piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
keithonearth (2019-06-20 17:30:43+00:00): I don't want to step on your toes, but I did make an edit that may have negatively impacted your edit. I just reverted a couple of changesets that I view as vandalism (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68196326 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68196294). The changesets deleted a bunch of trails and one 4x4 track. This edit by you replaced one trail and extended a residential rd in the place of the 4x4 track.

I decided it'd be better to maintain the history of the original ways, rather than keep your ways. I've compared the ways with the Strava Imagery, and it looks good to me. 

I wanted to give you a heads-up, in case you'd like to review the area. It'd also be nice to have other editors know about the history of vandalism in the area, and keep a bit of an eye out.
Adam Schneider (2019-06-20 17:45:23+00:00): I'll take a look; I was going to go back into that area and fix up some "access" tags anyway, having visited in person a couple days ago.

(I don't think I'd characterize those Westwind changesets as "vandalism"; maybe just overzealousness.)
keithonearth (2019-06-20 19:44:22+00:00): It's a wonderful place, isn't it? 

I'd call it as overzealous the first time he deleted all the details, but then he did it again after I'd explained it all to him. He gave it about 9 months, and tried again.

Irrespective of how we characteristic the changeset it negatively impacted the map, and reverting it took up my time.
Adam Schneider (2019-06-20 23:59:51+00:00): I think the solution — which I just did — is adding Westwind to the map and marking it and all of its trails/roads as "private."  Then there's no ambiguity about what that blank space on the map means.
keithonearth (2019-06-21 16:28:41+00:00): Adding Westwind to the map is a good idea, unfortunately tourism=camp is not the right tag for it. If the entirety of it is tagged this way it means you could camp anywhere within Westwind. That is not the case. It could also attract people to the area, as most campgrounds are the sort of places you can just show up to, and the `access=private` tag may not be presented to users. Indeed it wasn't with the default rendering, I don't think many apps or renderings would present access restrictions on a campground in a meaningful way.

The `leisure=summer_camp` rendering the most accurate one that I know, and I see you have that on already, so I left that in place. It may not be rendered, at least when I looked into it a few years back it wasn't rendered. But it's better to have accurate info that is not presented to the user, than incorrect/misleading data that is presented to the user.

If I'd missed the private tag on any roads in Westwind then it would be good to add them, but I thought I got them all.
Adam Schneider (2019-06-21 17:16:58+00:00): Fortunately, it looks like leisure=summer_camp is now being rendered.  Unfortunately, it looks exactly like tourism=camp_site. I'm going to add "(private)" to the camp's name just to cover all the bases.
Adam Schneider (2019-06-21 17:23:29+00:00): My mistake, it doesn't render at all.  (I was looking at cached tiles.)
keithonearth (2019-06-22 04:13:14+00:00): I'm not sure that adding description or advice into a name tag is a good idea. It's not got "(private)" in its name, and it shouldn't really be in the name tag either.
freebeer (2020-09-16 05:14:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 90958854 where the changeset comment is: maps.me castle for a personal home
mavl (2019-07-21 16:12:44+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mueschel (2019-06-22 15:55:15+00:00): Coild you check this node? The tags seem strange:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6552482653
Davie Dean (2019-06-23 23:46:34+00:00): Thanks for picking that up. Should be better now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71543272 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6552482653
chnav (2019-07-17 08:24:25+00:00): Дворовые проезды это highway=service. Пожалуйста читайте документацию.
chnav (2019-07-17 08:28:03+00:00): Очень грубая работа. Дороги прилеплены к landuse.
mavl (2019-06-19 16:51:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
user_5359 (2020-02-07 20:07:49+00:00): Hello! Please have a short look on the payment keys of https://www.osm.org/way/506470366. payment:notes and payment:coins are booth not accepted, but payment:cash is accepted. There is no third possiblity for payment:cash.
Badojo (2020-02-07 21:43:28+00:00): Hi, thanks for letting me know. I actually didn't make the hotel, I just merged the node with existing building and didn't mind the tags. But yes, you can pay with cash and other unaccepted tags are unnecessary
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mavl (2019-07-21 16:12:48+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
JM82 (2019-10-12 17:59:14+00:00): Warum änderst du wiederholt Gehsteige (footway) zu Pfaden (path) im innerörtlichen Bereich um? Weder ist der Gehsteig dieses Changesets https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/370461823 für den Radverkehr freigegeben noch darf man (in AUT) auf Fußwegen fahren (sofern nicht explizit erlaubt).
Luzandro (2019-10-13 17:21:37+00:00): Offenbar um die Radroute FB12 dorthin zu legen, aber zumindest auf mapillary ist zu sehen, dass zumindest Ende 2018 der Großteil ein normaler Gehsteig war und der Radweg erst weiter vorne beginnt: 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=46.94128513548657&lng=16.01182495082969&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=1RGDDg95E4KvXTXPJENlIw

