piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2016-04-30 07:55:04+00:00): Are https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402995159 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402995178 really spelt with a double S?  The village, and other amenities, aren't.  Also, you didn't happen to notice what the access to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/402995582/history from the west is?  It seems to be a closed gate at the east.
Yorvik Prestigitator (2016-05-03 00:37:20+00:00): oops, you are right, my heavy fingered typing is to blame. Thanks for spotting that.
Can't really definitively help you with whether the other pathway is gated, sorry.
HubMiner (2017-07-25 03:19:29+00:00): Greetings, based on personal observations, I want to reduce sac_scale from T6 (set by you) to T2, for http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/242778134/#map=16/43.7575/-110.7443 and adjacent trails (I am familiar with). Please let me know if you have any objections.  

Reference: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale#Values
Carnildo (2018-08-17 06:45:01+00:00): I've reduced many of the trails to T1 or T2 based on my (sometimes rather hazy) memory.  I've left Paintbrush Canyon at T3 because I've never hiked it, and in the aerial imagery, parts of the upper reaches look like they might be a bit tricky.
mueschel (2016-03-12 13:10:34+00:00): Hi matildap,
welcome to OSM. You took quite some effort to map buildings, but the tagging needs to be revised. E.g. you put these tags on one of the buildings:
    building=subdivided house
    carparks=0
    dwellings=10
    period=2000
The building-Key only uses well defined values, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
building = apartments might be appropriate here. The other three keys do not exist as keys in the OSM-world yet. As long as they are not documented in the OSM wiki, they are rather useless as no software and no user is able to interpret them as intended.
Also, name = Garage is not correct - to mark a building as a garage, just use building = garage.

In case you have some questions, don't hesitate to ask either here, via PM or in the forums!
Enjoy OSM,
Jan
manings (2016-03-14 12:43:23+00:00): Duplicated ways exist:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403007095/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403007099/history
grin (2016-03-11 13:47:00+00:00): Picit még javítgattam rajta, benne maradt egy gazdátlan vonal meg a benzinkút, viszont kimaradt egy szántó. Gondolom potlatch-ben nehezebb látni, mint nekem JOSM-ban. De jó lett, köszönjük!
SomeoneElse (2016-03-12 23:14:02+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Edits that you make update the one shared map that everyone sees. That's why it's important that only valid edits are made to the map. If you want to experiment with the editors, you can do so over at http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org (an exact copy of the main site apart from the map display).
Best Regards,
Andy
mueschel (2016-03-16 09:20:11+00:00): Hi dina_ein,
there are a lot of misspelled new keys popping up in Melbourne recently. E.g. I found 
dwelings, dwelligns, dwellinds, Dwellings, Dwelling as well as 
caparks, car park, car_park, carparking, carparks

Some of them are added by you, some by others. Is this some kind of common mapping effort going on there? If so, could you write a note to the others that spelling of keys is very important as is documentation in the Wiki which seems missing.

Cheers and enjoy OSM,
Jan
EneaSuper (2016-03-11 11:33:28+00:00): Interessante, quando li hanno tirati su? :o
sabas88 (2016-03-11 11:35:41+00:00): http://genova.erasuperba.it/notizie-genova/boccadasse-ex-rimessa-amt-comitato-abitcoop
tunnelbauer (2016-03-14 11:04:12+00:00): Ich denke nicht, dass das Vesuv ein nightclub im Sinne von http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dnightclub ist (= Disco). Bitte dies zu ändern.
maraf24 (2016-03-11 19:27:57+00:00): Cześć.
Proszę nie wpisywać nazwy miejscowości do miejsca przeznaczonego na ulicę. Dla miejscowości bez nazw ulic to pole zostaje puste, trzeba natomiast dodać pole addr:place z miejscowością.
Superadlen (2016-03-12 17:30:06+00:00): merci
aharvey (2022-01-30 12:16:59+00:00): Hi, the highway=cycleway tag you added here to https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/45023175 was recently removed. Do you remember your source and what the situation was/is on the ground?
Zulu99 (2022-01-30 23:54:16+00:00): Hello Andrew. I'm interested in how quickly you detected these changes. I would like to hear about what method you are using to do so. I see that highway=cycleway has been changed to highway=footway. This will stop the path being rendered in opencylemap.org correctly (and other maps). I've ridden past here many a time and here in street view you can see the cycle signage:https://goo.gl/maps/hvqDxXv1Xh4497CS9 Likewise here you can see the ped/cyclist logo on the pavement: https://goo.gl/maps/6rCQ3oSebXbcfX1G6 And this cycle sign pointing to the "Veodrome" https://goo.gl/maps/TJsR8vBTJxeFptPZ6 Hope this helps? Do you plan to query user "HighRouleur" - they have changed a few paths in the immediate area. Just by the way, this is this me!! https://goo.gl/maps/4fQDk17VEVgFUDDT6
aharvey (2022-02-01 01:46:06+00:00): Hi Zulu99, actually it was picked up by another mapper and reported to DWG.

