piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
ovruni (2021-05-17 03:26:30+00:00): Hola, el uso de la etiqueta name no es para descripciones, por favor revisar la documentación sobre nombres. [0]
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Los_nombres_no_son_para_descripciones
ovruni (2021-05-17 03:48:46+00:00): Por favor revise los comentarios anteriores en los conjuntos de cambios 104791336 y 104789596, si desea modificar alguna edificación mueva los nodos de las mismas, ademas de usar nombres solo para objetos que tengan uno, no para descripciones.
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
Saludos
Saludos
Glassman (2021-05-17 20:28:09+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104792405
user_5359 (2021-05-17 05:25:32+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please use the key building instead of buildings.
Glassman (2021-05-17 20:28:12+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104792623
rene78 (2021-05-19 00:12:52+00:00): Are your sure about https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943706031?
It doesn't look like as if there is a way?
GrabMY_FaizDjamil (2021-05-20 16:23:49+00:00): sorry for the wrong edits. i have re-look the gpx file and our street recording
rene78 (2021-05-20 19:09:01+00:00): 👍
ovruni (2021-05-17 04:18:07+00:00): Hola por favor revise los comentarios anteriores, el uso de la etiqueta building no es para lotes, tampoco los nombres lo son para descripciones y por favor no retire edificios anteriores.
Saludos
ravali_78 (2021-05-18 03:15:55+00:00): Hi maning,
I have fixed the alignment as building polygon overlapping with residential road.kindly check with way 943707048,https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104855004.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104793648
whb (2021-05-18 08:43:21+00:00): Guten Tag sladen,

Blumenbeete sind keine Fußgängerzonen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943717663
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943717664

Verkehrsinseln, auf denen Masten, Ampeln und Verkehrsschilder stehen, nicht für Fußgänger gedacht und mit Geländern abgeschirmt sind, ebenfalls nicht:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943698403
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943698404
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943698405
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943698406

Wenn du keine halbwegs aktuelle Ortskenntnis besitzt, dann könntest du zumindest Mapillary verwenden, z.B. https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/_u-VzPIBNOdWVrALbPxkWQ
Links bzw. rechts die von dir als Fußgängerzonen bezeichneten Blumenbeete.

Viele Grüße
whb
sladen (2021-05-18 14:09:56+00:00): Positive Gruesse whe!

Einfache Frage: Welche Tags waeren besser: zB. "traffic_calming=island" + "surface=grass", osw.) ?

MfG -Paul

(dh. …anstelle von "x ist nicht y", "z ist nicht y", "nicht das", "nicht die" "nicht der"; diese sind *nicht* nuetzlich. )
whb (2021-05-20 09:41:39+00:00): Guten Tag!

Für die ersten beiden Flächen:
landuse=flowerbed:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dflowerbed
Für die erste Fläche wäre evtl. zusätzlich area:highway oder traffic_calming möglich, siehe unten.

Für die restlichen Flächen:
area:highway=traffic_island mit surface=paving_stones:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Street_area#traffic_island
Das Wiki meint, traffic_calming=island sei nicht für Flächen vorgesehen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming
Aber eigentlich fände ich das auch richtig.
mavl (2021-05-18 13:00:32+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок добавляет здание с названием "1". В России здания обычно не имеют названий, но имеют адреса. Название улицы здания указывается в теге addr:street, номер здания - в теге addr:housenumber.
skquinn (2021-05-17 05:42:20+00:00): Oops, sources should have included TIGER Roads 2020
ratrun (2021-05-22 09:00:54+00:00): Hi,