Ich habe versucht die Entstandene Lücke der Radroute in Fehring mittels Mapillary wieder zu schließen. 

Weiter nördlich bei der Fehringer Straße bin ich aber wieder auf einen Fuß- und Radweg gestoßen, der aktuell weder am Luftbild, noch auf der Mapillary-Aufnahme von 2017 in irgendeiner Weise erkennbar ist:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/103065352/history#map=19/46.94898/16.00971

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=46.948798030103205&lng=16.009667736457345&z=17&focus=photo&pKey=VvoINedoCIpn7PJ_utq10w&x=0.3814562521437264&y=0.5472815457580388&zoom=0
Robhubi (inaktiv) (2019-10-26 17:08:41+00:00): Bitte beteilige dich an der Diskussion im Forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=767007#p767007
mavl (2019-07-21 16:12:51+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mavl (2019-07-21 16:12:54+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
chnav (2019-07-17 08:00:36+00:00): Здравствуйте, пожалуйста не рисуйте дороги извилистыми линиями, тем более с самопересечениями. Сетка улиц должна оставаться сеткой.

Проезды на дачах это highway=service.
chnav (2019-07-17 08:01:16+00:00): Фиктивное название улицы удалено, правки под специфичный навигатор не приветствуются.
JM82 (2019-08-13 06:45:55+00:00): Wieso hast du die Gehsteige (highway = footway) auf highway = path geändert. Das ist per def. des Wiki schon mal falsch, da es sich dort ausschließlich um klassische Gehsteige handelt, auf denen NICHT mit dem Fahrrad gefahren werden darf.
Die Route "kasanientour" verläuft dort nicht quer über die Landesstraße, sondern das Stück zwischen Leitersdorferstraße und der Abzweigung zum GH Fuchs befährt der Radfahrer auf der Landesstraße.
Ich habe diese Fehler korrigiert bzw. die Wegtypen wieder richtig gestellt bzw. die Tags dieser auch korrigiert.
Robhubi (inaktiv) (2019-10-26 17:10:13+00:00): Bitte beteilige dich an der Diskussion im Forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=767007#p767007
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
Chris Fleming (2019-06-18 10:51:21+00:00): HI Liam - one thing to look out for is the offset on the imagery. It looks to be like the Digiglobe Premium Layer has quite a big offset compares to GPS Tracks layer and other layers such as the Bing layer and OS OpenData Streetview. I ended up with offsets of -42,18 when looking at this which means that many of these adjustements weren't needed.
TheEditor101 (2019-06-18 16:35:48+00:00): Just to chime in, my general experience mapping around Aberdeen has been that Bing and Esri Clarity have the best alignment
LiamHarper (2019-06-18 16:40:17+00:00): Thanks, I appreciate the comments. I've found it very tricky to figure out the best imagery to use.  Some nearby roads seemed to be aligned to one layer, so I tried to match those. Reckon I should undo these? I'm not sure how!
TheEditor101 (2019-06-18 16:57:45+00:00): A bit of misalignment isn't a huge deal as it's still useful to see the road layout.

