piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
WoodWoseWulf (2022-04-27 21:50:51+00:00): It looks like you accidentally changed the residential area surrounding your edit into a park. I have changed it back to a residential area.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/231046389/history
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-05-10 10:28:34+00:00): These were properly mapped
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:32:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
eggie (2022-04-26 18:19:09+00:00): Dag Dannox..  
Je vraagt feedback. 
Wat is Roll The Dice?  
club=?

Ook de aard van de instelling toevoegen.
Zie de wiki ...   
Gr eggie
Dannox (2022-05-03 19:38:12+00:00): Club=Board_games toegevoegd.

Wat bedoel je met de aard van de instelling?
eggie (2022-05-03 20:07:12+00:00): Precies wat je hebt gedaan... Alleen een name= doet niets in OSM

club= overigens ook niet op de standaardkaart, maar dat is een keuze van de kaartenmaker. 
amenity=community_centre zou je kunnen toevoegen als die vlag de lading dekt. Denk dat dat wel kan. Dan krijg je een symbool.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcommunity_centre

Gr eggie
jmaspons (2023-08-18 11:53:32+00:00): Hola! Pot ser que lo Teixidor sigui el parc que hi ha un parell de carrers més al sud i que el que has marcat estigui equivocat?
norman masià (2023-08-19 07:40:06+00:00): Hola,
Aquesta tarda ho vaig a mirar i ho confirmo.
MxxCon (2022-04-25 20:46:54+00:00): Hello.
"opening_hours" tag has a specific format in how things should be recorded. You can read about it in more details on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours. However, you can also use https://projets.pavie.info/yohours/ to simply generation of correct values. 👍🙂
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120182359
4004 (2022-04-30 23:45:36+00:00): лицензионно подходит, потому что как бы государственный документ public domain etc?
tanonin (2023-10-24 16:46:00+00:00): Orthophoniste?
iriman (2022-05-01 21:18:50+00:00): Hi LockOnGuy,

May I ask why you removed "name:fa"?

What's wrong with my edit?

It was only me that added a single name:fa to this place just after your previous revert on this object with your(?) old account (LockDownGuy which is deleted now).

Now if I search for "حرم امام حسین, کربلا" there is no results.

Muslims who speak Persian know these places as "حرم" nearly equivalent of "عتبة" in Arabic. Rest of name is the name of the Holy Imam Hussein ("امام حسین") which referred to with "الحسينية" in Arabic.

So how you call it vandalism, spam, low quality, fake...?
iriman (2022-05-01 21:23:26+00:00): Forgot to mention, it is about this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/988123654
LockOnGuy (2022-05-01 21:27:19+00:00): Hello iriman,   
Your changeset was reverted fully because of the other tag you added in your changeset, that rag is not an official name. You can add it with ‘alt_name:fa’ if you want because there is no street with name “بين الحرمين” excited in the official documents.   
And about this changeset comment is for the other things that got removed in this changeset like private homes etc.. 
best regards.
iriman (2022-05-01 22:11:41+00:00): Then name="بين الحرمين" is official? I added same name=* in name:fa=* with a single difference in character "Farsi Yeh".

I recommend to have a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name to have a better interpretation of name tag and its variants.

Also I should say that it is all irresponsibility as a mapper to revert correct edits because of what we found and think is wrong (meanwhile not vandalism or edit of a vandal) and after all what we think was wrong actually was correct! :)
iriman (2022-05-01 22:16:26+00:00): comment is about this way:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199416278
LockOnGuy (2022-05-01 22:30:32+00:00): Dear iriman,      
Your edit was wrong that was the reason it got reverted. Simple as that.        
You can see the 'addr:street' of the way you shared above (the first link) there is a different street name. Both are wrong though.       
The reason I reverted only the one you added is because I reverted your changeset not the one before it. That doesn't make the previous one correct. Feel free to remove the wrong ‘name’ tag if you want.        
I recommend you look at the exact link you provided for the Key:name ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#:~:text=The%20feature%20is%20known%20by%20a%20generic%20term%20or%20description ) and see this exact line: "Do not use name=* if: The feature is known by a generic term or description." and the name you added is a description of the street, not the real name, you added the name as "between the 2 mosques" This is not a name! the names for minor roads in Iraq is numeric like XXX-XX which x is a number. I suggest you stick to local edits in your country if you're not familiar with this area.     
Best Regards.
iriman (2022-05-01 23:58:24+00:00): 1- "Your edit was wrong that was the reason it got reverted"
2- "Feel free to remove the wrong ‘name’ tag if you want."

