piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
PhysicsArmature (2022-08-18 05:14:56+00:00): Thank You
RicoElectrico (2024-11-02 16:29:35+00:00): Cześć. Według tej uwagi sklep zamknięty. https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3907367
eggie (2023-03-29 20:32:12+00:00): Dag Erik... Het is al even geleden, maar waarom tag je vehicle=no op een fietspad..?
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=101216737

Dan kun je toch raden wat er gebeurt.

MVG
eggie
gscscnd (2021-03-18 11:26:08+00:00): Na drodze <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/296005375>, która wcześniej obejmowała też drogę <https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/918466270>, ustawiłem surface=fine_gravel; na tym drugim fragmencie ustawiłeś surface=ground. Zobacz ilustracje na <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface#Values>. Jeżeli stan nawierzchni na tym nowym fragmencie się nie zmienił, to zastanów się nad przywróceniem surface=fine_gravel lub podobnego. surface=ground jest nieprecyzyjne, ale przede wszystkim oznacza gorszą (dla rowerów i samochodów) nawierzchnię niż np. compacted czy fine_gravel.
Jan'ek (2021-03-18 20:45:24+00:00): Pewnie masz rację, ze zdjęć nie wyglądało precyzyjnie. Zmieniłem na surface=fine_gravel.
A tak przy okazji - korzystając z twojego większego doświadczenia - mam problem do rozwiązania: jak poprawnie otagować "jedną drogę dwie nazwy"? Może włączysz się do dyskusji https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2579329.
gscscnd (2021-03-18 22:04:57+00:00): Ja tam po prostu byłem jeszcze latem i na tej podstawie ustawiłem surface. Na zdjęciach satelitarnych słabo to widać. Oczywiście jeśli będziesz na miejscu i stwierdzisz, że nawierzchnia zdążyła się zmienić, to tag surface powinieneś zaktualizować.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-03-20 16:28:33+00:00): Bom dia Catarina, senao existe não pode estar no mapa, este mapa não é feito para testes.
rah_em (2021-03-23 06:11:00+00:00): hi VLD171,
I have given connectivity from the node 8548614494 to node 8548614484
kindly the refer the changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101494090
thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101216969
rah_em (2021-03-22 09:35:05+00:00): Hi VLD171
I have provided connectivity for the way 918888182.
kindly refer the below changset, 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101483727
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101217020
Frans S (2023-01-13 14:13:09+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
About your mapping. 
Both rectangular and circular buildings are found here.
Rectangular buildings can be drawn with 4 nodes.  Square them with the q key. 
Circular buildings. Draw a triangle over the edge of a building and hit the O key. It becomes round.
Not all round objects are buildings. 
When you see a shadow on the outside and inside it is not a building, but a small open round storage.
Best regards and keep mapping
StephaneP (2021-05-06 16:14:50+00:00): Re,

Là aussi https://www.osm.org/way/918473427 fait doublon avec https://www.osm.org/way/557620586 qui est autorisé aux piétons et cyclistes et avec le tag segregated=yes.

Dans ce genre de cas, où il n'y a pas de séparation physique, je suis plutôt partisan de ne pas créer 2 voies.

A+
Stéphane de Carto'Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
rah_em (2021-03-22 09:02:24+00:00): Hi VLD087

I have added missing connectives for the way 918474276
way 918474271
way 918474279 based on maxar imagery.
kindly refer changset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101486167
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101217737
habi (2021-03-19 19:59:26+00:00): Hey
In this changeset you've added a lot of buildings tagged with `bldg:levels`. The tag should be https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building:levels, abbreviated like it is now they are meaningless.
I took the liberty of correcting this in changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101350197