https://osmcha.org/ is probably the easiest option to monitor for changes to an area, you can setup a filter to limit what shows up and you can then monitor through OSMCha directly or via the RSS feed.

I can see per the Google Street View imagery that this is a shared cycleway but we can't use that as as source for mapping. But from your comment you have first hand knowledge indicating it's a shared path.

I've sent a note to HighRouleur that many of these cycleway changes are being disputed and to try and take care to ensure only changes validated on the ground are made especially when unclear from other sources.  At the moment I'm assuming these changes were made in good faith from a survey, if you have evidence that any of these cycleways changed to footways are actually for use by bicycles on the ground then please let me know.
HolgerJeromin (2018-09-02 00:46:01+00:00): Du hast den Bäcker im Bahnhof mit access=customer getaggt. 
Halte ich für fragwürdig. Was bedeutet das? Nur Bahnkunden dürfen Brötchen kaufen? Nur Bäckereikunden dürfen den Laden betreten?
rolandmwagner (2018-09-02 04:28:11+00:00): Hallo, danke für deine Nachfrage.
Das bedeutet, dass nur Kunden des Bäckers einkaufen können. Der Gegensätze ist der Korridor, der eher public ist. Genau genommen hat aber die Bahn im Bahnhof Hausrecht und es ist keine freue öffentliche Fläche. Es gibt viele Bahngesellschaften, die sogar gültige Fahrkarten fordern, damit da keine Leute rumlungern.
VG
Roland
HolgerJeromin (2018-09-06 18:51:13+00:00): > Das bedeutet, dass nur Kunden des Bäckers einkaufen können.

Und die Leute die nichts einkaufen sind keine Kunden und dürfen daher nichts einkaufen? Das meinst du doch nicht ernst oder?

> Der Gegensätze ist der Korridor, der eher public ist. Genau genommen hat aber die Bahn im Bahnhof Hausrecht und es ist keine freue öffentliche Fläche. 

Also könnte man die footways access=permissive taggen.

> Es gibt viele Bahngesellschaften, die sogar gültige Fahrkarten fordern, damit da keine Leute rumlungern. 

Dieser Bahnhof nicht.
CloCkWeRX (2017-05-24 03:30:12+00:00): Howdy, thoughts on http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/909840 ?
TheSwavu (2017-05-24 03:56:17+00:00): Not really. Might want to ask the original mapper:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37452764
ramyaragupathy (2016-03-14 06:47:52+00:00): Hey! I would like to more about the source of data imported here. Also why do you alternate between adding and deleting imported data here?
ENSG Battir (2016-04-07 07:15:48+00:00): Dear ramyaragupathy
All my apologies for this late answer.
Data source is Battir village council topographic database that was given to our engineer school (ENSG) to be gathered, updated, corrected (with a lot work remaining) and published for worldwide use. We gonna try to fix all the numerous problems due to the atypic generation process and to comment this work.

> Also why do you alternate between >adding and deleting imported data here

In this case, substitution method is the most efficient because previous data that was published in 2014 was updated in the source GIS.

