piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
OakGrover (2021-02-08 21:51:26+00:00): This tag is misleading.  Although maps indicate this area along McLoughlin Blvd as being Oak Grove, the unincorporated city(?) of Oak Grove is centered in the area west of here near the junction of SE Oak Grove Blvd and SE Arista Drive.  In its heydey the main N/S trollley line ran through this junction on its journey between Portland and Oregon City. (One of the first electric trolleys in the country powered by the first electric power generating facility in the country.)  This right-of-way has now been converted into the Trolley Trail Park maintained by Clackamas County parks.>0
JodaStephen (2020-10-12 22:13:53+00:00): Hi! Just to let you know that I've been using an image offset for the new Bing imagery in the Wimbledon / Raynes Park area, because Bing seems to be inaccurately positioned. The offset is (3.43, -1.03). Sadly, this has to be manually entered into the ID editor in every editing session. Thanks
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92377371
GinaroZ (2020-10-12 22:22:15+00:00): Thanks, I know about new Bing and offsets - I used one to align things with old Bing (Esri clarity) and OSSV.
Miguel Pedr (2020-12-09 04:55:28+00:00): Hola,
Aquí el valor de las direcciones dadas es incorrecto y también las direcciones de valor incorrecto afectarán la ruta o la navegación. Tenga cuidado al asignar unidireccional.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92377511
(Inactive) hairyhaggis_kaart (2020-12-09 16:30:21+00:00): Hi Miguel, the addr:street tag and one way have been updated. Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92377511
Jan Olieslagers (2020-10-13 09:41:07+00:00): Thanks for taking the trouble to add the airport. And my compliment for doing the job so comprehensively! You could have saved yourself the trouble, though: the airport was already given quite extensively before. See node 3036530811. Now we have an annoying double entry, kindly remove either your new addition or the pre-existing one. Kind regards,
Dcdude (2020-10-13 15:29:05+00:00): Thank you for your comment. When I was updating the airport taxiways and standing positions, I extracted the airport node and there must have been some mistake by me, since there was double nodes for Ivalo airport. I fixed that and combined these into one. I hope this is now fixed, but if not, then let me know. Thank you! Best regards,
Jan Olieslagers (2020-10-13 15:42:08+00:00): Looks irreproachable now - many thanks! Keep up the good work!
felipeeugenio (2020-10-12 22:33:18+00:00): Hola Estimado.

Estas relaciones para no virar en U qué sentido tienen? son sobre la misma vía
SomeoneElse_Revert (2020-10-12 22:23:42+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 92377131, 92377145.
hocu (2021-11-02 13:25:35+00:00): Merhaba, OSM'e katkilariniz icin tesekkurler.

Lutfen eklediginiz yerlere kisisel websitesi adresinizi, email adresinizi ve telefon numaranizi eklemeyiniz. Webstienizi ziyaret ettigimizde isaretlenen kamp yerleri ile ilgili bilgi yerine duzenlediginiz ucretli turlar hakkinda bilgiler goruyoruz, bu dogrudan reklama girer ve OSM uzerinde kabul edilen bir katki degildir. Website alani sadece ve sadece eklenilen yerin resmi websitesi ya da yer ile ilgili guncel bilgi veren bir websitesinin adresi olmalidir.

Katkilarinizin devami dilegiyle.
felipeeugenio (2020-10-12 22:46:05+00:00): Ah.. veo que los empezaste a sacar. ok. no hay problema
Mateusz Konieczny (2020-10-18 10:16:52+00:00): Czy numer drogi 1503L jest wyraźnie widoczny na znakach drogowych?

Jeśli nie to tag unsigned_ref wystarczy i nie trzeba dodawać ref.

Zobacz https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2390078
aharvey (2020-10-13 02:49:41+00:00): hi I removed name=Lookout because https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things
Woidmadl (2020-10-13 12:31:31+00:00): Servus,
kann es sein, dass durch das Löschen von einzelnen Punkten (Hagebau, Expert) und überführen auf eine Fläche, einige Infos verloren gegangen sind?
Es fehlen nun z.B. die Öffnungszeiten und Kontaktinfos vom Hagebaumarkt und Expert. Teilweise sind nun auch doppelte Tags (Lidl als Punkt und als Fläche) vorhanden.
VG
Woidmadl
Wegeschlenzer (2020-10-13 18:07:42+00:00): Servus Woidmadl
danke für den Hinweis. War wohl etwas zu spät geworden mit dem mappen letzte Nacht...
Habs nun korrigiert. Passt jetzt hoffentlich.
Grüße Wegeschlenzer
Woidmadl (2020-10-13 19:02:48+00:00): Servus,
versteh ich^^. Hab gerade noch ein paar fehlende Tags wiederhergestellt.

