piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Warin61 (2021-05-28 01:05:31+00:00):  Use https://openhistoricalmap.org for things that no longer exist.
ElliottPlack (2021-05-29 06:15:58+00:00): You need to write longer changeset comments. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

What exactly was realigned and removed?
DressyPear4 (2021-05-28 16:33:09+00:00): Olá, eu removi sua edição.
Você adicionou vias por cima de vias que já existem no local, e várias delas sem conexão nenhuma.
Para caminho informal use highway=path, e não há necessidade de colocar nome.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105451085
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2024-01-03 15:36:59+00:00): OK, sem problemas, @DressyPear4, estava iniciando no mapeamento e fiz, à época, um curso bem precário, que não me ensinou muito. Hoje, ensino os demais, pois estudei por conta própria e também com a capacitação do UN Mappers, que foi importante no meu processo de desenvolvimento.
user_5359 (2021-05-28 19:01:19+00:00): Hello! Please use the key highway instead of road! Please connect the new highway with the existing highways.
Carlos_N (2021-05-28 21:33:37+00:00): Hello, there must be an error. I have not created a new highway.
Regards
user_5359 (2021-05-29 04:03:01+00:00): Sorry, you're right. You just changed the data without correcting this mistake.
chris66 (2025-05-25 20:01:22+00:00): Way : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/831441955

access=destination passt nicht mit traffic_sign=DE:253 zusammen... :)
RHWD (2021-05-28 08:36:56+00:00): Alles klar. Danke. VG
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105451744
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:59:28+00:00): not sure why this building was deleted, re-instated in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105452223
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 15:38:26+00:00): Thank you Sir for your revert (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/667097224).
It is like overlapping with this building (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/528002669).
aharvey (2021-05-29 01:00:14+00:00): Oh I see, thanks. so your edit was correct. I re-deleted this one now. Because your changeset comment mentioned crossing water bodies I didn't realise you'd removed this because it was duplicate, sorry.
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-29 01:23:42+00:00): Got it. No problem Sir. Thank you for flagging this.
tekim (2021-07-30 21:20:47+00:00): I highly doubt that this trail:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/840670704
Has a compacted surface in the OSM sense: "A mixture of larger (e.g., gravel) and smaller (e.g., sand) parts, compacted (e.g., with a roller)" - The park service is not dragging a road compacter/roller into the back country to "compact" these trails.
StackKorora (2021-07-31 21:05:25+00:00): I walked those trails. I know what they were like. The trails are a mix of small rock and dirt that has been compacted into a dense firm path that is clearly distinguishable from the ground around it. That's why I chose that option. I don't really care if you relabel them as ground, but there is a difference between untouched ground and a compacted path which can be compacted after heavy use (eg: lots of foot traffic). It doesn't have to be from a roller, that is just one option. And you don't have to be snide and sarcastic in your comments either.
danieldegroot2 (2021-08-04 12:11:45+00:00): Hey KetoCat,

This building seems to not be vacant since H2 2019. It is now used by the "Universal God Centre" ("Universal God" charity).
- 2019: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=577430419866932
- 2020: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1128170260999636&focus=photo

They were and are still active, as far as I can see from their Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/TheUniversalGodCentre
KetoCat (2021-08-04 14:59:36+00:00): Hi danieldegroot2,
Ah, thanks for that. Did my closing the, "Is this vacant?' note throw a spanner in the works?
I'm still finding my way around OSM and I may be making mistakes still.
I've walked past the building and glanced through the windows over the last few months - it's been closed each time, even on Saturdays. I had taken a look at their Facebook pages to look for details to add. This is why I'm a bit surprised that I might have given the impression that it was vacant and seemingly not added any further details - yep, I'm still finding my way around, sorry. The organisation also seems to have a website too btw:
https://www.universalgodmessageofpeace.org/
Perhaps you can add this to the map for me so that I can watch someone who's more savvy at work so I can learn.
Thanks.
danieldegroot2 (2021-08-04 21:53:24+00:00): I have updated the POI in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/109165668