In general you'll want to check imagery against GPS traces (can be enabled under background settings panel of the iD editor). A good way to do this is find nearby roads and junctions with many traces and see if the imagery is generally in line with the majority of them (traces aren't perfect which is why it's good to find a road with many).

Now in a situation like this where the new road layout is only present on a misaligned layer, what you can do is adjust its imagery offset (under background settings in iD) to align the layer as best you can with the traces and with other imagery you know is aligned well (toggle between them to see if the roads shift much).

Feel free to contact me if you ever have any questions or need a hand with something!
TheEditor101 (2019-06-18 17:26:05+00:00): This area is a little tricky looking at it now.

I see you've aligned Kingswells Causeway to the Esri World Imagery layer which actually aligns well with the A944.

However, if you adjust the DigitalGlobe and Maxar Premium imagery to align with the A944, they put the Causeway further left.

I suspect the Esri layer imagery hasn't been fully corrected ("orthorectified") because there's a single trace heading south down the causeway which should be aligned with the right side of that road and Esri puts it on the left. Similarly switching between it and Bing skews the nearby car parks differently.

The other layers don't seem perfect either though as they show similar differences. However, I believe they're closer to reality when the offset is adjusted.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:12:57+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:00+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
Vicente crespo Tortosa (2019-07-06 13:29:16+00:00): 2.019
Vicente crespo Tortosa (2019-07-06 13:29:57+00:00): 5.000
Vicente crespo Tortosa (2019-07-06 13:32:16+00:00): 9.000
Vicente crespo Tortosa (2019-12-06 16:20:54+00:00): 12.000
HansWürstchen (2019-06-18 17:17:45+00:00): Hallo, 
ist es denn jetzt ein Picknickplatz, oder nur eine Sitzbank wie im Fehler angegeben?
Beides muß aber auch nicht zwingend einen Namen haben.
MfG
chnav (2019-06-17 16:46:25+00:00): Здравствуйте, ещё один такой тест на удаление и вся ваша группа редакторов будет послана на рассмотрение в DWG на полную блокировку. Похоже слов вы не понимаете.
chnav (2019-06-17 16:48:11+00:00): REF:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71043659  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71087261  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/71089111
Road–Runner (2019-07-28 00:55:41+00:00): Hallo. Warum ist der gesamte Weg auf acess=no gesetzt? Das hieße, niemand darf denWeg benutzen? Oder ist er stattdessen nur für MTB und nicht für Fußgänger?
mavl (2019-06-19 16:52:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 71409389 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects].
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:03+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
Phyks (2019-06-17 12:05:06+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OSM,

Je ne comprends pas très bien cette modification. Pourquoi rajouter le nœud https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6552718340 pour représenter le collège

alors qu'il existait déjà, voir

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6535355494

?

Les deux nœuds font doublons et il faudrait supprimer https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6552718340 à mon avis.

Bonne journée,
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:07+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:10+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mueschel (2019-06-22 11:10:52+00:00): Please check these ways, something went wrong with their name tag:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/336772568
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/595525919
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/315731053

Thanks!
DemoLogin (2019-06-17 22:36:10+00:00): "餐厅" is not a book shop
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:13+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
DemoLogin (2019-06-17 22:35:17+00:00): "马赛克工厂" is not a book shop
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:16+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:19+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:23+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:26+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
korolenok (2019-06-21 07:58:57+00:00): Please, don't use highway=residential for the boarder of forest . Could you fix it?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/71325184
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:29+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-17 19:27:36+00:00): Hi Dhana Bhatta, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several hundred buildings? Thanks

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71325336

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
Phyks (2019-06-17 12:31:29+00:00): Bonjour,

Concernant le point du village, il a été modifié (sa position a été modifiée et il est maintenant situé en bordure du parking). Ce n'est pas génial, mais ce n'est pas très grave dans l'immédiat.

Je ne comprends cependant pas très bien la modification. Pourquoi rajouter un nœud pour l'église (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6552790909) alors que l'église existe déjà et est déjà ajoutée et complète (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/122696740) ?