you have created a strange way crossing houses. Are you sure that your change is correct, this looks very strange. Thank you.
StefanHRT (2021-05-17 08:35:06+00:00): Hallo rik,
Danke fürs korrigieren der Radstreifendetails. Ich glaube hier wurde mal an die Straße ein use_sidepath gesetzt, dies wäre durch die nicht vorhandene nutzungspflicht der Radwege falsch, wärst Du so gut und bearbeitest dies mit? Möchte Dir ungern in Deine Bearbeitungen "reingrätschen" VG Stefan
rik_ (2021-05-17 08:51:15+00:00): Hi Stefan, danke für den Hinweis, das hatte ich übersehen. Habe das Tag auf allen Segmenten (bis auf eins, wo es passt) entfernt.
StefanHRT (2021-05-17 08:57:15+00:00): Super, danke Dir. Bei mir dauert es noch ein wenig bis ich dort aktiv unterwegs wäre, gestern war erst einmal Niederlehme dran (Bin da zwar noch nicht durch mit Fotos auswerten, aber die Radnutzung passt dort zumindest bei der Schleuse)
timmito (2021-05-17 12:33:33+00:00): Hallo trailschneck, hast du gesehen, dass ich da vor einer Woche schon dran gearbeitet habe? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/104453372

Das amenity=drinking_water habe ich ganz entfernt und nicht auf disused gesetzt, weil es sich auch vorher schon offiziell um keine Trinkwasserstelle gehandelt hat, es war höchstens geduldet auf dem Privatgrundstück.

Meines Erachtens handelt es sich nach wie vor um ein natural=spring. Es ist ja nicht disused, nur weil da eine Spanplatte davor ist. Es tritt nach wie vor Wasser aus, welches unter dem Ölmühlweg durchfließt und dann in den Bach gelangt.
tux67 (2021-05-17 07:37:49+00:00): You connected to main roads here - and the way added looks like a parking_aisle .. please ensure no routing is established between roads across private ground.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104799331
pravallg (2021-05-19 08:07:38+00:00): Hi, 
Thanks for looking into our edits. I have added the missing segment as per the available OSM resources. Apologies for missing the access of the segment. I have added access=customers (w943744294,w943744295)  as it leads to Gym/Fitness center and Automobile showroom respectively. Please find the changeset (104938005) with modifications. Always happy to learn from the community.
Thanks and Regards, 
pravallg.
ovruni (2021-05-17 06:18:15+00:00): En este conjunto de cambios principalmente se han eliminado edificaciones, lo cual puede ser considera como un acto de vandalismo. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Vandalismo
ovruni (2021-05-17 06:25:07+00:00): De manera similar que en el conjunto de cambios 104799935. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Vandalismo
Buraddo (2021-05-17 10:07:05+00:00): Hello, if you live nearby then point me to where it is marked as DN1N, last time when I checked the km markers (borne kilometrice) say "Varianta de Ocolire Cluj Est (shorted as DNVOCE), there is no evidence of DN1N. Also in law (HG 540/22.06.2000) is also marked ad "VOCE"
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 11:30:43+00:00): https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/DN1N

i think this should be ok as proof
https://www.google.com/maps/place/DN1N/@46.7320804,23.6765494,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x47490cb576dd9159:0x394ded883ecad69b!8m2!3d46.7320804!4d23.6787381
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 11:36:11+00:00): Hello,
While it may be that they are abreviated for local use as VOCE in (HG 540/22.06.2000) this does not surpass the fact that all national roads are DN 
https://lege5.ro/Gratuit/gi4diobu/anexa-la-hotararea-guvernului-nr-540-2000-privind-aprobarea-incadrarii-in-categorii-functionale-a-drumurilor-publice-si-a-drumurilor-de-utilitate-privata-deschise-circulatiei-publice-din-22062000
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 11:38:10+00:00): aslo if you soom out you can sew DN1N south of feleacu merging into "DNVOCE" as its written now, unfortunatly this is wrong
Buraddo (2021-05-17 11:42:34+00:00): Wikipedia is for sure not a valid source, the article was made by people having the same assumption as you, that the information in Google Maps is correct. Look over the document better, VOCE is not the local use abbreviation, it is in the "variante ocolitoare" subcategory of DNs (DNVOCE is it's only classification)
Just take a road trip and look what is written on the road markers. DN1N exists fictionally, as it the former part of DJ105S that was taken over during the construction of the road. But the entirety of it is marked as known as DNVOCE/VOCE/Varianta Cluj-Est everywhere in the official documents.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 11:55:10+00:00): "DN1N exists fictionally, as it the former part of DJ105S that was taken over during the construction of the road"

Really? is this why we are calling it DN1N? asking as you know some other people living here but ok. I guess locals know worst.