An amenity=* tag could always be added later.
mariotomo (2021-05-28 01:40:25+00:00): hola.  no entiendo qué haces que conduce a nodos duplicados.  debe ser algo sistemático, pero qué será?
ElliottPlack (2021-05-29 06:15:55+00:00): You need to write longer changeset comments. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

What exactly was realigned and removed?
ElliottPlack (2021-05-29 06:15:52+00:00): You need to write longer changeset comments. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

What exactly was realigned and removed?
aweech (2021-05-28 00:40:51+00:00): Hi,
There are many things wrong with this edit. Firstly, you removed vital tags like destinations, lanes, and refs. Secondly, you split a highway that is not divided on the ground. Thirdly, you removed several entire exits. Now, it could be that some of these changes have really occurred, but you have a terrible track record at this point, so I'm reverting this, your other changesets here tonight, and contacting the DWG.
Joseph R P (2021-05-28 02:30:07+00:00): Hey, apparently I somehow forgot to re-map the exits at Coral Canyon Boulevard. It appears I saved my changes before finishing completely since I went straight to work on the I-15 interchange instead of working on the Coral Canyon one then moving onto a whole other area. This was just a mistake by me and I meant good intentions when editing here and if the edits were un-reverted I could finish where I left off. I also had trouble saving some additional edits (such as mapping the proposed interchanges and frontage roads) because you reverted my edits. Apologies for any interferences and I'd like to fix this if I can since I spent hours mapping it.
aweech (2021-05-28 12:31:29+00:00): While you may have had good intentions, you have yet to explain why you split SR-9 into two ways despite it being undivided, why you deleted the destination and lane info at the I-15 junction, why you deleted access tags at the I-15 junction, why you changed the speed limit between 5300 West and the bridge over the river, why you deleted turning lane info along the route, why you marked the junction with the Southern Parkway as under construction, and why you wanted to delete all of the history on every way along this route. You may have spent hours working on it, but so did the mappers who worked to add all of the information you tried to delete. The only source you cited was Maxar imagery, but none of those changes appeared in that source. For more information, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice. 

Normally I'd wait for a response before reverting a changeset that may have had good intentions, but basically everything you've done in Utah over the last few months has been undone by local mappers, and you've been mostly ignoring the complaints about your edits across the country, so I decided to take quick action here.
Joseph R P (2021-05-28 18:24:09+00:00): And I can explain the other edits; I separated the road because most of the route was separated by an unusable rough asphalt median rather than a turn lane, and this median was also going to become a wall as the segment from I-15 to Southern Parkway was going to be upgraded to a freeway with interchanges, overpasses/underpasses, and frontage roads as part of a Zion-bound traffic improvement project, which is currently in environmental study: https://www.thespectrum.com/story/news/2020/02/25/utah-road-sr-9-needs-improvements-udot-zion-national-park/4858022002/

I'm pretty sure I added correct speed limit and lane info, as I traveled along street view reading all of the speed limit signs along the route, which is what I do for every road-editing project I make, but if I didn't, these are all just minor errors that I would have corrected in a revision with remapping the Coral Canyon interchange.

As for Southern Parkway, I could find no sources stating that the road was complete or that a junction existed right there, all I could find were articles about how the Sand Hollow interchange was complete, nothing about a junction with West 3000 South or State Street.
aweech (2021-05-28 22:21:44+00:00): The Southern Parkway was opened to motor vehicles last week, though it has been open to other users for a while https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2021/05/20/mgk-todays-a-great-day-officials-celebrate-completion-of-southern-parkway. You would have noticed that if you had checked the history on the way.

An empty lane is not enough of a barrier to divide a highway. Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Divided_highways for more information. I did ask around and several others agreed that this is not enough of a barrier to warrant splitting the way in OSM, plus it's what's documented in the Wiki. And SR-9 can be divided in OSM when the construction project actually happens. The info in OSM shouldn't be purposefully wrong for years just because of a future project. 

