piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Noen (2022-05-01 19:31:48+00:00): Hei og velkommen til OSM!
Hvis du skal legge til et ferdselsforbud til OSM må det være et faktisk forbud. At «eierne er misfornøyde» holder ikke.
Her kan friluftsloven § 3a gjelde. Da vil forbudet gjelde kun gårdstunet og ikke hele veien.
Prøv i så fall å splitte veien. Velg et punkt på veien nærme gårdstunet og trykk på ikonet med saks.
Glassman (2022-05-01 19:31:49+00:00): correction -  #osmus-task-305 #https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Skagit_county_import
aceman444 (2022-05-06 21:53:52+00:00): 'mobile' ma byt 'phone' a aj s medzinarodnou predvolbou, 'website' by mala obsahovat celu adresu aj s "http://" a nezadali ste ziadny typ obchodu ci prevadzky.
george1201 (2022-07-27 23:05:08+00:00): Hallo townlion,
du hast am Weg 154664632 bicycle=no auf yes geändert.
An der SO-Seite des Wegs (Kreuzung mit Holderweg) steht aber das Zeichen DE:254 "Verbot für Radverkehr". Somit wäre bicycle=no passender zur Beschilderung. Interessanterweise findet man das Verbotsschild nicht auf der anderen Seite des Weges. Von NW kommend darf man also den Weg mit dem Rad benutzen, andersrum nicht.  Wieder mal eine sehr merkwürdige Beschilderung.
Scout Jens (2022-07-28 07:17:03+00:00): Hallo George,
Das andere Schild hatte ich wohl nicht gesehen. Aber es macht ja Sinn, da der Weg nicht so breit ist. Ich habe es geändert und Deinen Hinweis auf das Schild Indie Notiz übernommen, so dass Andere es nicht wieder ändern, die nur im NW vorbeikommen. 
Wichtig war die Änderung zur Kreuzung, da sonst das Routing für Radfahrer nicht richtig funktioniert.
Viele Grüße, Jens
george1201 (2022-07-28 08:49:32+00:00): Aber rein rechtlich ist es doch erlaubt aus Richtung NW nach SO zu fahren. Der Radfahrer sieht das Schild am Ende seines Weges doch nicht. Dem kommen höchstens Fussgänger entgegen, die ihn böse angucken. Das ist mal wieder ein klarer Fall von falscher bzw. unvollständiger Beschilderung. Ich bin mir nicht sicher, was man bei einer solchen einseitigen Verbots-Beschilderung am Weg eintragen soll. (Man kann sich ja noch andere Verbote vorstellen: Maximalgewicht, Durchfahrtshöhe etc.) Ich bin hier weder mit bicycle=yes noch bicycle=no glücklich.
george1201 (2022-07-28 21:16:19+00:00): Ich habe gerade im Wiki gefunden, dass es tatsächlich bicycle:forward und bicycle:backward gibt. Hier eine yes/no-Zuweisung würde die Situation vor Ort exakt beschreiben.
Gewollt von der Stadt war aber vermutlich ein Verbot für den gesamten Weg aus beiden Richtungen. Aber wir wollen ja die vorhandene Realität beschreiben. Dann wäre das doch die Lösung. Oder?
Scout Jens (2022-07-29 05:52:30+00:00): Also gut, so habe ich es jetzt eingetragen
silversurfer83 (2022-05-02 10:15:46+00:00): Gude Andi,

so eine Hindernis wie https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1129190340 gehört eigentlich direkt auf den Weg, der dadurch behindert wird. Wenn das Gate relativ breit ist, kann natürlich eine lange Linie gezeichnet werden, die das realistisch abbildet, jedoch ist es besser, wenn ein einzelner Node auf dem Way entsprechend als barrier getaggt wird.