Für die Zukunft würde ich dir raten, Punkte/ Tags nicht einfach zu löschen. Ich bin mir nicht sicher, ob es nicht gleichwertig ist, entweder ein Gebäude (Fläche) mit Tags zu versehen oder einen Punkt in die Mitte setzen und diesen mit Tags zu versehen (z.B. Punkt Lidl & Gebäude Lidl). Falls dem so wäre, wären teile deines Änderungssatzes "übereifrig" bzw. hätten den Infogehalt der Karte sogar reduziert (z.B. der chinesische Name für Hagebau war vorher in der Karte enthalten^^). Auch sind hierdurch die Chroniken zu den Punkten (Shops) nun weg.
VG
Woidmadl
Wegeschlenzer (2020-10-13 21:35:45+00:00): Oje, hab ich doch noch mehr durcheinander gebracht. Dabei wollte ich genau das Gegenteil. Danke fürs gradbiegen.
Beim E+C-Markt z.B. sehe ich die Tags ein wegen der verschiedenen Geschäfte unter einem Dach. Aber sonst?

Sehr interessant, was du berichtest über lnfos in der Karte wie dem chinesischen Namen für hagebau... Wo kann ich das erkennen? Überhaupt bräuchte ich mehr gezielte Informationen über so manche vorhandenen Einträge und auch neue Schritte. In den Blogs rumsuchen finde ich recht mühsam und zeitraubend. Wo hast du das alles gelernt? Ich lerne durch probieren und Rückmeldungen wie jetzt von dir...
VG
Woidmadl (2020-10-14 10:14:05+00:00): Macht nichts, jeder macht Fehler^^. Wie gesagt, ich meine es ist gleichwertig (finde auf die schnelle aber nichts im Wiki dazu) und wird wahrscheinlich aus den Anfangszeiten von OSM kommen.

Ich nutze JOSM, ein externes Tool. Ist zwar am Anfang etwas unübersichtlich, später aber sehr hilfreich. Auch gibt es zahlreiche Plugins für spezielle Zwecke. U.a. kann man sich auch die Chronik zu einzelnen Punkten anzeigen, wer wann was bearbeitet hat. Daher kam der chinesische Name. 
Vieles steht im Wiki, aber einiges hab ich auch durch try and error mit Feedback gelernt^^
VG
Wegeschlenzer (2020-10-14 22:40:04+00:00): Danke für deine offene Rückmeldung. Hab auf deinen Hinweis mal nach JOSM geschaut. Klingt interessant. Ich will mich damit noch mehr beschäftigen...
Hast du dir ein Plugin eingerichtet, damit Fehler (wie von mir veranstaltet) gleich gemeldet werden? Du wirst sicher nicht jeden Tag stundenlang nur OSM bzw. JOSM beobachten...
Wie ist das eigentlich, wenn ich anklicke 'meine Eingaben prüfen lassen'. Ploppt dann bei erfahrenen Mappern wie z.B. dir eine Meldung auf und du schaust dir all die vielen Eingaben nochmal an? Das will ich eigentlich niemandem zumuten, auch wenns vielleicht ab+zu sinnvoll wäre...
Hab bisher auf den Validator vertraut wenn er keine Verstöße erkannt hat. Offenbar erkennt er aber nicht alle. 
Grüße
Wegeschlenzer
Woidmadl (2020-10-16 20:08:46+00:00): So ein Plugin verwende ich nicht (k.A. ob es so eines gibt). Ich schau nur ab und zu Changesets grob durch, was geändert wurde. Deinen hab ich zufällig genauer angeschaut, weil ich vor ca. 1 Monat die Shops im Gewerbegebiet selbst bearbeitet habe. 

Es wird dann nur ein neuer Tag im Changeset hinzugefügt mit "review_requestedt" (wie changesets_count oder created_by). Genauere Beschreibung: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:review%20requested?uselang=en