Best regards
Hervé QUINQUENEL
ENSG
Hjart (2016-03-11 10:29:55+00:00): Hej

Jeg har lavet det her om til en rigtig rute relation da det ikke er smart at lægge stier og veje oven i andre stier og veje.
sorteflue (2016-03-11 13:20:28+00:00): Hej Hjart
Jeg er ikke helt med...hvor var det at det gik galt?
Se iøvrigt på de arkæologiske steder her ved Givskud :-)
Hjart (2016-03-11 16:11:29+00:00): Du havde lavet en enkelt "footway" hele vejen rundt langs sporet. Det går ikke for så kan man jo ikke se på kortet hvor der reelt er unclassified, track, path osv. Derfor har jeg lavet sporet om til en såkaldt ruterelation (http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Walking_Routes), som bl.a. fremtræder på http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/da/?zoom=14&lat=55.27341&lon=8.96986&hill=0&base=0.485#routes
sorteflue (2016-03-11 16:24:43+00:00): Ah ha ...Jeg skal vist ha kigget på nogle af de mange vandrestier jeg har lagt ind!
Tusind tak for belæring:-)
Finn
parukhin (2016-03-20 12:55:47+00:00): коллега, верните дорожки и лестницы обратно. пешеходная навигация по площадным объектам не работает.
parukhin (2016-03-20 12:57:08+00:00): ну и у Двины и в других местах тоже восстановите.
MiSerg (2016-03-20 22:10:28+00:00): А что не так? Где конкретно не работает? И где написано, что надо иначе? Если я ошибся, обязательно исправлю.
parukhin (2016-03-20 22:31:20+00:00): здесь, например http://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=mapzen_foot&route=64.54038%2C40.52353%3B64.53976%2C40.51442#map=17/64.53963/40.51891
и в других навигаторах тоже нужны рёбра графа, а не красивая заливка.
MiSerg (2016-03-21 12:50:07+00:00): Не в красоте дело, а в том, что до правки одна дорожка шла по другой более широкой (по площади). Разве это правильно? Да и по ссылке вижу лишь что программа неправильно строит маршрут. Может надо программу учить, а не рисовать под е
MiSerg (2016-03-21 12:51:25+00:00): ...её кривую маршрутизацию? Но может я ошибаюсь, но где конкретно сказано, что по пешеходной площади надо рисовать еще и дорожки?
MiSerg (2016-03-21 12:54:14+00:00): Это не моя прихоть или вредность, просто так вроде логичнее и правильнее. Исправлю, если ошибаюсь. Но мне надо четко знать, что правильно так, а не иначе.
MiSerg (2016-03-21 12:59:47+00:00): Задам вопрос на форуме!
parukhin (2016-03-21 18:14:33+00:00): узнавать, как правильно, лучше всё же перед тем как что-то удалять а не в обратном порядке, я ведь тоже могу Троицкий, например, area'ми нарисовать по бордюрам, а way'и снести, но не делаю так.
MiSerg (2016-03-21 21:19:31+00:00): Я вообще то тоже не первый день тут и удалил не просто так. Всегда перед тем, как что-то удалить или новое нарисовать, читаю и форум, и wiki. Кстати, как правильно, так нигде четко и нет. Пока восстановил дорожки, будем разбираться
parukhin (2016-03-21 21:45:57+00:00): Вопрос то на форуме только сегодня прозвучал, я бы не обратил внимание, всё так бы и осталось... у МРВ ещё не восстановлено, и может быть в других местах, вы удаляли -- вам виднее.
Спасибо.
MiSerg (2016-03-21 22:00:13+00:00): Я знаю, уже восстановил. И в других местах тоже.
parukhin (2016-03-21 22:30:20+00:00): Понял, спасибо ещё раз.
Ortsangabe (2016-03-11 10:56:47+00:00): Hello Sebarga Shozodalaisov,
are you aware that Google shouldn't be used as source? I can't  see the buildings and the road on Bing or Mapbox Satellite. If your source is Google Satellite imagery this should probably be reverted.
SomeoneElse (2016-03-13 00:06:34+00:00): Oops - something went a bit wrong here. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403042119/history was in the middle of the Atlantic; I've deleted it.
eggie (2019-02-07 20:17:47+00:00): Dag DutX.. Na drie jaar weer een edit, maar nooit een welkomstmail ontvangen. Bij deze alsnog... Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Ortsangabe (2016-03-11 11:00:54+00:00): Hello Gulrukh,
are you aware that Google shouldn't be used as source. The buildings don't seem to be visible in Bing or Mapbox.
edvac (2018-01-02 14:41:42+00:00): Hi, Jean-Marc:

You say you have used government data, so that looks at a first glance an import.
Have you discussed this with the local OSM community and the imports list?
Jean-Marc Liotier (2018-01-02 15:15:24+00:00): I have discussed it in private with a few persons interested in Senegal's Openstreetmap data - the most active of which are not located in Senegal (getting any sort of feedback is a challenge - especially online, even though I have met contributors personally in Dakar) - responses have been positive. Severin Menard, whom I met recently, has convinced me to document the process (especially the attributes mapping, which are sometimes not simple one to one) and publish it - that is one of my goals for 2018 and I shall do it when I resume this work (of which about two thirds remain to be done - down along the Senegal river) at an undefined later date. An awful lot of manual work goes into cherry-picking (some objects classes are worse than Openstreetmap so they are left alone - and that quality varies between regions), conflating and checking those data in JOSM - for example the waterways  in the original source are not oriented and each of them has to verified manually (many thanks to the JOSM developers who responded to my needs - https://josm.openstreetmap.de/ticket/12646) so you can be assured that this is not about dumping raw data but actually smoothly integrating into Openstreetmap... Completely artisanal - the way it should be.
edvac (2018-01-02 19:59:30+00:00): Hi, Jean-Marc. In fact I see a lot of very good work in that. But  my concern is about that you are using external data to integrate/conflate it with OSM data, and that makes it actually an import, so you should follow the import guidelines for that.
Among other things, I doubt the license is compatible with the ODbL: http://www.basegeo.gouv.sn/Conditions-d-utilisation.html
Jean-Marc Liotier (2018-01-03 00:31:00+00:00): At least one the people who helped Senegal deploy this geographic information publishing portal is a well known Openstreetmap contributors and you can bet that he had a hand in the licensing. The paragraphs of interest to us is: "le Sénégal octroie au Détenteur de licence une licence non exclusive, sans frais ni redevances exigibles, et le droit d’utiliser, incorporer, modifier, améliorer, développer et distribuer les Données" - which translate as "Senegal grants to the licensee a non-exclusive, free of cost license and the right to use, incorporate, modify, enhance, develop and distribute the data"... Fits our purposes perfectly. Apart from that, yes, I should follow the import guidelines.
Jean-Marc Liotier (2018-01-03 00:45:49+00:00): To ensure peace of mind for Openstreetmap, we are going to check the compatibility of the license with the ODbL as interpretation of other clause may raise issues. I'll keep you posted.
Hjart (2016-03-11 12:02:54+00:00): Jeg har tilføjet site_type=tumulus til alle de gravhøje du har angivet. Dette specificerer at der er tale om en gravhøj.
sorteflue (2016-03-11 13:11:01+00:00): Tak skal du have.
Endres Pelka (2016-03-11 23:31:51+00:00): This edit heavily damaged street layout around "Rue des Amandes". Reverted in 37774980.
aharvey (2018-01-13 02:02:38+00:00): how about adding https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/club=surf_life_saving ?
zstadler (2016-07-08 10:21:52+00:00): It looks like you have mapped more than 7000 walls in and around Battir, as can be seen on Overpass Turbo : http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/hc8

Based on Bing images and the shape of the walls, it looks like most, if not all, of the walls are agricultural retaining walls. 

