piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
user_5121 (2022-09-21 18:29:51+00:00): I "became aware" of this changeset a couple of weeks ago and my view on it is that DaveF's reason for the change as described in his first comment here is correct.  But I'm not sure that making such a wide change in one go was such a wise idea although from the conversation it appears that only one case (highlighted by ohmanger) was actually wrong although several more are disputed.

I have recently "been reminded" of this changeset so I looked at the changed ways and I have to admit that for two ways I was the previous editor.

For https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1054074314 it was not me that added the 'access=private' tag but I can confirm that it is now "highway=footway" and can see in version 7 of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/22969049 that it used to be "highway=service".  SomeoneElse recently reverted his previous reversion on the same basis.

For https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/993439675 I made the edit that introduced the 'access=private' tag.  More accurately I changed the highway type and left the previous access tag.  The history of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30074297 shows that version 7 used to continue to the road but my survey showed that it no longer did so I changed it to a footway.  DaveF's change here was correct, it was my error not to have removed the access tag when I changed the highway type.  Hopefully SomeoneElse can revert his previous reversion here too.
SomeoneElse (2022-09-27 13:48:52+00:00): @user_5121 done: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/126699855
habi (2022-09-05 21:09:58+00:00): Hallo @chm!

Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap, schön machst du hier mit!

Du hast hier mit `review_requested=yes` nach einem zweiten Augenpaar gefragt, für mich sieht das alles tiptop aus.

Gruess usem Liebifäud,
habi
adas (2022-11-07 10:09:14+00:00): Budynki na terenie budowy McDonalda zostały wyburzone jakiś czas temu. Geoportal nieaktualny.
Urbis13 (2022-09-12 07:35:30+00:00): Ciao, volevo chiederti se fossi sicuro del cambiamento che hai effettuato nei pressi di Porta Imperiale a Feltre. Per come è mappata adesso la strada che porta alla Cittadella è mappata come una pista esclusivamente ciclabile; sei sicuro sia corretto ?
Da quanto mi ricordo la strada sotto la può essere percorsa in generale dai veicoli autorizzati diretti in Cittadella e solo in direzione nord senza alcuna eccezione sul senso unico per le bici (tralasciando il fatto che magari poi, visto che il tratto è breve, si preferisca imboccarlo contromano in bici invece di fare tutto il giro). E' effettivamente cambiato qualcosa nello scorso mese (io sono passato in zona ad agosto) o è semplicemente un errore di mappatura (anche considerando che nella descrizione del changeset ti riferisci ad una strada nel centro di Belluno e non di Feltre) ?
Michele Pelacci (2022-09-12 08:13:39+00:00): Buongiorno Urbis13, grazie del commento: è come dice lei, il mio interesse era esclusivamente quello di rendere quel brevissimo tratto a doppio senso di marcia per le biciclette, com'è nella realtà.
(nella descrizione del changeset ho confuso Feltre con Belluno, errore mio!)
Urbis13 (2022-09-13 05:52:55+00:00): Buongiorno Michele Pelacci, alla fine ho fatto le seguenti modifiche. Ho rimosso highway=cycleway perché quello significa che la strada è una pista ciclabile il che non era corretto; per i sensi unici ho ripristinato oneway=yes perché è il tag che descrive il senso unico generale. Per quanto riguarda la situazione di fatto delle bici contromano andrebbe utilizzata il tag oneway:bicycle=no anche se in teoria non è corretto farlo dato che la mappatura dovrebbe rispettare la segnaletica. Per cercare di trovare un punto d'incontro ho usato oneway:bicycle = tolerated che non è un valore standard (quindi dubito che verrà riconosciuto dai router) ma è già utilizzato in qualche caso.
Michele Pelacci (2022-09-13 07:06:54+00:00): Grazie davvero Urbis13, 

E scusami se non sono stato preciso nelle modifiche: era una delle prime che apportavo, nelle seguenti sarò più preciso.

Grazie di nuovo,
M
cytryn (2022-09-05 19:46:57+00:00): Hej,
Czemu zdublowałeś name i start_date na odcinku drogi na moście (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802967629), skoro wszystkie szczegóły dotyczące mostu są już dodane do jego obrysu (
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1069063538), wedle: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge#Bridge_properties ?
Pozdrowienia
SekeRob (2022-09-05 16:35:19+00:00): Hi,

Buildings in Ethiopia AND what?

You did more, touching creating an Change Set bound box touching on 3 continents along the way. Incomplete edit comment and edit set sitting in local CS history view for the next few days for everyone within that CS bound box.

