piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:44:22+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
blackboxlogic (2021-05-23 12:33:54+00:00): this is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103675426
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:47:10+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
Dimacn (2021-04-27 07:17:31+00:00): Пожалуйста прекратите вандальные действия. Карта OSM - карта реально существующих объектов. 1. Вы удалили существующий дом №164. 2. Изменили контуры других домов  до нереального - №162 , №44 и №38.
Dimacn (2021-05-24 05:34:28+00:00): Ваши пакеты правок отменены
Dimacn (2021-04-27 08:02:02+00:00): Вы сдвинули все объекты с его реального местоположения. Прежде чем редактировать карту нужно сначала выровнять подложку по gps трекам. Вот здесь подробно - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Использование_аэрофотоснимков
Dimacn (2021-04-27 07:23:59+00:00): Пожалуйста прекратите вандальные действия. Карта OSM - карта реально существующих объектов. 1. Вы изменили контур дома до нереального и сместили его с реального места. 2. Изменили дворовую дорогу до неузнаваемости.
Viajero Perdido (2021-04-27 16:14:11+00:00): Wow - high productivity mapper!  Thanks for the attention you've been giving to my home area.  Looking better all the time.  :)
gscholz (2021-05-06 04:36:55+00:00): Hi islami_m,
your recent edits have created a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding not connected ways (red dots):

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-47.18689&lat=-23.10190&zoom=12&overlays=snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_2,unconnected_open_ends_4,unconnected_open_ends_5,unconnected_open_ends_6

As youn probably know these can not be used by routing software. Can you please fix this?

Please have also a look at the warings in this changeset which your editor showed as you uploaded this changeset.

Kind Regards
Guido
flohoff (2021-04-28 09:47:34+00:00): Moin,
mit diesem changeset habe ich ganz massive probleme.

Die Topologie der Kreuzung stimmt so einfach nicht mehr. Die beiden Richtungsfahrbahnen des Pavenstädter wegs triffen sich NICHT in einem Punkt auf der FR Bielefeld - Das stimmt so einfach nicht. Ich gucke mal ob ich den changeset so komplett reverte oder repariere.

Flo
ChookMan (2021-04-27 06:05:15+00:00): Whoops accidentally messed up the description by a misclick, I meant to write 
'add Agricultural landuse in The Gardens'
impiaaa (2021-04-27 14:43:02+00:00): This removes the name and contact information of an adjacent, unrelated hotel. Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103714183
Henri97 (2021-06-11 20:01:08+00:00): Wieso hast du das Gebäude auf das bestehende Gebäude gelegt? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/935684875
czubi (2021-08-16 14:18:35+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2804764#map=18/50.92128/11.57660&layers=N
Yury_77772 (2021-04-27 06:36:32+00:00): улица переименована в 2014 году
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B5_%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B8%D1%86%D1%8B_%D0%A2%D1%8E%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8#%D0%9F
blackboxlogic (2021-05-23 12:38:57+00:00): This is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103678337
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:45:50+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
impiaaa (2021-04-27 14:40:06+00:00): When drawing an area around a hotel campus, be sure to remove the "building" tag from the boundary, since the buildings are mapped separately. Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103714039
Filip009 (2022-04-13 10:39:19+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8670787054 Nie je to náhodou len route_marker?
Filip009 (2022-04-13 10:41:02+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8670767957 Toto nie je náhodou https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dsurvey_point
Mirecnet (2022-04-13 19:00:13+00:00): Nie, to je skor v skale - survey_point:structure=medallion

Opravene
Filip009 (2022-04-14 06:13:04+00:00): Pokiaľ použijete survey_point:structure nezabudnite k tomu pridať aj man_made=survey_point, tak ako sa píše na wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:survey%20point:structure
Mirecnet (2022-04-14 10:02:24+00:00): Opravene
Glassman (2021-04-27 23:37:17+00:00): #TIP: Square the building by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103680152
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 11:10:28+00:00): Eddie Cannon,

I'm posting this as a comment in a changeset so it's public instead of a message.

I scanned through the changes by AnzuM. I don't mean to pick on this one editor, they were just the first I clicked on.

Looking at their most recent 5 edits (from four days ago):
105098711 - a hotel inside a hotel
105097885 - a hotel next to a hotel
105097707 - a motel inside a motel
105097639 - a motel inside a motel
105097521 - a motel inside a motel
And I'm assuming hundreds more...

At some point they decided it was easier to draw a "building" around the whole lot? See: 103678337, 103675426, 103675220, 103684032, 103683664, 103683162, 103682802, 103682560, 103681771
And I'm assuming hundreds more...