And you wouldn't have to fix all of the lane and access info that you deleted if you hadn't had deleted them in the first place. I did notice that woodpeck had told you before that that style of mapping is not great for many reasons.
mariotomo (2021-05-28 01:32:32+00:00): Hi. you keep requesting review of your contributions, but I have the impression you do not read them.  anyhow: here you're using the name to provide a description. there's more objects on your name, tagged as named "Uso Público".
VictorIE (2021-05-28 18:56:37+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1891372813 and this https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8774039513 appear to be duplicates. Would you know which is correct?
b-unicycling (2021-05-28 19:47:35+00:00): Oops, according to mapillary, it's the one further south.
ElliottPlack (2021-05-29 06:15:50+00:00): You need to write longer changeset comments. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

What exactly was realigned and removed?
WalthamCity (2021-06-22 14:14:02+00:00): Do you have evidence that cycling is allowed on the footpath and new square next to Walthamstow Central station? While I think this is a long term goal for this spot, there is no signage and I don’t think it has been implemented.
MacLondon (2021-06-28 13:42:09+00:00): Hi,

There is shared use signage 'round the corner', viewable at https://goo.gl/maps/PLC9oQDNR9Lte7Sz9 - from memory I believe there are now 2 of these signs at this location.

There is nothing (either signage or tactile paving) to indicate that this shared use ends between there and the toucan crossing near the Cycle Hub (https://goo.gl/maps/RKpKxfD2mnVLJZqJA).

I'd agree it could do with some repeater signage along it.

Also, it's not clear to me how the infrastructure would allow eastbound cyclists to get to St. Mary's Road from the end of Quietway 2.
WalthamCity (2021-06-29 12:55:34+00:00): That’s very helpful. Thanks! I will take a look in person soon and resurvey. I think, implicitly the shared space is likely to end at the corner of Selbourne Road, but the signage appears ambiguous and I want to take a close look in person to see if I can decipher what the council has in mind here. 

I agree with you about the crossing to St Mary’s Road, before the rebuild of the square there was a direct cycle crossing here. Now, I suspect the only officially supported route is via the crossing South of the station.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-05-28 01:38:44+00:00): Hi Irma,

Thanks so much for your contribution to the Central Coast area.

I have a couple of questions if that's okay.

1) I noticed you deleted the pier in this changeset - was that intentional? The source listed on the changeset is Maxar, but the pier is present in that imagery.

2) You slightly moved the building near the pier. At the moment we find that DCS NSW imagery has a superior offset compared to Maxar. The building was aligned correctly with DCS imagery, so I would suggest that the original location was more correct.

Thanks again!
Irma IRM-ED (2021-05-28 02:38:53+00:00): Hello WoodWoseWulf, 
Thanks for your information and the question, 
I apologize if accidentally deleted pier data and shifted the location of the building,
I will fix it accordingly again using DCS NSW imagery.
In the future, I will use the DCS NSW imagery for highway crossing validation so that events like this don't happen again.
Thanks
WoodWoseWulf (2021-05-28 02:48:11+00:00): Hello Irma,

No problem at all!

Maxar imagery is currently newer, but the resolution and alignment in this area is much lower quality than DCS NSW. You might find that you need to swap between the two sources. Just one of those things, haha :-)

Happy mapping!
Irma IRM-ED (2021-05-28 04:25:16+00:00): Hi  WoodWoseWulf, 
DCS NSW is nice and very helpful to validate this area.
Thanks again :)
archie (2021-05-28 01:44:42+00:00): Felfritt! Grattis!
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:52:11+00:00): I reverted this because it doesn't make sense to have a slipway at the end of a pier, and from the imagery the piers are next to the slipway.
I did a second changeset to update based on imagery.
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 15:21:09+00:00): @aharvey. Thank you Sir for your info and revert (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/948142387). It is very clear information from you.
ElliottPlack (2021-05-29 06:15:27+00:00): You need to write longer changeset comments. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

What exactly was realigned and removed?
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:40:12+00:00): hi from the imagery it looks like there may be a path here, so I don't think it's right to delete.
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:46:10+00:00): looks like you've reinstated this, thanks.
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-29 01:38:53+00:00): Thank you Sir for flagging this. Found no issue so far.
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:32:28+00:00): hi, I don't see the point in tag fiddling source:geometry and source:position they mean the same thing and both are common.
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 15:15:32+00:00): @aharvey. Hi Sir. You are correct. 
I checked these links (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source:geometry#wiki) & (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/source:position#wiki). It will open the same Wiki page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Asource%3Ageometry).
Let me double-check with her later about this changeset.
Kind regards.
DiahW IRM-ED (2021-05-31 00:15:43+00:00): Hi @aharvey. thanks for reviewing my work. Sorry for my fault and thank you for giving me advice about this.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-05-28 02:10:59+00:00): Hi YesJayden,

In the past hour, I've managed to find and add several unmapped parks in your local area just using satellite imagery.