Here's a wiki discussing how to be a good OSM citizen, in German for your convenience, but if you like to read in another tongue just follow the links top of the page.

Ciao from Italy.
PAGlang (2022-09-15 15:08:52+00:00): My bad. Thanks for pointing it out.

It seems I left my session open without saving my edits in Gondar. When I returned later I edited some features near Wittmund, Germany and saved. 

This is how I got this huge bounding box. I need to save more frequently to avoid such mistakes.

Have a nice day.
literan (2022-09-08 20:52:13+00:00): здесь нет знака запрета разворота https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CCUVuMu1LD

пожалуйста, не надо вносить выдуманные объекты/запреты в базу OSM. Я удалю несуществующие запреты.
ruugie (2022-09-24 14:48:03+00:00): Landuses like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1092136376 are heavily overlaying the water areas of the Ebro. Please fix this!
rskedgell (2023-05-05 18:23:31+00:00): I've added the PRoW tags to this bridleway, which includes foot=designated.

You may already be aware of this, but you can check the mapping status of PRoWs in Hampshire here:
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/hants/
SomeoneElse (2022-09-06 15:39:39+00:00): What did the original mapper(s) hope to indicate by the use of this tag?
DaveF (2022-09-06 16:27:03+00:00): Unsure, as they're mainly old edits & there's no wiki info. Appears to be mostly symbiotic with highway=* tags.  
Would reintroducing the tag  add benefit to the OSM database?
SomeoneElse (2022-09-06 16:40:42+00:00): I'd definitely suggest asking the people who actually added the tag.   There are 1400+ examples here; you must be able to find someone who added the tag who is still mapping.

> Would reintroducing the tag add benefit to the OSM database?

If it actually meant something to the original mapper, yes - even if it's not a great way to express whatever that concept was.

Without that level of investigation this is just an undiscussed automated edit and liable to be reverted.
DaveF (2022-09-06 17:55:25+00:00): The main protagonist last edited 7 years ago. In my experience they either fail to reply or say they can't remember. 
There are a total of 24 examples left world wide.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-09-09 12:12:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 125977934 where the changeset comment is: Reverted, since it didn't follow https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct , and in addition no attempt was made to understand what information was likely to be lost.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125819078
DaveF (2022-09-09 12:28:37+00:00): Hang on, I'm still awaiting response from the person who added this duplicating irrelevant tag which no one else uses. You haven't proved it serves any purpose.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-10-25 02:50:03+00:00): have they replied since? Can you link where you asked them?
Znaika (2022-09-08 12:43:20+00:00): Hallo.
Bist du sicher, daß es hier Fahrradschließfächer gibt???
Ich habe es bislang an der Stelle nicht gesehen. Auch an der Internetseite ist nicht zu finden. https://www.dein-radschloss.de/boxbuchen/?preselect_unit_uid=1944
Gruß, Znaika
Kienzler (2022-09-08 13:15:14+00:00): Hallo Znaika. Vielen Dank für deine Nachricht und Interesse. Die Fahrradabstellanlage ist gerade in der Produktion und wird in den nächsten Wochen aufgestellt.
-----
Viele Grüße
Kienzler Stadtmobiliar
NieWnen (2022-09-07 12:07:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3349495
ruugie (2022-09-12 19:20:02+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
sheldonelectric (2026-03-06 18:10:56+00:00): Hello, what is the source for the russian names?
silversurfer83 (2022-09-07 09:43:28+00:00): Moin Hallenberger,

du hast die Straße wegen Bauarbeiten "gesperrt". Wenn Fußgänger und Radfahrer dort noch lang können, passt das so. Sinnvoll wäre noch das Feld "note=..." und dort die geplante Dauer anzugeben sowie in deiner Änderung ggf. noch irgendwo einen Hinweis auf die Bauarbeiten im Netz anzugeben. Wenn die Straße für ALLE Verkehrsteilnehmer für länger als 4 Wochen (meine persönliche Regel) gesperrt ist, dann setze "access=no".

Bei Fragen: meld dich
Grüße
ToniE (2023-10-09 09:58:36+00:00): Servus,

es ist nun schon 1 Jahr her seit der Vollsperrung. Ist die Straße wieder frei gegeben?

Gruß
Toni
Hallenberger (2023-10-09 10:00:34+00:00): Seit kurzem wieder frei gegeben. Nur die Fahrbahnmarkierungen fehlen noch.
ToniE (2023-10-09 10:05:49+00:00): Danke, dann kann das in OSM also auch wieder frei gegeben werden.