En fonction, on verra comment améliorer ce changement.

N'hésitez pas à répondre ici ou à m'écrire par la messagerie privée,
Bonne journée,
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-17 19:28:15+00:00): Hi DevinaJoshi, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several hundred buildings? Thanks

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71325404

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
damjang (2019-06-17 18:19:07+00:00): Plese stop vandalism you! The names that you state that are italian was italianized during the fascism, when all what is not italian was burned and destroyed! And after the fascism were canceled and not used anymore. Only italian IGM use the fascist names yet on their maps, because were not updated till now (after 80 yeras!). So this names is correct to go in old_name for storical memory only, but are not used anymore nowhere.
danieledvx (2019-06-17 18:30:44+00:00): Lipizza, Sesana? Have you ever seen some map before fascism? Probably do not you, it you really believe in what you day. But this is not the point. There are millions of Italians using them. Look at wikipedia and Google maps,  Italian version, just to make a stupid example
damjang (2019-06-17 18:59:38+00:00): Yes, as you say, stupid example, because were wrong.
danieledvx (2019-06-17 19:07:42+00:00): Why wrong? Only because you don't like? Please leave politics outside openstreetmap and don't remove information for your personal ideas.
damjang (2019-06-17 19:11:22+00:00): You leave politics out of OSM, to google and wikipedia. I didn't remove any information, but correct it.
Cascafico (2019-06-17 20:31:40+00:00): Nel sito del comune di Nova Gorica non ci sono tracce di "Salcano", per cui ufficialmente tale toponimo non è in uso. La voce wikipedia, affrontando anche l'evoluzione storica dei toponimi, giustamente lo cita e sarebbe quindi coerente inserirlo come tag "old_name". Un sopralluogo comunque alla segnaletica credo sia la miglior soluzione per sciogliere il nodo del tag "name".
danieledvx (2019-06-18 06:27:18+00:00): I want to explain better. It doesn't concern a road signal, but a name used in a language. If you go to London, you will find a lot of name:*. Tags old_name:* are for historical names, used in a period, changed to new names, like Istanbul (name:Instanbul, old_name:Constantinople). old_name:* go with name:*, they stay together.
Remember also name:* are used for languages, not exclusively for other official languages spoken/recognised in a country. Don't look only at your area, Italians are about 140.000.000.
StefanB (2019-06-18 07:29:43+00:00): As much as I'd like to just sit back with my popcorn, my love for the OSM community won't allow me to do so. Please keep the discussion civil.

I don't know much about these particular place names, but tagging intuition and experience tells me that old_name:x tag should not require the presence of name:x tag, just for the sake of it (or to keep some validators happy). Also, if the name is still actively and the most used one in language x it should be written to name:x tag regardless of how old it is, or if it was invented by unpopular regime.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:32+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
DiogoBaptista98 (2019-06-21 13:21:40+00:00): I'm notifying you because you ruined a bus route.
Get more attention the next time you edit so you do not ruin the work of others.
Thank you.
Diogo Baptista
Denise Merchuk (2019-06-23 07:34:00+00:00): Hi Diogo,

Thanks for your message. I'm sorry for editing incorrectly, was not my intention. For sure next time I will pay more attention in every single edit. Can you please tell me what was the bus route? I would like to fix it.

My apologies.

Thanks,
Denise
sdoerr (2019-06-17 13:55:43+00:00): An unnamed body of water is already mapped at this location - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/5096006

Would it not be better to add the name to that existing object?
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-09-28 20:04:55+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3377920

Can you look at this note? Maybe you can help with it even if plenty of time since the edit (if not - then I wish you a happy mapping!)
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-17 19:28:29+00:00): Hi DevinaJoshi, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several hundred buildings? Thanks