This user has made 767 edits, so I'm guess that 767 edits need to be cleaned up, either by your workers or by volunteers. I'm glad to see you've hired a GIS specialist. I look forward to seeing any improvement. It would be a strong show of good faith for you to clean up your month of previous work BEFORE continuing on new ground.

I'm also interested to know what you think would be a reasonable way for our community of volunteers to respond to your work. Bluntly: after how many consecutive bad edits do you think your team and their edits should be removed? After how long of not listening to feedback, not fixing previous work etc. What seems reasonable to you?

-Alex
Eddie Cannon (2021-05-25 22:05:23+00:00): I'll ask the team to pause updates to any properties that have multiple buildings. We initially got some confusing guidance on how to handle those. We'll conduct and audit of all the items worked on by AnzuM and will fix any issues. This will start tomorrow.

We'll also audit the ones done by pabi12 and AasmaK. We will get this corrected.
Eddie Cannon (2021-05-25 22:56:45+00:00): I reverted all the change where the comment was "removed building type' plus all the ones Alex mentioned. These were all the ones with multiple buildings or had nodes that previously existed. As part of the audit we'll pay special attention to those. 

Here's the list I reverted:
105294334
105294244
105294039
105294013
105293976
105293259
105293215
105293175
105293121
105293044
105293008
105292952
105292914
105292802
105098711
105097885
105097707
105097521
105097639
Eddie Cannon (2021-05-25 23:01:31+00:00): Add this change to the list of reverted: 103680174
Eddie Cannon (2021-05-26 11:08:55+00:00): Reverted these changes this morning after further review: 
103675426
103675220
103684032
103683664
103683162
103682802
103682560
103681771
eggie (2021-04-27 08:51:16+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
Ale_Zena_IT (2021-04-27 09:50:46+00:00): Hello.
Please, try to avoid to span a changeset over 4 Continents. Everyone in between trying to monitoring/Q.C.-ing the activities come across your changeset.

Cheer
  Alessandro
SekeRob (2021-04-27 10:11:17+00:00): Hi Ale_Zena,

Popular globe spanning change sets start either in Germany or France and then have a single change in New Zealand, Japan or a Polynesian island. It's annoying, but then I see the 'verified' bosses do this time and again. the day before, 2 nodes 10,000 miles apart. Happened to me once using the osmose editor which does not close the set even though you save it... something with caching and a certain time frame (hours) before an auto close is forced. ID Editor definitely does not suffer the problem, my preferred mapping tool.
cheers
bob3bob3 (2021-04-27 16:42:53+00:00): Hmm, no idea how that appeared in your qc checks. None of my mapping is outside au. Which way/node is outside au?
bob3bob3 (2021-04-27 17:10:50+00:00): aghaa i see it now. Bollon and bollard.. That was about the time i had a internet connection power failure. Have removed the bollard from the field in Spain
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 10:56:47+00:00): way 935696768 is not a building. And I'm assuming that you've done this is hundreds of other locations that need to be fixed. Please go back and fix all those locations.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103681258
Max-Kritic (2021-06-25 12:30:40+00:00): Raccourci sur giratoire. A corriger
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 10:55:39+00:00): way 935697800 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103681569
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 10:54:57+00:00): way 935698326 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103681771
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 10:54:38+00:00): way 935699797 is not a building.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103682116
eggie (2021-04-27 09:11:47+00:00): Dag Ed
Die weg was nog een import van kaartenmaker AND uit 2007
Lijkt me oke als het hier aangeven staat met art 461 wvs  .
Ik heb er alleen even een highway=track van gemaakt met tracktype=grade5
De laagste categorie
MVG
eggie
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 02:46:22+00:00): way 935701357 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103682560
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:42:26+00:00): Instead of building what will be the type for this?
This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 12:31:19+00:00): "building=yes" is for the outline of a building. This feature would be significantly improved by just removing the building=yes tag. "What is this" is already answered by "tourism=hotel" (it's a hotel). Others might suggest just adding this information to the building(s) instead of outlining the property boundary. You can get immediate responses from a variety of people if you ask questions on the #tagging channel at: https://slack.openstreetmap.us/
I hope you've already found the wiki which is an excellent resource for questions like this. Example: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
I'm not going to copy/paste this same answer to the other changes with the same issue. I hope you can apply this information to your other changes.
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 02:45:30+00:00): way 935702446 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103682802
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:42:47+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
Ser9ei (2021-04-27 08:03:37+00:00): landuse=orchard - это плантации для выращивания фруктов, бобовых и др. продуктов в КОММЕРЧЕСКИХ масштабах. Не стоит мапить плантациями частные участки. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:landuse%3Dorchard
jqngarcia (2021-05-01 06:32:06+00:00): Bon Dia, he corregit les teves dues edicions,no es pot mapejar un edifici dintre d'un altres

