piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
romeoko (2015-01-17 20:50:55+00:00): Betriebshof lange nichtmehr vorhanden. Seit 1991 reine Wohnnutzung
romeoko (2015-01-17 20:38:17+00:00): Sehr fehlerhaft:
-kein Betriebshof
-Hausnummern fehlerhaft
-Wege fehlerhaft
romeoko (2015-01-17 20:46:42+00:00): -Hausnummer am falschen Gebäude
-"Wirtschaftsgebäude" ist Wohnhaus
Hinweiß: nicht auf "Bing" vertauen
zarl (2015-05-18 13:55:21+00:00): Da sind scheinbar zwei Fahrradläden nebeneinander, siehe  http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/366091

Oder kann man beide Nodes zusammenführen?
joost schouppe (2016-07-17 19:14:03+00:00): Is way 5117544 werkelijk een tol-weg?
(niet door jou toegevoegd, maar wel gesurveyed, misschien weet je het nog)
escada (2016-07-18 05:29:30+00:00): Ik kan me niet herinneren dat ik ooit een tolweg gezien heb in een woonwijk.
Hier zijn 2 foto's van die straat:
https://xian.smugmug.com/OSM/OSM-2014/2014-11-22-Hove/i-whkBfKL
en
https://xian.smugmug.com/OSM/OSM-2014/2014-11-22-Hove/i-F9mNTmw/A

zie daar toch geen tolbord staan :-)

haal het er nu af
joost schouppe (2016-07-18 06:46:18+00:00): Lijkt mij inderdaad ook sterk :)
Er was er ook één in centrum Antwerpen, en daarnaast nog een in Sint Niklaas: way 146222642. Maar voor de rest nergens in Vlaanderen behalve de Liefkenshoektunnel.
berndw (2014-12-01 17:41:07+00:00): Was soll das für eine öffentliche Straße sein?
Ein Fussweg wäre in Ordnung, aber bestimmt nicht mit Tempo 30

bitte korrigiere das
yuryleb (2015-01-21 21:51:11+00:00): Интересно, зачем был добавлен этот проезд, если на него нельзя проехать ни с какой другой дороги? Да и виден еле-еле только на старом Бинге.
DemoLogin (2015-01-21 22:43:38+00:00): Источник: обследование местности. Проезд существует, но доступ частный - отмечен на шлагбауме.
DemoLogin (2015-01-21 22:45:54+00:00): Ой я перепутал. Я имел ввиду этот проезд: http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/163291383

Про http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/315296427 ничего не могу сказать.
yuryleb (2015-01-22 06:54:23+00:00): Ну так удалить хорошо бы тот проезд - кажется, на снимке следы от прокладки теплотрассы.
DemoLogin (2015-01-22 11:19:19+00:00): Проверил. Проезда нет.
yuryleb (2015-01-22 11:41:53+00:00): Спасибо, проезд удалил
Hjart (2014-12-02 11:00:37+00:00): Cykelstier langs Paltholmvej var allerede markeret med cycleway=track på selve (bil)vejen. Vi har nogle en generel vejledning for cykelstier i http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Da:Cykelstivejledning. Tak
BushmanK (2014-12-07 18:38:46+00:00): OSM - не Викимапия, подписывать "поле" и "лес" здесь не нужно. http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:name - тег name предназначен только для имен собственных, то есть названий.
Gumeg (2014-12-08 07:16:13+00:00): Согласен. Просто чужие кеи не трогал, только точки объекта.
BushmanK (2014-12-08 07:32:26+00:00): Пардон, что подумал на вас, но в любом случае - в OSM нет "чужих" тегов, они все общие. Бояться трогать то, что добавил кто-то другой - не нужно.
Раз видели ошибку, стоило исправить - никто ведь мог и не заглянуть сюда еще неизвестно сколько месяцев.
Polarbear (2015-10-25 12:22:35+00:00): sport=gaelic_football is deprecated. The correct tagging is sport=gaelic_games + gaelic_games:hurling=yes
gaelic_games:football=yes
etc.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dgaelic_games