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71326410

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
Sosha1996 (2019-09-21 22:29:10+00:00): توی این نود 6362831183، ساختمان رو وصل کردید به معبر.
VA00 (2019-12-28 21:54:53+00:00): Nie przypominam sobie tu ani szlabanu, ani tym bardziej znaku STOP.
mavl (2019-07-21 16:13:35+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: copyrighted data were used.
frosm (2019-12-30 13:46:45+00:00): Bonjour,
comment avez-vous fait avec Bing pour voir le défibrillateur ?
je me pose cette question car je cherche à positionner la place de la Mairie (adresse officielle de la marie et du bureau de poste) et place de l'église (adresse que se donne l'Epicerie le Sérieux).
hors les 2 places ont l'air soit de se toucher soit d'être une unique place.
avez-vous des infos à ce sujet ?
sur2roues (2019-12-30 16:23:25+00:00): Bonjour,
je ne saurais comment vous aider désolé. Les rues de séparent elles pas ces deux places ?
frosm (2019-12-30 16:42:05+00:00): on peux le suposer, mais sans certitude.
j'ai fais une première modif en ce sens.
on verra si quelqu'un passe un jour là pour améliorer
literan (2019-06-17 17:11:51+00:00): то есть через эти шлагбаумы любую машину пускают без пропусков?
Siobkhan (2019-06-18 08:52:42+00:00): если я не ошибаюсь, то да. если ошибаюсь - не возражаю против исправлений ;)
pitscheplatsch (2019-06-17 19:29:08+00:00): Hi DevinaJoshi, welcome to OSM.

May I know the reason behind deleting several hundred buildings? Thanks

More information about your changeset: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=71327491

--- 
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
Jose Luis Infante (2019-06-17 14:26:20+00:00): Hola,
gracias por tus ediciones.
Quiero comentarte algo al respecto de esta edición.
Para editar rutas se utilizan las relaciones, pero si no las conoces es mejor que obtengas más experiencia editando. Un ejemplo es este: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2329422

También hay otra alternativa, y es usar la etiqueta ref. Por ejemplo, ref=D1. Un ejemplo, con una carretera sería este: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/673862134

Lo que no es correcto es modificar el nombre de una calle para añadir el nombre de la ruta.

Un saludo!
kai-bcn (2019-06-17 14:59:59+00:00): Hello Jose,

thank you. It's very kind of you to share those tips. 

The relation seems like a good way to chain segments together - I'll start using that.

I understand the ref tag could be used when a path has a different name, and that name is *established* and also used in signposts, like street signs. 
Sadly, in the Collserola park that doesn't seem to be the case: even when a path has a name that one could find in a map, the signposts in the park seem to only indicate the 3-character reference and any destination one could find, but no names. Well, and most paths don't even have any other name.

Here is an example of a signpost:
https://www.trailforks.com/photo/16920827/

The 3-character references are red signs, and easy to read.

Here is an example that has multiple references, but many are too tiny and too difficult to read:
https://www.alamy.com/indicadores-en-el-parque-de-collserola-barcelona-catalunya-espaa-image61496944.html

For navigation with any map-system that is based on OSM source data (like for example all Garmin systems), it is extremely useful being told which exact path to go ... and that should be the reference, or at least prefixed with that reference. Currently most system just show these paths as "unnamed road" or "unpaved road".

I trust that my edits of names will eventually tickle down into systems where they will extremely useful for navigation for people who hike or who go with mountain bikes.

best regards, Kai
PT-53 (2019-06-18 06:28:52+00:00): Hallo dddos,
bitte für Firmen nicht nur den Namen eintragen sondern auch die Branche / den Firmenzweck.
Wenn es nichts passendes gibt,  sollte wenigstens office=yes gesetzt werden.
Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:office
Machst Du das noch?
Fragende Grüße
dddos (2019-06-18 17:43:23+00:00): Hallo PT-53,
danke für den Hinweis.
Ist erledigt.

Antwortende Grüße :)
PT-53 (2019-06-19 09:03:15+00:00): Hallo dddos,
du hast jetzt noch company=transport egränzt. Wie wäre es mit company=passenger_transportation ?
Grüße