Salut i Mapes, JQN
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 02:44:40+00:00): way 935705374 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103683664
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:45:42+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
blackboxlogic (2021-05-25 02:44:19+00:00): way 935706915 is not a building
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103684032
AnzuM (2021-05-25 08:45:30+00:00): This won't happen again.
Thank you for the comment.
t_ja (2021-04-30 19:12:42+00:00): Ahoj,
mám pripomienky k úprave chodníka okoly Billy:
1) chodník je označený značkou č. 222 "spoločná cestička pre chodcov a cyklistov", preto by malo použiť príslušné tagovanie ako je uvedené na https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:segregated
2) pri rozdelení chodníka na pešiu a cyklo časť si ponechal pôvodné tagovanie na chodníku pre peších, takže je tam teraz bicycle=designated, čo je zle. Taktiež tam ostalo segregated=yes, čo nedáva zmysel pre chodník určený len pre peších.
3) úzka časť chodníka na konci zjazdu na Košickú ulicu je označená značkou č. 221 "cyklistická komunikácia". Ty si to zmenil na chodník pre peších (t.j. značka č. 220, ktorá tam ale nie je). Tým pádom tade nebude fungovať vyhľadávanie trasy pre cyklistov, aj keď je ten úsek legálne označený príslušnou značkou. Tu je trochu sporný fakt, že značka č. 221 je len v smere dolu kopcom, opačným smerom chýba.
4) aj keď sa opraví predchádzajúci bod, stále nebude možné routovať cyklistov od Billy smerom k Hypertescu, lebo tebou zakreslený cyklochodník končí na ulici Pri Celózke.
5) tak, ako si zakreslil separátne chodníky pre cyklistov a peších by to mohlo byť len vtedy, ak by boli označené značkami č. 220 a č. 221, t.j. rovnako, ako je to popri OC Dubeň. 

Vzhľadom na to, že tvoje úpravy nesedia s realitou, ťa chcem požiadať o vrátenie uvedených zmien do pôvodného stavu.

S pozdravom
Tibor
impiaaa (2021-04-27 14:37:26+00:00): When drawing an area around the campus of a hotel, be sure to delete the "building" tag. Also be careful not to connect it to unrelated things, like a post box or another building. Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103713945
borovac (2021-04-27 09:51:20+00:00): fixing changeset comment: Adding missing buildings and aligning road network #osmhr-project-15 #potres-kod-petrinje #MSFTOpenMaps
L'imaginaire (2021-04-27 16:42:34+00:00): Dag Karel,

Leuk dat je de deze extra informatie toevoegt! Het veld "beschrijving" ("description") geeft echter maar plaats voor enkele woorden of een korte zin. Als het om informatie uit Wikipedia gaat, dan is het beter om naar het Wikipedia-artikel te linken. Ik heb dit even voor jou gedaan. De Wikipedia-beschrijving wordt op deze manier ook zichtbaar in bepaalde apps.
jqngarcia (2021-05-01 06:47:01+00:00): Bon Dia, He fet cambis en les teves edicions, tot l'edifici,no es el comerç

Salut i Mapes, JQN
EDP445 (2021-05-04 07:36:42+00:00): Bon dia!
moltes gracies per la seva aportació, gracies a vostè hem après a millor ultilitzar openstreetmap
salut i mapes!
Ser9ei (2021-04-27 08:17:22+00:00): poor geometry. use Q hotkey to make angles right.
Kayla C (2021-04-27 13:00:18+00:00): Thank you. I will try next time.
Ser9ei (2021-04-27 08:13:32+00:00): The cabin geometry is obviously wrong. It is a quadrangle. You cut out the shadow from the tree.
Famlam (2021-04-27 08:03:13+00:00): Missende bron: Mapillary
L'imaginaire (2021-04-27 16:51:45+00:00): Beste Karel,
Bedankt om dit zwembad toe te voegen! De manier waarop het zwembad was getagd, kon nog wat beter, ik heb dit even rechtgezet. Door bijv. de tag leisure=swimming_pool te gebruiken, weten alle apps die de data van OpenStreetMap gebruiken dat het om een zwembad gaat. We zetten dit dan ook niet meer in de name-tag, die is voorbehouden voor de naam, in dit geval dus Aquandé.

