piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Minh Nguyen (2017-06-28 22:37:54+00:00): Phase II of the BART Silicon Valley project has not yet begun construction. In fact, funding hasn’t even been fully secured for it yet.
Minh Nguyen (2017-06-28 22:41:44+00:00): Construction won’t begin until late 2018: http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2017/01/23/are-you-ready-for-a-subway-digging-for-bart-begins.html

Reverted in changeset 49904054. Please let me know if you have any questions.
Parzelle13 (2017-06-28 15:34:04+00:00): Hallo, kannst du den Sinn dieser Änderung mal erklären?
UWJ (2017-06-28 16:33:40+00:00): http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:waterway%3Dfish_pass
UWJ (2017-06-28 17:27:40+00:00): Ich habe die Flächen dazu editiert. Nun sollte es wieder korrekt aussehen.
Parzelle13 (2017-06-28 17:48:59+00:00): Ich glaube nicht das das so richtig ist. 
Fischtreppen werden bisher von keinem Renderer dargestellt. Somit erscheinen sie derzeit auch nicht auf der Karte.
Lese dir mal im Wiki: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:waterway=fish%20pass?uselang=de durch. Der zweck von natural=water ist hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:natural%3Dwater beschrieben und eigentlich für eher stehende Gewässer gedacht.
UWJ (2017-06-28 18:34:47+00:00): If you want to draw the waterbody (the area of the fish pass), draw an additional closed way and tag it with natural=water + water=fish_pass. "Wiki.openstreetmap.org". Dies habe ich jetzt so umgesetzt.
Die Übersetzungen auf deutsch sind oft sehr unvollständig, daher kann ich nur empfehlen sich neben den deutschen auch die englischsprachigen Artikel durchzulesen.
*Martin* (2017-07-06 11:46:41+00:00): Hi Boris. Do you know that untagged way will not be rendered?
praeteritum (2024-01-04 04:10:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 145863193.
praeteritum (2024-01-03 04:08:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 145822094.
luiswoo (2017-06-23 19:26:13+00:00): Не существующие парки, как другие не существующие объекты на карте не нужны.
M!dgard (2017-07-30 15:42:29+00:00): You're practically just dumping the GRB buildings in OSM! Could you please do some more checking? The buildings in the mapped construction site have *obviously* been removed. And those next to it too, they're going through a way. This means JOSM would have given a warning, and you ignored it!
joost schouppe (2017-07-31 22:00:46+00:00): Hi endless autumn,

As you might have noticed from messages from OpenStreetMap, a lot of your work is being reverted. It seems that you have been using the GRB building importer a little bit too enthusiastically. You see, the tool just prepares the data for import, but doesn't merge it to the existing data by itself. You still have to use the merge geometries plugin to keep the history of exiting buildings. Also, some object types form the source data are not easily translated to OSM, so they get a dummy tag like building=verdieping. The mapper then needs to translate that object to something that fits in OSM, on a case by case analysis.
Because of the way you imported the data, you have erased a lot of previous hard work by other mappers. To try and recuperate that work, the only sensible option seemed to revert your import. Even so, it will take a lot of effort to recuperate that previous work.

OpenStreetMap is the product of collaboration, mostly by manual work, sometimes helped by imports. But imported data can never just overrule what was already mapped. We will be reviewing the GRB documentation on the wiki to see if it makes this clear enough, as well as better clarify that the import tools are a work in progress, available for testing in close contact with the rest of the community. Even when  entirely finished, it will still be necessary to stay in touch with the people behind these tools to make sure everything goes well. I hope this experience will not turn you off from being part of the group that will do this. 

If you have questions or complaints, please contact us at community@osm.be

Joost Schouppe 
OpenStreetMap Belgium boardmember
Alan (2017-06-23 22:35:13+00:00): Thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap! It sounds like this feature might also need the shop=copyshop tag, if you think it's appropriate. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dcopyshop
literan (2017-06-24 12:38:56+00:00): Hallo. Please do not dub existing objects. I will fix it
Andreas Binder (2017-06-23 19:20:53+00:00): Laut http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Contributors#Bayern für OSM erlaubte Quelle
Felipe Alves (2017-06-26 22:29:26+00:00): Oi, Eliane. Tudo bem? Vi que tinha a intenção de adicionar a estação do Bicicletar, mas ela já existia no mapa (estava apenas um pouco deslocada do local correto, arrastei mais para perto de onde colocou). É no ponto do link a seguir, e pode reparar que existe uma categoria própria para estações de bicicletas, diferente de bicicletários.
http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3833597261
user_5359 (2017-06-24 06:52:32+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please check the position of your nodes! And I don’t belive San Francisco have a phone with the country code of Nepal! 