Grüße :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-06-05 14:54:43+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1056486609/history - are there any remains whatsoever of this rail still present?
granitschädel (2025-06-11 10:49:28+00:00): No, since there was build a park there, all remains was removed, except this little „new-built“ piece in the south. I haven't the time yet to transfer the razed railway tracks to OpenHistoryMap
Trevor_1 (2022-05-22 14:27:39+00:00): Hi, why did you change this road to secondary? It only connects to the state highway system at one end. It's not good to have secondary stubs like this. I'm going to have to change it back to tertiary.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220423673#map=13/33.3623/-97.4707
Trevor_1 (2022-05-22 21:34:05+00:00): My bad, I looked again and you weren't the one who changed it to secondary. My apologies.
PLima785 (2022-05-02 08:03:44+00:00): Não apagues o elementos todos deixa ficar a área e converte para construção assim como o ponto passa para morada. Quando se confirmar o que vai ser feito ai sim vemos o que é para aproveitar
BertMule (2022-05-02 08:42:33+00:00): Had er zelf gaan gekeken en heb het doordoor veranderd.
Is hoog riet en vochtig.
Ga dit terugdraaien.
eggie (2022-05-02 08:49:14+00:00): Oke   dan...  natural=wetland
wetland=reedbed
Dit was even een noodoplossing.. Alleen natural=wetland levert gewoon een wit vlak op met wat blauwe streepjes.
Eer hoort een specificatie bij
Voorbeelden
wetland=meadow wetland=marsh
wetland=swamp..

Pas je het zelf aan.
Ik denlk dat reedbed het beste is in dit geval.
MVG
eggie
BertMule (2022-05-06 17:35:40+00:00): Dat witte vlak was wat ik nabij aantrof.
Heb ik ondertussen gelijk getrokken naar riet.
Niet voor de hand liggend dat er 2 tags nodig zijn.
eggie (2022-05-06 17:40:55+00:00): Toch wel... De 2de tag is de specificatie van het natural=wetland..  Die 2de tag wetland=  zorgt voor de juiste rendering.

gr eggie
BertMule (2022-05-06 18:01:33+00:00): Ik snap het.
Maar als men dat niet weet, dan denkt men al klaar te zijn.
Was voor mij dus al gebeurd.
eggie (2022-05-06 18:18:11+00:00): Vandaar dat er de wiki is.. en dan 'moet' je dus weer weten waar je moet zoeken.
Dat wordt in het begin veel vragen en zoeken en later gaat het vanzelf.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wetland

Ik google dan wetland=  wiki osm
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:30:51+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.
Skinfaxi (2022-05-02 20:01:54+00:00): is their a special reason why you are not useing highway=track instead of highway=service? I think highway track seems much more suitable (with the subtagging tracktype=grade2) is better. (i speak swedish and english)
Jessica Lily (2022-05-02 20:09:16+00:00): Jag visste inte att det fanns ett "track" alternativ. Det skulle passa bätte till vägen. Tack för hjälpen
Skinfaxi (2022-05-06 09:52:48+00:00): bra. jag ser att du har ändrad det. Service är för mig mera väger på parkeringsplatser och dylikt, inte väger i Skog och mark. Track betyder ju Skogs- eller jordbruksväg på svenska.l
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:24:28+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 01:23:27+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 (2022-05-02 06:10:00+00:00): Best lastig ...landuse en water....

Aan de westkant van de sloten lopen nog stroken akkerland. Wellicht zal dat ook grass moeten zijn. 
Je kunt als achtergrond de transparant van de BGT omtrekgericht instellen in JOSM. De sloten zijn daar als blauwe lijnen al ingetekend en dat helpt je bij de juiste positie. 

Kijk eens hier
BGT implementeren  

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=59021 
(Zo doe ik het meestal)

Forumdraadje ..  De beste imagery layers om NL OSM te mappen met JOSM. 
(Zo kan het ook.. dan heb je een laag met de BGT omtregericht en nog veel meer)
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=64644 

Hier kun je zien hoe je de .jos file kunt gebruiken binnen JOSM.  
https://youtu.be/33EenoZezWg 