PS: I came here from http://osm.mueschelsoft.de/taginfo/newkeys.htm
habi (2021-03-19 20:04:52+00:00): And the same for `bldg:material` -> `building:material`: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101350327
PhysicsArmature (2021-03-20 03:29:04+00:00): @habi, Thank You. I will be more careful.
habi (2021-03-20 06:33:40+00:00): No worries, typos happen.
Happy mapping!
Carnildo (2021-03-18 08:15:20+00:00): Do you have evidence that Old Eureka Airport was not closed 35 years ago like the description indicates?  It sure looks closed in the aerial imagery: the runway has Xs painted at the ends indicating closure, and the taxiways have fallen into disrepair.
faustopt (2021-03-20 13:20:11+00:00): Identificação Desadequada e Incorreta - As residências têm uma morada (nome de Rua e Número) não o nome de quem vive nelas... Aconselho o Utilizador a ler as normas e boas práticas do OSM. Edição será revertida ou Apagada.
MxxCon (2021-03-18 00:39:36+00:00): When adding nodes, please try to position them correctly. I highly doubt benches and a bike rack would be in the middle of a 6-lane road. 😉
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101218062
akadouri (2021-03-18 01:49:04+00:00): Oh no! I was tracing using OSM background and forgot to flip back to satellite imagery. Things should be aligned now, fixed with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/101219457
jhmeniscus (2021-03-18 02:43:42+00:00): …Continued from changelog: Naming sidewalks causes visual clutter with multiple instances of the road name causing confusion: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1cc14SScjubHFakF439OKMdXaU3hsNysH/view?usp=sharing
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101218138
treestryder (2023-02-05 21:17:58+00:00): The waterway=rapids should replace a section of waterway=river. And be added to the same relations as the replaced section. Don't worry about adding a name, unless the rapids have one. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Michigan for meetings and Michigan mapping cheatsheet.
pardthemonster (2023-02-05 22:12:21+00:00): Prior tagging was perpendicular to water centerline; I have updated to latest tagging practice for node usage per wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway=rapids).  Feel free to refine further with line or area, or relation as you note.
MxxCon (2021-03-18 00:54:58+00:00): Hello.
A couple of tips regarding your edit.
When mapping polygons that are supposed to have square corners, you can right-click after drawing them and select square.(Some of those houses look pretty crooked😉).
Additionally, as documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dtennis, when mapping tennis courts, each court should be mapped separately as its own area.
Finally, when mapping other areas, please try to draw them as accurately as you can to match best available satellite imagery. Some of the parking lots and residential areas you mapped cross into nearby streets. 👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101218551
VLD071 (2021-03-22 21:14:44+00:00): Hello note_fixer, 
Reaching out to see why these inner members were removed from the relations I created? Based on the OSM wiki I believe this is the best way to map out these islands or islets. (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland#Islands_in_waterways_and_lakes)
Thanks, Ry
Canal des Pangalanes (2021-09-16 12:46:55+00:00): Some of the buildings you wisely imported from Microsoft have already been deleted because they are demolished in reality: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=88643133
woodpeck (2021-10-07 08:58:37+00:00): The DWG has had a complaint about this line, especially the "proposed" part https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/261185619, claiming that showing this proposed railway "has caused many economic impacts as the land value has reduced through which the route is shown and many people who have to sell land for the education and marriage of their kids are getting only cheap value for their
land. ... The government has not finalized the route and showing an incorrect route causes severe impact in the life of many people".

Can you verify that the current route is in line with actual government planning? Or if the state of affairs is just that this is "one of several proposed alternatives", then perhaps consider removing it from OSM until one of the alternatives has been settled on. 

I have told the complainant that we'll pass on the request to the local community but DWG is not going to be further involved. 