Please cleanup of edit. If you need help you are welcome!
bdiscoe (2017-06-24 06:24:44+00:00): Could you please explain what these edits are? I truly hope it is not the "USGS treecover 2010" which is derived from low-resolution LandSat which is entirely inappropriate for mass-import into OSM.  Or did you get this import discussed and approved?
bdiscoe (2017-06-24 06:26:16+00:00): I spot-checked these imported forests and they bear no similarity to what is actually on the ground.
ff5722 (2017-06-24 06:59:54+00:00): They are derived from usgs data, I added everything in manually checked chunks with background imagery enabled. Some places need more refinement, but 'no resemblance at all' seems exaggerated.

It was discussed in talk-cn.
ff5722 (2017-06-24 07:12:38+00:00): See my documentation here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Ff5722/USGS_treecover_data

I would say it is more comparable to using Scanaerial. 

Admittedly the data from this area is not that good, but as i trace around this area manually often, I also expected to refine it soon by hand.
bdiscoe (2017-06-24 07:47:44+00:00): OK, it's possible that the places i checked were worse than average, but consider the fine-grained nature of these features, like at http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49780057#map=17/34.37226/104.93077  When the nodes are as close as 2.4m but the source data (Landsat) is 28m (!) then there is something terribly wrong here.  I am worried I will have to come in here and do another massive simplification cleanup.
ff5722 (2017-06-24 09:54:32+00:00): I have simplified the ways in JOSM with a 15 m threshold, and merged or deleted all ways with less than 17 nodes. Some abberations redrawn from Bing. It should be a lot better now. Later i'll refine it from imagery more.
bdiscoe (2017-06-24 18:06:07+00:00): OK, thanks!  I am much reassured that quality is being cared for and you aren't just making work for me to clean up later :)
praeteritum (2024-01-03 04:04:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 145821947.
eggie (2017-06-24 08:35:12+00:00): Prima zo..
eggie (2017-06-24 08:37:24+00:00): Kijk ook eens op het forum van osm. Je kunt jezelf voorstellen onder het draadje Welkom. Dan ben je ook herkenbaar als lokale mapper op Flakkee. 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12
M!dgard (2017-07-30 15:35:06+00:00): The water outlines on the GRB are outdated near Cotton Island.
user_5359 (2017-06-24 06:36:01+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Note that in OSM description of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the page http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a.

If you need help: You are welcome!
user_5359 (2017-06-24 06:44:11+00:00): I have revert your changeset, because you move a street node over other street an buildings (picture exists). Please be careful with editing and ask the community for help (on whatever channel), when it happens!
user_5359 (2017-06-24 06:53:43+00:00): Please see the comment for you first changeset.
Alecs01 (2017-06-24 08:56:01+00:00): Hi Andrei, there's no museum there, you probably misplaced the Cenacolo or the church, both are already on the map
Mike Baggaley (2017-07-02 11:57:10+00:00): H Platinum, in this change you seem to have named a number of ways as Thames Path. This name is the name of the route running along the path, not the name of the individual paths, and the Thames Path route is already defined. OpenStreetMap does not display route names, but you can find the Thames Path (and lots of other routes) at http://waymarkedtrails.org/ - this uses the OSM data.
Please revert this change so that the paths are not named with the route name. 
Thanks,
Mike
mueschel (2017-06-24 18:22:19+00:00): Hi,
it looks like something went wrong here - too many strange tags:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/502976662
Cheers, Jan
naoliv (2017-08-16 19:49:21+00:00): realkaka, esses dados que você utilizou aqui são de onde, por favor?
realkaka (2017-08-16 20:08:48+00:00): naoliv, dos setores censitários do IBGE.
naoliv (2017-08-16 20:12:25+00:00): Beleza. Valeu!
MK 1 (2020-10-25 11:26:33+00:00): Замок во Кадино, лечи се бре пичка ти матер.
icestormy (2017-06-23 22:10:43+00:00): Diskussion über Belag siehe hier:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/49081269
evod (2017-06-24 08:59:26+00:00): super, danke!
Supaplex (2017-06-25 17:22:41+00:00): 請不要將Youbike的名字改成無識別性的品牌名稱
literan (2017-06-24 12:31:24+00:00): Получился парк в парке https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140114591/history#map=18/56.74877/37.18601 Пока тот, что меньше, закомментирую
Mike Baggaley (2017-07-02 14:57:54+00:00): Hi, this change to Leazes Bowl appears to have replaced the roundabout we can see on the aerial imagery view with a new junction. The tag junction=roundabout is still in existence on some of the ways, but it no longer looks like a roundabout. Should these tags be removed?

