piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
BubbaJuice (2021-11-03 23:57:24+00:00): Hello 1T_money, 

Splitting ways to make them shorter literally serves no purpose unless you are editing the area and the way you are editing becomes over 2000 nodes long.

You have caused an inconvenience to me because I have a lot of unpublished changes in this area and I got one big conflict because of this.

Please reconsider this next time.

Thank you, BubbaJuice
archpdx (2021-11-03 01:49:51+00:00): Hi,
In the future please use more descriptive changeset comments - 'date added' makes it difficult for other mappers to see what you've changed in your changesets. For example, 'added access tags' would've been sufficient here. You can read more about what makes a 'good' changeset comment here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
cbhackmeyer (2022-02-21 09:17:52+00:00): Hello.

I ran across this changeset while trying to diagnose some bicycle routing problems I was having along OR 219 crossing the Willamette. It seems you added tags to this section of 219 indicating that bicycles and pedestrians are prohibited. I cannot find any statute stating that this is the case. ODOT's official list of highways where bicycles are prohibited does not mention any part of 219. https://www.cityofsalem.net/Pages/find-bike-paths.aspx appears to indicate that this is a legitimate bike route. I even looked at Mapillary street-level imagery from this stretch and did not see any signage indicating bikes / pedestrians are not allowed. Can you confirm if bikes and pedestrians are actually prohibited here by statute?

Thank you.
nztraveler (2022-02-21 17:56:46+00:00): Hello cbhackmeyer,

The reason I changed the OR 219 crossing the Williamette river is because I rode the section myself last September 2021.  When crossing the bridges there is no shoulder or extra lane for cyclists to take crossing the bridges.  Cyclists are forced to travel in middle of the one lane that is available for that direction of traffic.  The one lane available is extremely busy with logging trucks, large trucks and other cars driving at a high rate of speed.  

I felt it wasn’t safe for cyclists to travel on the OR 219 without creating a lot of danger to the cyclists.  Plus, I wanted to give a “warning” to other cyclists taking this route.

I realize that there are limited options for cyclists crossing the Williamette River.  If you feel differently, you can change the section.

I hope this helps.  If you have more questions.. feel free to email me.

Thanks,
archpdx (2022-02-21 20:15:36+00:00): I think in this case bicycle=discouraged (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/bicycle=discouraged) would be the appropriate tag to use since bicycles aren't legally prohibited but can be dangerous without a shoulder.
nztraveler (2022-02-21 21:32:10+00:00): I changed all the changesets across the bridge to "discouraged" for bicycles.  I updated the comments as well to reflect there is no shoulder.  I had no idea you could add the "Discouraged" Tags. Thanks
cbhackmeyer (2022-02-22 00:34:51+00:00): Thanks for the prompt reply, and archpdx for your input as well. I understand and appreciate the motivation behind tagging the road in this way, but there is a strong consensus that, per the wiki, access tags should "describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth e.g. signage or legal ruling". The wiki further states ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access#List_of_possible_values ) that the "discouraged" value should be used "only if marked by a traffic sign" because it is "subjective otherwise". This applies to other modes, as well, not just bikes.

It might be useful to have some OSM-based map that provides recommendations for which roads to use or not when cycling, but OSM itself is meant to include only data that is objectively verifiable. Many cyclists would probably be uncomfortable riding on a road like this. Personally, I have often ridden on roads that look much scarier than this one and am relatively comfortable doing so for short distances. It's a subjective judgement call, and if we were to consistently use the "discouraged" access value on all roads where most people would feel unsafe riding a bike, it would have to be applied to the vast majority of highways across very wide swaths of North America.

