piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aweech (2022-09-29 23:17:39+00:00): Hi,
I'm confused as to why you added no left turns from 36th Street to Harrison. Is this a new traffic pattern that you surveyed? Your changeset description doesn't provide much information.
kevinp2 (2022-09-29 23:23:41+00:00): Harrison has been under construction and No Left Turn has been posted for the last two months.  I go there weekly, so will remove the restriction once the signs come down.
aweech (2022-09-29 23:44:30+00:00): Thanks for the information!
mavl (2022-09-24 04:59:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 126568781 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [Reason: wrong statuses of the roads - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6393].
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:49:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:49:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:51:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
surveyor54 (2023-05-10 15:41:04+00:00): Hallo greecemapper,

warum hast du hier administative Grenzen die nach einem Shapefile der Hessische Verwaltung für Bodenmanagement und Geoinformation eingepflegt wurden verschoben und tlw. Grenzpunkte gelöscht?

Gruß
surveyor54
greecemapper (2023-05-10 21:11:40+00:00): Um welchen way geht es dir konkret?
surveyor54 (2023-05-11 06:07:34+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424241382 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9708924409

Im Bereich dieses Punktes wurde die Grenze verschoben. 

http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=126276278&zoom=13&lat=49.93736&lon=8.56956&layers=B000000TTTFT



Hier ein anderer Bereich, hier wurde einiges durcheinander gebracht. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1113442672#map=16/49.8057/8.5596

Grenz- und Wegtagging auf einer Linie, das sollte nicht sein. Administrative Grenzlinien und Wegelinien sollten separat sein.

http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=128958501&zoom=14&lat=49.80189&lon=8.54358&layers=B000000TTTFT

Gruß
surveyor54
greecemapper (2023-05-11 09:08:20+00:00): Ist leider schon zu lange her, ich kann die edits nicht mehr nachvollziehen. Aber es sieht so aus, als ob ich die Grenzen und Wege verbunden hatte. Was ist daran falsch?
surveyor54 (2023-05-12 15:27:35+00:00): Es ist allgemeiner Konsens, dass administrative Grenzen als separates Objekt eingetragen 
und mit keinen anderen Objekten verbunden wird, außer vielleicht anderen Grenzen, die sich
den gleichen Abschnitt teilen.

Taggt man Wege u. Grenzen auf einem Objekt, kommt es zu Schwierigkeiten wenn man den Weg aufgrund
genauerer Luftbilder verschiebt, denn die Grenzen sind fest.

Ich werde mal versuchen das auseinanderzuklabüstern.

Gruß
surveyor54
greecemapper (2023-05-12 22:00:27+00:00): Danke, ich beteilige mich gerne, wenn du mir sagst wie ich helfen kann.

Vielleicht sollten wir an die Knoten administrativen ways einen Vermerk hängen, á la ref:position=HLBG o.ä. damit man die knoten nicht als noch verschiebbar ansieht.
surveyor54 (2023-05-13 07:51:47+00:00): Danke für dein Angebot, ich habe den einen Bereich schon bearbeitet, ich habe noch die Shapefiles auf dem Rechner. Kannst du es bitte einmal kontrollieren?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136031097

Die Kollegen meinten, dass eine Vermerk am CS reichen würde, ich habe extra noch einen an den way geklebt.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/open-data-geodata-hessen-ab-01-02-2022/94571/36

Den anderen Bereich bekomme ich auch noch hin.

Gruß
surveyor54
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:49:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:51:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:49:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:50:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:51:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:50:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:51:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:50:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
b-jazz (2022-09-18 02:17:48+00:00): Why are you doing this? Please stop. There is nothing wrong with my edit. If you feel there is, please discuss it instead of reverting my work.
pitfire (2022-09-17 10:50:42+00:00): Hallo Joe_West,
TEL. Säulen bekommen keinen Namen,
hier die Regeln für Telefon Säulen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dtelephone
Joe_West (2022-09-17 12:26:35+00:00): Danke geändert :)
Benoît C MdP (2022-09-20 07:50:49+00:00): Bonjour yxoc,

Pour information, la piste cyclable était déjà présente sur le way principal qui lui est parallèle : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095248707
Il y a donc un doublon.
Est ce que par ailleurs cette piste cyclable a bien été pérennisée ?