If so, according to the wiki page on barriers, http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:barrier , they should be tagged as barrier=retaining_wall: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dretaining_wall

This tagging leads to incorrect maps wherever walls are shown.
zstadler (2016-07-19 17:52:56+00:00): In a few days, 2 weeks after my previous message I'm planning to change the tags to retaining wall.
If you have any objections, please let me know.
SomeoneElse (2016-09-01 08:38:35+00:00): @zstadler Thanks for helping to resolve the mess here!
zstadler (2016-09-02 22:22:28+00:00): @SomeoneElse Thanks for noticing. However, there is still a long way to go in this area....
zstadler (2019-02-20 08:26:52+00:00): Tagged as barrier=retaining_wall in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67381557
Friendly_Ghost (2022-10-12 14:31:18+00:00): I simplified most objects in this area with a 0.1 meter error margin:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127414795
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127414809
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127414818
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127414822
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127414876

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127417184
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/127417253

In total I removed about 60,000 objects, most of which were nodes.

There are still a bunch of unwanted intersections of barriers, waterways and other objects in this area.
zstadler (2022-10-12 18:54:15+00:00): Thank you Friendly_Ghost for further cleanup of the mess created by ENSG Battir!
Friendly_Ghost (2022-10-13 08:46:14+00:00): You're very welcome :)

JOSM gave me nearly 13,000 warnings yesterday AFTER the cleanup that included 80,000 object deletions and some regular QA. The number of Osmose issues to my name has also skyrocketed. All in all this area is an gargantuan mess. 

Is this a low quality import or did the mapper actually map this manually while ignoring the validators?
SomeoneElse (2022-10-13 09:09:37+00:00): It's a low-quality import by a French engineering school.  Some of the replies you can see at http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2504387 explain what they were trying to do (6 years ago).
I don't know if it was just a process failure (the actual source data was sound; they just imported it multiple times) or whether the source data itself was a problem.
species (2016-05-16 15:49:09+00:00): Hab den am Hauptbahnhof gelöscht, da doppelt.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/280235721 war schon vorher da.

Der am Lendplatz is wohl OK, hab ihn zur Relation hinzugefügt.
GerdP (2016-03-14 08:10:14+00:00): Hi there!
Please check unusual tagging on a way:
highway=street_lamp
layer=1
power=minor_line

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403075247
I assume one or more of the poles should be highway=street_lamp instead of the way?
escada (2016-03-14 10:07:16+00:00): You are absolutely right. I probably had selected the way as well as the nodes when I set that tag. I've corrected it.
ndm (2016-03-12 00:18:21+00:00): I only added Windsor Place a couple of days ago -- did I miss a 20 mph sign? Did you survey it? I've been assuming that there should only be a maxspeed if there's an sign, as it's not an explcit 20 mph zone.
southglos (2016-03-12 11:40:14+00:00): Hi. It's an assumption, based on the fact that it's a residential road hanging off a 20mph road, within the Inner South Bristol 20mph zone.

More info at http://www.bristol20mph.co.uk but as a summary: The 20mph pilot area at Inner South Bristol came into operation in 2010. Every road within the pilot area boundary became a 20mph speed limit from this date, unless excluded (ie: specified major through-roads).

I'm not blanket adding 20mph limits, as I don't know exactly where the edges are, but I think it's safe to assume that residential roads connected only to other 20mph roads will also be 20mph.

I wouldn't copy directly from this PDF, but it gives a good picture of the overall scheme in the area: http://www.bristol20mph.co.uk/sites/default/files/images/Map%20-%2020mph%20pilot%20area%20at%20Inner%20South%20Bristol.pdf

But feel free to remove the 20mph tag if the assumption makes you nervous; I won't be offended :-)