(Ticket#2021100710000053)
blackboxlogic (2021-03-24 01:14:52+00:00): Based on the name you gave way 928496528 "Organic Garden", I wonder if leisure=garden would be more appropriate than landuse=meadow?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101219976
Glassman (2021-03-18 16:37:23+00:00): #TIP: Just correct the address on the building instead of removing it. Can you add the correct address to the building?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101220132
micha_k (2021-08-11 16:07:48+00:00): Worin besteht der Sinn, nicht mehr bestehende SEV-Linien zu mappen?
ticki_52 (2021-08-11 17:18:01+00:00): Guten Abend Micha, zunächst einmal wünsche ich mir in diesem Forum einen freundlicheren Korrespondenz-Ton mit einer persönlichen Anrede und Grußformel. Jeder hat einmal angefangen in OSM und arbeitet sich nach und nach in die Materie ein. Da passieren eben Fehler. 
 Zur Erklärung: Die RB19E (BK <-> WN) war vor einem halben Jahr noch im Liniennetz des VVS enthalten und da habe ich die mal gemappt. Dass es sich hierbei um eine veraltete SEV-Linie handelt, habe ich erst im Nachhinein erfahren und bin bisher nicht dazu gekommen, zu fragen, ob ich die wieder rausnehmen soll. Was meint der Fachmann.... Einen schönen Abend noch... ticki_52
micha_k (2021-08-11 17:36:40+00:00): Hallo ticki, ich bitte um Entschuldigung, dass mein Kommentar zu kurz und undfreundlich geraten ist.

Ich wollte lediglich den etwaigen Hintergrund verstehen, bevor ich diese gründlich gepflegten Relationen einfach so lösche.

Ich würde vorschlagen, diese Relationen zu löschen, da die dazugehörigen Buslinien real nicht mehr existieren.

Viele Grüße, Micha
ticki_52 (2021-08-11 18:13:09+00:00): Hi Micha, danke für die Info. Ich werde diese Relationen löschen, habe aber noch eine Leiche im Auge. Es handelt sich um den Teil der Linie 335, der früher von BK via Nellmersbach ging mit Endstaton RM-Klinik Winnenden. Die gab es schon vor meiner Zeit und da habe ich mich nicht getraut, etwas zu löschen. Kannst Du Dir das mal anschauen und mir Bescheid geben, wie zu verfahren ist.
Grüßle aus BK ticki_52
micha_k (2021-08-14 17:57:16+00:00): Hallo ticki, ich kenne mich da vor Ort nicht aus - aber Buslinien(teile), die es eindeutig gar nicht mehr gibt, würde ich auch löschen. (Linien, die nur vorübergehend nicht verkehren, sollten natürlich bleiben.)
Viele Grüße, Micha
ticki_52 (2021-08-14 21:27:34+00:00): Hatte ich inzwischen schon gelöscht. Danke trotzdem.... Schönes Rest-WE.... ticki
ralley (2021-03-18 03:25:46+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits.  Please don't put object names in the description, there is a dedicated name tag (I see you added this later); addr:city is just Auckland, the suburb (Mount Eden) is already tagged in the seperate addr:suburb tag.  Also please note abbreviations like Mt should be expanded.  A cafe should also have an amenity=cafe tag, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcafe
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101220814
ralley (2021-03-18 03:21:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits.  Review as requested: Please use more descriptive changeset comments: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments; Most buildings in NZ consist of 90 degree corners, this can be enforced in Id by right clicking and selecting "Square"; building:levels=0 seems wrong.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101220947
nevw (2021-03-19 16:26:43+00:00): Hi
Seems to me this was correctly tagged so unsure why you are reverting.
The first changeset had a house that had the tag addr:suburb =A instead of Ardeer.
I would normally fix it it myself but am in bed using my small phone.
Tks
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-05-15 19:12:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 104745748 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some fantasy mapping in the Philippines.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5028 .
nevw (2021-03-18 04:20:33+00:00): Hi
I corrected the tagging format for these houses.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr
tarta (2021-03-18 12:01:32+00:00): Obrigado pela importação.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-05-15 19:11:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 104745748 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some fantasy mapping in the Philippines.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5028 .
Felipe Alves (2021-03-18 12:08:14+00:00): Oi, Reginaldo. Tudo bem?
Percebi que marcou no mapa alguns pontos de interesse próprio, o correto seria marcá-los somente para você, nos seus favoritos.
Qualquer dúvida, só falar.
Abs
hunterghost (2021-04-22 10:23:02+00:00): И правда, получилось как-то неоднозначно.
Обозначал давно руководствовавшись темой на форуме с сокращением именований объектов карты и существующим на тот момент примером именования обелиска как объекта карты из другого населенного пункта.
Всем приношу извинения, цели оскорбления не имел.
С новой правкой согласен.
marc__marc (2021-03-19 17:11:42+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8232257054
the wikidata you added it's not about a tree but about a 
scientific article published in January 2006
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q51121093
Regards,
Marc
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:05:58+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
geoaria (2021-03-24 17:58:28+00:00): عزیز نقشه کش شما تگ access را برای این مکان 32.71473/51.60258 روی no قرار داده اید. هدف شما اگر عدم ورود خودرو های غیر از اتوبوس است که به روش دیگری برای آن باید مشخص می کردید . مسیر پیاده ای را به این خطوط اتصال داده اید که با تگ فوق حالت جزیره پیدا کرده است . مورد فوق اصلاح شد. دقت کنید . سمت زینبیه هم خیابان دستغیب را حف کرده بودید و کلی کوچه به حالت جزیره رها شده بود . در ویرایش هایتان دقت کنید. با این ویرایش ها دارید نقشه را تخریب می کند تا تکمیل
abakus_uploader (2021-03-18 23:31:48+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
Hjart (2021-03-19 08:14:21+00:00): Why are you doing this? I'll personally recommend not to do it, because quite often piers do not start at the coastline. For that reason I have unsnapped quite a lot piers my self.
MadRiverBank (2021-03-22 03:59:26+00:00): Hi Hjart, thanks for reaching out. I was following OSM wiki guidelines here (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dpier#How_to_map) about connecting piers to coastline. To me, in this instance it made sense to make the connection to land so it’s not floating in water. I can understand how it could go the other way too - happy to hear your suggestion for this case.
Hjart (2021-03-22 05:56:21+00:00): Please consider the possibility that those who edit the wikii aren't necessarily all that experienced.
MadRiverBank (2021-03-23 00:08:14+00:00): Thank you for the advice on this, it seems like this would be a good opportunity to update the wiki if you think it could be improved. A lot of people use this resource for guidance. Would you be willing to add clarification either to this page or on the Denmark page about piers modeling?
bkw777geo (2021-04-01 19:27:56+00:00): Привет, iWowik,