Hab's geändert.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142342301
skquinn (2022-09-05 15:36:07+00:00): The more commonly used source tag for on-site surveys is source=survey.
eggie (2022-09-05 16:27:56+00:00): Beste Martin,  Meestal is de combinatie access=no met foot=yes fout.
Welk bord staat er vooraan de strandafgangen?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-05 16:59:25+00:00): Wat doet de app van de hulpdiensten met access=no wanneer emergency=yes ontbreekt?
eggie (2022-09-05 17:06:14+00:00): Er staat bij het appartementencomplex bv bij de opgang een C1 bord. Dat impliceert
vehicle=no
horse=no
traffic_sign=NL:C1

foot=yes is al default, maar kan uiteraard geen kwaad. 
Kijk hier even welke tagging bij de verschillende verkeersborden hoort.
Overzicht Nederlandse verkeersborden 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=NL:Overzicht_Nederlandse_Verkeersborden&direction=next&oldid=984258#C:_Geslotenverklaring 

 Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125819974

Let op dat je geen wegen aan de grens van de bebouwde kom plakt. 
Dat kan ellende geven bij verschuivingen. 

Groet
eggie
eggie (2022-09-05 17:11:40+00:00): Strandafgang De Favauge losgemaakt van de landuse=residential van Zandvoort.
Kijk je nog even naar die ' access=no ' Die denk ik vervangen. 
Het is hier een andere situatie als bij het station. Bij een C1 bord mogen gewoon voetgangers komen.
user_5359 (2022-09-12 11:00:21+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/444145240 (one of nine objects)? What is the meaning of the tag ref:fantoir? Did you mean fre:FR:FANTOIR?
petrovsk (2022-09-12 15:25:31+00:00): Yes! I messed up. It's corrected now, thank you.
user_5359 (2022-09-12 16:41:27+00:00): I have also corrected the remaining eight ways.
petrovsk (2022-09-12 17:46:15+00:00): Nice, thanks.
eggie (2025-12-06 09:34:11+00:00): Dag JT Ik zie dat je op een aantal plaatsen name=voetpad invult. 
Dat lijkt me niet correct. Wellicht kun je nagaan waar je dat nog meer hebt gedaan.
Dat zou van de zelfde orde zijn als name=huis name=bankje name=boom.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125820753
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-12-06 09:41:51+00:00): Maar wellicht heet hier een straat daadwerkelijk Voetpad?
Maar dan met een hoofdletter?
en/of is het een loc_name?
eggie (2025-12-06 09:44:11+00:00): Ahh  Het fietspad heet officieel Voetpad, maar die stukjes bij de kazerne hebben kennelijk geen naam.
Groet,
eggie
somix (2022-09-05 18:10:30+00:00): Hi! If it's a Lats shop with a sign that says Līgotņi, it should probably be name=LaTS, brand=LaTS, branch=Līgotņi. Or am I wrong?
Dāvis Kļaviņš (2022-09-05 19:06:41+00:00): Yes, that would be better, corrected.
pitfire (2022-09-08 05:48:28+00:00): Hallo 1998alexkane,
warum hat der "Wegverlauf: 178542678" die Eigenschaft "segregated crossing"
user_5359 (2022-09-12 10:51:14+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/node/10002455285. What is the meaning of  the tag Av Normalistas = 561? Did you mean addr:housenumber=561?
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-05 18:05:30+00:00): Well no, waterways go through the lakes. Otherwise it is impossible to route waterways. We use these in waterway routing.
user_8101879 (2022-09-05 18:39:51+00:00): So you need to create a route : a waterway relation is not a route, see wiki here : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway

and here : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:route%3Dwaterway

Best regards
user_8101879 (2022-09-05 18:46:55+00:00): You have an example here on this section of the Nile river with 2 relations, a waterway (rel 50793) and a route (rel 8273925) : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1008235943
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-05 19:03:51+00:00): Well, but geographers say that river goes THROUGH the lake, nots end at one side of the lake and then restarts at the other (at least when the name is the same).
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-05 19:07:51+00:00): https://openmap.lt/baseinai.html - we did add waterbodies on top of riverways for this particular map, but rivers do not have gaps in actual data.
user_8101879 (2022-09-05 19:43:16+00:00): if the river has a name when it flows into the lake and another name when it comes out, then we have 2 rivers. You can create a virtual waterway way to link the 2 rivers but this waterway is neither one nor the other river
And here you have 3 rivers because you have 3 waterway relations with 3 different names.