Cheers
ndm (2016-03-12 22:12:36+00:00): I'd have less objection if it was signed as a 20 mph zone -- then you could make "safe" assumptions about the roads inside. However, it's probably ok.
opendcc (2016-03-12 08:27:19+00:00): Hallo,

bitte die Tags richtig vergeben, siehe http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dkneipp_water_cure
opendcc (2016-03-12 08:33:52+00:00): Bitte mit korrekten Tags versehen - zumindest die religion mit angeben
literan (2016-03-11 14:19:26+00:00): Здравствуйте! Если на какой-то улице нет знака ограничения скорости, а макс.скорость 60 просто из-за того, что это в черте города, нужно ставить тег maxspeed=RU:urban! В таком случае, если ,скажем, дума примет поправки, которые в гор. черте снизят скорость до 50 км/ч (что готовится), навигаторы автоматичски это поймут. Если же ставить maxspeed=60, то кто в таком случае будет это отслеживать и исправлять? Для загородных дорог, аналогично, по правилам положено ставить maxspeed=RU:rural
literan (2016-03-11 14:19:53+00:00): maxspeed=RU:urban - без воскл. знака :-)
mrSerViT (2016-03-11 15:31:11+00:00): Спасибо. Вроде исправил свои правки. Если так посмотреть, то это "всю" Москву переделывать надо. Например дублер Варшавского, там уже стоит maxspeed=60 (делал не я), к сожалению знаков таких нет. -))) а камер много.))) P/S. Проверти мои правки. Буду рад, вашим замечаниям.-)
literan (2016-03-12 10:56:36+00:00): Посмотрел - все норм! Насчет дублера Варшавского - а там точно нет знаков 60? я там после реконструкции всего один раз проезжал.. Если нет - потихоньку переделаем, и будем загибать пальцы чтобы в ПДД не внесли эти изменения :)
mavl (2019-03-18 16:42:11+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
Nakaner (2016-03-19 19:03:55+00:00): Hallo kschamer,

du gibst bei diesem und anderen Änderungssätze an, dass deine Quelle der NVV ist. Meines Wissens nach haben wir keine Erlaubnis, NVV-Daten zu nutzen. Fremdquellen (also alles, was nicht auf Ortskunde und Ortsbegehung basiert) benötigen bei OSM die Erlaubnis des Rechteinhabers. Weder auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Potential_Datasources noch auf https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Permissions finde ich dazu einen Eintrag.

Ich möchte dich daher bitten, offenzulegen, welche deiner Beiträge aus NVV-Datenbeständen stammen. Dann kann ich einen eventuell nötigen Revert auf das Nötigste einschränken.

Solltest du mit kommerziellen Absichten in OSM editieren, bitte ich dich, das auf deiner Benutzerseite anzugeben. Das gilt auch für deine Kollegen.

Viele Grüße

Michael
kschamer (2016-03-19 21:33:53+00:00): Hallo Michael,
alle Beiträge bis auf den Bereich der Linie 500 von Gudensberg bis Bad Wildungen habe ich aus der Erinnerung heraus (selbst befahren) hier erstellt.
Sorry für die falsche Angabe der Quelle.
Kann man die Quellenangabe nachträglich korrigieren?
Viele Grüße
Jasper
mavl (2019-03-18 16:42:16+00:00): This changeset was redacted.
bigbug21 (2016-11-26 19:26:58+00:00): Danke für die Updates!
Nakaner (2016-03-19 19:00:05+00:00): Warum hast du psv=yes + vehicle=no an diesen Node getaggt? Zufahrtsbeschränkungen werden bei OSM nur bei physische Barrieren an Nodes getaggt. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4040463379/history

Sein Way ist schon mit vehicle=no getaggt, da braucht der Node das nicht. Wenn der Way für ÖPNV-Straßenfahrzeuge nutzbar ist, dann gehört da psv=yes dran.
kschamer (2016-03-19 21:40:19+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis.

Ich werde das in Zukunft berücksichtigen, und entsprechend korrigieren.
Nakaner (2016-03-19 22:05:11+00:00): Vielen Dank für deine zügige Antwort.

Nein, nachträglich kannst du die Tags eines Änderungssatzes (comment, created_by, source, …) nicht korrigieren. Aber deine Aussage genügt.
joost schouppe (2017-05-08 18:06:11+00:00): Hi,
You mapped this path http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/403094273 as a disused railway. Since you had added that horses can access, I assume it's used as some kind of path now. Is it really an old railway?
literan (2016-03-11 14:44:20+00:00): дворовые проезды обозначаются как highway=service + living_street=yes. Поправил здесь все.