While you're the ultimate "map cleaner" why you're not eager to remove the wrong name and ask me to do it?

But it isn't wrong and it's a known landmark in Karbala, although it looks like a generic name. 

see:
"منطقة مابين الحرمين" in https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/كربلاء

Also it's interesting that a photographer printed "مصوّر بين الحرمين" on his shirt:
https://goo.gl/maps/BTXhLekTz41mkaTUA

What you think about an Iraqi user who added this area:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/988108040/history
LockOnGuy (2022-05-02 00:40:03+00:00): Dear iriman,       
Here in OSM, we are a community with the same goals to make and improve the map, the key point is teamwork. You need to understand this.        
Going back about that road, still, we can not add descriptions of the road as the 'name' tag. You can add it as 'description' but not as a name, as I said before we can not use the name "between the two mosques" as it's not the road name.       
And to answer your question about the Iraqi who added the wrong name too. I just removed it too as it was tagged wrong with "residential" tags and a wrong name. spam is spam it doesn't matter where the user came from.         
If you notice any other spam feel free to remove it yourself or ask me to do it, you're most welcome!     
Best Regards
iriman (2022-05-02 02:46:15+00:00): Dear LockOnGuy,

If we are in a teamwork, we should try to interpret others' edits as best as we can, this is first step. Second we can ask the user for more info.

An Iraqi user added a feature with wrong tag (for whatever reason). He is local, knows the place and gave it that name. The name he used is not wrong while there are evidence for it.

We shouldn't think mechanical.

But let me tell how I interpret that street and that residential area:

The highway is a pedestrian, so this is clue 1. With a little of local knowledge and attention to the map, I understand that here is not a usual street for cars. So I don't expect a name like xxx-xx...

I see "someone local" added an area named same. I have aerial photos, images from that place, etc. I say with myself probably the user picked the wrong tag for a feature of real-world. 

Although these edits are not complete, but works from the eyes of some "non-spammer users".

When I see such edits:
- I can simply add more info, so someone else will be more certain: oh, this is really sth important that another user also added more info to it.
- I can put more time (like now) and find the proper solution. for example I think adding these tags to that area instead of "residential" would work:
highway=pedestrian + area=yes + landuse=religious + name=* + name:*=* and then I change those pedestrian highways to footways...
- IMO it's not a good idea to choose last option first (I mean reverting) that will remove some useful info (vandalism cases are rare).

Good Luck
LockOnGuy (2022-05-02 03:00:32+00:00): Dear iriman,        
I was talking with the user Nawfal who added the 'name' tag on telegram before and I asked him to get the local maps data to have the roads as xxx-xx and he said he will be on it and will start with his local residential area in the same city and expanding.         
Please don't assume things without prior knowledge.      
Best Regards and good luck to you too.
iriman (2022-05-02 08:00:30+00:00): Do you have any source (a picture of signpost or anything) for Bain-ul-harmain pedestrian that reveals the real name you claim (in xxx-xx format)?
LockOnGuy (2022-05-02 09:35:08+00:00): iriman, Please re-read what I said above. In the end, we can not add a 'name' based on a generic term or description. We can not add “between the two mosques street” in any Arabic, Persian, English, or any other languages. Please don’t argue, and don't waste my time. Thank you for understanding.
iriman (2022-05-02 11:59:14+00:00): You simply reverted my edits and yet keep reasoning. You wasted my time and efforts simply by playing with reverter toy! Every time you reverted or changed data about bainulharamain, you left there addr:street, or name filled with بين الحرمين or بين الحضرتين and still persist that it's not a name. You even don't know what are you doing!
Allison P (2022-07-28 00:49:25+00:00): Check https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9693388114. Just a quarter of a mile from a peak with over 3000 feet high difference?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:17:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
RaccoonFederation (2022-04-27 23:56:17+00:00): This changeset has deleted footpaths that exist, including a set of steps that exists. The footpaths may not be public access, although there is no forbidding signage. This changeset should be reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120183067
clay_c (2022-05-04 12:48:19+00:00): Hi HaPe-CZ,

The railway you retagged from service=yard to usage=industrial should not have been changed. This is a yard track, not a main track. Why did you change it?
HaPe-CZ (2022-05-04 14:24:37+00:00): Hello, is it the main or secondary or military or tourist railway? 
The marking is also based on knowledge of the railway operation and its organization. Many tracks have also been designated as loading bays here and are in fact marshalling yards.
clay_c (2022-05-04 14:34:24+00:00): I am not sure what is meant by the sentence "is it the main or secondary or military or tourist railway?"

