piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Futur3r (2021-03-31 16:55:20+00:00): Salut,

Fait attention quand tu fait des modifications de voirie, tu as supprimé toute la route.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102060058
Futur3r (2021-03-31 16:56:58+00:00): J'ai annulé le changeset
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102060058
JessAk71 (2021-04-27 02:48:33+00:00): Hello, it looks like this changeset has removed valid nodes from the adjacent building here and has created an incorrect building outline for the adjacent building. Please be more careful when editing building footprints as some of your changesets are removing valid nodes on accurate building footprints. These buildings will need to be modified to fix the issue.
pabi12 (2021-04-27 04:13:30+00:00): We are notatying per guidance from OSM user https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Lyx on our Talk for Zartico here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Zartico. What you are suggesting is in conflict with that guidance and the One feature, one OSM element guidance. Please contact https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Eddie%20Cannon to clarify.
phjarry (2021-04-02 10:16:44+00:00): "Le Quatre" Il y a une erreur sur l'adresse, le bis doit être accolé au numéro de rue
Pour plus de précisions sur une boulangerie-patisserie il est recommandé d'ajouter le tag pastry=yes
UNGSC-DTLM-Ale_Zena (2021-04-01 12:37:24+00:00): Thank you, Merci beaucoup Mustafa
JessAk71 (2021-04-27 02:36:44+00:00): Hello, it looks like this changeset removed nodes from the adjacent buildings here and has led to those adjacent buildings to now have incorrect building footprints - note they look like triangles now with 3 nodes instead of squares with 4 nodes... please be more careful when editing buildings, as it seems you are actually removing correct geometry from nearby structures...
pabi12 (2021-04-27 04:13:41+00:00): We are notatying per guidance from OSM user https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Lyx on our Talk for Zartico here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Zartico.

What you are suggesting is in conflict with that guidance and the One feature, one OSM element guidance. Please contact https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Eddie%20Cannon to clarify.
JessAk71 (2021-04-28 16:29:14+00:00): Thanks pabi12 for your response on the changesets. As you suggest, I have DM Eddie Cannon to let him know about these kind of issues and he responded that he will be revising the guidance to help accommodate these kinds of things. In the meantime, there are a lot of fixes that other users now need to make... thanks again for your response.
eggie (2021-03-31 14:23:39+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht. 
Feedback..  Alle gebouwen zijn directe import vanuit het kadaster en precies ingemeten.
Je hebt de gebouwen veranderd. Zijn ze in werkelijkheid anders geschakeld?
Je huisnummers heb je verplaatst en geplakt aan de rand van de gebouwen. Dat kun je beter niet doen. 


Je edits
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=102060417MVG, 

Eggie 
namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-03-31 14:37:50+00:00): De huisnummers heb ik even weer teruggelegd waar ze horen. 

Wanneer de gebouwen verkeerd liggen kun je dit doorgeven aan het Kadaster via deze site
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=Cissy%20van%20Marxveldtstraat%208&resultOffset=0&objectId=0546100000061083&geometry.x=92476.473721136&geometry.y=463471.18099978&zoomlevel=7&detailsObjectId=0546010000076843

MVG
eggie
Supaplex (2021-04-01 02:29:03+00:00): 加油站這應該是封閉換管線，施工完之後還是加油站
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102060774
s8321414 (2021-04-01 04:30:41+00:00): 封閉？……
Supaplex (2021-04-01 07:08:12+00:00): https://vipmember.tmtd.cpc.com.tw/mbwebs/service_store.aspx?StnID=D2177
應該講這間吧
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102060774
Supaplex (2021-04-01 04:25:56+00:00): There are two bus stops not in China. There are actually in Taiwan
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102061050
JayTurnr (2021-04-01 07:15:20+00:00): Ooops, I was just splitting the changeset up otherwise it would have been one big International changeset.