Note that it is possible and can be quite useful for vulnerable road users to add more objective data that can help people make their own decisions about whether to use a certain right of way. For example, check out the "shoulder" tag (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shoulder), which allows you to specify whether there is a shoulder that cyclists and pedestrians can use, its smoothness, material, width, etc. OR 219 is already tagged as being a trunk highway (suggesting relatively heavy and fast traffic) and as lacking a sidewalk. The "maxspeed" and "lanes" tags can also be useful if you know that information.
archpdx (2022-02-22 01:04:08+00:00): Yeah, you're right it does look like discouraged access should only be used for places that are signed. Thanks for adding the shoulder tags to the appropriate sections.
nztraveler (2022-02-24 18:24:38+00:00): Ok.  So we appear to be back where we started?
I too, am en experienced cyclist, having cycled all over the world.  I would avoid this section of OR 219 at all cost.  

Is there a tag for "no shoulder and 3 foot cement wall where the shoulder should be on the bridges?"  The cyclist has no place to go should a fast moving vehicle not slow down.. 

How can cyclist make informed judgements about whether something is safe if there is no useable information?
cbhackmeyer (2022-02-24 22:17:45+00:00): Again, I completely understand your concern for cyclists' safety. I hope I have not come off as dismissive in that regard.

There is indeed a way to map concrete walls along the side of the road (though I think it is generally assumed, at least in the US, that bridges have some such side barrier):

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dwall

We're not exactly back where we started; I did tag one section as having no shoulder at all. Other sections could perhaps be refined by adding "shoulder:est_width=*" (or just "shoulder:width=*" if you happen to know the exact width) to indicate other areas where the shoulder narrows considerably.
mueschel (2021-11-03 10:35:38+00:00): Hi,
welcome to OSM!
Please spend some time understanding how OSM works - it looks like you're trying to add some private routes between POIs. OSM is not the right place for that - please consider using an OSM-based service like umap.
Nakaner (2021-11-03 17:00:21+00:00): Hallo,

sind die Eppinger und Mannheimer Straße wirklich mit Fahrrad-Piktogrammen auf der Fahrbahn versehen, um den Mischverkehr von Rad- und Kfz-Verkehr zu verdeutlichen?

Viele Grüße

Michael
Jolllllll (2021-11-14 19:27:44+00:00): Hallo Michael,

nein, Fahrrad piktogramme sind dort keine.
Tut mir leid wenn ich die Auswahlmöglichkeit falsch verstanden habe.

Ich dachte das sei die richtige Auswahl wenn sich Auto und radfahrer die Straße teilen.

Viele Grüße,
Jonas
seattlefyi (2021-11-03 01:00:03+00:00): Hi, this is really considerate of you, thanks for taking the extra effort to make the change for others' safety!
Nearby0051 (2021-11-07 11:05:08+00:00): Thanks from me as well!
Happy mapping
Lee Carré (2021-11-03 02:22:19+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas (bounding boxes), please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Lee Carré (2021-11-03 08:15:24+00:00): “edits based on personal experience.”

http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:source = local knowledge
Mashin (2021-11-03 21:15:56+00:00): Thanks for updating. But has the building been demolished as well?

Also for the future, when you are removing a closed business please delete only tags that are related to that business and leave other intact. 
E.g. address of the place often stays the same for a long time. And this way it preserves edit history for that object.
Thanks
Fortyseven (2021-11-03 21:36:17+00:00): Ah. Sorry about that; I'll try to be more careful about that. (I don't think I've had the opportunity to remove one before? 🤔) 

Is it possible to roll back the change? Worst case I can put the building back on there. Whichever is better.

But nah, the building is still there (at least it was when I walked by there today).  I did notice some construction guys  crawling around on it the other day. Not sure what the plan is. :P
Mashin (2021-11-04 00:54:48+00:00): No problem.
I restored the building and the two address nodes from your other changesets.
JJIglesias (2021-11-03 01:50:30+00:00): Slds. Los Hoteles, Restaurantes y otras facilidades turisticas requieren mas datos q solamente la Creacion de un nodo. Maps.me permite agregar Telefonos, Emails y otros datos de interes sobre cualquier facilidad turistica....
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:23:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
BCNorwich (2021-11-04 08:04:07+00:00): Hi, I've reinstated the pub tags and tagged them as disused: this is as OSM practice so other folks don't later add them back.