Я заметил, что вы отменили изменение названия улицы для https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/55952507 со Степовая улица на Степная улица. Могу я спросить, почему вы это сделали? Спасибо.
iWowik (2021-04-25 12:55:12+00:00): День добрый!
Спасибо, что обратили внимание. похоже, что я несколько ошибся.
mueschel (2021-03-19 10:58:15+00:00): Please check this way, it doesn't have any proper tags.
valentinanavarrogarcia (2021-06-14 12:50:15+00:00): this bench is perfect to sit down and have a rest. If someone is tired or hurt or simply lonely, they can take a seat on the buddy bench and have a break from their walk around jerrabomberra. Once finished sitting on the buddy bench, one can walk around the lake which is about 200 meters away and they can enjoy the view.
ScottWalkerAU (2021-03-18 07:26:41+00:00): Fixed issues with splitting Park Avenue in #101236362...
osmowm87 (2021-03-21 10:49:07+00:00): Noted, thank you
eggie (2021-03-18 06:47:18+00:00): Welkom bij OSM..  Kleine aanpassing verricht.. Info samengevoegd met de BAG adresnode.
MVG
eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-21 21:42:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103365292 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  No reply to previous changeset comments.
stephankn (2021-03-21 20:47:40+00:00): only upload real, existing data
SomeoneElse (2021-04-11 15:53:08+00:00): Hello didihsu and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
You've added https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/918539004/history here as a "motorway" and I don't think that's a valid tag for the location.
If you've got any questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-04-11 16:08:31+00:00): I've reverted this to fix the node drag and the motorway.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-04-21 21:42:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 103365292 where the changeset comment is: Following a request from HOT, reverting some poor quality edits.  No reply to previous changeset comments.
MxxCon (2021-03-18 07:44:04+00:00): Hello.
Please note that OpenStreeMap has standardized name tags for all the data you entered. When you added a POI, if you would've selected "Restaurant" as a feature type, it would have provided you all the standard fields where you enter relevant information, rather than you coming up with your own tag names.
I have corrected this entry to use standard tags. In the future if you are going to add or modify data, please try to follow guidelines from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org 👍
aharvey (2021-03-18 10:56:54+00:00): could you elaborate on the motivation for the change? Was it just that shoulder:access:bicycle=yes is assumed as default? Even then it doesn't hurt to have it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/101232483
Jorisbo (2021-03-18 12:12:28+00:00): Hi Aharvey, Thank you for the reply!
Its the combination of multiple things together which made my algorithm highlighted the place.
If you like to revert it (no problem) maybe we can find a combination of tagging which fits best.
a) The section was 'orphaned' tagged as shoulder:access:bicycle=yes. Pre-post sections did not tagged as such.
b) shoulder:access:bicycle=yes is a bit of 'lets say: extensive odd way' of telling: bicycle=yes & shoulder=yes
c) Australian wiki says bicycle & foot is allowed on trunks by default (no need for extra tagging ),
d) but since the pre-post sections did explicitly exclude foot=no in combination with the aerial (heavy traffic) it looked hardly likely bicycles can use it safely.
Sofar my reasons.

