piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Supaplex030 (2021-01-13 23:26:19+00:00): Und die von dir gelöschten level-Informationen hatten (zumindest teilweise) schon auch ihren Sinn und Mehrwert. Wenn sich ein kleines Kiosk-Gebäude auf einem mehrstöckigen Bahnhof auf erhöhter Ebene oder "Nullniveau" befindet, dann kann man das super mit level ausdrücken - du hast es jetzt einfach gelöscht...
itchybellybutton (2021-01-14 08:29:26+00:00): Hi Supaplex030,
"eigentlich gibt man bei Fahrstühlen die Level schon mit Semikolon an" - das stimmt nur für den einzelnen Punkt eines Fahrstuhls, nicht für das Gebäude herum. Deswegen ist dein Link auch richtig. An einem Gebäude kommt kein level. Die Position kann mit layer oder halt mit min/max_level gekennzeichnet werden.

Auch ein Kiosk bekommt kein level, wenn es als building getaggt ist. Du hast recht, dass ich vermutlich etwas gelöscht habe, das für jemanden Sinn ergibt hat. Jedoch ist es dann falsch getaggt worden. Ich versuche vor einer Änderung immer darauf zu achten, was mit dem level wohl gemeint war, nur manchmal sehe ich das halt nicht oder der Aufwand wäre zu hoch, da man manche Dinge nur vor Ort feststellen kann.
آرمین بریمانی (2021-01-12 20:43:23+00:00): OK
GerdP (2023-12-18 13:24:19+00:00): Moin aus Wildeshausen!
Du hast hier maxspeed=80 gesetzt, aber maxspeed:source=DE:rural gelassen. Sollte wohl auf maxspeed:type=sign geändert werden?
https://www.osm.org/way/356429922
A67-A67 (2021-01-12 21:02:24+00:00): Ik heb de onderbreking van de Molenweg toegevoegd. 

De rendering van de kaart duurt de laatste tijd erg lang, dus het kan zijn dat het pas morgen te zien is op de kaart.
literan (2021-01-13 20:00:08+00:00): добрый день. Интернет-магазины, людей, облака, мысли и прочие не существующие на местности объекты мы в базу не вносим. На сайте никаких упоминаний о реальном магазине нет. Удаляю
BCNorwich (2021-01-14 12:23:03+00:00): Hi, surely the garden outline extends to the fence and building lines? Or is there a ragged gap of up to 3 feet between garden and fence? In 50 years working on housing projects, I've never seen anything laid out like this!

Regards Bernard
Medioxre (2021-01-14 12:33:53+00:00): Of course it does it's just that I didn't want to attach it to the fence, I was using a mobile version of osm but I'd be happy to fix it it'll take a bit though as I'm a bit busy right now so feel free to fix it.
dvdhoven (2021-01-13 07:47:21+00:00): Je hebt veel wegen van track naar service gezet. Dat is principieel onjuist.
Een service is een niet openbaar toegankelijke weg op privé terrein met uitzondering van de parking_aisle op parkeerterreinen.
Onverharde openbaar toegankelijke wegen zijn tracks
Veel routeerders routeren ook niet over service.
Ik heb al de nodige wegen weer terug gezet naar track.
opendcc (2021-01-13 05:11:13+00:00): Hallo,

hast Du das nach Ortskenntnis oder nach Luftbild gemacht?
opendcc (2021-01-13 05:39:29+00:00): Hallo,

wegen des doch gravierenden Fehlers habe ich mich entschlossen, das sofort zu reverten. (CS 97411136). Grund: das Luftbild gibt hier eine veraltete Sicht wieder, das ist ein temporärer Zustand während des Ausbaus der Ortsumfahrung Obing. Wir waren da zu zweit vor Ort und haben das jeweils auf Stand gehalten.
❤️‍🔥 (2021-01-29 06:46:39+00:00): hi, you tagged this small part of Wairere Drive as a "motorway". Motorway means restricted access, generally characterized by no at-grade intersections, no 🚷🚳, and/or ramp signals.