You should also check that leisure=pitch and the sport is not used on the tribune building.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-01 23:34:35+00:00): Oops - I think that something went a bit wrong here.  There were a couple of stray nodes at lat=0, lon=0 in this changeset (I've deleted them - hope you don't mind).
edvac (2014-12-03 16:24:46+00:00): I noticed that mess when importing some data in Centralafrican Republic, just about 4 hours after you did this changeset and I solved it.
What puzzles me is that the nodes added to the Arun River way weren't producing a new version of the way... So I "blamed" the user from the last version (AlbertKa), who said he didn't have any idea about that.
Could you check why there isn't a version of the way with the nodes you added? Because in that case there might be an error or something in the database, and maybe we should contact the DWG for that.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-03 17:56:15+00:00): @edvac:  The only new node in this changeset was the one at "null island" that I deleted.  The problem that caused the river to appear in the Central African Republic was a series of node moves - see for example http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2425119344/history .  Node moves don't change the history of a way as viewed on the OSM (though the Potlatch2 editor at least displays a "consolidated history" view that includes both node and way changes; not sure what other editors can show).
edvac (2014-12-03 19:48:34+00:00): Still, I had to delete a duplicated node in that null island and rearrange the river in several parts... Are you sure you had fix the thing when I spotted the problem?
SomeoneElse (2014-12-03 19:50:10+00:00): @edvac Which "duplicated node in that null island" did you delete?
edvac (2014-12-03 19:58:30+00:00): This one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/306410874
It was in LAT 0.1 and LON 0.3
SomeoneElse (2014-12-03 20:19:22+00:00): @edvac that explains it - you fixed a number of river nodes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27163606 , then 4 hours later I deleted the one remaining unconnected node (which wasn't part of the river)
anderfo (2014-12-01 16:01:10+00:00): JOSM somehow managed to upload this using the wrong account. (I wanted to upload using anderfo_import ) Will try my best to avoid this in the future!
trigpoint (2014-12-01 17:32:23+00:00): Is there something else using the shop in its place?
londonite (2014-12-01 17:42:18+00:00): Yes - a letting agent has moved in; just adding a new point now
Peilscheibe (2015-03-25 21:48:21+00:00): nun, ich werde hier keinen Editwar anfangen, es ist aber sachlich falsch, das maxspeed=120.
Jojo4u (2015-03-26 08:44:39+00:00): die 120 beziehen sich auf die "Verkehrsrechtlich angeordnete maximale zulässige Höchstgeschwindigkei" aus [1].

Damit geht diese Information nicht verloren. Mittlerweile ist :variable auch häufiger als signals [2].
Bei der A8 habe ich weiterhin signals verwendet wegen der Seitenstreifenfreigabe und weil sie von Leonberg zum Kreuz sehr oft niedriger anzeigt.

Was sind deine Argumente?

[1] http://www.svz-bw.de/fileadmin/vba/Anlagensteckbrief_SBA_A81_Leonberg_Mundelsheim.pdf
[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:maxspeed%3Dsignals
Peilscheibe (2015-03-26 10:35:06+00:00): 1. Das Konzept ist broken. Z. B. bedeutet maxspeed=x jetzt nicht mehr, dass ein Tempolimit von x gültig ist. Es können beliebige Limits sein, bis hin zu "kein Limit" auf der deutschen Autobahn. Es ist nur dann ein Tempolimit von x gültig, wenn _kein_ subkey maxspeed:variable=yes existiert. Das ist mMn eine Änderung der Semantik, nicht abwärtskompatibel und daher broken.

Was das Beispiel A 8 angeht: dort wurden auch schon alle möglichen Varianten getaggt, zuletzt von maxspeed=signals auf none (http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/27316989)

2. Die Information an sich ist nicht überprüfbar. Fährt B unter einer Schilderbrücke durch, gilt u. U. für ihn ein anderes Tempolimt als für A, der die Signalanlage 3 Sekunden vorher passiert hat. Beide editieren OSM nach dem Motto "tag what you see". Wie weiter?
rickmastfan67 (2014-12-01 23:10:34+00:00): Thanks for adding this change to the database.  Don't hesitate to add any other missing oneway roads or other roads that have been changed into two-way that you find in East Liberty!  Welcome to OSM.
Joshua Powell (2014-12-02 02:22:50+00:00): Yep, thanks for the feedback and for the welcome!
ant32 (2014-12-01 19:43:44+00:00): one way was going the wrong direction
*Martin* (2017-04-04 07:35:58+00:00): Park???
CRCulver (2020-12-24 09:12:05+00:00): These changesets of yours in Cluj six years have caused big problems: ways (streets, footways) are not supposed to bear addr: tags. Adding addr: tags to them generates an OSM bug. If you look at Cluj with the Osmose view turned on, you can see that nearly every way in the city is tagged improperly. I have been undoing some of the damage, but it would be great if you could help as the original editor.
mdomnita (2020-12-25 07:07:16+00:00): First, these changes were made over six years ago when the number of features on OSM was much lower in the area. To geocode an address from the OSM database multiple queries had to be made to get the street name, number, city, county, country etc and it seemed normal to me to get some of that information directly from the road tags.
Regarding the big problems, all I can do is select all of the ways with JOSM and delete the tags but as I didn't edit OSM for a long time I wouldn't want to cause more big problems. I think it would be best for me to stay away from OSM from now on because all I get are negative comments and let the ones that have the right skills edit it.
Please let me know if I can help you and give me more information, consider that I only heard about osmose now and I don't know where this bug you mention is documented.
CRCulver (2020-12-25 07:18:39+00:00): I didn’t mean to sound too negative. Everyone makes the occasional mistake when tagging, I know I myself have made loads of tagging mistakes in my time.