Succes,
eggie
eggie (2022-05-02 06:10:42+00:00): ele is het niveau boven NAP.. Zou dat kloppen?
eggie (2022-05-02 06:18:26+00:00): De kleine watervlakken heb ik samengevoegd
eggie (2022-05-02 05:45:27+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
kasztelan111 (2022-05-02 12:56:25+00:00): please check before making changes, you removed real names of street and square, which is not parking anymore
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-05-02 17:48:22+00:00): I was just reverting the conversion of a parking lot to a park. If you have a source for any of these names you're welcome to correct it.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:32:35+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 01:18:07+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 01:21:44+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.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-05-01 20:54:53+00:00): Buildings added in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/120435102
eggie (2022-05-02 05:44:30+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
user_5359 (2022-05-02 20:57:54+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/node/9707972417 (one of six). What is the meaning of the foreign keys
    Contact = taekwondolyoncompetition.com
    Informations pratiques = 11 rue de Condé, 69002
    Offre = 30 euros de réduction
    Sport = Lyon métropole taekwondo
This nodes doesn't have any OSM keys!
Lejun (2022-05-11 04:01:21+00:00): Hi, thanks for the comment. Those errors are unfortunately quite common due to the french highschool curriculum having pushed OpenStreetMap onto non users teachers. We kinda got this.
syntex (2022-05-06 20:34:10+00:00): Część z nich to nie są tablice reklamowe, tylko ogłoszeniowe. Dlaczego zmieniłeś ich typy?
cytryn (2022-05-06 22:22:30+00:00): No właśnie dlatego. advertising=board to niby właśnie jest tablica ogłoszeń lokalnych. Chociaż nie upieram się przy tym, bo jest tu pewna niespójność - praktycznie ten sam efekt osiągnąć, stosując Twój wcześniejszy opis, ale uzupełniony dodatkowo o board_type=notice (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:board_type), bo bez tego sugerowało to raczej typową turystyczną tablicę informacyjną. Może rzeczywiście korekta w tę stronę sprawdziłaby się to lepiej, chociaż granica między tymi dwoma tagami wydaje mi się na tyle płynna, że wybór może w dużej mierze zależeć, co akurat na tej tablicy wisi w momencie wizji lokalnej ;)
ottwiz (2022-05-01 21:10:50+00:00): Bocsi, 
"tehergépkocsival behajtani tilos (12t zóna) "
De a lényeg átjön
maxweightrating:hgv=12
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:26:25+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.
DP24PH (2022-05-01 23:06:22+00:00): This changeset reverts the changeset 120374466 in response to the anticipation of the public opening of CRK T2.


DP24
Warin61 (2022-05-04 00:28:46+00:00): Hi,

The parking areas don't extend to teh center of footpaths - should be drawn as a separate way. 
When added please observe any existing amenity=parking so the feature is not duplicated.
jordol (2022-05-04 02:21:15+00:00): OK no worries I've adjusted them to be separate. Noted you changed one so left that one alone.
Warin61 (2022-05-04 07:51:25+00:00): It is a minor thing, but helps with other features too - like parks, schools etc.
frosm (2022-07-04 14:46:47+00:00): Bonjour,
vous avez indiqué 549 bandes de circulations, c'est un peu beaucoup :)
j'imagine que c'est un doublon involontaire du no de rue.
en parlant de ce no, c'est la piste elle meme qui a le no ? ou le batiment proche ?
Wimble84 (2022-07-04 15:07:16+00:00): Effectivement c'est une erreur de ma part sur le numéro de rue ...
 
Par contre j'ai un doute sur ce fameux numéro. Seul Google Maps (à prendre avec des pincettes) donne ce numéro. Le site internet du club tout comme la rubrique associations de la mairie de Cavaillon ne le mentionne pas.
Il serait peu être judicieux de ne pas de le conserver.
frosm (2022-07-04 15:34:12+00:00): merci pour votre retour.
surtout ne pas copier GoogleMap : non seulement c'est plein d'erreur (dont certains intentionnelles) mais surtout leur licence ne leur permet pas.
en cas de doute c'est mieux de ne pas mettre. à l'occasion regardez sur place si vous constatez une plaque avec le no
Bonne continuation
Wimble84 (2022-07-04 15:38:30+00:00): J'en prend note. 