Sorry if I caused offence
GinaroZ (2021-04-02 13:00:05+00:00): Hi, have the tracks been lifted from this branch?
and_E (2021-04-02 13:27:04+00:00): No. The tracks up until the heritage centre are maintained by NR. This section is privately owned and has been abandoned for several years as the company no longer exists.
GinaroZ (2021-04-02 14:03:11+00:00): Thanks for the reply. If the tracks are still in place but not in use then it should be tagged as railway=disused (instead of abandoned, which is where the tracks have been lifted by you can still see the alignment)
and_E (2021-04-02 14:09:39+00:00): Ah I see, thank you. I will correct this.
Andrea Musuruane (2021-04-01 13:17:16+00:00): Ciao Michele, ci sono parecchi problemi in queste modifiche. Per prima cosa i marciapiedi non si etichettano con solo con highway=footway ma bisogna aggiugnere anche footway=sidewalk. Inoltre hai inserito una serie di attraversamenti pedonali che nella realtà non esistono. E' comunque abbastanza difficile inserire i marciapiedi come elementi separati dalle strade perché è molto facile commettere errori non collegandoli in modo opportuno. Più facile è aggiungere alle strade il tag sidewalk=both/left/right/no a seconda del fatto che il marciapiedi sia presente su entrambi i lati della strada/solo a sinistra/solo a destra/siano assenti. Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102061117
pitscheplatsch (2021-04-02 11:15:14+00:00): reverted
Stereo (2021-04-01 15:57:02+00:00): Félicitations pour ta première modification, et bienvenue sur OSM! :)
pitscheplatsch (2021-04-02 11:18:24+00:00): Welcome to OSM!

Please notice this is a production database and not a playground or testing database.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
Chalalandes (2021-04-02 12:30:32+00:00): I am totally aware OSM is not a "playground".
I was just verifying OSMand did work correctly before teaching to my collegue how to use it.
I deleted the node as soon as it appears on openstreetmap.
pitscheplatsch (2021-04-02 16:29:53+00:00): Thank you very much for your answer, Chalalandes!

#HappyMapping
SafetyIng (2021-03-31 22:41:04+00:00): Allgemeine Verständnisfrage: Müsste hier nicht der Radfahrer indirekt abbiegen? Also über Dannenberger Straße drüber und dann Links die Hundisburger queeren?
Robert46798 (2021-04-03 19:25:00+00:00): Hallo,
das ist auf jeden Fall eine Möglichkeit. In der Tat ist das auch der Weg den ich an diesem Tag gefahren bin. Ich denke (aber weiß es nicht mehr), dass der übergang fälschlicherweise mit 'bicycle=yes' gekennzeichnet ist. Also muss man absteigen. Der alternative Weg ist jener, sich auf die Linksabbiegerspur einzuorden. Das es nicht unbedingt sinnvoll ist zwei Autospuren auf der Hauptstraße zu kreuzen sei einmal dahingestellt. Aber die Bordsteinabsenkung ist da und deshalb habe ich sie auch eingetragen. Ob man sie nutzt oder nicht muss man dann selbst entscheiden.
Viele Grüße,
Robert
SafetyIng (2021-04-03 23:12:18+00:00): Die ist dann aber deutlich weiter hinten.....  (Müsste auf Höhe Beginn Linksabbigerspur sein)
Robert46798 (2021-04-05 11:26:40+00:00): Das klingt erst einmaal schlüssig. Ich habe mich von der einzelenn markanten GPS-Spur leiten lassen. (törichter weise) Ich habe den Weg schon einmal ein Stück nach hinten versetzt und mit einem fixme versehen.
blef (2021-04-02 18:50:52+00:00): Bonjour,
Non, cette voie est la voie réservée aux taxis.
La voie de bus, à ce niveau, n'est pas séparée de la chaussée principale et est déjà  taggée en tant que  busway:right=lane sur l'Avenue de la Gare https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/525669438
Si vous tenez à la séparer à tout prix pour créer son propre tracé, elle se situe donc juste au bord de la chaussée, avant la piste cyclable.
En plus, vous devrez y faire passer toutes les relations des lignes de bus: bon courage!
blef (2021-04-02 18:59:25+00:00): De plus l'attribut highway=bus_guideway ne me semble pas approprié.
Cordialement.
py_berrard (2021-04-03 22:00:14+00:00): Je crois que le déplacement de l'hydrant est une fausse manip' ?
Eugen Dedu (2021-04-04 12:28:36+00:00): Je ne comprends pas.  D'après mes recherches, ce changeset ajoute la couleur red à l'hydratant au nord, et introduit un hydratant au sud, donc pas de déplacement.
py_berrard (2021-04-04 12:56:50+00:00): ah oui exact, désolé pour la fausse alerte.
G_P_J (2021-04-05 21:53:12+00:00): Cześć, wprowadzasz niewłaściwy format adresów. Jeśli miejscowość nie ma ulic, to nazwę miejscowości zapisujemy w tagu addr:place i nie dublujemy tej nazwy w tagu addr:city. Jeśli edytujesz w iD, to tagi możesz wyświetlić rozwijając pole "Wszystkie znaczniki" w menu po lewej stronie. Popraw proszę swoje zmiany. W przeciwnym razie będę musiał je wycofać.
tars4815 (2021-04-02 15:22:56+00:00): Attenzione al tag bycicle repair che fa riferimento solo a stazioni do-it-yourself e non a negozi attrezzati. Ho sistemato il tag.
Federica x PoliMappers
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102063334
eggie (2021-03-31 15:17:58+00:00): Dag Frank.. meestal zijn tweewielers uitgezonderd van oneway=yes  Is dat hier ook zo?