Cheers,
Mike
confusedbuffalo (2017-07-02 15:38:50+00:00): I was unsure whether to leave them or not. The sign for the junction as you go west on the A690 towards it still shows it as a roundabout (it seems to be the same sign that was there before the junction update), and it does behave somewhat like a roundabout with traffic lights
Mike Baggaley (2017-07-02 22:58:28+00:00): Thanks, I have had a look at the plans, and I it looks like it is still a roundabout, however, I have removed the roundabout tag from the western second loop so that there is now just a single loop tagged as a roundabout, and rounded the corners slightly.
TreeTracks (2022-06-02 06:34:33+00:00): Hi Ewen, many thanks for all your work in NW Vic. Do you have any objections to upgrading the long Old Mail Road from a track to unclassified? The Vic Gov database calls it a minor road rather than a track, and its the main access route for all properties and parks in the area. Cheers Ian
Ewen Hill (2022-06-02 07:41:03+00:00): Of course there is no issue Ian. This was done a long time ago with lower quality satellite images and you are the doyen of dirt, sultan of surface and governor of gravel. Please make this and any other alteration
TreeTracks (2022-06-02 08:53:39+00:00): Merci, Monsieur Micromap ;)
marc__marc (2020-11-13 01:23:15+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9234806
what's the meaning of class=bath ?
class was about the class of a road and is depreciated since 2006 in favor of highway
Regards,
Marc
hedd2 (2020-11-13 14:04:57+00:00): Hi,
I can simply not remember that kind of tag, nor ever having used it. Must be an error, for whatever reason. Since there are both a leisure=swimming_area and leisure=swimming_pool nearby, I guess that object/node is meaningless. I'll remove it.
Regards,
Heiko
deierstoiner (2017-08-06 00:21:23+00:00): Hallo,
die Straße ist noch nicht offiziell umgewidmet. Solche Änderungen sollten nicht so weit im Voraus vorgenommen werden. Es ist noch nicht bekannt, mit welchem Datum die Umwidmung vollzogen werden wird. Momentan sieht man jetzt auf der Karte eine Straße, auf die in Wirklichkeit keine einzige Beschilderung hinweist.
nikhil5 (2019-03-01 03:31:48+00:00): "Hi hadist1,

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Jakarta, I have come across the way 502984779 classified as 'Unclassified'.However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, the area around seems to be 'Residential'.

Please look into this and share your thoughts on this. Thanks in advance."
Baloo Uriza (2017-06-24 15:20:47+00:00): Names are not refs.  And in some cases it appears that you have actually replaced a valid name with a ref on US 56, even though the name is cited.  We should probably revert this...
Baloo Uriza (2017-06-24 16:08:34+00:00): OK, left the geometry you provided, did reset the names
Fishztikz (2017-07-02 19:46:20+00:00): My apologies and thanks for reverting it
Herr Kramer (2017-08-07 12:42:37+00:00): Warum ist die B6n denn schon umgeändert zur A36? Es ist zwar schon bestätigt das die Straße höher klassifiziert wird, jedoch noch nicht vollzogen. LG Kramer, Landesstraßenbaubehörde
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:18:55+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784725
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:18:40+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784753
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:18:26+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784763
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:18:14+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784772
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:18:01+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784786
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:17:48+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784820
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:17:36+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784830
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:17:18+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784845
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:17:01+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784868
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:16:54+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784877
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:14:28+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784887
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:08:43+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784894
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:08:28+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784902
FTA (2017-06-24 18:23:18+00:00): Hi there,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! I see you have made some name changes to the tollway in Tulsa. Based on http://www.oklegislature.gov/cf_pdf/2003-04%20COMMITTEE%20SUBS/scs/sb350%20cs.pdf it appears this section of Creek Turnpike/OK 364 was actually correctly named as "Liberty Parkway", which another mapper has pointed out in the past. Does that make sense or do you have any questions about that?