Bonne continuation

Benoît
yxoc (2022-09-21 06:53:43+00:00): Bonjour Benoit,

merci pour le message, je n'ai effectivement pas fait attention a ca. Oui le couloir velo est bien pérenissé. Est-ce que les outils vont le comprendre quand je met cycleway:right=separate, ou faut-il supprimer le tag ?

Meci pour ta perspicacité -yxoc
Benoît C MdP (2022-09-21 14:09:52+00:00): De mon point de vue, les outils ne sont pas adaptés puisqu'ils ne permettent pas de détecter les doublons.
En l'occurrence, tu peux mettre cycleway:right=separate, ce sera très bien car cela palie cette déficience des outils. Il faut aussi supprimer les tags concernant la coronapiste.

Bonne continuation

Benoît
mcliquid (2022-09-18 16:08:08+00:00): Hi, you should add oneway=yes to the roundabout junctions, add the relevant turn restrictions and fix the bus route relations.

Could you have another look here?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095249255
KosutM (2022-09-18 17:21:42+00:00): Now hopefully fixed:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126339530
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126338848
mcliquid (2022-09-18 17:22:59+00:00): Looks fine. Thank you!
un1matr1x (2023-02-08 06:46:05+00:00): Moin,

Bilder von StreetComplete werden kurz nach dem Schließen des Hinweises gelöscht, daher bitte nicht als "image" hinzufügen, da sehr zügig nur noch eine 404-Fehlerseite erreichbar ist.

MfG
Mapperschwob (2023-02-08 07:52:24+00:00): Hallo un1matr1x,

danke für Deinen Hinweis.

MfG
bigopenmac (2023-07-05 10:58:39+00:00): Какие есть примеры использования имени Африка для данной местности за последние, например, 20 лет, когда интернет пришел в Беларусь?
Предлагаю откатить данную правку.
Для исторических названий можно использовать http://openhistoricalmap.org/
literan (2023-07-05 11:12:56+00:00): согласен
artagonist (2023-07-15 13:36:04+00:00): не згодны. 20 гадоў таму і такія тапонімы як "ляхаўка", "траецкая гара" і іншыя не ўжываліся ў гарадской тапаніміцы шэраговымі грамадзянамі. пры гэтым выкарыстоўваліся ў прафесійнай супольнасці і старажыламі. 
з дадзеным тапонімам аналагічная справа. яшчэ ў 90-х сустракаў яго ў размовах людзй, якія тут жылі. краязнаўцам гэты тапонім вядомы добра і ўжываецца дагэтуль. таму лічу неабходным вяртаць ягонае ўжыванне, як некалі было з той самай ляхаўкай і траецкай гарой
artagonist (2023-07-15 13:42:21+00:00): https://minsknews.by/mirnyj-1941-j-kak-zhilos-minchanam-v-chastnom-sektore-v-predvoennye-gody/

https://www.kp.ru/daily/26496.7/3365186/

https://blog.t-s.by/minskie-istorijki/2013/04/kriminalnyj-kvartal-ili-medicinskaya-istorijka/

http://www.poznaibelarus.by/minskie-progulki-cheburashki-i-barmaleya-part2/
bigopenmac (2023-07-15 14:19:45+00:00): Цитата из Вашего источника: "В Минске тех времен была даже своя «Африка»!"
Т.е. в те времена была, но сейчас нет. Я не против хранить память об истории, но использовать карту как способ возвращать старые названия, это разве правильно? Карта же для фактических данных.
literan (2023-07-15 15:07:54+00:00): оставлю это здесь:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_historic_events_and_historic_features
artagonist (2023-07-16 10:01:18+00:00): Я зыходжу з таго, што гэты тапонім не з'яўляецца архаізмам, а яшчэ выкарыстоўваецца ў пэўных колах. Так, не шырокіх. 
Але цалкам аналагічная сітуацыя з тымі ж раёнамі "Ляхаўка", "Кашары" і гд, якія пакуль што не ўвасобленыя ў афіцыйнай тапаніміцы, але на мапу нанесеныя. 
Таму не бачу тут супярэчнасці
Samuel Chávez (2022-12-26 20:22:24+00:00): Por favor debes de revisar que editas porque borrastes vías y editaste una ruta de transporte público que acabo de reparar.
Strubbl (2022-09-17 18:34:32+00:00): Hi Bratzke, wo hast du die Hydranten denn her? Hast du bereits geprüft, ob vor Ort schon welche gemappt waren?
Strubbl (2022-09-23 10:19:30+00:00): Hallo Bratzke, wie per PN besprochen habe ich das Hinzufügen der Hydranten rückgängig gemacht mit CS https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126539518