Dan bijtaggen
oneway:bicycle=no

en evt 
oneway:moped=np
oneway:mofa=no

MVG
eggie
frank_v_s (2021-03-31 15:26:33+00:00): Ik ga het straks even controleren en eventueel aanpassen
eggie (2021-03-31 15:28:45+00:00): Top!
Mapse
Eggie
eggie (2021-04-01 07:35:16+00:00): Tja.. hier staat de uitzondering fietsers er niet bij
https://www.rucphen.nl/Modules/BM-Module-31/Van-Hovedreef,-Rucphen

Het was een proef..  definitief nu?

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-03-31 15:19:46+00:00): Review.. Lijkt me allemaal oke zo.
MVG
eggie
Colin Smale (2021-03-31 16:02:38+00:00): Hi,
Do you have a source for the change to the boundary of Calne and Calne Without? It looks like Wiltshire Council might be planning a review, but as far as I can see it hasn't happened yet. In that case the change you made is incorrect - will you revert it please? If the boundary really has been changed, please add the source into the tagging or changeset description. Thanks!
PS: For the avoidance of confusion, the legal boundaries of a parish council may or may not correspond to local perception of the boundaries of the place.
reportingsjr (2021-06-13 17:33:52+00:00): Hi!
I was wondering where your info for the bald rock loop trail came from? I obtained the GIS info from red river gorge climbing coalition, who owns and maintains these trails, and it does not match a lot of what you added for that trail.

Admittedly, their GIS data isn't /amazing/, but so far the majority of it has matched what I've seen hiking/climbing in these areas pretty well.

If you were mostly going off of strava heatmap I'll probably adjust this trail to match the GIS data I have from RRGCC.

Thanks!
osmhonehone (2021-06-13 17:55:10+00:00): I made the loop cycle route (overkill) based on https://www.mtbproject.com/trail/7015061/bald-rock-loop-2016 .  I also used the current and pre-2019 heatmap. I think there was a well-attended MTB bike race on the south part which could be the source of the majority of old heatmap traces. Unfortunately it seems that this trail building project is abandoned now.

I recently hiked the southern/Flat Hollow and the Sore Heel Trail, returning on the gravel road to Flat Holler (4 miles covering the east part).  I did have problems finding any obvious trail in the southernmost part
that would match either the "official" map or mtbproject.  I can share my GPX file.