Has this part of Wairere Drive changed, because last time I was there I think it was just a normal 80km/h road. similar to the Albany Expressway in Auckland. In which case it should be tagged as highway=primary, not motorway
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97398627
zachbonettinz (2021-01-31 07:30:38+00:00): Hi Kyle,
Thanks for the feedback, and apologies for the mistake. I have seen some expressway grade links, but I see why it should not be that.
Thanks
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97398627
❤️‍🔥 (2021-01-31 08:54:26+00:00): no problem, and thanks for taking the time to improve the map !
syntex (2021-01-12 23:19:24+00:00): Ale po co dublujesz obiekty? Tu już jest ALDI dodany
syntex (2021-01-12 23:21:14+00:00): Usunąłem zdublowany
Max-Kritic (2021-01-14 13:51:02+00:00): La Mairie d'Hénin-sur-Cojeul est un peu plus au Sud. Voir https://www.heninsurcojeul.fr/mairie_fr.html

J'avais réalisé le déplacement, il y a 3 ans.
Max-Kritic (2021-01-14 13:58:47+00:00): Il y a aussi 4 autres mairies en doublon. A voir où sont les bons emplacements.Les Mairies bougent.
GeorgeKaplan (2021-01-14 18:49:26+00:00): Bonjour Kritic,

Effectivement, je me suis rendu compte après coup qu'il y a beaucoup trop de doublons dans cette analyse Osmose. Je ne l'utilise plus.
Est-ce que tu as supprimé les doublons ou je fais un revert ?
Max-Kritic (2021-01-15 09:31:32+00:00): Je vérifie et je supprime les doublons. Pour Wail, c'est la Mairie qui a déménagé en 2018 dans l'ancien presbytère. Voir https://www.lavoixdunord.fr/349204/article/2018-04-01/l-ancien-presbytere-devient-mairie-un-patrimoine-rehabilite-et-sauvegarde

Je viens de corriger. J'ai réalisé pas mal d'améliorations. Mais le cadastre est aussi à corriger. il manque un château et un moulin en autre.
Dino Michelini (2021-01-13 17:18:30+00:00): ti segnalo altri errori: hai dato stesso name sia alla ruote che alla highway le specifiche dicono che Se non ha un nome come “Sentiero degli Alpini” non si compila; questo non è il nome ma la descrizione. La key surface è inventata leggi https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface.
BCNorwich (2021-01-13 08:29:13+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've made quite a few tweaks to the paths and cycleways you've added. This to joins some ways and better align them to other features.