Wenn die Situation mit der Lizenz der Daten geklärt ist, befolgt bitte unbedingt den Importprozess, der unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Import/Guidelines beschrieben ist bevor Daten zu OSM hinzugefügt werden. Ansonsten gilt der Massenimport der Hydranten als unabgesprochene Massenbearbeitung und wird rückgängig gemacht werden.

Du kannst mich auch gerne bei Fragen kontaktieren. Dann versuche ich weiterzuhelfen.

Viele Grüße
Glassman (2022-09-17 23:53:29+00:00): We need a tag to describe the node/point. I'm not sure what exactly to suggest. I looks like a place that the group might meetup for which OSM doesn't really have a tag for. Do you have an office for the club? I'm happy to help but need more information.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126278339
Glassman (2022-09-17 23:53:37+00:00): We need a tag to describe the node/point. I'm not sure what exactly to suggest. I looks like a place that the group might meetup for which OSM doesn't really have a tag for. Do you have an office for the club? I'm happy to help but need more information.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126278339
maraf24 (2022-09-16 21:06:57+00:00): ...oraz dwa place zabaw w miejsce starego jednego
archpdx (2022-09-17 15:10:42+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for updating this area and adding street names. Please note however that we don't abbreviate street names in OSM (see https://wiki.osm.org/abbreviation). For example, 'E Willakenzie St' should be unabbreviated to 'East Willakenzie Street'
jmsbert (2022-10-02 13:19:03+00:00): correction: edits were related to "Neerstedt" not "Wildeshausen"; other changeset description is correct
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126279343
DiogoBaptista98 (2022-09-26 04:23:35+00:00): Hello, for parking spaces you should use the tag amenity=parking_space ,  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space please correct all the wrong parking spaces youve made. Thank you
skkeeper (2022-09-26 17:29:23+00:00): Hi,
Thanks for the feedback, I've made a new changeset with the fix: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126665650
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
ssundell (2022-09-22 20:26:28+00:00): En ole itse vielä Korkinmäenkatua ajanut, mutta katusuunnitelman perusteella se on kyllä aika jännä rakennelma. Tuo "designated" on ehkä hiukan väärä merkintä kadulle laitettavaksi, kun kyse ei kuitenkaan ole esim. pyöräkatu.

Pyöräkaistat siellä kuitenkin käsittääkseni on, joten tuohon voisi laittaa cycleway=lane ja ehkäpä tuo cycleway:lane=mandatory, kuten Wikin Alankomaa-esimerkkikuvassa neuvotaan: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway

Jos tuo on tehty katusuunnitelman mukaisesti, tuolla aivan päässä Härkälänmäenkadusta itään kaista on vain Hervannan suuntaan, eli cycleway:right=lane. Samalla pätkällä länteenpäin en oikein tiedä, mikä olisi järkevin tapa merkitä tuo viritys... Katusuunnitelma kuvaa sitä vain pientareeksi, joten olisiko jotenkin seuraavasti:

cycleway:left=shoulder
shoulder=left
shoulder:width=1.25
shoulder:left:bicycle=designated
shoulder:left:foot=designated