Als je nog vragen hebt, reageer dan gerust hieronder of via een privéberichtje.
kasmar00 (2021-05-06 14:32:04+00:00): Cześć, w oznaczonych przez ciebie miejscach nie ma ani stacji kolejowej ani muru miejskiego. Zmiany wycofałem
Linkid (2021-04-27 11:26:29+00:00): Salut. Merci pour la contribution, c'est top !
Je pense que tu n'as pas mis les coordonnées sur le bon objet : j'aurais plutôt vu celles-ci sur le bâtiment (2167029) plutôt que sur le chemin ;).
Rayan_K (2021-04-27 12:46:19+00:00): Ah oui mince, je pensais avoir modifié le polygone. Merci beaucoup pour la correction ! ;)
Linkid (2021-04-28 06:56:30+00:00): Pas de soucis, la relecture est là pour ça. Je te laisse faire la modification : c'est toi qui en est l'auteur, après tout.
ivanbranco (2023-04-13 21:01:15+00:00): Hi StpnGeorg, 

I know it's a 2 years old changeset, but maybe you still remember why did you change Gerolamo with Girolamo?
eggie (2021-06-22 19:50:33+00:00): Beste Tilia.. Loopt hier werkelijk een tunnel=culvert onder het hele gebied door? En dan bedoelik dat stuk wetland 
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=103688449

MVG
eggie
Tilia_J (2021-06-23 06:01:37+00:00): Foutje... Hersteld
eggie (2021-06-23 06:04:36+00:00): Top! Was toevallig hier een starter aan het helpen en toen viel het met op.
De rendering hier hersteld.. 
Mvg
Eggie
habi (2021-04-27 09:28:27+00:00): Ciao Soumbill 
You have added a lot of `buildding=yes` in this changeset, which is a typo. 
I changed all these to `building=yes` to make the buildings on the map :) 
Have a good day, 
Greetings from Switzerland 
habi
maraf24 (2022-02-11 16:20:52+00:00): Hj
Skąd pochodzi ta granica? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12634739
Z całą pewnością nie jest ona prawidłowa.
Sigridstorrada (2022-02-11 17:03:19+00:00): Hej, dane pobrałam z tego linku: 
wms:http://emuia1.gugik.gov.pl:80/wmsproxy/emuia/wms?SERVICE=WMS&FORMAT=image/png&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=emuia:layer_miejscowosci_granica,emuia:layer_miejscowosci,emuia:layer_miejscowosci_labels&STYLES=&SRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}  jest to w poradniku https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Poradnik_rysowania_granic_wsi_oraz_aktualizacji_granic_gmin - ale używam wyłącznie do przysiółków i małych miejscowości niesołeckich. Pozdrawiam
maraf24 (2022-02-11 17:08:50+00:00): Sprawdzę później co jest podane w tym wms.
Problem z przysiółkami i wsiami jest taki, że one oficjalnie granic nie mają. Czasem daje się je pośrednio  jednoznacznie określić, ale nie zawsze.
W podanym przez mnie linku łatwo sprawdzić, że granice nie pokrywa się z granicami działek, i że wyglądają jak kółko zakreślone ołówkiem na mapie - takie "granice" już widziałem w kilku innych miejscach w Polsce i sądzę, że takie właśnie jest ich pochodzenie - bazgranie po mapie.
Sigridstorrada (2022-02-11 18:06:08+00:00): Te granice naniosłam niemal rok temu. Także wydawały mi się dziwne i w sumie zarzuciłam to, a obecnie korzystam wyłącznie z wms:http://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/wss/service/PZGiK/PRG/WMS/Boundaries?REQUEST=GetMap&SERVICE=WMS&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&FORMAT=image/png8&VERSION=1.3.0&LAYERS=Granice_obrebow_ewidencyjnych,Granice_jednostek_ewidencyjnych,Granice_gmin,Granice_powiatow,Granice_wojewodztw,Granice_panstwa,PunktyGraniczne&STYLES=,,,,,,&EXCEPTIONS=xml&CRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}{header(User-Agent,Mozilla/5.0 (JOSM)} 
no i skupiam się tylko na sołectwach, nie ruszając już drobnicy. Pozdrawiam serdecznie
rthik007 (2021-04-28 06:02:55+00:00): Hi 8212,
Changed the classification of connectivities 
way 935728405
way 935728406
way 935728407
way 935728408
way 935728409
Kindly check with 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/103746866
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103688958
portalaventura (2021-04-27 08:50:55+00:00): Kremiudo, boas-vindas ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira contribuição!