Is the GIS data the same as what's on the map?   Please feel free to make any changes that would better reflect the on the ground situation.

Thanks!
osmhonehone (2021-06-13 18:17:33+00:00): BTW, a temporary (?) "FWD car parking" was on the east side of the road on March 31, 2021.  There was some grading/construction going on on the west side.  It is possible that the lot is on the west side now but any aerial imagery is likely to be obsolete.
reportingsjr (2021-06-16 11:42:50+00:00): Cool, that explains a lot of what I'm seeing on here. I wish that the strava heatmap was better, but considering how remote it is it's better than nothing.

I really need to get down to this area and do some actual hiking. I'll probably climb here in the next couple of months and try to work out what's up with some of these trails.

Yes, the GIS data is basically what is on the maps. There were some spots in miller fork just east of this area where their gps data was quite far off. I think they are just using a single smartphone GPS capture for their mapping which isn't ideal.

Also, concerning the FWD car parking, I actually just moved that to the west side of the road funny enough. The owner of the property redid that area and started charging people to park there, maybe a month ago.

Thanks!!
Basstoelpel (2021-07-27 13:32:34+00:00): Hallo DiLichti,

leider stellt StreetComplete per default nicht die richtigen Fragen an den Nutzer, wenn es um Hausnummern geht. Die zweite wichtige Frage ist nämlich: zu welcher Straße gehört das Gebäude. Das ist in SC ein anderer quest. (PLZ und Stadt sind zwar auch interessant, die kann man aber meist aus den vorhandenen PLZ-Gebieten konstruieren.)
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=9.23743&lat=52.40552&zoom=12&overlays=street_not_found
Magst Du das alles selbst korrigieren? Am besten gehen Hausnummern mit JOSM und dem HouseNumberTaggingTool.
Gruß,

Baßtölpel
HattedMapper (2021-07-27 13:54:22+00:00): Hallo Baßtölpel,
In der Vergangenheit musst man tatsächlich jede Strecke mehrfach ablaufen, um Gebäudetyp, Hausnummer, Straßenname, ... in SC einzutragen. (Das hat sich übrigens mit dem letzten großen Update geändert.) In dieser Gegend bin ich leider noch nicht oft genug (und seitdem noch gar nicht) durchgekommen. Adressdaten trage ich aber prinzipiell ungern von zuhause ein: Zu leicht vertut man sich oder extrapoliert aus fehlerhaften Ausgangsdaten. Aber die Gegend steht bei mir durchaus noch zur weiteren Vervollständigung an.

Gruße

David
loveshack (2021-04-05 18:00:01+00:00): Could you please correct this and your other edits.  You've removed a track which clearly exists, and these tracks obviously aren't named like "Private Access".  I don't think there's any assumption of public access for such tracks, and specifically not that they're a public footpath -- designations of which I'm adding in the area -- as your comments suggest. Similarly for the Ordnance Survey mapping of these, but you're welcome to add access=private where appropriate. access=no implies delivery companies can't use them, for instance.  So, a private track should have "highway=track", "access=private", and no name (unless it actually has one locally). Likewise for a service road.

Thanks.
pesec (2021-04-01 04:49:17+00:00): Так всё же правильнее название ставить на территорию или на здание?
Я склонен давать названия зданиям. В поиске правильнее будет показывать.
mavl (2021-04-01 05:02:11+00:00): Название детского сада должно быть на том объекте, на котором находится тег amenity=kindergarten.
pesec (2021-04-01 05:17:45+00:00): На мой взгляд, тут имеет место несогласованность тегов.
Ранее здания так же маркировались тэгом  amenity=kindergarten. Но сейчас так же есть тэг building=kindergarten, который более правильный для таких зданий. Если добавлять amenity=kindergarten к зданию, то выдаёт ошибку. Однако, территория так же должна иметь тэг назначения.
mavl (2021-04-01 05:37:04+00:00): На территории детского сада сейчас есть теги amenity=kindergarten и name.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/530177443  
  