Is this why a national road ends south of Feleacu and then continues as it enters E576? Look at google maps those are accurate.
Is there a reason why you are so combatative with a local sharing and correcting mistakes ??
Buraddo (2021-05-17 12:25:31+00:00): I wouldn't have to be combatative if I wouldn't have to always explain to people that it is illegal to copy from Google Maps and that if their mistake became the name that most people use, it still doesn't become truth. I have showed you official documents and asked you to look at road markers for the correct information and you will see that it is indeed DNVOCE.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:29:22+00:00): The documents you claim to be official are nothing more than political names for infrastructure repair projects. National roads are always called DN and a number. I really don't care how well you think you found the name. Its false.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:36:29+00:00): please read the Police communique about road status:
Go ahead and translate for yourself and see that i am right. 

https://www.politiaromana.ro/ro/info-trafic/judetul-cluj-circulatie-oprita-pe-centura-municipiului-cluj-napoca-din-cauza-unui-eveniment-rutier

DNVOCE or Centura de Est a municipiului Cluj-Napoca (DN1N) is the road you insist that is DNVOCE which cannot exist legally. ITS DN1E. I dont have all day to argue with you so please rename your mistake. Again the road police uses DN1E as its descriptor not what ever you just wrote.
Buraddo (2021-05-17 12:36:45+00:00): There are a lot of roads which do not have DN number format (actually most beltways), for example DNCALB DNCORA, DNVO1K, DNVTM. Just because you didn't encounter them it doesn't mean they do not exist.
Please, show me proof that DN1N variant is the correct designation if you insist that my official documents are false and no, Google Maps is not proof.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:38:45+00:00): I just did above. Also i bet those are wrong too, did you also invent those?
ctrl-alt-k (2021-05-17 12:43:55+00:00): You literally linked Wikipedia and Google Maps, that's not proof lmao. Just take the L
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:46:36+00:00): to be clear DN1N is the national road and DNVOCE as you insist to call its the local name for the segment but its still DN1N. Please do not create more confusion in the map than its needed.
While you may cite that wikipedia is not a source you should read about how roads are named and you can clearly see that the full road is given a name DN1 and then its branched into portions, You are complacently obliterating its real name as DN1N and replacing the local segment on top of its root, IF you really want its DN1N (VOCE) 
https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/DN1
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:47:00+00:00): I will not take the lose as you say when you clearly have it wrong.
Buraddo (2021-05-17 12:48:00+00:00): This discussion is going nowhere. Please make your statement on the talk-ro mail list (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ro) and I willl also make mine and let the community decide.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 12:57:05+00:00): No. I dont care i just wont use the OpenStreet map. You can take your ego with you. You are wrong but you refuse to do basic research and insist you know better than locals even when i give you  Police Communiques about the road. I will not have pointless discussion with you and dig the whole legislation about roads because someone with and unchecked ego is miffed someone told him his commit 5 months ago is wrong.  I simply refuse to waste my time.
kbruen (2021-05-17 13:04:21+00:00): virgiliuG, I recomment you watch this video about how commercial maps have mistakes put in them on purpose: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DeiATy-FfjI

While it may not be the case that DN1N on Google Maps is a mistake on purpose, you should still not take anything on other maps as if it's 100% correct.

After that, recall that Google Maps displays "Map data ©2021" in the bottom right of the screen. You are not allowed to copy things from Google Maps.

Please also notice that the Wikipedia article does not cite any source. Since anybody can edit Wikipedia, without any source the article cannot be used as a source itself.

Într-un final, deși apreciez efortul de a corecta greșeli, trebuie să fi atent să nu greșești tu în acest efort. Situația este neclară, actele nu sunt clare (tipic românesc).

În Brașov, de unde sunt, toată lumea îi zice unui cartier "Răcădău". Numele oficial al cartierului este totuși "Valea Cetății" (atât pe semne de circulație cât și în acte). OpenStreetMap trebuie să reflecte statutul oficial, nu felul în care numesc localnicii un anumit loc.