Regards Bernard.
DH63 (2021-01-13 09:09:29+00:00): Thanks Bernard There’s a few more paths I can add around this area feel free to adjust them wherever you see it’s needed - thanks again!
Dino Michelini (2021-01-13 17:08:30+00:00): Nel mappare hai anche toccato i confini del parco dei Simbrunini. Fai attenzione.
Dari0N (2021-01-13 17:19:21+00:00): Ciao! Si ho ricalcato un tracciato che ho fatto qualche anno fa, seguendo un vecchio tracciato mappa IGM. Se ho toccato e/o modificato qualche elemento di certo non era mia intenzione è me ne scuso. Posso anche cancellare il tutto e via. Però non era segnato, ho provato.
Dino Michelini (2021-01-13 17:07:28+00:00): Ciao, anche tu stai seguendo il corso CAI Lazio? Ho notato che nel mappare stai commettendo alcuni errori: ad es. i nomi dati alle singole higway non possono essere "Grande Anello del Viglio" o "GAV" che va dato al name della route e al ref che descrivono l'anello. EE ha una sua key (cai_scale) che si utilizza solo nella route mentre sui singoli tratti di highway si utilizza il sac_scale. Per favore fermati, dai una letta alle specifiche CAI (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/CAI), a quelle delle route (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route), della sac_scale (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sac_scale), quindi correggi gli errori. Grazie
Dari0N (2021-01-13 17:42:07+00:00): si lo sto seguendo anche io! ok grazie dei consigli! piano piano cerco di correggere gli errori commessi e riportare il tutto cosi come da specifiche.
aceman444 (2025-05-24 13:22:16+00:00): vegan is not vegetarian...
Dino Michelini (2021-01-13 17:11:54+00:00): se studi su https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#routelist?map=14!41.8827!13.3699 le relazioni costruite in zona per i percorsi forse le idee ti si chiariscono
Dari0N (2021-01-13 17:38:03+00:00): grazie ora pian piano cerco di modificare questo tracciato secondo le specifiche, cosi da rispettare i canoni. Grazie per i consigli
Frans S (2021-01-17 09:59:26+00:00): Hello. Thanks for your contribution
I reviewed your mappings and noticed some issues. 
Major issue: Mapping adjacent buildings as 1 building. 
Not all rectangular buildings are squared
Please take a look to this picture
C:\Users\Frans\Desktop\greenshot\17-01-2021\adjacent buildings mapped.jpg
Please read this document as well
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit?usp=sharing
Best regards
Frans S (2021-01-17 10:00:35+00:00): Sorry.  wrong link to picture. Here is the correct link
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1s_mOTmFaYufFD4WgFeL0qgDVcOoyhekB/view?usp=sharing
wireguy (2021-01-13 02:04:35+00:00): Mapbox imagery is more recent than Bing in this area.   You deleted the Cobalt Apts, but they are new to Sommerville.   Please restore.
eggie (2021-01-13 06:28:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Feedback..  Hier is iets niet helemaal goed gegaan. Schuiven met de kaart in editmodus levert vaak schade op. 
Ik kijk even of het simpel te herstellen is en anders draai ik de changeset terug.
Gebouwen zijn directe import vanuit de BAG (Kadaster)  Daar niets aan veranderen svp.
Geef ook concreet aan bij upload wat je hebt gedaan.



Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=97401731


MVG,
Eggie
namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-01-13 06:32:29+00:00): Van de Jumbo heb je één groot gebouw gemaakt over de parkeerplaats?
De coop is verdwenen als gebouw.
Je hebt het gebouw samengeknepen.
War was je bedoeling?
eggie
eggie (2021-01-13 06:37:14+00:00): reverted by changeset  #9741561

Je edits zijn teruggedraaid. Wanneer je nog vragen hebt stel ze gerust.
MVG
eggie
aharvey (2021-01-13 02:53:57+00:00): hi this track was already tagged as access=private which signals that it can't be used except with permission. If the track is still used by the those people with permission then it still exists and should still be mapped, otherwise if the track is being closed to be removed one of the lifecycle https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix tags would be best instead of removing it just yet.
wireguy (2021-01-13 02:07:50+00:00): Your edit on rt22 may have deleted a turn restriction without you knowing.  Please check if that was your intention.
mariotomo (2021-12-20 18:50:03+00:00): hola Carlos Eduardo.  con relación a las etiquetas industrial=*, estas van en combinación con otras, a lo mejor un landuse=industrial o building=industrial.  obviamente estamos hablando de type:way.  para los type:node con la etiqueta industrial=factory, no sabría y pienso que debas revisar tus contribuciones, a lo mejor apoyándote al wiki o preguntando en la comunidad.

