_6

Can you please fix tihs?

Kind Regards
Guido
MacLondon (2020-03-10 03:02:53+00:00): Hi, Just to let you know, I've corrected a number of "surface=grassq" that you have tagged. These should be "surface=grass".
NKA (2020-02-28 09:34:25+00:00): The signs on the ground says "E 6", both in Norway in Sweden.

Could you tag int_ref="E 6" please (also on the relation). Using int_ref="E 06" leads to confusing rendering in navigation apps, which displays both "E 6" and "E 06".

I know that the official international name is "E 06", however that name would not follow the OSM principle of "mapping what's on the ground".
Bentogen (2020-02-20 11:44:57+00:00): Moin kjon,
ein kleineres Changesetgebiet wäre doch besser.
kjon (2020-02-22 15:21:03+00:00): da hast du recht...nächstes mal denk ich dran ;)
abakus_uploader (2020-02-16 23:30:42+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!