Here is a yard track where you removed the service=yard tag in this changeset. The previous tagging was correct: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1054881652
HaPe-CZ (2022-05-05 06:56:11+00:00): Existují staniční železniční koleje, které zůstávají průjezdné - obslužné, tedy nejsou seřaďovací. Naopak na seřaďovacích kolejích jsou tyto většinou obsazeny vagony. To je ten případ zde.
clay_c (2022-05-05 12:56:43+00:00): I am still not sure what you are trying to say here, but the way you are tagging railways in North America is not in accordance with tagging guidelines. This is, what we call in North America, "track other than main track". Please restore the service=* tag to these segments of railway.
HaPe-CZ (2022-05-05 13:46:13+00:00): Vaše poznámka mi není nijak jasná. Pravidla obslužných a seřaďovacích kolejí jsou všeobecně stejná a to celosvětově (snad mimo 3 zemí).
clay_c (2022-05-05 14:32:06+00:00): Machine translation from Czech: "Your comment is not clear to me. The rules of service and marshalling yards are generally the same worldwide (perhaps outside 3 countries)."

I would prefer that you continue this conversation in English, or at least attempt a machine translation to English, because the mapping community in the United States generally uses English to discuss local tagging issues.

How do these marshalling and service yard rules you speak of correspond to OSM tagging? What is the relationship between them and the North American concept of "track other than main track"? What tagging guidelines are you using here?
HaPe-CZ (2022-05-05 15:12:31+00:00): Hi, great, the use of machine translation :). Each station has several functional tracks (main passable, switch, stabling (missing in OSM), marshalling or service / repair (missing in OSM). Designations as industrial tracks (without further ado) are used through tracks where other tracks are connected (branched off). It's also easy to see in the pictures. Branching tracks from these are then marshalling (there are wagons standing on them). This then makes sense on the traffic map, where the tracks are distinguished.
RaccoonFederation (2022-04-26 08:19:54+00:00): You've deleted paths that do exist, including an entire staircase.
Whether they are legally public footpaths or not is irrelevant.
ovruni (2022-04-26 07:25:56+00:00): zonificación no es una etiqueta de OSM. Revierto este conjunto de cambios.
eggie (2022-04-26 07:16:37+00:00): Tip.. De parkeervakken langs de wegen zijn eigenlijk geen parkeerterreinen.
Naast amenity=parking voeg je dan toe
parking=street_side
parking:orientation=perpendicular of zolas hier ook diagonal
De P's komen dan ook minder prominent in beeld.

Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=120183373

MVG
eggie
koopfloop (2022-04-26 18:55:21+00:00): Het zijn wel parkeertereinen, er geldt namelijk een parkeerverbod.
eggie (2022-04-26 19:54:45+00:00): Er worden binnen de OSM community bepaalde afspraken gemaakt hoe te taggen.
Zo worden parkeerplaatsen langs de weg anders gemapt dan grote parkeerterreinen. Ook om te voorkomen dat je een wijk vol grote P's krijgt.
Groet
Eggie
koopfloop (2022-04-27 19:58:23+00:00): Dat snap ik, maar het is ook niet de bedoeling dat er de indruk wordt gewekt dat er langs de straat geparkeerd kan worden. Er staan overal borden E1 en G5. Fout parkeren is een groot probleem in deze wijken met smalle straten, tot overlast van hulpdiensten.
eggie (2022-04-27 20:16:59+00:00): Dat is precies de reden dat ik de langsliggende parkeervakken niet intekenen. Omdat mappers dat toch blijven doen hebben we de tag parking=street_side bedacht.
Voorheen werd parking:lane= veel gebruikt... maar dat rendert niet.. zie wiki.
Ik volg ook maar gewoon de consensus.
Wanneer je iets wilt veranderen dan kun je het evt aansnijden op het forum.
Dat gebeurt doorlopend.
koopfloop (2022-04-27 20:32:39+00:00): Dan is het denk ik beter om voorlopig geen parkeermogelijkheden aan te geven, het is toch alleen voor bewoners. Ik zal de vakken langs de weg weghalen.
eggie (2022-04-27 20:44:16+00:00): Dat hoeft niet, want als je parking=street_side toevoegt en parking:orientation=......  dan rendert het minder prominent.
Het is dus niet verkeerd om die parkeervakken in te tekenen. Gebruik wel de extra tagging.
De P's zijn dan kleiner op de kaart.
Gr eggie
koopfloop (2022-04-27 21:25:43+00:00): Hoe werkt dat? Ik heb geen idee meer. Ondertussen heb ik de vakken al verwijderd,
eggie (2022-04-27 21:29:09+00:00): amenity=parking
parking=street_side
parking:orientation=perpendicular of zoals hier ook diagonal 