Vähän ehkä omituinen merkintä, mutta omituinen on tiekin.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/126280480
marczoutendijk (2022-09-17 08:33:35+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6370
seattlefyi (2022-09-16 23:14:49+00:00): Updated building location from imagery and note.
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:57:36+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 12:00:31+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 12:00:13+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:59:55+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:59:22+00:00): 群主的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:59:10+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
nevw (2025-11-30 22:09:27+00:00): Hi, this is mapped as a relation and the name is only added to the relation...not the outer ways.
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:56:48+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
b-jazz (2022-10-11 17:11:53+00:00): FYI, I reverted this changeset as the changes made introduced dozens of consistency errors when you moved parts of objects but left behind many nodes that were shared with other objects, creating ways that zigzagged and created invalid areas. If objects don't align with the imagery you are using, it doesn't been they are wrong. Your changeset comments gave no information about why you thought your imagery was more up to date.
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:56:32+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:56:19+00:00): 潜在的破坏，已回退
mariotomo (2022-09-18 00:02:50+00:00): hola. mi experiencia en Latinoamérica es que las "living street" simplemente no existen. Quizás en Taboga sea diferente, pero el concepto de "living street" (y pues la expectativa que despiertas en el visitante extranjero) es que ahí el peatón tiene prioridad sobre cualquier medio de locomoción a motor. En un Living Street puedes caminar en el medio de la calle, cruzar sin mirar, y nadie te atropellará ni pitará ni cortará camino con determinación. … determinación hasta asesina! :-).
Si eso existe en Taboga, me confirmas? tendré que visitar algún día.
mariotomo (2022-09-18 00:08:53+00:00): (la línea costa, si tienes manera de documentar con trazas GPS, sería genial! por ejemplo aprovechando del mediodía tres días después de luna nueva o luna llena, para caminar al borde del mar, y documentar la baja marea? y al revés el mismo día al amanecer y a la puesta del sol, para documentar la marea máxima? la costa así como está es trabajo que no sabría como juzgar, en máxima parte por maperos remotos, sin mucho conocimiento del área. — p.ej.: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94409482)
Carlos Peterson (2022-09-18 06:01:46+00:00): Holaa. En lo de los "living streets" me parece que es mas como una cosa de facto. Hay muy pocos vehiculos motorizados andantes, de los que vi solo habian motos, carritos de golf, pickups y esos todos terrenos que ves en playas (creo que el termino es UTV). Ellos van a velocidades muy bajas no por ni una restricion o ley por lo que veo, pero simplemente que las calles no son muy anchas y hay gente caminando por todas partes. Ahora cuando un vehiculo si pasa, personas se apartan entonces no se si llamar eso prioridad al peaton, pero si es un espacio compartido, que no se ve igual en partes de la ciudad exepto por casco antiguo y esos alrededores.
Carlos Peterson (2022-09-18 06:15:32+00:00): En lo de las costas, la playa que conecta El Morro con el resto de la isla esta expuesto y puedes caminar en la arena hasta el islote. De si esto se sumerge cuando el mar esta a su punto mas alto posible no estoy claro, pero cuando yo fui el viernes (16/9/22) donde estaba en la isla desde 9:00am-4:00pm la marea estaba bien lejos de cubrir toda la playa.
Carlos Peterson (2022-09-18 06:24:17+00:00): Si tengo una de esas applicaciones que te puedes rastrear, pero no consegui hacerlo funcionar sin mi celular mantenerse prendido. Hay un mapa del municipio que encuentras en la isla que te enseña todas las calles del pueblo. Aqui mando un link con la imagen.
https://we.tl/t-cfmzuAijsf
one_half_3544 (2024-05-20 10:52:08+00:00): Let's not add paths/roads that do not exist in reality - this violates the rules and might confuse the users of the map.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095295122#map=15/38.6995/72.5854&layers=D
BG2ETV (2022-09-17 11:52:18+00:00): 潜在的破坏行为，已回退
stevea (2022-09-18 01:02:59+00:00): While neither choosing one in particular nor commenting on the specifics of tagging or style, what I DO like is the level of detail here.  "A good sketch of more."

Tree cover in residential areas can, does and doesn't change a bunch, that's highly local, but change in trees in "suburbia" is inevitable.  Pools, yes, once in, those don't change, and helicopters can use them with buckets for fires; I've added lots of pools.