Nice map. But you can't change rules of wiki just to have nice map. A waterway relation is not a collection of all elements of a river, waterbodies should not be in this type of relations
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-06 05:04:09+00:00): In geography a river A can flow into river B even if that meeting point is theoretical in the lake. You're just pushing us to simply rename all waterway=river relations we create/maintain for very specific purpose to something else so that you will not damage our data and our applications would work.
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-06 05:07:26+00:00): wiki is just an opinion of some random people. It was never obligatory to follow the wiki and will never be.
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-07 13:52:08+00:00): Can you comment on the reasons why adding lake part of the river to the river relation is a problem to you? What problems are you getting because of that?
I've discussed this with geographers, hydrologists of Vilnius University and all say that the river does not "disappear" in the lake. Lithuanian river registry (UETK) also gives river geometry through the lake as part of the river - even with different names on in/out sides - river network does not have any disjunctions.
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-07 14:04:41+00:00): Also can you point out a specific place in waterway wiki saying that it is not ok to put waterway ways inside waterbodies (lakes, reservoirs)?
user_8101879 (2022-09-08 13:11:27+00:00): A lake is not a river, even a reservoir behind a dam into a river is no more the river. In osm, rivers are waterways, not water areas (water areas are only there for rendering on maps). Like roads are ways, a single line even for a 6x6 road like the one I saw in Mississipi states in USA. You can add the surface of this road in osm but you will not add this surface in a bus route.

To connect rivers through a lake you have to use a waterway (it is the rule) and you add this unclosed way in the waterway relation if it is the same river. Same thing with 2 rivers : you don't stop a waterway way at the border of a waterbody, you have to connect the waterway ways of each river.

To add the waterbodies in the waterway relation is a big mistake for example if you think to add all waterbodies in these relations 50790, 1657491, 50793. It is useless and create huge relations nobody can update.
Tomas Straupis (2022-09-08 14:14:48+00:00): We're not trying to add waterbodies (polygons), just a way (line) going through the waterbody so that the final river network is connected line network. By what you write in the last comment (as opposed to changeset comment) there is no more disagreement :-) So have a good day.
user_8101879 (2022-09-09 13:09:54+00:00): Not perfect, there are waterbodies in the relation La Dysna.

And the way 565159749 had the role side_stream but on Bing imagery it seems to be the main_stream : I fix it but I don't move all the relations from the old main stream = the new way 1093144864, result of a split of a bigger way in 3 sections (in particular the boundary between your country and Belarus). If you want to have a look.

Have a nice day.
Best regards
BCNorwich (2022-09-06 06:55:21+00:00): Way: 1092161505 is a duplication, please remove it.
BCNorwich (2022-09-07 11:53:46+00:00): Removed duplicate section of highway.
emersonveenstra (2022-09-05 19:46:27+00:00): Reverted in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125828998 for the same reason as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125501047. Names need to be the *actual* name of the trail, if you don't know the actual name of the trail, *don't* change the name of it.
bxl-forever (2022-09-05 22:18:16+00:00): Your edit has been reverted.
Housenumber 16 already on the map.
No need to create a duplicate, that would just corrupt data.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-03 11:11:20+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3582433 ?
Đuro Jiří (2022-09-07 12:33:06+00:00): Ciao Martino, ho notato che hai apportato delle modifiche al Parco San Giovanni Bosco.In base alle modifiche che hai apportato, vedo che le hai apportate solo in base alle immagini satellitari.Parco San Giovanni Bosco è stato completamente restaurato 3-4 anni fa. Alcune strade non esistono più, altre sono state aggiunte, una strada è solo pedonale,... Hai ragione con la chiesa, è stata mappata in modo errato.  L'ho sistemato così com'è oggi. 
Saluti e buon divertimento
sheldonelectric (2026-03-06 17:44:46+00:00): Hello, what is the source for the russian names?
lefuturiste (2022-09-06 07:23:07+00:00): Je ne pense pas que ça soit la bonne chose à faire, place=quarter est généralement utilisé dans une ville ou les différents quartiers sont dans un même tissu urbain, ici il me semble qu'il faut garder place=village en dépit de la distinction administrative qui de toute façon doit se faire au niveau des relations de type boundary (les frontières des communes).
mavl (2023-06-21 16:02:01+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
Negjana (2022-11-08 15:43:47+00:00): Dieses changeset ist völliger Humbug, Anfang August wurden in dem Abschnitt neue Signale in Betrieb genommen. Bitte nicht nochmal ändern!
flohoff (2022-09-07 08:24:40+00:00): Moin,
nur mal so als Frage - Woran machst du fest ob ein Weg beleuchtet ist? Ich würde den Weg hier als beleuchtet ansehen. Sowohl Kramersweg wie auch der Grenzweg haben Straßenlaternen und die stehen weiter auseinander als dieser Weg lang ist und strahlen da rüber.