Merci
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:30:27+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.
alester (2022-05-05 21:51:17+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain a road by this name here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:24:17+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.
alester (2022-05-05 21:49:57+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain a road by this name here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
alester (2022-05-05 21:49:19+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain roads by these names here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
Anton Melnichuk (2022-05-02 19:36:49+00:00): please not edit Ukraine map in war time

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
Lokalfuerst (2022-07-25 11:22:21+00:00): Danke fuer den Hinweis.
Du editierst selber dort.
Passt das zusammen?
Anton Melnichuk (2022-07-25 12:41:57+00:00): Danke für Ihr Verständnis. Entschuldigung, der erste Kommentar wurde vor der falschen Änderung abgegeben.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-01 23:04:58+00:00): which specific source was used here?

Please mention specific sources rather than linking list of all possible sources
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:46:18+00:00): Road Network
Select Organization: Statistics Canada
Search for: National Road Network
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:46:30+00:00): I am serious
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:48:31+00:00): https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/92-500-X
alester (2022-05-05 21:48:34+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain a road by this name here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
alester (2022-05-05 21:47:49+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain a road by this name here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
pio2_122 (2022-05-02 10:23:15+00:00): Dlaczego to rondo zostało rozrysowane, skoro ma przejezdną wyspę środkową?

Było ono, przed tą zmianą, poprawnie oznaczone jako skrzyżowanie z tagiem highway=mini_roundabout.

Więcej informacji:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:highway%3Dmini_roundabout
olo81 (2022-05-02 10:33:23+00:00): Zauważyłem że ludzie w Yanosiku zgłaszają takie miejsca.
pio2_122 (2022-05-02 10:52:45+00:00): Hmm, z mojego doświadczenia Yanosik podczas nawigowania traktował mini ronda identycznie jak te rozrysowane.

Możliwe, że powodem tych zgłoszeń jest brak wyświetlania ich w aplikacji.
To już jednak problem po stronie Yanosika. OSM-wiki w taki sposób odnosi się do tej sprawy:
„Why is it important to follow this tagging guideline if the map looks good even when tagged differently?
The map is not everything. There exist a lot more applications which process our data and these tags have different implications e.g. for routers. So if you tag a small roundabout as a mini-roundabout or a loop at the end of a street as a turning circle, it might look ok on the map but will break other applications. So please don't think of this as annoyance and try to use the most fitting tags in each situation.”
olo81 (2022-05-02 11:38:04+00:00): Tak, Olga pisała że  yanosik sobie radzi z mnirondami, chodzi tylko o to że ludzie je mimo wszystko zgłaszają. To rondo ma 20m szerokości od osi drogi, nie jest małe.
Niiepce (2022-05-01 22:28:51+00:00): Ein paar Details aber noch nicht alle Fehler behoben
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-01 23:04:55+00:00): which specific source was used here?

Please mention specific sources rather than linking list of all possible sources
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:48:10+00:00): Statistics Canada National Road Network
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:48:24+00:00): https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/92-500-X
alester (2022-05-05 21:47:07+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain roads by these names in these locations, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-01 23:04:53+00:00): which specific source was used here?

Please mention specific sources rather than linking list of all possible sources
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:50:05+00:00): https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/92-500-X
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-03 15:45:56+00:00): Are you aware of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines ?
alester (2022-05-05 21:43:00+00:00): The StatsCan dataset does not contain a road by this name here, but Google Maps does, so I suspect that's where this data came from.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-01 23:04:51+00:00): which specific source was used here?

Please mention specific sources rather than linking list of all possible sources
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:58:29+00:00): https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/92-500-X
alester (2022-05-05 21:42:02+00:00): The data you added does not match the StatsCan dataset, but it does match Google Maps, right down to the incorrect connection of Ivanhoe Road to Brandon Road and the presence of the non-existent Jeep Road.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-05-01 23:04:41+00:00): which specific source was used here?