With another volunteer, I'm discussing decks and patios and those are difficult (presently) to achieve consensus...I think it's happening but it's a longer, chewier convergence of agreement that hasn't happened yet.

Fences, too:  yeah, good, especially when gates are present and added to OSM.  Benches, picnic_tables, yeah, I'll do those in parks, but backyards, not so much, unless it is say a playground for children at a school, like near me is a daycare with some swings and stuff, not public, but there, benches and a drinking_fountain and kids behind a fence.  Where something is included or not is wobbly, but swimming pools (even when fenced and private), fences, obvious or even "landmark" trees, sure, plenty of those.  Driveways are well done here, too, yay.

Depending on how everything is surrounded by a landuse=residential (and this one is) and how there might be a boundary=administrative polygon or place=* node, ideas of private property are asserted.  But as they are "big and glommy," these are crude.  (My city has a small example of where a residential landuse is being turned into smaller one at a block-in-neighborhood level; see Prospect Heights in Santa Cruz, California or read about how that's happening in our wiki).  So, yeah, the area of street and sidewalk might be "in" the neighborhood, but they are public, not private, and getting access=* tags on everything can get pedantic, but it helps when things are accurate and detailed rather than vague.  A balance is getting struck, but it's not done yet.  I mean, a fence is a fence, but you might already be on private property as soon as you depart the sidewalk (and sidewalks are "not even" in yet, here).

Pretty "conversation," you've "drawn" here so far, though.
highflyer74 (2022-09-17 06:47:56+00:00): Moin! Da der Edit über eine MapRoulette Aufgabe durchgeführt wurde, wäre es vielleicht sinnvoll, wenn du den Ersteller der Aufgabe (Expedia Group OSM Contributions) kontaktierst, da diese Aufgabe sonst weiterhin besteht und auch andere Mapper an ihr teilnehmen können.

Ich kenne mich mit dem Thema historic=* nicht so gut aus, aber wenn du Recht hast, sollte die Challenge rausgenommen werden.

Ich habe mal im Forum nachgefragt: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/how-to-contact-the-person-group-running-a-maproulette-challenge/2705. Vielleicht kannst du dort weitermachen.

Schönen Tag!
lutz (2022-09-17 07:30:08+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, habe in der Challenge einen Kommentar hinterlassen.
highflyer74 (2022-09-17 08:20:50+00:00): Aus dem Forum-Thread:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/Expedia
SekeRob (2022-09-17 12:30:22+00:00): Bitte auf English... 5 continents from Scotland to Tasmania spanning edit set.
lutz (2022-09-17 12:38:22+00:00): Vandalism reset, historic=exhibit is evaluated in a map, and there has been a Josm template to map this for over 6 years. The biggest plague of OSM is people just destroying other people's work!
ManuelB701 (2022-09-17 20:22:43+00:00): I don't really understand your message. Apparently, you restored historic=exhibit in many elements, though according to the Wiki, that tagging is actually discouraged: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:historic#Possible_tagging_mistakes

By the way, Achse Kleinspurbahn has both, historic=exhibit and exhibit=historic. Make that what you want.
SomeoneElse (2022-09-18 16:03:31+00:00): Hello,
Andy from the Data Working Group here.  I've commented at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/how-to-contact-the-person-group-running-a-maproulette-challenge/2705/8 and also tried to get the attention of the person who created the MapRoulette task https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 .
Best Regards,
Andy
emvee (2022-09-27 18:15:56+00:00): I do not have a opinion about historic=exhibit versus exhibit=historic and that discussion should not take place here but on the Wiki Talk pages, on the forum or on the tagging list.

As long as the Wiki is not updated and indicates to "historic=exhibit ‒ Use exhibit=history instead." these kind of changes will keep on happening, so please get the Wiki updated.

I find it strange to revert changes without contacting the "owner" first. On https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Reverter you can find:

Do not revert changes by other users without contacting them first in a polite way and giving them enough time to reply (one week minimum). Broken data can be fixed easily, but a broken community is not so easy to restore. :)