I understand that it feels frustrating when you make a change in good faith and it turns out to be wrong, especially when the situation is as muddy as the current one. However, attitudes of "I know better" don't help much either and only make people more frustrated, making things worse for everyone.

Finally, since you claimed "Also i bet those are wrong too, did you also invent those?", here are some proofs:
DNVO1K - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.6934855,25.5830431,3a,75y,204.75h,93.87t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sevCezzDZUxu4JPHIFt96gA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
DNCT (Centura Timișoara) - https://www.google.com/maps/@45.7780608,21.3191138,3a,39.5y,51.73h,89.97t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIOG3OH-zVZJSNyuWK5RYlA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 13:12:50+00:00): may i direct you to :
https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/DN1
that cites its sources:
DN1N	Vâlcele - Sub Coastă (sector din Centura Vâlcele - Apahida)

Bibliografie
Harta rutieră, Indexul localităților, România, Romania, Rumänien, Roumanie,1:700.000, Szarvas.Kárpátia, 2007
ADAC Straßenatlas Ost-Europa, ADAC e.V. München, 1993

Again you are naming, subsegments (local ones) of DN1N .... This is very confusing when you are telling a driver keep DN1N untill you reach apahida for example and he look at OpenMaps. But regardless have it your way.




But fine since you wont change it i really don't care that much
kbruen (2021-05-17 13:22:47+00:00): Regarding the confusing, that could be perhaps solved with something like https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:alt_name

Another solution might be to add both names: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FAQ#What_shall_I_do_for_roads_that_have_multiple_values_for_a_tag.3F

While the situation is confusing, the goal is to create an accurate map, not a subjective one.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 13:41:09+00:00): Maps should be accurate. 
If that is the case perhaps CNADNR should be asked about what is the exact name of the road. 
May i suggest http://cluj.cnadnr.ro/
As its investment name it is called indeed "
VARIANTA de OCOLIRE CLUJ-EST" but it extends national road DN1N yet they fail to specify.

if you look at from the same institution http://cluj.cnadnr.ro/harti/drumuri-nationale-executie

and click on the blue line heading to cluj you will see the investments to be made are for DN1.
kbruen (2021-05-17 13:46:14+00:00): Thanks for providing the link!

http://cluj.cnadnr.ro/retea-drumuri-nationale-administrata-de-drdp-cluj

On this page, there is an Excel file to download. In that Excel file, there is VOCE (as well as many others).

Given that the file comes directly from CNADNR's website related to the roads they manage, I think it's fair to say the official name is DNVOCE.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 13:52:00+00:00): Perfect! now if Buraddo could have linked the correct information rather than a pay-walled  site all of this could have been avoided.
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 13:56:48+00:00): actually no! its just VOCE. Read the table again. there is no DN in front
ggl (2021-05-17 14:04:19+00:00): The solution is to use VOCE, not DNVOCE, because it's not a national road DN designation as loc_ref, also because it's not a name, it's a local abbreviation.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:loc_ref

The segment is named DN1N and is referenced as such in several official documents and Police press releases and in your own documentation:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DrumuriNationale
virgiliuG (2021-05-17 14:07:19+00:00): yep
Wilmer Osario (2021-05-22 23:18:43+00:00): ¿Habría alguna manera de mejorar al frontera municipal para que no atraviese toda la ciudad de esa manera? ¿Existe plano oficial o documento donde se especifique el trazo actualizado de la frontera?

Entiendo que esta frontera oficialmente fue trazada de esa forma hace muchos años cuando Guanipa no estaba tan poblada, pero en la actualidad debe haber documentos de la Alcaldía donde se especifique su forma mejorada. Sobre todo porque actualmente debe existir "poligonales" de sectores y consejos comunales que demarquen su trazado verdadero.