This fictional park and path that you've re-added will be removed. I would suggest that you spend your time actively improving your local area with real mapped features that won't be deleted.

If you need help, please feel free to reach out.
Kovoschiz (2021-05-29 11:46:59+00:00): What does this do?
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:30:44+00:00): hi, I've also sent a note to the MapRoulette Challenge author, but I'll also ask you, how do you know there is actually a ford here and there's not a foot bridge?
aharvey (2021-05-30 09:46:41+00:00): I removed the ford=yes because you can't know if it's a ford or there is a bridge here from imagery, best to leave untagged so it can be set once surveyed.
Fauzan IRM-ED (2021-05-30 23:00:01+00:00): Hi aharvey, thank you for your info and correction. Will more careful about objects like this.
Kind regards.
ravali_78 (2021-05-31 04:55:36+00:00): Hi Brayant105,
I have fixed the connection of residential highways to the main road.Kindly check with way 947993977,way 947993978,https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105594880.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105456086
ravali_78 (2021-05-31 03:18:38+00:00): Hi vydn,
I have fixed the geometry of service road.Kindly check with way 947993981,https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105591423.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105456092
jleedev (2021-07-31 17:17:08+00:00): Toll booths were demolished and not changed in-place to toll gantries. Toll gantries were constructed in a different spot.
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:42:21+00:00): If the path leads to the shelter, then it should connect, so I've reconnected.
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 16:22:05+00:00): Thank you Sir, for your edit (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/8774900126).
Kind regards.
Miftah IRM-ED (2021-05-30 23:50:26+00:00): Thank you Sir for your information and correction. 
Kind regards.
Zeazon (2021-05-28 03:03:02+00:00): add thai name, english name of ซอยราชปรารถ 3 too
nyampire (2021-05-28 06:36:00+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for editing the data in Japan!

May I ask you to tell the source data of your maxspeed/turn restriction data?
And it seems your edit looks like Organized Edit.
Are you participating to a mapping team?
nyampire (2021-05-28 06:35:57+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for editing the data in Japan!

May I ask you to tell the source data of your maxspeed/turn restriction data?
And it seems your edit looks like Organized Edit.
Are you participating to a mapping team?
rocky2109 (2021-05-28 04:16:19+00:00): Added buildings of university #MSFTOpenMaps
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105458490
A67-A67 (2021-07-15 20:42:21+00:00): The correct highway tag for a busway is highway=busway, see the wiki page of this approved tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbusway

Busway is a road type that buses can use. The tag even implies bus=designated.

Therefore I've restored the highway tag.
Nithinat S (2021-05-29 14:57:46+00:00): Don't make the turn restriction on a road that's only blocked with no turn restriction sign. If the road is just blocked you should just add an appropriate barrier=* as a node on the road. More info at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction
Regards
Fischkopp0815 (2021-05-28 08:17:39+00:00): Ich habe deine Änderung revertiert. Die Straßenkarte auf der Büsumer  Internetseite ist von Google. Die dürfen wir nicht verwenden.
jannikvomlande (2021-05-30 06:32:45+00:00): Moin, danke. Ich werde dies nächste Woche mal mit dem Kollegen des Amtes Büsum-Wesselburen klären.
BCNorwich (2021-05-29 08:40:56+00:00): Way: Hill view Avenue (948019955), duplicated highway removed
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:52:20+00:00): hi from the imagery it's not clear these are actually bridges
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:38:46+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105460438
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 16:07:59+00:00): Thank you Sir, for your info and revert  (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/366747918). Will more careful about objects like this.
Kind regards.
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:52:55+00:00): I've been there, surveyed this, it's not a tunnel.
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:37:47+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105460498
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 16:17:57+00:00): Thank you Sir for your revert and info.
The previous editor also mentions this info came from a survey (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/16161496). We should aware of this.