Thanks and Happy Mapping,
Ethan aka FTA
US Highway 266 (2017-06-24 23:47:35+00:00): The official name of the road is "Creek Turnpike". The secondary name of the road is "Oklahoma 364". All of the signs on roads along the turnpike and the turnpike itself mention either the Creek Turnpike or OK 364. There is exactly one sign that says "Liberty Parkway" and it is referring to the Liberty Parkway Trail that parallels the turnpike. Locals know of the road as the Creek Turnpike and they never call it "Liberty Parkway". "Liberty Parkway" is a tertiary or even quaternary nickname for the road that nobody even knows about. It is an honorific name, not the actual name of the road. There are literally two websites on the entire Internet that mention "Liberty Parkway". One is a city of Broken Arrow website with archived meeting minutes, another is the Oklahoma state legislature site where it mentions that it is an honorific name. "Liberty Parkway" does not appear on either the Oklahoma Department of Transportation or the Oklahoma Turnpike Authority website in reference to this road. Nowhere. I've never seen a map that refers to it using this faux name, and I've seen thousands of Tulsa area maps. If you want URLs, I can post dozens of URLs that confirm the road is called the "Creek Turnpike". The guy who keeps adding "Liberty Parkway" is simply trying to get out of towners lost. My edits to the page were correct.
FTA (2017-06-27 01:26:00+00:00): Thanks for the comment and information. I think a solution to this would be to leverage multiple name tags, where this area has an official_name of Liberty Parkway and a regular name of Creek Turnpike. In this manner, we can capture the legislated name as well as the on the ground situation. Does that sit okay with you?
Baloo Uriza (2018-01-12 01:08:13+00:00): Hello!
            Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
            I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
            that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
            to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/49784911
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-08-16 12:23:39+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4933471832#map=16/46.8855/17.9114 was not existing
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-08-16 12:26:32+00:00): What is the source of this low quality import? Is it discussed anywhere? Has local community agreed to do it?
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-08-16 12:27:13+00:00): Also - is damage limited to Hungary?
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-08-16 12:28:28+00:00): What is the copyright status of this import? What is the original license?
puniny (2017-08-17 08:19:53+00:00): Thanks a lot. We will respond in detail this evening.
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-09-05 16:33:49+00:00): ping?
Mateusz Konieczny (2017-12-27 07:01:37+00:00): What is the source of this low quality import? Is it discussed anywhere? Has local community agreed to do it?
puniny (2017-12-29 14:20:42+00:00): Hi Mateusz,

So, the source of the data is Heineken Hungary and the data is limited to Hungary. The goal of the project was to assess the accessibility of more than 10,000 places by Heineken sales reps (places they visit for their job anyway). They have made a contract with Route4U Hungary Ltd. that they provide their own data collection for the purpose of putting this data in openstreetmap. It has been discussed with the Hungarian OSM community on Facebook and in mailing list s as well. We have recognised that there are some mistakes in the database (especially in positioning, since, otherwise they are living PoIs visited monthly by Heineken). These mistakes are in the magnitude of few hundred compared to the new data of close to 20,000 PoIs. The Hungaraian community has marked the potentially bad nodes and working on cleaning it.
Athoss15 (2017-07-02 12:09:02+00:00): Szia!
Az egyik importált kocsma (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4933476929) a Duna közepén van.
Athoss15 (2017-07-02 12:25:15+00:00): Átraktam a megfelelő helyre.
route4uuser (2017-07-02 12:43:42+00:00): Köszi. király vagy. Egy sörgyártótól kaptuk az adatbázist azokra a helyekre, ahova szállítanak. 5-10 méteres hibákat láttunk a koordinátákba, de ez azért kicsit durva lett. Köszi a segítséget.