Em https://wiki.osm.org/Brasil você encontra informações úteis sobre o projeto de mapeamento colaborativo.

Enquanto você se acostuma com o OpenStreetMap, procure conversar com pessoas mais experientes se tiver dúvidas ou antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que lhe causarem estranheza.

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Em https://wiki.osm.org/Pt:Canais_para_contato estão listadas formas de interagir com a comunidade brasileira. Nacionalmente, no grupo de Telegram https://telegram.me/OSMBrasil_Comunidade você encontrará muitas das pessoas que colaboram com o OSM. Regionalmente, a comunidade da Bahia mantém o grupo https://telegram.me/osmBA, e a do Nordeste mantém o grupo https://telegram.me/osmne.

Boa diversão com suas edições!
Buraddo (2021-04-27 09:01:46+00:00): Hello, those boundaries do not really have an administrative purpose, they are approximate boundaries of city neighborhoods according to common knowledge. Is the boundary=administrative tag correct in this case? I know that some may argue that they shouldn't even be present on the map...
user_177389 (2021-04-27 10:02:16+00:00): Hi,

thanks for the hint. Maybe you are right. It might be better to use "boundary=civil" (without admin_level), or place multipolygons "type=multipolygon, place=*" (without admin_level). Otherwise the next user will come and add the wrong tags.

Relations changed by me:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283545

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283546

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283576

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283425

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283492

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283491

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283395

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283394

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283169

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283168

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283028

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11283027

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11282940

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11282905

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11282896

Best regards,

Mario
user_177389 (2021-04-27 10:41:06+00:00): Another suggestion: boundary=place (also quite common)

I could change that tonight...
Buraddo (2021-04-27 12:53:51+00:00): boundary=place seems to be the most accurate tag for this case!
user_177389 (2021-04-27 21:30:50+00:00): Should be fine now.
Glassman (2021-04-27 23:59:07+00:00): It looks like in your earlier edits you added building within buildings but later just renamed the existing buildings. Can you relook at Wendell Hall and a couple of others so there is just one building. It's okay to break a building into smaller pieces. Let me know if you need help.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/103690265
Polarbear (2022-06-06 19:22:38+00:00): Hi MKnight und thetornado76,
ich forsche grade, warum mir auf Teilen der A36 immer noch B6 angezeigt wird, und wie vermutet hängen einige Abschnitte noch in B6-Routenrelationen. 
Gibt es dafür einen formal-behördlich-widmungstechnischen Grund, oder muss das schlicht noch aufgeräumt werden?

Viele Grüsse
Polarbear
(crossposted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/96915626 )
thetornado76 (2022-06-06 19:42:38+00:00): Hallo Polarbear,
Ich vermute, daß dies noch Altlasten sind und weg kann.
Viele Grüße thetornado76
Polarbear (2022-06-06 20:27:44+00:00): Ok dann warte ich kurz ob MKnight noch Einwände hat, und teere das im Laufe der Woche über.
MKnight (2022-06-06 21:57:06+00:00): Moin, ich habe die Relationen nicht auf dem Schirm und auch meine Finger nicht drin, also: Tu was Du tun musst.
MKnight (2022-06-06 22:10:13+00:00): Nachtrag: möglicherweise war das missverständlich.
tl:dr: keine Einwände
TomJeffs (2021-04-28 21:05:00+00:00): I mean it doesn't make much difference tbh, but it is signed as a cycleway.  It's also named after an Olympic cyclist.

https://www.stockport.gov.uk/cycle-routes/alan-newton-way
peaksandpuddles (2021-04-29 11:27:21+00:00): They do seem to have managed to install the low-level signs incorrectly. This path definitely has equestrian access, while the path into Woodbank Park is foot/cycle only. Just thought it was helpful to clarify.
TomJeffs (2021-04-29 11:35:52+00:00): It isn't currently shown on Stockport's definitive map which suggests it isn't a bridle path - https://www.stockport.gov.uk/stockport-public-rights-of-way/prow-map

The map may be out of date though, I don't know the area well enough to look for any definitive map modification orders.

I would still tag it as a walking and cycling path, and add horse access.  Bridleways have a specific legal definition which this route doesn't yet appear to have.
peaksandpuddles (2021-04-29 12:09:38+00:00): Fair enough, they are planning to add it as as a defined PROW but obviously haven’t got that far yet!