Der Validator betrachtet hauptsächlich "technische" Fehler, wie unverbundene Wege o. falsch geschriebene Keys und eher nicht "inhaltliche" Fehler wie falsch geschriebene Namen oder gelöschte Tags.
VG
Woidmadl
Wegeschlenzer (2020-10-24 09:04:36+00:00): Hallo Woidmadl,
das mit dem Plugin war nicht ganz ernst gemeint...
Bin momentan mit einigen anderen Themen beschäftigt, wollte aber deine Antwort mit weiteren freundlichen und hilfreichen Hinweisen nicht unbeantwortet lassen. Danke dafür. Kommt leider etwas verspätet.
Will dir nicht ständig mit hin+herschreiben die Zeit rauben. Würde mich aber sehr freuen, wenn ich dich manchmal um deinen Rat fragen dürfte...
VG
Wegeschlenzer
Woidmadl (2020-10-24 18:46:02+00:00): Servus,
kein Problem, gerne doch. Du kannst mich jederzeit gerne um Rat fragen.
VG
Woidmadl
Wegeschlenzer (2020-10-26 09:04:15+00:00): Super, danke!
Gute Zeit
Wegeschlenzer
Retired Account (2020-10-16 17:39:30+00:00): The recent changes have made those building addresses non-searchable in Nominatim.
aDSAT (2020-10-16 22:44:24+00:00): Hello JaLooNz,
I searched all of these building parts in Nominatim and it provided results: “Waterloo Centre, Singapore” (https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/search.html?q=Waterloo+Centre,+Singapore), “262 Waterloo Street, Singapore”(https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/search.html?q=262+Waterloo+Street,+Singapore), “263 Waterloo Street, Singapore”(https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/search.html?q=263+Waterloo+Street,+Singapore), “264 Waterloo Street, Singapore”(https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/search.html?q=264+Waterloo+Street,+Singapore).
Could you clarify the issue here as I am not seeing a problem. If you would like to discuss the modeling of this building I am happy to do so.
Thanks,
aDSAT
Retired Account (2020-10-17 01:03:31+00:00): Seems like there has been a recent change in Nominatim, where building:part has been made searchable. However, I would prefer that buildings with unique addresses remains as buildings instead of building:part.

Nevertheless, this change is still impacting other downstream usages of address search and rendering whereby the (1) address number is no longer rendered and (2) other apps that only indexes buildings and not building:parts will break searches.
Retired Account (2020-10-17 01:05:13+00:00): I think this has been discussed previously with ADT too.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66204783
aDSAT (2020-10-20 23:14:25+00:00): Hello JaLooNz,
Yes, I was informed of this discussion but that occurred when Nominatim did not support building:part addressing, so my edits were made in accordance with that recent enhancement to Nominatim. Modeling these as building:part=residential is correct per OSM policy but I can change them back to building=residential if that is what you are suggesting. 
It is unfortunate that the apps are not able to recognize unique addresses on building:parts since this is an approved tagging in OSM and is a more accurate method of modeling complex buildings. It might be worth reaching out the the app developers so they can consider accounting for OSM policy. Do you have a specific app in mind that does not support addressing on building:part? 
Thanks,
aDSAT
Retired Account (2020-10-22 12:40:16+00:00): Hi,
I think all OSM renderers do not show building footprints tagged as building:part. So this breaks both map renders and searches. Thus, I would still recommend any buildings with unique addresses remain tagged as buildings instead of building:part.
aDSAT (2020-10-23 22:29:56+00:00): Hello JaLooNz,
I have changed these building:parts back to buildings. Thank you for discussing the modeling here. Which renderers and searches are you referring to? I would suggest that you reach out to the developers or maintainers of the tools you are concerned with so they can update them to recognize the current OSM policy about building:part and building relations. 
Thanks,
aDSAT
eggie (2020-10-13 06:48:01+00:00): Dag Jeroen,

Een barrier=lift_gate laat per default geen motor_vehicle door in de meeste routers.
Zou dus als er emergency=yes staat op een doorsteek ook emergency = yes op de slagbomen zetten. 
Sommige VRT's  maken al gebruik van een eigen routing-app. 
Het is al enkele malen gebeurd dat iemand voor bruggen slagbomen op de hoofdrijbaan gaat heeft getagd zonder access=yes  met als gevolgd dat de routering zoek is. 
Kijk je nog even?
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2020-10-13 07:09:35+00:00): typo VR's (Veiligheidsregio's)
JeroenvanderGun (2020-10-13 10:22:58+00:00): Heb nu access=no emergency=yes op de slagbomen gezet, net als op de verbindingsweggetjes.
skquinn (2020-10-13 01:16:27+00:00): I added one of the ramps. I am not in this area often (and it's not a great area of town) or I'd offer to survey/GPS trace the new alignment.
luisforte (2020-10-13 01:11:24+00:00): Viva, revê, por favor, todas as tuas edições. Uma escola não é um local de culto, os terrenos não têm nome de “terreno”, a etiqueta landuse é suficiente. Tenta ajustar com mais precisão a definição dos edifícios.As estradas que colocas como secundárias, não são  secundárias, deves corrigir para residenciais, ou outras, conforme as regras. Consulta https://wiki.openstreetmap.org , para te ajudar a entender como mapear melhor.
tastrax (2020-10-17 02:44:41+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added according to the following format +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
hocu (2020-10-14 09:36:10+00:00): Merhaba, katkıların için teşekkürler.