If you are known at the place, we can also re-add the shoulder assignment? Together with bicycle = yes (or no, because unsafe)
Best together with bicycle=yes on the pre-post sections as well. And if there is a genuine bicycle-traffic-flow we could make a connection for routing apps between the primary link and the nearby footway starting from huntleys point road.
The latter is not good enough visible on aerial imagery to deside as armchair mapper.
Kind regards, and thank you for the chat, gr. Joris
aharvey (2021-03-19 11:11:09+00:00): Overall I don't think the tag really adds much as it's a fair default assumption, but still somebody decided to add it, so removing it should be thought out.

I think the originally mapper was trying to say that bicycles can use the shoulder here. Which would be the default so they certainly aren't wrong.

> b) shoulder:access:bicycle=yes is a bit of 'lets say: extensive odd way' of telling: bicycle=yes & shoulder=yes

Not quite, the top level access tags like bicycle=yes would refer to the carriageway not usually the shoulder. You could have different access rules for the shoulder vs the roadway.

>  it looked hardly likely bicycles can use it safely.

That's not really a concern for the access tag. access tag is legal access, not perceived safety.

> If you are known at the place, we can also re-add the shoulder assignment? Together with bicycle = yes (or no, because unsafe)
Best together with bicycle=yes on the pre-post sections as well.

As you said, bicycle access is allowed by default here.

> And if there is a genuine bicycle-traffic-flow we could make a connection for routing apps between the primary link and the nearby footway starting from huntleys point road.
> The latter is not good enough visible on aerial imagery to deside as armchair mapper.

I uploaded Mapillary imagery here a while back, eg at https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=nEtl70cmj-b2GG-V5d18vA&focus=photo

There is no connection between this link road and the footway here, so would be wrong to add a connecting highway=cycleway. However you can still road on this link road if you're riding on the road access Burns Bay Road bridge.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-06-27 14:35:48+00:00): Jesteś pewna że ta kancelaria parafialna istnieje?

Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2711255 i https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3242589 ?
StefanHRT (2021-03-18 07:27:53+00:00): Guten Morgen,
Warum hast Du das oneway rausgenommen? Ist Weg jetzt für beide Richtungen freigegeben zum Radfahren?
VG
Stefan
geozeisig (2021-03-18 07:38:48+00:00): Auf diesem Teilstück ist der Radweg für beide Richtungen freigegeben.
VG
Dieter
StefanHRT (2021-03-18 07:55:10+00:00): Mhh, ok, habe da nie solche Schilder gesehen und auf Fotos auch nichts erkennen können, aber gut ist vielleicht neu. Bin ja öfter dort in der Gegend, werde mal schauen, bis wohin das genau geht, da jetzt das oneway bis zur Straße Alt Schönefeld weg ist und dort gilt auf alle Fälle oneway (Stand 06.03.2021). VG Stefan
Cristoffs (2021-03-18 19:58:46+00:00): Proszę opisuj dokładniej swoje zmiany.