Para en un futuro trazar las fronteras de barrios y sectores, necesitamos que la frontera municipal no tenga esta forma tan "atravesada"
Glassman (2021-05-17 20:26:27+00:00): #TIP: if you know the names of the businesses it's nice to add that as well as the tag describing the business.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104800777
Buraddo (2021-05-17 10:06:42+00:00): Hello, if you live nearby then point me to where it is marked as DN1N, last time when I checked the km markers (borne kilometrice) say "Varianta de Ocolire Cluj Est (shorted as DNVOCE), there is no evidence of DN1N. Also in law (HG 540/22.06.2000) is also marked ad "VOCE"
Buraddo (2021-05-17 10:10:50+00:00): Hello, apart from the road name problem I wrote about in a previous changeset, you have modified a huge meadow into a building in this changeset, this is certainly incorrect
ggl (2021-05-17 11:50:14+00:00): Yes, because what was a construction site is now actually a building.
Buraddo (2021-05-17 12:17:25+00:00): Well, then modify the construction site, not the entire meadow.
ggl (2021-05-17 12:23:18+00:00): There is no "meadow". There nenevr was a "meadow", but several houses and then a construction site which is now a huge 5 story building with underground garage and concrete poured all over what remains of this "meadow" . And please wirte to the actual changeset so I know what you're talking about.
Buraddo (2021-05-17 12:31:04+00:00): You have edited relation #12227641 in this changeset. This relation was the huge meadow between Feleacu and the Vâlcele-Apahida road. You have edited it to be a dovecoat building. (look at object's history: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12227641/history )
Nevermind, it has been corrected by another user in the meantime. Pardon my observation. I was just trying to inform you.
ggl (2021-05-17 13:44:34+00:00): Oh, ok, my bad. Sorry. I thought it was about a previous edit.
Glassman (2021-05-17 20:25:29+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

#TIP: be careful drawing features, you accidently connect a building to a service road. Can you fix it?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104801499
SekeRob (2021-05-17 12:28:05+00:00): Hey Gianni. What's the source of your cycle track mappings? Please add origin i.e. source=survey, trace whatever, and be careful, don't connect to powerlines. ;o).
Glassman (2021-05-17 20:23:56+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
#TIP: square buildings by selecting the outline then just type a 'q'
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/104802247
A67-A67 (2021-05-17 13:42:05+00:00): In december lag de route nog ten westen van de gracht in het voetgangersgebied. Ik heb de tag survey:date toegevoegd om aan te geven dat ik de route toen gesurveyd heb.

De Routedatabank lijkt niet altijd te kloppen in deze omgeving of achter te lopen.
dvdhoven (2021-05-17 14:46:54+00:00): Sorry, ik had niet op de surveydate gelet
changeset is terug gedraaid.
Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
A67-A67 (2021-05-17 14:55:45+00:00): Bedankt!
vasony (2021-06-25 05:26:36+00:00): Hol volt Rákóczi Ferenc kiírva?

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=46.879180299932&lng=17.673137100002&z=17&pKey=745577609419830&focus=photo&x=0.7551612094469855&y=0.695806785356002&zoom=1.4958448753462605
itineris (2021-06-25 05:59:42+00:00): (Bocs, de a Mapillary nálam már nem jön be).

Ha jól emlékszem, a Fő utcai "téren" láttam így.

Mivel a többi világoskék táblán én is "Rákoczi ut" kiírást látok, és az önkormányzat weblapján is Rákóczi út címmel szerepelnek a rendelők.
ezért módosítottam.

De: a helyi építési szabályzat különböző dokumentumaiban "Rákóczi Ferenc utca" szerepel, így ezt felvettem official_name-nek.
vasony (2021-06-25 06:24:54+00:00): OK, úgyse lehet jól csinálni (1 éve jártam körül, ezért érdekelt volna hogy változott valami vagy csak a régi káosz van).

- a választási címjegyzékben Rákóczi út 
- a strand címe Rákóczi út
- a címeres táblán (ezek az újak) pont a Fő utcánál Rákóczi utca 
- a helyi ezer éves térképen ami szintén ott van fent, ott Rákóczi Ferenc utca
itineris (2021-06-25 07:51:52+00:00): Nem tudom, ki szokott önkormányzatokkal levelezni ilyen ügyekben, de lehet, hogy rájuk kellene ereszteni.
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism
woodpeck_repair (2021-05-17 14:11:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 104830692, 104812722, 104825757, 104828444, 104822539, 104816372, 104819623 where the changeset comment is: remove nationalist vandalism