piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-20 16:08:33+00:00): No problem with English language here.
1. If such a small residential area would cause a requirement of residential or even unclassified road it would mean changing 99% of track roads in Lithuania (as well as Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine etc.).
2. Such a drastic reduction of track roads in favour of residential/unclassified roads would make a distribution of road classed totally unbalanced and irrational - thus unusable.
3. Unusable data distribution and hierarchy would make data impossible to be used in cartographically sound maps.
4. Disbalanced/unusable data hierarchy would make it impossible to meet the essence of cartography - convey a message in easy understandable and elegant way.
5. Current schema used in Lithuania is based on more than ten years of experience (both mine as well as fellow Lithuanian mappers) and millions of objects changed on our behalf. It is also well aligned with such giants of cartography as SwissTopo (check our attempt to create something like SwissTopo: https://topo.openmap.lt).
6. Current Lithuanian schema is totally aligned with professional members of Lithuanian Fellowship of Cartographers.
7. Wiki has always been and will always be just a rough guideline, not a rule. It is very subjective and uses non GIS/Cartography aligned criteria.
Joseph E (2019-10-21 03:41:32+00:00): How do you and other local mappers currently decide if a road to a small hamlet or a couple of houses should be a highway=residential or a highway=service or a highway=track? If it is paved with stones, bricks, concrete or asphalt would you still use highway=track for the example above? 

> "If such a small residential area would cause a requirement of residential or even unclassified road it would mean changing 99% of track roads..."

I've checked several areas along the border with Latvia (where I already had data downloaded), and it looks like a majority of the highway=track there are used for access to areas of woodland, forest, or farmland 

Here are some examples of highway=track which are access to agricultural or forestry areas:

1)  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86399532
2) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/313101139
3) https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/56.38954/24.75204
4) https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=15/56.3898/24.8920
5) https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/56.2454/24.9899

All the above locations show roads which appear to be used only to access forestry or agricultural areas, which fits the definition of the tag highway=track since early in the history of OSM: 

(Though I did see many tracks which lead to residences, and I would usually map those as highway=service (or highway=residential), they did not appear to be a majority)
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-21 05:45:24+00:00): highway=service is a final approach to something. Service roads are not essential for routing network, they can easily be dropped from medium scales (as is done even in OSM-Carto).

Way wide enough for two vehicles to pass one another without getting of the way is above track (residential/unclassified). Unclassified is higher than residential and should create it's own higher level graph (maybe google translate will be able to translate this: https://blog.openmap.lt/2017/12/09/keliu-hierarchija/)

Paved narrow way is track+grade1 (this is something new, 10 years ago all tracks were unpaved...).

From your example ways:
1st one is a road leading to nowhere (could be "agricultural"
2nd road leads to natural monunument - a tree in a forest
3rd is agricultural
4th are forest roads which are used for forestry but most of the time are used by people to get to the forest for different leisure activities. Absolutely the same type of roads would be used in national park forest roads.

In practice forestry tracks are much larger/wider as they need huge forestry vehicles to pass, they are very clearly visible from ortophoto. As opposed to smaller "personal/leisure" use tracks in the forest as the ones here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/55.0562/25.6032 (and here twice as many actual tracks should be mapped)

The point I'm making is that in Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Belarus, Ukraine there is no distinction of agricultural/forestry roads, all of them are accessible and are used by general public. Such information on a map conveys no useful message. Useful message is the road network and usefulness of each separate segment of it.
Joseph E (2019-10-21 08:14:36+00:00): It's still not clear to me how highway=track is defined in Lithuania.

You mentioned that it should not be wide enough for two vehicles to pass one another, but it can be paved. However, highway=service (and highway=residential) can also be narrow, and can be paved or not. 

So how does one decide whether to use highway=track in the case of way 230684594, but not in the case of way 319125591 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/319125591 and other similar situations? 

The definition at the wiki page is clearer, because it focuses on whether the road serves as access to agricultural/forestry areas - this is  highway=track. In contrast, a road which provides access to developed properties like a house, hotel, or power substation is a highway=service.
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-21 09:01:29+00:00): highway=service is usually short. So basically ways we can forget if we have a map with a scale of 1:25000 or more. They do not help in general routing or general orienting in the field.