На здании тег building=kindergarten.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87554209  
  
Так обычно и обозначают детские сады (и другие объекты).  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:amenity%3Dkindergarten
pesec (2021-04-01 05:42:12+00:00): Именно так за последнее время и обозначил все территории садов и школ в городе, но названия остались на зданиях.
literan (2021-04-01 13:29:10+00:00): вот и надо убрать их со зданий, чтобы не дублировались
user_5359 (2021-04-04 09:06:24+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on the three ways modified by change set https://www.osm.org/changeset/102261978. You add the tag A=P, i correct  this to access=private.
darkonus (2021-04-01 14:29:55+00:00): Зайві адреси видалив я, тому що вони дублювалися і валідатор Джосма показував помилку. Як варіант, можна чотири будівлі об’єднати в один мультиполігон і додати теги для нього. Сам квартал дуже детально промальований, хороша робота.
ieager (2021-05-02 12:15:16+00:00): Я это этот квартал нарисовал очень давно кучу лет назад, когда вокруг было только дома без нумерации (и то не все) и улицы без деталей. Хотелось тогда эталонный квартал. В последнее время периодически дополняю так как появились нумерации квартир и пр.
В общем в guru (вчера в нём Украина обновилась) норм этот адрес ищет и показывает так что норм. В один полигон точно не стоит перересовывать (всё таки это отдельные блоки с перегородкой).
user_5359 (2021-04-02 06:26:25+00:00): Hello (again)! Please use the key building instead of BUILDING! I have correct this typo. 
Bonjour (encore) ! Veuillez utiliser la clé building au lieu de BUILDING ! J'ai corrigé cette faute de frappe.
VictorIE (2021-05-19 20:06:11+00:00): Hi,

Is this https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3872297 a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1390623 ?
fukejs (2021-05-20 06:21:54+00:00): Hi. I don't think so. It has different admin level (7 vs. 8).
gscholz (2021-04-02 06:53:44+00:00): Hi Pablo,
this changeset has destroyed at least the boundary relations for Morelos, Puebla, Atzitzihuacán, Cohuecan and Zacualpan. Even as your comment just states the opposite:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-98.60492&lat=19.08863&zoom=9

Can you please fix this?
Kind Regards
Guido
confusedbuffalo (2021-03-31 19:42:13+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this change.
If there's a pavement along the road, then you might consider the cycleway or sidewalk tags:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cycleway
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:sidewalk
SomeoneElse (2021-11-27 13:43:54+00:00): Hello,
Can you explain what your source for tracktype on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/924419212/history was please?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2021-11-27 13:44:09+00:00): Здравствуйте,
Чи можете ви пояснити, яке джерело для tracktype на https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/924419212/history було, будь ласка?
З найкращими побажаннями,
Енді
masquer (2021-11-27 18:36:39+00:00): Hi
I based on satellite images. Are there any problems with this date?
SomeoneElse (2021-11-27 19:09:47+00:00): I was just a bit surprised that you'd be able to set the "tracktype" from that.
masquer (2021-11-27 22:04:53+00:00): I am not sure, to be honest. I have never visited that specific village. But my decision is partly based on experience gained when hiking in this locality. Tracks like this usually consist of clay and are not hard enough. In this specific case I see there's a mix of clay and grass surface.
Do you think it's better to skip tracktype is such situation? Or maybe it worth to set grade3-5?
SomeoneElse (2021-11-27 22:13:16+00:00): > But my decision is partly based on experience gained when hiking in this locality.
That's great!  If you're familiar with the local conditions then yes - you'll have a pretty good idea what the tracktype is.
francians (2021-03-31 18:07:06+00:00): Ciao!