http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=12&lat=8.1137&lon=-80.9415&item=2110&level=1%2C2%2C3&username=Carlos%20Eduardo%20Rodr%C3%ADguez
Carnildo (2021-01-13 18:39:32+00:00): When did the trail numbers change?  When I last hiked in the area, the signs still had the old numbers.
Carnildo (2021-01-17 22:07:35+00:00): I surveyed a batch of these yesterday, and in every case, the signs on the ground matched the old number or lack thereof.  I'm reverting the whole set.
bnkhunter (2021-01-24 05:20:19+00:00): Trail numbers were updated to reflect the new Riverside State Park Trail Map published in 2020 by the www.riversidestateparkfoundation.org.  The official map can be purchased at REI and other locations referenced in the foundation's web page.  It would be nice to have the on-the-ground trail numbers AND the new map trail numbers in the label.  Maybe something like "Trail 204/(aka 223)"
Carnildo (2021-01-24 07:00:01+00:00): I don't see any value in having these numbers in OSM if they're not present on the signs.  Without signs on the ground, they're useless for navigation.
ralley (2021-01-13 04:51:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits - unfortunately a POI for a park run does not belong in OSM.  As a map only physical entities that can be verified on the ground should be added.  See the on-the-ground rule at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_We_Map
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/97402934
mariotomo (2022-10-04 15:58:56+00:00): hola, estaba ampliando la mirada con relación al Topic (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/nombres-que-describen-un-hotel-sin-la-etiqueta-correspondiente/2943) y encuentro esta contribución, en que cuatro edificios "building=hotel" no están asociados a un tourism ni amenity hotel.
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-21 00:22:51+00:00): I'm not sure why the features were added and named "Player"...  This is not correct.
vaccine (2021-03-02 09:57:56+00:00): Hi midget,

have you had checked https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9012659/history ?
Sonny Rollins (2021-02-13 20:21:09+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147692199/history is not a motorway!
davidbradway (2021-01-13 03:07:53+00:00): Usher not Adler.
davidbradway (2021-01-13 03:08:31+00:00): Ader not Aderp
ZLima12 (2022-03-23 22:47:30+00:00): Hi,

There's a couple oddities with the way you're tagging I-2 here. First of all, network=US:I and direction=west should go on the route relation, not the ways in it. This may have been an accident, let me know if so.

The other thing is that ref on ways isn't supposed to contain the direction of travel. It was already fine as it was: `ref=I 2;US 83`.
ZLima12 (2022-03-23 23:07:07+00:00): Also, destination is probably not being used correctly here. It is supposed to be used on ways that have signage nearby saying where a driver will end up if they choose to follow that way. Shortly after the signage, the destination tag should be dropped.

I'm going to remove this tag, but if there is signage saying McAllen, please add the tag back only where that sign is.
MxxCon (2021-01-13 04:06:20+00:00): Hi.
If those parking spaces still belonged to "B1", you shouldn't have modified it just to move the sign. The most important thing is for the data to be accurate, not for it to look pretty. Changes to how map is generated in future can improve such situations..but not if the underlying data is incorrect. Changing tags just so it looks nice is an incorrect approach. Please see article for more detailed explanation https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer 👍🙂
MapSpot (2021-01-13 04:11:55+00:00): I getcha. This wasn't just about the render, though I see how you inferred such from the edit-description. This was more of a minor "groundwork" edit.