Difference between good track and bad residential is blurry, both are important for both routing and orienting. But the way discussed in this changeset (230684594) is nowhere close to being a residential - narrow, no name, no local municipality caring (levelling, surface hardening, snow removal etc.), ground/grass surface, leads to only one-two addresses, very low traffic.
Joseph E (2019-10-21 12:11:29+00:00): But this could be highway=service, as used in way 319125591 and many other examples in Lithuania. It's short, as are most of the other examples of roads currently tagged highway=track which lead to residences.
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-21 12:32:24+00:00): This particular way could be used to get access to the river (to say put in/out kayaks) as that is before residential/private area. It can also be used to go through the residential area to some kind of small shelter/shed/whatever (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/411023632). And it is also used for access and as alternative (non official) part of hiking route (Akmenos pažintinis takas), see the relief there: https://topo.openmap.lt/#t/15/55.39351/22.23773/0/0/.
So it is too important for orienting to be downgraded to service. Without this track it is not obvious how to get to the residential zone - so it is also important topologically.
Joseph E (2019-10-22 00:48:48+00:00): > "Without this track it is not obvious how to get to the residential zone - so it is also important topologically."

OK, while I didn't want to make assumptions, I will try to guess how you are currently using highway=track from your previous comments, since I have not yet seen a clear statement of the definition for highway=track in Lithuania.

From the comment above, it appears that you treat highway=track as a higher class than highway=service, but below highway=unclassified (and =residential maybe?) and you would like highway=track to render sooner than highway=service on your maps.

It doesn't appear that there are any specific physical characteristics that you can use to define a track: it can be paved or not, it's usually narrow but "forestry tracks are much larger/wider as they need huge forestry vehicles to pass", and it can be short or long. 

Am I missing something else?
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-22 05:12:40+00:00): You're getting the idea. And it is not specific to Lithuania. General idea in GIS/Cartography/design: essential thing is data hierarchy as well as visual hierarchy.
mavl (2019-10-25 17:05:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 76218999 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3227].
pio2_122 (2019-10-19 13:52:41+00:00): the tracks are under the bridge here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4031968107 
so, there shouldn't be a common node with "level_crossing" for the tracks and the road.
marcoSt (2019-10-20 09:04:54+00:00): Thanks for your direction. I've improved, yet.
ma-rt-in (2019-11-23 12:00:16+00:00): Hallo,
wenn du etwas geprüft hat und es eine fixme dazu hat, dann bitte die fixme auch löschen. Ich habe das nun getan.
vg
RajSarkar (2019-10-19 13:30:22+00:00): ok
kartonage (2019-10-19 14:12:34+00:00): Nodes like these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/933877838 show how poorly these changesets of yours are done.
kartonage (2019-10-19 14:00:23+00:00): With this automated edit you are not going to be able to decide if tourism=gallery or shop=art would be more fitting. As is, you are creating false data. Your changes are therefor not welcome.
KarmaCleaner (2019-10-19 17:03:48+00:00): Why you deleted a seamark:small_craft_facility:category slipway?
why you replaced a pier with an unusable service road?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/75930938
felipeeugenio (2019-10-20 15:09:21+00:00): Sir
what is the purpose of this editions?
stefanct (2021-07-04 14:53:39+00:00): Das ist keine Radroute sondern eine Sammelrelation, welche nicht einmal, wenn sie korrekt getaggt wäre (type=network) dem Konsens der Community entspricht (siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:network). Wieso hast du sie eingetragen? Zusätzlich ist auch der ref-Tag erfunden.
ReinerMeyer (2021-07-04 15:59:05+00:00): Als ich im Herbst 2019 einige Male durch die Lobau gewandert war, habe ich die Radrouten ebenfalls gesehen. Diese habe ich dann als route=bicycle eingetragen. Da die einzelnen Teile alle in der Lobau liegen, habe ich diese mit ref=Lobau getaggt. Glücklich war ich mit diesem Netz nicht, da Radrouten meistens von einem Start zu einem Ziel führen. In diesem Fall wären es mehrere Starts mit mehreren Zielen.
Erst Anfang dieses Jahres bin ich dann auf type=network gestoßen und kann mir gut vorstellen, dass diese Radrouten gut damit klassifiziert werden können. Auch das Radnetz von Wien sollte damit abgebildet werden können.
mavl (2019-10-25 17:05:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 76218999 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3227].
mavl (2019-10-25 17:05:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 76218999 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: nonexistent objects - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3227].
Jordi MF (2019-10-19 16:09:25+00:00): Hola,
Parece que todo es correcto. Una pregunta, ¿eres de Quart de Poblet? Existe una nota en la que un usuario pedía que alguien comprobase la avenida o calle de Trafalgar: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1262786