Çalışma saatleri her gün 10:00-20:30 arası mı? OSM üzerinde saatler belirtilirken günlerin de belirtilmesi gerekiyor. Her gün bu saatler geçerliyse Mo-Su 10:00-20:30 şeklinde güncelleyebilirsin.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92379977
user_5359 (2020-10-20 04:36:07+00:00): Hello!
Did you study the wiki page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/General_Transit_Feed_Specification/Mapping_to_OSM_tags before importing? There is no reason to create a gtfs_stop_desc from stop_desc instead of decription
SJoao (2020-11-06 00:33:17+00:00): I had glanced over it, makes sense!
Applied it @93508049

Appreciate any other tips on this work, tks.
szydzio (2020-10-18 18:32:37+00:00): Przy dodawaniu numerów dróg powiatowych/gminnych zwróć proszę uwagę na już istniejące numery w tagu unsigned_ref=*, nie ma sensu ich powielać w ref=* tym bardziej, że prawidłowym tagowaniem numerów dla tych dróg jest właśnie unsigned_ref, patrz => https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:highway?uselang=pl#Nazwy_i_numeracja + https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:unsigned_ref
S-Klasse (2020-10-18 22:07:05+00:00): Why is the church https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/695895964/history gone?
boopington (2020-10-19 04:39:40+00:00): It appeared gone in the latest imagery.
TTPC_Checksum (2020-10-19 20:52:38+00:00): That church was actually a common case of mistagging the whole area as building.  The tagging should have been corrected instead of deleting the building.  (Complex hadn't changed since ESRI Clarity, indicating that it's not recently changed).   Restored in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92728709
Supaplex (2021-04-16 16:04:55+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
naveenpf (2020-10-30 15:15:24+00:00): Welcome to OSM Kerala.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Kerala/Members

To join OSM Kerala Telegram click on. 
https://t.me/osmkerala
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92381404
iandees (2020-10-13 03:26:15+00:00): Hi, why did you delete this? What demonstration are you trying to make?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/92381850
Supaplex (2021-04-16 16:05:24+00:00): 恭喜您透過 Maps.Me 完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。Maps.Me App 採用開放街圖的地理資料，由社群而非商業公司建置的地理資料庫。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

由於Maps.Me隨著軟體更新更新最新地圖，App裡的地圖資料版本可能略舊，透過Maps.Me增添商家等資料時有可能開放街圖上已經有了，請到http://www.osm.org 網站看是否要加的商家有沒有人加上去了。

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Wolfgang Fey (2020-10-13 06:44:56+00:00): Ja klar, das „bu“ war ein Eingabefehler.
opendcc (2020-10-13 05:10:23+00:00): Hello, please restrict your changeset to smaller areas. Thank you.
user_10215874 (2020-10-13 07:05:20+00:00): why u do this
Strubbl (2020-10-13 08:14:42+00:00): sorry. my bad.
Strubbl (2020-10-13 08:15:29+00:00): won't happen again
user_10215874 (2020-10-13 10:18:16+00:00): don't worry, we make mistake :)
user_6110846 (2020-12-06 17:12:34+00:00): когда добавляете польские названия улиц - допускаете ошибку - пишете слово ulica 