HIer die Straßenlaterne die genau an der Einfahrt vom Grenzweg steht:

https:/www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=511699310011641

Flo
Szymson (2022-09-06 09:15:33+00:00): Gdzie na tej ścieżce: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934471516 są znaki że piesi i rowerzyści mają jakkolwiek rozdzielone pasy ruchu? Przecież to ścieżka gruntowa, nie da się na niej wymalować oznakowania poziomego. Chodzi mi o te tagi designated
fuchspl (2022-09-06 17:30:12+00:00): "Gdzie na tej ścieżce: są znaki że piesi i rowerzyści mają jakkolwiek rozdzielone pasy ruchu?" - nie ma. Skąd założenie, że powinny być?

Wg mnie użycie foot=designated i bicycle=designated jest jak najbardziej zasadne. Nawet w dokumentacji tagu w Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle=designated?uselang=pl jest pokazany ten sam znak pionowy, który stoi na obu końcach tej drogi: https://api.sports-tracker.com/apiserver/v1/image/scale/631637679c83631a8b807149.jpg?width=2000&height=2000&fit=true (zdjęcie z 2022-09-05).

"Chodzi mi o te tagi designated" - na pewno nie mylisz z segregated=yes? :D
Szymson (2022-09-07 10:25:59+00:00): Dobra, wszystko się zgadza, nie było tematu :D
ZLima12 (2022-09-05 19:03:02+00:00): Additionally, these roads were already tagged with expressway=yes, which is used to denote their limited access characteristics.
balint36 (2022-09-05 19:12:14+00:00): Bővebben // See more
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125350082
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125348057
balint36 (2022-09-05 19:17:55+00:00): The user has created so many wrong tagged items (railwas and platforms) however he was asked several times not to do it but he never answer. This time he also deleted several EuroCity lines. // A szerkesztő helytelenül címkézett fel vasúti elemeket annak ellenére, hogy már rá lett szólva, hogy amit csinál, az rossz, de egy alkalommal sem volt hajlandó választ adni. Ez alkalommal számos nemzetközi vonatot is törölt minden indok nélkül.
balint36 (2022-09-05 19:19:35+00:00): The erroneous changesets: // A problémás változtatások:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125350082
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125349752
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125349225
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125349080
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125348057
SekeRob (2022-09-06 18:59:06+00:00): Ciao

23 avvisi per riepilogo CS e una grande lacuna nel proposto confine  Matese

Hi,

23 warnings per CS summary and a big gap in the proposto Matese boundary.
Polarbear (2022-09-06 20:50:21+00:00): No Mo, could you please provide the source of the name?
Is there any signposting at the bridge?
Karl K Schneider (2022-09-07 11:26:32+00:00): The bridge's tags Name and Ref. have been corrected to reflect their details according to the Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr :
Name "Brücke im Zuge der K 6162 über die A113"

Ref.: "3647582"

Source: Bundesministerium für Digitales und Verkehr (BMDV)
https://via.bund.de/bast/br/map/
Karl K Schneider (2022-09-07 11:33:28+00:00): The bridge's name is rather verbose, more a description than a name. 
I do not know the convention for bridge's name. Perhaps the bridge's number (tagged a Ref.) is a better Name Tag as numbers appear as signs on bridges. Please feel free to change this if you have more experience with this.
streckenkundler (2022-09-07 12:08:54+00:00): @No Mo
Is the data source approved for OSM?

I see the BAST building names more as an extended description than a real name.
Polarbear-repair (2022-09-08 09:27:10+00:00): The "Brücke im Zuge der K 6162..." is clearly a description.
Reference numbers are indeed tagged as "ref=".
 
You were avoiding to answer the question about the source of the
"Autobahnbrücke zum Sandwerk".
The only occurrence where I found such name was an apparently automated entry in Google maps. 
Did you take it from there?
emersonveenstra (2022-09-05 19:47:09+00:00): Also see changeset comment on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125501047