I have to add surface data in a future edit, and it would not be ideal to have the pedestrian area (to be tagged as concrete) overlapping the parking lot (to be tagged as asphalt).
MxxCon (2021-01-13 04:18:27+00:00): You could use StreetComplete mobile app to tag some missing info. It might be easier and faster to do it there than with iD or josm.
MapSpot (2021-01-13 04:22:51+00:00): Thanks for the tip. Hopefully there's some decent data visualization features I can utilize in the app. I want to be sure I don't leave any roadways or terrain polygons inconsistently tagged, but there's definitely a lot to keep track of. 😅
abakus_uploader (2021-01-13 23:31:20+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!
aharvey (2021-01-13 13:05:29+00:00): What's the reason for access=no? If it's open to cyclists and pedestrians then I'd omit this access tag unless it's closed and no one can access it.
sudface (2021-01-14 03:18:41+00:00): Whoops - probably a misclick on my part. I'll fix it now. Thanks!
sudface (2021-01-14 03:20:10+00:00): I'm sorry, but what would I change it to? The options appear to be permissive, permit and destination. I'm unsure as to which one it would be. Thanks!
aharvey (2021-01-14 09:31:45+00:00): Just omit the access tag, because you've already specified the designated access for foot and bicycles.
syntex (2021-01-14 18:40:03+00:00): That is weird that there was an unnecessary line in the relation and JOSM gave no warning about it (after I've run the validator)
user_177389 (2021-01-14 20:03:50+00:00): There was a missing segment in a relation, it was separate what I connected to a longer segment. This also changed relations that were in order. (The above missing segment was there, so no error message.)
user_177389 (2021-01-14 20:07:40+00:00): You must load all(!) involved relations - JOSM does not know all of them. The best way is to download every way before change.
syntex (2021-01-14 22:12:32+00:00): I've downloaded all of them, that is why I am surprised. I only got the usual errors about the religious_administration areas (building role in the relation-place of worship). I had to download all of them, because I've been adding the exact shape of these borders. For example - Radiowo now has almost all new borders that were added in my changesets. You can check that here http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=11191068 And that page shows that you've deleted one member of that relation and fixed the continuity. BUT I've checked all the relations and they had no problems with the continuity (I remember checking the Radiowo relation aswell). I downloaded all members and also the whole area where they are. So I don't know how JOSM had not showed me the error message before sending the changeset (also no sign of broken continuity in the edit relation window, everything was fine)
user_177389 (2021-01-16 10:44:02+00:00): I don't know why that was either. I find errors with my test tool and JOSM shows me the errors exactly there - but only if the respective relation is fully loaded (including admin_level / label node).
user_177389 (2021-01-16 10:45:08+00:00): admin_level -> admin_centre
Rizki IRM-ED (2022-12-02 02:19:28+00:00): Hello ponna_kanti. Thanks for your contribution. I delete the node (Node 8317354332) due connectivity issue which should be connected to a nearby node (https://maproulette.org/challenge/30179/task/142913504). Thank you.
Warin61 (2021-11-29 02:28:35+00:00): The name tag is for the name only, not name=tennis courts ... that is conveyed by sport=tennis! 

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:43:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:33:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:30:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
GoodClover (2021-02-04 20:18:51+00:00): Hi, it appears you used
`highway=pedestrian` + `area=yes` to map the sidewalks here.
This tagging should only be used for large areas, such as plazas. For this You should map it as a way and use `area:highway=footway` in *addition*.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway#Differentiation_area:highway_vs._area.3Dyes_on_a_highway

I'm fixing this myself, so don't worry :)
GoodClover (2021-02-05 15:37:57+00:00): Ok maybe I'm not fixing it, the multipolygons are hard to deal with
MapSpot (2021-02-05 15:44:10+00:00): Hey there. I'll look into re-tagging the mutlipolygons, since like you said, they're pretty cumbersome and tricky to edit (especially in iD) without doing more damage. 

There's a similar instance of this a few miles north in Hoboken, where roadway polygons were not removed, but they were re-tagged to be a "Road Area" instead of "Highway Feature".
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:42:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
DaveF (2021-01-14 19:43:29+00:00): Hi
Tourist railway stations are not public_transport. Please don't click iD editor's validation/resolve button without comprehending the circumstances.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:48:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:29:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:36:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:33:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:24:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
user_5239402 (2021-01-13 08:56:38+00:00): 안녕하세요.
바뀜집합의 댓글을 좀더 구체적으로 적어주세요.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:36:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al
user_5359 (2021-01-13 05:51:51+00:00): wrong commet, correction: no abbrevqtion on street names, please
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-07-28 20:22:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 108776146, 108778638 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some allegedly Google-derived and otherwise poor edits in the Philippines and Nigeria.  See https://github.com/OSMPH/papercut_fix/issues/83 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-ph/2021-July/006788.html et al