Muchas gracias por mejorar los datos de OSM.
sai_sri (2019-10-30 08:12:02+00:00): Hello sgmapperhh,  
  
 I'm from the Grab Data team, while mapping in Singapore, we came across few of your edits (Eg: way 658174809, way 481114110). We were not able identify these roads neither via the satellite imagery nor the OpenStreetCam imagery. Can you help us understand the source you have used or referred while mapping these roads.  
  
Thank you, 
sai_sri
SomeoneElse (2019-11-01 23:06:56+00:00): @sai_sri Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.  We've had other complaints about this user.  I've sent them a "message that they have to read before continuing toedit" at https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3235 .  Do you or the local community here need any help fixing the data problems that remain?
sai_sri (2019-11-05 11:34:00+00:00): Hello Andy,

 Thank you for replying and also reaching out to the user. At the moment we have corrected the errors and are keeping an eye out for the same in the future, if this continues, we'll reach out to you and the Data Working Group for help. Thanks again
SomeoneElse (2019-11-05 12:16:40+00:00): @sai_sir thanks.  Thet've been quite active since their block (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Map3787/history ) - presumably their recent edts are OK
mavl (2019-10-19 14:44:11+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changeset 75141800.
Kovoschiz (2019-10-19 18:30:33+00:00): Are you sure about your offset? Also, other objects like roads don't seem to be corrected together or relatively.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/75931836
azakh-world (2019-11-01 11:41:24+00:00): Hi.
Subway is a mass transit system, regardless is it underground or not. Bangkok MRT and Skytrain systems are subways by their purpose and characteristics. I'll return "subway" tag for the stations.

BR, Alexey
mavl (2019-10-19 15:42:53+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 75170650, 75188847.
tanish1980 (2019-10-21 05:14:24+00:00): Please draw the polygon on the building only, as you have denoted with the entire area.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/75932175
Tomas Straupis (2019-10-19 15:11:20+00:00): Grąžinau teisingą kūdros reikšmę landuse=basin, iD redaktoriaus siūlymų „taisyti“ nereikia klausyti.

Bet klausimas kodėl nuimta shop=convenience nuo Viados degalinės? Ar ten dabar tik kurą galima piltis ir nebegalima nusipirkti įvairių smulkių dalykų: užkandžių, gėrimų ir pan.?
smootheFiets (2020-03-26 21:07:32+00:00): De highway=track die je hier heeft toegevoegd -- is die wel toegangelijk? Ik zie op Google Maps / Mapillary alleen een bruin bordje van Staatsbosbeheer maar kan het niet lezen. Blijkt daaruit misschien foot=permissive, bicycle=permissive of zoiets?
E de Wit (2020-03-27 18:38:00+00:00): Ik zou het eerlijk gezegd niet weten. Een toegangsbeperking (tijdens broedseizoen) is goed mogelijk.
Ik ben bang dat er een survey nodig is om te achterhalen wat er op het desbetreffende bordje staat.
Misschien even een opmerking plaatsen zodat een lokale mapper hier uitsluitsel over kan geven.

Ik heb me rond het Lauwersmeer destijds vooral gericht op het uitlijnen / detailleren van sloten en landuse.
smootheFiets (2020-03-28 09:14:05+00:00): Begrijpelijk. Dan ga ik daar straks lang. Ben sowieso een tochtje Lauwersmeer aan het plannen en kijk waar OSM een beetje aandacht nodig heeft. Op die manier ben ik hier belandt :)
Een fijn weekend toegewenst en stay safe!
E de Wit (2020-03-28 11:32:48+00:00): Er wordt rond het Lauwersmeer niet heel veel gemapped, dus zeker wegclassificaties / toegangsbeperkingen etc. kunnen ontbreken.
Het is in ieder geval een erg mooi gebied.