Please mention specific sources rather than linking list of all possible sources
PopeyePopcord (2022-05-02 21:58:19+00:00): https://www150.statcan.gc.ca/n1/en/catalogue/92-500-X
alester (2022-05-05 21:38:47+00:00): This road is marked as London Road in the StatsCan dataset. However, Google Maps shows it as Balcom Road, so that was likely used as the source.
SomeoneElse (2022-05-05 21:42:00+00:00): Thanks - there has been similar feedback about other edits too.
Revert in progress.
mapper377 (2022-05-01 23:11:27+00:00): The "address:country" tag on the substation outline should be "address:county" instead. The substation is in Gallia County.
MxxCon (2022-05-01 23:48:18+00:00): Hello.
What "street level imagery" did you use? I see this is Three Star Billiards, not King Billiards.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120437681
wildcatz$ (2022-05-02 22:21:19+00:00): hi,  
I used openmap and view the building with the imagery there, as well searched the address and it gave the property information.
drivec (2022-05-11 02:52:22+00:00): Reverted and fixed based on free imagery, city GIS, and GPS traces.
gordo anorexico (2022-05-08 15:26:32+00:00): Hola, gracias por ayudarme mejorar las vías y a contribuir en la zona.
Si tienes alguna consulta, puedes unirte al grupo de Telegram de OpenStreetMap Chile.
https://t.me/OSMcl
yasslay (2022-05-01 23:08:23+00:00): Hi! As a sidenote, I took this into consideration and tried to ask people on the forums (I didn't use talk:GB, so that is somewhat on my part) but I didn't get any response, so I decided to go through with it anyway. If this change turns out to be erroneous, please let me know!
GinaroZ (2022-05-02 20:47:09+00:00): Just read your forum post. 
What have you based the changes on, as in, which particular road signs? Because for this section of the A8 for example, there are white signs off the M9 and a green sign at Maybury junction.
The trunk tagging in OSM matches Transport Scotland's trunk, as there are inconsistencies with the green/white signs in various places.
yasslay (2022-05-02 20:57:39+00:00): I tried to go off with the signage in areas but were some foggier areas in particular since some sources such as Wikipedia reference the A902 as being a primary road, which I think might be in reference to Maybury Road, but I am unsure on this as well.

For road signs, there are green signs on the A8 from M9 J1 and around Gogar Roundabout, and on an unrelated note, some are signed green on the A90 as well from the B701, as well as the A1 from the A199-A1 junction as well, but some white signs are mixed around the area as well as I have found.

Also, in relation to the inconsistencies, would it be related to the green and white signage? I'm a bit confused on this due to the said inconsistencies as well, and I mean no ill will by this. This is what I know on it so far, and thanks for the help by the way!
GinaroZ (2022-05-02 23:53:20+00:00): No ill will, just I've had the same thought and investigated it before :)

From a quick look around various junctions, the signage doesn't really allow you to decide on trunk/primary as they often disagree with each other.

There are white signs coming off the M9 to the A8 https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=5714577045249570 (on Street View you can see these were green signs in 2013) - but at the roundabout exit there is a green sign.

At the Barnton junction there is a green sign on the east side which would seem to indicate the A90/A902 is trunk https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=303705991384867 but that is contradicted by a white sign at Maybury which points to the same road: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=890379831691638

At Burnshot you have a white and green sign (the latter has now been replaced by white on Street View!) https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=530446831695644

So in short - I don't think these should be trunk in OSM...
yasslay (2022-05-03 07:26:15+00:00): I see! It was really confusing and I didn’t have any malicious intent by doing this! I don’t have a clue on how to revert a changeset by the way, so if you or someone else could possibly revert the changeset I’d be really thankful! Thanks for the help once more!
alester (2022-05-05 21:36:42+00:00): There is no such road here, neither in the StatsCan dataset nor on-the-ground. Google Maps does have a road incorrectly marked here with that name, so that was likely the source for this.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-06 01:31:48+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.
LockOnGuy (2022-05-01 23:15:12+00:00): This changset revert user/RealNamesMatter's vandalism edits in changeset 120418520 , 120417909, 120417504, 120416877, 120416757, and 120416601. Except 120419601, which woodpeck (DWG) reverted it in changeset 120424626