Kind regards.
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:53:45+00:00): these paths go to the waters edge so should connect
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:36:39+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105488443 since this disconnected the lookout and the path, and because the paths probably do go to the waters edge
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 16:24:26+00:00): Thank you Sir, for your clear explanation and your revert (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/332750251).
Kind regards.
Miftah IRM-ED (2021-05-30 23:51:06+00:00): Thank you Sir for your information and correction. 
Kind regards.
nyampire (2021-05-28 06:35:53+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for editing the data in Japan!

May I ask you to tell the source data of your maxspeed/turn restriction data?
And it seems your edit looks like Organized Edit.
Are you participating to a mapping team?
aharvey (2021-05-28 10:58:04+00:00): the building deleted here shows up on the DCS imagery, and it's unclear on other imagery.
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:34:12+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105461286
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 15:16:34+00:00): @aharvey Thank you Sir for your revert. Really appreciated it.
Kind regards.
aweech (2021-05-28 22:39:17+00:00): Hi,
A few things about this edit. Firstly you forgot to expand the abbreviation of Magnolia Lane. And secondly, it would have been helpful to cite a source since you are a remote mapper working as part of a team, and it was only recently that Prospect Avenue was renamed. It took some hunting to verify that it had in fact changed to Magnolia Lane. Even if the source is something opaque like internal Mapbox data, it helps folks working to fix errors understand where the info is coming from.

Anyways, thank you for your contribution in Exeter!
VitKlim (2021-06-01 06:57:56+00:00): Thanks for the recommendations on how to leave edits in osm. In the future, I will take your advice and leave the correct comments. In this case, I used the data from this document: page 9  https://www.exeternh.gov/sites/default/files/fileattachments/select_board/meeting/42921/sbmn190211.pdf
aharvey (2021-05-28 11:10:16+00:00): https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/589839759 probably goes continue to go into the shelter, the warning in iD doesn't mean the path must be moved
Adiatma IRM-RV (2021-05-28 14:55:59+00:00): @aharvey. Hello Sir. 
I do agree with your feedback. Since the original user said it come from survey (https://osmcha.org/changesets/59146433/), it probably goes continue into the shelter.
I modified it back (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105499148).
Kind regards.
Irma IRM-ED (2021-07-22 03:18:04+00:00): Xin chào chát_19!
Hãy tin rằng những gì bạn đang làm là đúng. Nhưng phân loại đường https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/948024576 này có phù hợp không?
Còn phân loại đường "khu dân cư" thì sao?
Cảm ơn bạn
Skinoku (2021-05-28 20:34:31+00:00): Sono passato stasera per caso di qui, ed ho visto la strada aperta.
Aprendo OSM ho visto che avevi già fatto tu. Ottimo!
canfe (2021-05-29 06:24:49+00:00): Non son sicuro che da via Bellini per via Borsellino il promo pezzo che porta alla corsia del parcheggio sia o no a senso unico.
Che poi metterlo è una porcata terribile, impedisce l'usufruizione della strada che tanto servirebbe in zona ospedale.
Vinber (2021-05-29 08:33:21+00:00): Hi,
OpenStreetMap is not to map what you want, it is a database for mapping what you're seen on ground or imagery...

Bonjour,
OpenStreetMap n'est pas pour cartographier ce que vous voulez, c'est une base de donnée pour cartographier ce que l'on voit sur le terrain, sur de l'imagerie...

Are you're sure of Roudis ?
Êtes vous sur de Roudis ?

Regards
nyampire (2021-05-28 06:35:49+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for editing the data in Japan!

May I ask you to tell the source data of your maxspeed/turn restriction data?
And it seems your edit looks like Organized Edit.
Are you participating to a mapping team?
!bm (2021-05-30 23:17:36+00:00): Hallo berlina1,

zunächst willkommen zu OSM!

Website war schon per contact:* getaggt – habe es jetzt zu https:// korrigiert und ebenso für phone das contact:*-Schema genutzt – dadurch wird es übersichtlicher.

Happy mapping!

--besteGrüße!bm