OSM is ook een hoop rijstebrij in het begin. Het is niet anders.
Ik kan je parkeerplaatsen weer terughalen overigens. Zeg het maar.
Moet dan wel even naar je changeset kijken
koopfloop (2022-04-27 21:34:21+00:00): Dat is prima, ga je gang. Dat ik het niet snap is niet zo vreemd, de documentatie is ver te zoeken en er is te veel redundantie onder functies.
eggie (2022-04-27 21:40:34+00:00): Zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side
eggie (2022-04-26 07:29:22+00:00): Dag koopfloop..
Wellicht nog niet bekend mee.. 
Nieuwe gebouwen worden periodiek geïmporteerd vanuit het Kadaster,
In het vervolg kun je bij nieuwbouw dit versnellen door een verzoek te doen op het forum van OSM in het draadje Verzoek BAG import.
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12
Ik heb de BAG gegevens en adresnode nu zelf even toegevoegd.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-04-26 07:38:08+00:00): Aanvulling.. De paden in deze wijk waren (zijn?)  door een voorgaande mapper allemaal op de Duitse manier getagd als fietspaden  met
highway=path bicycle en foot=designated. Ik he zo veel mogelijk designated vervangen door yes.. anders zie je op de kaart die blauwe fietspaden en dat zijn ze dus niet. 
Wellicht zou je dit nog een keer kunnen checken. Iets is alleen een fietspad als er een g11 g12a of g13 bord staat. 

MVG
eggie
koopfloop (2022-04-26 18:58:58+00:00): Langs de huizen zijn allemaal voetpaden, fietsen kan haast niet.
eggie (2022-04-26 19:59:27+00:00): De meeste paden highway=path heb ik ontdaan van bicycle=designated..
Die combinatie resulteert in een zichtbaar fietspad op de kaart. Nu lijken het weer gewone paden.
Het is de Duitse manier van een bepaald type fietspaden taggen. Wij gebruiken die combinatie niet. Het viel me gewoon op en zet fietsers op het verkeerde been.
Mapse
Eggie
koopfloop (2022-04-27 20:02:24+00:00): Dankjewel, het is inderdaad vervelend voor fietsers want er staan op meerdere plekken hekken. Heb jij een tip om de fietsenrekken aan te geven bij het winkelcentrum? Ik heb ze maar apart gedaan, maar het ziet er eigenlijk niet uit.
eggie (2022-04-27 20:18:59+00:00): Je kunt het type zelfs specificeren.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dbicycle_parking
koopfloop (2022-04-27 20:33:59+00:00): Ik pas het aan naar een node.
ovruni (2022-04-25 21:08:59+00:00): Hola, en varios de sus conjuntos de cambios ha estado agregando etiquetas en vías que no son edificios [0], por lo que he revertidos sus conjuntos de cambios.
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
martien-176 (2022-04-26 18:39:36+00:00): Hi, welcome to HOTOSM, great having you here. You requested a review of your mappings. 

They are quite well mapped. But please square your buildings after tagging them by pressing ‘q’ on your keyboard. For the round buildings you should use the 'o' key. 

Keep up the mapping - many thanks! Kind regards, Martien, Global Validator
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120183683
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:22:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
Unbeatable101 (2022-09-16 03:19:09+00:00): Hello Boardgamebrewer, you made the track here private, but it is an Unopened road allowance, which means that the public can freely use it as a road, though it is not maintained as one.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120183987
user_5359 (2022-04-27 13:47:19+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/427097154 (only example). What is the meaning of the tag t = archeo?
superrache (2022-04-27 14:51:55+00:00): it's an error, I will delete this tag now
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:31:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:29:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
archpdx (2022-04-26 01:16:33+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap! It looks like Sunset Hills Memorial Park Cemetery was already mapped here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/156983758
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:32:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
DoKimbDeSun (2022-04-30 12:59:53+00:00): norðtofta*
MxxCon (2022-04-26 05:51:17+00:00): Hello.
Do you have more information about this mural?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120184761
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:29:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:28:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:27:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:17:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
fogey (2022-04-26 09:34:48+00:00): Hello, 
Suggest adding more than "lots of stuff" to the change set comment.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120185129
supercrazycoder10000 (2022-06-13 18:22:56+00:00): will do
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:17:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:24:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:24:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:26:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 120609049, 120606009 where the changeset comment is: Following a number of reports to the DWG, reverting some data that appears to be copied from Google Maps.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5978 , links from there and previous blocks for more info.