Grazie per il contributo.. Il nome della cascina andrebbe su un nodo a parte con:

place=farm + name=*

Suggerisco l'uso di mettere le iniziali ed i nomi propri in maiuscolo, quindi:

Cascina Leonotto Inferiore

Fammi sapere se hai qualche dubbio

Buona serata

Francesco
Cp_510 (2021-03-31 18:14:43+00:00): Scusa, hai ragione.
Nel caso volessi solo fare le segnalazioni  ( esempio segnalazione di edifici) come posso fare?
francians (2021-03-31 18:18:55+00:00): No problem. In che senso segnalare? Puoi mettere le note, ma non è detto che qualcuno le risolva... Magari scrivimi un messaggio così mi spieghi bene cosa vorresti fare.

A presto
Francesco
GinaroZ (2021-04-02 14:19:33+00:00): I moved the block you added onto the A78 to the service road: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1287060514 - as I assume it's not on the main road :)
Have those traffic lights for the junction and pedestrian crossing been added recently as they aren't visible on the aerial imagery?
and_E (2021-04-02 14:28:41+00:00): Yes they have been added recently - around late December time last year. Sorry about the block! I will get to grips with the tools a bit more before making further edits :)
mueschel (2021-04-05 09:29:05+00:00): Hi,
what does 'signalization = illegal' mean? This tag is not used in other places. 
There are mappers using 'wrong_sign' for incorrect traffic signs.
Janjko (2021-04-06 20:59:16+00:00): It was supposed to be signalisation, without z. We use it for illegaly marked bicycle lanes, probably only in Zagreb. The problem is when we have only lines on the ground, and the law says there should be vertical signalisation, like signs.
tars4815 (2021-04-03 10:31:31+00:00): Great mapping! Thanks Ernesa for your contribution! :)
- Federica x PoliMappers
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102067142
tars4815 (2021-04-03 10:24:52+00:00): Well done, Silvia!
- Federica x PoliMappers
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/102067907
SomeoneElse (2022-02-07 20:20:54+00:00): As a correction, I don't think that this makes a lot of sense - there is unlikely to be a ladder in the middle of the road.  What there probably is is a ladder stile on the footpath.
SomeoneElse (2022-02-07 20:21:11+00:00): Als Korrektur halte ich das nicht für sehr sinnvoll - es ist unwahrscheinlich, dass eine Leiter mitten auf der Straße steht. Was dort wahrscheinlich ist, ist ein Leiterübertritt auf dem Fußweg.
Max-Kritic (2021-05-05 11:06:00+00:00): Le cadastre ancien de bâtiments voisins n'est pas bon. Il y a un décalage. Comment faire. Supprimer et réimporter.
pitscheplatsch (2021-04-02 11:18:16+00:00): Welcome to OSM!

Please notice this is a production database and not a playground or testing database.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
L'imaginaire (2021-03-31 22:16:28+00:00): Akkoord, had dezelfde bedenkingen bij de eerdere changeset.
sorcrosc (2021-03-31 22:49:51+00:00): This is the whole area of the model aerodrome. The actual "pitch" is mapped on this object:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6028601

Revert please
thetornado76 (2021-04-01 21:06:05+00:00): Hello,
I have only adapted the tags to the wiki, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag%3Asport%3Dmodel_aerodrome for
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6028601
Is the model airfield https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6028599 possibly drawn in twice?
sorcrosc (2021-04-02 15:10:21+00:00): Tagging from the wiki falls a bit short here. A feature like this, with buildings and other infrastructure, cannot be mapped with leisure=pitch as a main tag, like a stadium can't. The mapped leisure=pitch is just one part of the facility.
confusedbuffalo (2021-03-31 19:32:35+00:00): Hi, you requested a review of this and it looks good to me.
smaprs (2021-04-15 01:44:00+00:00): Marcos, esta linha de costa não segue o limite comum da maré. Há uma larga área por onde comumente circulam veículos que agora está inundada. Basta ver tanto na imagem do Bing quanto do Maxar. Por qual fonte você alterou? Favor mante como estava antes.
smaprs (2021-04-15 01:47:15+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/512985856/history