Regards Bernard.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:25:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
seattlefyi (2021-11-03 01:19:43+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edits! Great job adding the house and street. Looks like you did expand the abbreviation for NE to Northeast, but could also expand Ave to Avenue on both the house and the street? Thanks again, hope to see more edits!
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:22:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
JJIglesias (2021-11-03 02:02:47+00:00): Que es Pitagoras? Aparte de ser una atraccion Turistica que Clase de Atraccion Turistica es? Favor Describir
Gracias
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:21:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
JJIglesias (2021-11-03 02:06:58+00:00): Slds. Los Hoteles, Restaurantes y otras facilidades turisticas requieren mas datos q solamente la Creacion de un nodo. ID permite agregar Telefonos, Emails y otros datos de interes sobre cualquier facilidad turistica.... Esos datos son tan importantes como la creacion del mismo elemento
ZeLonewolf (2021-11-06 22:48:03+00:00): Looks good to me.  I agree with removing this motorway island and changing it to match the surrounding highway.
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:26:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
ZeLonewolf (2022-02-26 01:50:55+00:00): I think this particular edit is okay and should stand.  It's accepted practice that motorway islands should not be tagged for a single grade separated intersection.
ElliottPlack (2022-02-26 01:54:59+00:00): Thanks for checking! This was the one I was looking for with Joseph RP
ZeLonewolf (2022-02-26 02:00:47+00:00): Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117867523
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:25:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
Supaplex (2021-11-03 05:50:30+00:00): 你變森林王子了
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113308155
DP24PH (2021-11-03 03:31:45+00:00): ERRATUM on comment:

DP24 #DPresearch #Mapping101 #NewNormal #BetterNormal ALERT: [#Dasmariñas] #Sampaoc2 humanitarian fixes (wall/fence extension, additional buildings, abandoned building tagging)
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-30 11:56:11+00:00): Hello!

You used
material=concreted
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9220110415/history

Have you maybe meant
material=concrete
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?
❤️‍🔥 (2024-01-30 12:22:29+00:00): sorry, fixed now. It's a bit dumb that seamark tags use "concreted" but normal tags use "concrete"...
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-29 15:07:19+00:00): seamarks tags in general form quite weird parallel tagging scheme in general, often doing things differently without good reason...

thanks for fixing!
rthik007 (2021-11-09 06:21:20+00:00): "Hi MDPmapper,
Kindly give connectivity to the either of the roads which were created. All roads are being  hanging on both sides it affects the navigation.
and also check following changesets,
113309816
113309875
113310007
Thank you."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113308871
MxxCon (2021-11-03 07:10:36+00:00): Hello.
Based on the marking of that field, it seems like it's not only american football, but also soccer and lacrosse. Perhaps update that tag, if you haven't already?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113308873
Warin61 (2021-11-03 06:26:03+00:00): Hi,
Bibra Lake does not need to be a relation.
Bibra Lake Reserve ? Sorry but why is the lake excluded from the reserve??? 
And why delete the scrub area???? 

What is the source of the areas mapped as 'Reserves'?
000Tom000 (2021-11-03 08:07:30+00:00): Hi,
Yes I agree, I was editing the area boundaries that someone else made. I've made several edits which should fix it.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:23:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:23:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
Carnildo (2021-11-03 07:53:46+00:00): OpenStreetMap is about mapping what's there, not what we wish was there.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-04 10:34:47+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5423
 