Jij ook een fijn weekend en stay safe (tijdens het fietsen). :)
bkil (2019-10-28 07:52:31+00:00): Hello, thanks for your contribution. Unfortunately, this bar (pub) already exists on the map, but feel free to extend its information or improve its position by drag & dropping in the editor. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6841706814#map=18/47.48209/19.05228 Take care
eggie (2019-10-19 16:05:22+00:00): reverted by changeset #75933729
eggie (2019-10-19 16:06:48+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.

alle gebouwen zijn directe import vanuit het Kadaster. gelieve deze niet aan te passen of duplikaat adresinfo aan toe te voegen.

MVG,
Eggie
viloan (2019-10-19 15:33:07+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt
Se você está mapeando por causa do jogo do Harry Potter, as dicas e explicações na página anterior também são úteis para você.

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
alester (2019-10-19 21:38:30+00:00): Some of these clearly don't fall under the category of craft=*. I've now reported you to the DWG due to your massive number of mechanical edits and your failure to communicate with other contributors.
Glassman (2019-10-19 20:56:44+00:00): Not sure I agree that a place that sells Glass pipes and smoking accessories should be a glaziery. See node NODE: 4235166353. Are there others like this?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/75933205
woodpeck (2019-10-19 16:03:26+00:00): Please do not perform large search and replace operations like you did here. It appears that you have added craft=glaziery to quite a few objects where this tag does not match (eg 328531320). Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/What%27s_the_problem_with_mechanical_edits%3F for details.
sorcrosc (2019-10-19 16:58:11+00:00): The same in this changeset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/75933301
See node:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3016775101
alester (2019-10-19 21:23:55+00:00): This user is performing a massive number of mechanical edits all over the world. They need to be stopped immediately.
freebeer (2019-10-20 06:37:07+00:00): agreed.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3651038416/history was obviously tagged correctly by a local mapper, and it's not surprising to find crystal glass shops throughout bohemia as well as the rest of ex-czechoslovakia that are no more than (souvenir) shops.

one would think this user would have ceased these types of edits following so much criticism of earlier similar blind mechanical edits as well as numerous repeated reverts (where i seemed to get solely blamed for inappropriate activity).
mavl (2019-10-19 16:41:44+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 75190000, 75205095.
ForstEK (2022-04-23 09:41:36+00:00): Hello! I fixed your typo "farmacy" instead "pharmacy", please be patient: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dpharmacy
See here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120083043
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-19 18:43:59+00:00): Boa tarde, justifique esta sua edição e demonstre que isto é um parque. Aguardo antes de tomar outras medidas
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-10-19 18:43:15+00:00): boa tarde, pode justificar este parque? se está em construção não deve ser parque e a dimensão é pequena. Duvido que seja um parque. Aguardo justificação antes de tomar outras medidas.
stedewa (2019-10-19 16:14:25+00:00): Arabe... je voulais écrire Arbaz... dictionnaire de mobile....grrr
TeXnicer (2019-12-14 09:34:25+00:00): Warum wurde der _vorhandene_ Netto-Markt, einschließlich Parkplatz und Zuweg gelöscht? Das ist aus meiner Sicht falsch!
MKnight (2019-12-14 10:11:19+00:00): zurückgesetzt in #78403745
vogelfreier (2019-12-14 15:10:53+00:00): @ MKnight -> wieso zurück gesetzt?
@ TeXnicer -> wieso sollten den hier Nähe Chausseestr in paar Meter Abstand 2 Netto-Märkte vorhanden sein https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/180139467 ???