Прикол в тома что в польской каротиографии есть давняя тралдиция - на картах писать ТОЛЬКО НАЗВАНИЕ улиц Слово ulica -лишнее
iWowik (2020-12-07 07:32:25+00:00): 1) Да, в OSM в Польше есть общее правило не писать слово ulica, но в некоторых областях случаются местные договоренности и его таки пишут. К тому же правило ТОЛЬКО НАЗВАНИЕ тут вообще не применяется, так как всегда пишут слова bulwar и т.п.
2) Поскольку я ставлю тег не в Польше, к тому же есть местные особенности, традиция всегда писать тип, то я маплю соответствующим образом.
osmviborg (2020-10-13 06:46:18+00:00): Please do not challenge what has been decided in the Danish community. Thank you.
ChrissW-R1 (2025-07-09 22:08:23+00:00): Please check https://osm.org/note/4846876
SanJuanRidge (2025-07-11 18:01:03+00:00): Hello ChrissW-R1, 
Thank you for reaching out. I did not add the priority_road=track tag, but according to the edit history it appears to have been added by user b_adams in 2018. That said, I agree that the tag doesn’t seem appropriate in this context and can safely be removed.
HamiDesert (2025-07-11 18:02:51+00:00): Hi rarad74, thanks for making those updates!
ChrissW-R1 (2025-07-11 18:51:52+00:00): Fixed in https://osm.org/changeset/168810519
Crogan (2020-10-13 14:05:50+00:00): Ты что угораешь? Ну я думал конечно что ты самый умный маппер на свете, но чтобы настолько, я не подозревал? Что в натуре это очень необходимо мапить отдельные входы в частных домах на 2х хозяев? Вот этих домов в городе "миллион", у каждого будешь вход искать а проставлять "улица 16-1 и 16-2" или "улица 56/1 и улица 56/2" ? Занятия себе придумать не можешь? На пополам ещё может делить каждый такой дом начнёшь? Да и вообще как правило точки входа у таких домов сбоку располагаются. А у некоторых на табличках через тире, а у некоторых через дробь!
Crogan (2020-10-13 15:18:43+00:00): Не, я серьёзно! Дома делить не надо, а точки входов можешь делать по бокам (как правило они там располагаются). Только тире или дробь? У всех на табличках написано по разному. Ну и не на одном доме делай, а на многих, раз взялся за это дело! Теги какие-то такие должны быть доступ не для всех; access=no
квартира: addr:flats=2
вход в частный дом: entrance=home
Crogan (2020-10-13 15:23:07+00:00): Ну и на Mapnik"е конечно будет каша из цифр на каждом доме (уже заметно), ты знаешь как "улучшить" читаемость карты!
user_10149683 (2020-10-13 05:54:20+00:00): replaced with better onehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92388617
user_10149683 (2020-10-13 05:54:42+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92388617
chaubean (2020-10-14 02:40:40+00:00): Thanks for checking into our edits. It is good to see the community improvising our edits, I will take this as a learning from the community and make sure to implement in my future edits. always happy to learn from the community
Crusier (2020-10-15 21:05:43+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92543882#map=18/52.30082/21.08688
Karthoo (2020-10-13 17:49:11+00:00): I reverted your changeset because the service road has been removed during recent constructions.
kllahari (2020-10-14 07:09:36+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for reviewing and correcting the edit. Apologies for the incorrect edit. I've missed to check the construction feature. Will ensure not to repeat such mistake. Looking forward to learn more from you.

Regards,
kllahari.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-03-14 14:39:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 100992297, 100989735 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some invalid edits, mainly in Iran, following a complaint from the community there. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4814 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-03-14 14:39:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 100992297, 100989735 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some invalid edits, mainly in Iran, following a complaint from the community there. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4814 .
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-03-14 14:39:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 100992297, 100989735 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some invalid edits, mainly in Iran, following a complaint from the community there. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/4814 .
aceman444 (2020-11-18 23:06:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8002275047 - why the node?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380152148 - why did you remove the footway? Is it blocked now inside of Alfa restarant? last I was there it did exist.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2518390367 - addr:city=Petrzalka, how useful again.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/407193783 - nonsense maxspeed=10 again?
aceman444 (2020-11-19 21:41:53+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/380152147 - building=commercial? The restaurant is inside the building and does not occupy the whole building (at least as it is tagged now), so adding building= to it is wrong (you made a building inside a building, about which iD should complain (this time correctly)).
dónal (2020-10-13 15:50:30+00:00): Hi. Thanks for the contribution to the map...

Some feedback to help you develop your mapping skills:
 - Try and "square off" buildings when you draw their outline. See https://bit.ly/33VClZP
 - Try and map the schools in more detail. see https://bit.ly/33VDctv
 - Try and ensure the extent of the building / area is mapped. e.g. the way marking Cloone Graveyard should be expanded.
- For shops and restaurants that occupy a building, map the building and then add a node for the specific amenity (e.g. shop, fast food outlet, etc).
- Map what you can see and reference the sources you used (e.g. survey, mapillary, etc). This helps with validation of changes.
 - Try and capture the number of levels in the building.
 - Be careful with spelling.

If I can be of any assistance, please drop me a message.
dónal (2020-10-13 17:08:55+00:00): You can see the adjustments I made here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92430345
dónal (2020-10-13 17:10:49+00:00): Also - keeping your changesets small (just a few changes) and giving a descriptive comment for the change is very helpful.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments is a useful guide

Here's an example of a small correction I made: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/92430445