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
ovruni (2021-11-03 05:59:07+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se ha estado retirando sentidos de vías sin motivo aparente. Por favor indique en sus conjuntos de cambios información adicional a "edit street" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
user_5359 (2021-11-05 18:02:34+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/998428885/history Why did you change building=no to building:=no and add building=service.
ovruni (2021-11-03 06:00:47+00:00): Hola, este segmento de Jirón Cuzco al que le ha agregado sentido es un segmento que comienza con un bloque, que permite ingresar y salir para recoger carga, por lo cual no existe un sentido allí. Por favor agregue también un texto adicional en sus cambios, no solamente "edit street" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
impiaaa (2021-11-03 15:06:49+00:00): Thanks for your contributions. When you make a change, please be sure to include a descriptive comment so that other mappers can know at a glance what changed. Read here for more information: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
ovruni (2021-11-03 06:05:19+00:00): ¿Cual es el motivo para retirar el sentido de la entrada y salida del estacionamiento subterraneo del parque de la reserva?
ovruni (2021-11-03 06:13:04+00:00): Aquí hago mención al parque del Malecón de la Reserva.
SomeoneElse (2021-11-03 14:41:33+00:00): In http://osm.org/browse/changeset/111372699 I said "As can be seen from http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=248436981 this city has had the name tag changed several times in the last few months. It'd be really helpful to understand the reasons behind this change."
You've been discussing this with another mapper on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113104060 , but it doesn't seem as if that has come to any conclusion yet.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:23:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
ovruni (2021-11-03 06:23:05+00:00): ¿Cual es el motivo para cortar la calle Julio C. Tello?
ovruni (2021-11-03 06:27:26+00:00): En caso de que una vía tenga otra característica recorte solo la vía en cuestión, no ambas vías.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:24:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:24:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
catonano (2021-11-13 15:14:55+00:00): che signific questo numero di telefono aggiunto a un qiadrilatero?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113315168
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:25:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
StefanHRT (2021-11-03 06:57:43+00:00): Hey Nico, 
Kann sein, das bald jemand den Weg wieder einträgt, da er vor Ort dennoch zu sehen ist. In so einem Fall zukünftig einfach bicycle=no und smoothness auf unpassable alternativ anstelle highway -->abandoned:highway setzen ;)
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:24:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:22:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:21:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk (2021-12-11 19:46:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114828622 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert of incorrect edits to the map due to the use of incorrect tags.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:21:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:25:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:22:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:23:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:25:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
Protoxenus (2021-11-11 09:49:07+00:00): Hallo, du bist sicher, das das Sektorenfeuer neben der Seebrücke steht? Das ist auf keinem der Luftbilder zu sehen und auch unlogisch. Würdest du das bitte noch mal überprüfen?
Danke Protoxenus
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:25:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:22:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
ovruni (2021-11-03 20:27:04+00:00): Hola, le había escrito anteriormente en el conjunto de cambios 113312906, pero parece que ha ignorado el mensaje y ha vuelto a modificar la vía sin ninguna justificación, por lo que procedo a revertir su conjunto de cambios.
Saludos
johnarupire (2021-11-03 21:03:59+00:00): Gracias ovruni. 
Estimado nurdiana_ui por favor, comunícate con la comunidad osmpe en http://t.me/osmpe por si tienes alguna duda sobre cómo mapear en openstreetmap. Te agradeceremos que no retires información del mapa sin explicar el motivo. Saludos
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-10-07 13:24:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 127151699, 127148293 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert (on request from the community) due to the wrong use of tags related to trees and the naming of trees
Lee Carré (2021-11-03 08:13:34+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
grin (2021-11-03 11:25:41+00:00): It is not possible; this is a gobal change. There is no point to artificially create 200+ changesets for _one_ change (also, there is no way).
Thanks for watching, though!
glglgl (2021-11-04 10:59:11+00:00): It annoys people in all parts of the world which are not affected.
InsertUser (2021-11-04 11:56:18+00:00): Where was this mechanical edit discussed? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113316313
grin (2021-11-04 13:41:20+00:00): @InsertUser: it is not a mechanical edit. Read the wiki please.
InsertUser (2021-11-04 22:34:12+00:00): @grin I have, especially the bit that says:
> This includes: 
> - use of find-and-replace functionality using a standard editor such as JOSM or finding using services such as Overpass API and changing without reviewing cases individually;
> - manually changing tags without adequate review;

482 objects across several continents seems a long time to forget the upload button if you're actually checking each object.