Laut JOSM mit den 6 zur Verfügung stehenden Luftbilder ist an der wiederhergestellte Nettofläche eine Grasfläche - laut Nettofilialsuche steht der Marker an der "L21" ...
MKnight (2019-12-14 15:29:46+00:00): Laut DOP-Meckpomm ist dort die bauliche Situation weitgehend so, wie sie vor Deinem Edit war.
So weit mir versichert wurde, ist das bei google maps ähnlich (wahrscheinlich verwenden die genau das DOP-Meck-pomm) hab ich nicht geschaut.
Daher habe ich es zurückgesetzt.
MKnight (2019-12-14 15:38:37+00:00): Nachtrag zur Netto Filialsuche:
https://www.startpage.com/do/dsearch?query=netto+barth&cat=web&pl=ff&language=deutsch
TeXnicer (2019-12-14 15:50:23+00:00): @vogelfreier: 
- Die Luftbilder sind zum Teil richtig alt. Vorsicht!
- Wieso sollte das nicht so sein... Dein gesunder Menschenverstand in allen Ehren, aber ich kann Dir versichern, ich bin in den letzten Wochen wiederholt dran vorbei gefahren und habe auch über den Parkplatz davor gemapped.
- Im Norden (Diskussionsgegenstand) ist ein Netto "rot", weiter im Süden ist es ein Netto "schwarz".
- Frag nicht... es ist so.
- Wenn Du in der Gegend bist, lade ich Dich zu einem Rundgang "Kopfschütteln-und-Teetrinken" ein 
:D
TeXnicer (2019-12-14 15:55:42+00:00): Ich habe mich mit den Farben oben vertan, es ist anders herum.
Offizielle Lesart:
A) Netto Marken-Discount (aka "rot") hier: Norden, Chausseestraße
B) Netto Scotie (aka "schwarz", mit Hundelogo), hier: Süden, Hölzern-Kreuz-Weg 

...immernoch kopfschüttelnd, teetrinkend.

"wieso sollten den hier Nähe Chausseestr in paar Meter Abstand 2 Netto-Märkte vorhanden sein"
... das muss dieses "Marktwirtschaft" sein... denn irgendwie scheinen die beiden ja hinreichend Umsatz zu generieren.
dval (2019-10-20 07:37:13+00:00): Hi, anastasya777! Допускаете множественные ошики в разных направлениях рисования. Улицы именуете в нарушение правил ОСМ, дороги переквалифицируете, не имея представление о том, как это правильно делается, в адресах домов указываете н.п., с неверным именем.
dval (2019-10-20 07:52:44+00:00): В Прокоп. Салде вы наложили одну дорогу на уже существующую дорогу (ул. Сенянского). Такое недопустимо. Удалил.
2maxic (2020-01-11 10:42:09+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%B1_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3
Hjart (2019-11-08 21:04:15+00:00): Hvorfor slettede du de her wiki tags?
ragit (2019-11-08 21:53:49+00:00): Hvilke tags er det der er blevet fjernet? Er der en diff visning, eller lignende?
Hjart (2019-11-08 22:25:27+00:00): Du kan få lov at studere https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=75934511 :-)
ragit (2019-11-09 10:20:10+00:00): Tak for link, meget brugbart!
Jeg aner ikke hvorfor jeg fjernede dem, det var ikke min intention. Men jeg kan se de er blevet genoprettet https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=76825391
Hjart (2019-11-09 10:26:11+00:00): Ja, jeg opdagede det da jeg kiggede på nogle ændringer, som en svensker har foretaget med et værktøj.
Tak for svar. Det er godt lige at have en fornemmelse for om fjernelsen har skyldtes en misforståelse eller en teknisk fejl.
ragit (2019-11-09 10:36:05+00:00): Tak for at følge op, og godt det blev opklaret, for jeg kan se at det wiki-tag jo har en del data, som det ville være ærgerligt at miste 
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1142174
eggie (2019-10-19 16:50:25+00:00): Dag vogonix.. Dat heb ik je al eerder uitgelegd. 
Deze changeset is ook teruggedraaid. Svp geen gebouwen verwijderen of aanpassen. Bij periodieke import gaat het dan mis en staan er twee gebouwen boven op elkaar. 
Deze bijdrage draai ik terug.
Wat is dan je bedoeling?
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-10-19 16:50:53+00:00): reverted by changeset  #75934756
eggie (2019-10-19 18:02:44+00:00): Wanneer iets niet in orde is met de BAG gegevens zou je een terugmelding kunnen doen bij het Kadaster via hun site
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=buitenhuizerweg%2014&resultOffset=0&objectId=1690200000004119&geometry.x=215427.814&geometry.y=525858.334&zoomlevel=6&detailsObjectId=1690010000004119
Gr Eggie
mavl (2019-10-19 17:15:00+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changeset 75243306.