With regard to this bug, it is readily visible if you open Cluj in Vespucci and then turn on the Osmose bugs layer.
mdomnita (2020-12-25 08:32:01+00:00): No problem, I just like to know more information on the issues because I don't work with OSM anymore. I made some changes on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/96412783#map=15/46.7820/23.5843 is this what you suggested?
JOSM also gives warnings on these issues but none of them are marked as errors, just suspicious tags.
Matei
kgh (2014-12-01 20:38:08+00:00): Das Kindergartengebäude müßte noch etwas aufgehübscht werden. Gemäß Luftbild ein etwas anderer Grundriss. Im Großen und Ganzen aber schick.
kgh (2014-12-01 20:44:42+00:00): Klohäuschen ca. Mitte 2013 abgerissen.
kgh (2014-12-01 20:46:00+00:00): Baubeginn Herbst 2014
Josef73 (2019-03-10 16:40:32+00:00): Hello, when is the Kiraku open?
4rch (2014-12-03 12:53:43+00:00): Durch diesen Changeset wurde die Grenze des künftigen Nationalparks Hunsrück-Hochwald beschädigt: http://i.imgur.com/PgRRiSg.png

Ich repariere das gleich mal.
Mazezito (2014-12-01 21:37:49+00:00): By Maze
Reitstoen (2014-12-02 00:01:01+00:00): I reverted this changeset. Route was created with "duplicate" tags/ways on top of existing geometry.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-02 23:16:53+00:00): This changeset contains 15 pages of road classification changes (mostly from unclassified to tertiary).  Either you've done an awful lot of surveying around Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire during the last 20 days, or you're guessing.

To walkers and cyclists, classification of roads between unclassified and tertiary really does matter.  All other things being equal I'd be quite happy to walk down the typical OSM "unclassified" road, but not the typical "tertiary".  Taking just one as an example,

http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/111662014/history

is an unclassified road that I'd be more than happy to walk down (and have done so many times).  

Obviously there are edge cases, and with them there can be arguments on both side, but these have to be backed up by survey.  I'm sure that everyone would welcome a discussion about whether a particular road might justify a status different to what previous mappers have chosen, but you can't just say "I think that all of these roads in this area are tertiary" and change them - OSM is a collaborative project, and we have to work together to create "the best map".
5m4u9 (2014-12-06 18:46:08+00:00): Qué son los módulos? nombres de los edificios, el lugar designado para todos esos edificios...
5m4u9 (2014-12-06 18:45:01+00:00): Hola, en esta edición veo que añadiste lugares, pero están mal etiquetados... si buscas el "Rectorado" está como museo!! Debería ser una oficina administrativa de la U.
SimonvdP (2014-12-06 20:23:54+00:00): klopt maar op de Fietskaart is die route nu weg :-(
ijsb (2014-12-11 20:18:55+00:00): Dat is inderdaad jammer, maar wellicht is http://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/ (deels) een geschikt alternatief, en misschien wil de maker van de fietskaart deze aanpassen.
SomeoneElse (2015-01-01 14:04:38+00:00): test
SomeoneElse2 (2015-01-01 14:07:40+00:00): test
SomeoneElse2 (2015-01-01 14:17:08+00:00): test
SomeoneElse2 (2015-01-01 14:22:09+00:00): test
SomeoneElse2 (2015-01-01 14:30:14+00:00): test
SomeoneElse (2015-01-01 14:34:43+00:00): test
ha5vsa (2025-11-02 18:05:37+00:00): Kossuth Lajos szoborra Haraszti József neve milyen forrásból került mint alkotó?
mottiger (2018-10-08 10:25:23+00:00): there is no village at this point

can this be deleted?
tomlee721 (2014-12-02 10:54:31+00:00): Why "大潭山" be a circle now?
pizzaiolo (2014-12-03 19:03:54+00:00): I'm sorry, this was an accident. How can I revert it?
tomlee721 (2014-12-04 09:01:00+00:00): I have been fixed. But need a few day to let the map process to the original.
pizzaiolo (2014-12-04 11:54:10+00:00): Thank you. Again, I'm sorry!
emacsen (2014-12-03 13:13:31+00:00): These are some seriously awesome POI edits!
lxbarth (2014-12-03 15:34:13+00:00): Ha, much more work to be done. Also: some seriously awesome changeset commenting functionality ;-)
*Martin* (2014-12-03 21:23:29+00:00): Hey AvnerR!

Stop renaming places in Slovakia to Slovak - Hungarian name. Tag name must contain name of the place of the country it is in. It is nonsense to have combination of all languages in the name. Read more on http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name.

So far you've made pretty much of damage and pissed off slovak OSM commutiny. Please revert back your bilingual changes ASAP.

Thanks
Jose Riha (2014-12-03 21:36:39+00:00): yes, please stop otherwise we'll be more than happy to start renaming hungarian names to slovak equivalents. szia, jose
emacsen (2014-12-04 18:48:48+00:00): Jose,

If you have a problem with these edits, you can discuss them (such as is being done here) or contact the DWG (which has already been done). An edit war is not the way to resolve conflict.
*Martin* (2014-12-04 18:52:41+00:00): I am sure Jose will not start edit war. AvnerR I've heard your story from user cetko. I think that you should have had first started discussion on osm_sk@googlegroups.com discussion forum and explain your intent and reason there. It is still an option.
Jose Riha (2014-12-04 19:01:06+00:00): just trying to make a point here. and this guy is just not listening :-/
stephankn (2014-12-10 06:42:11+00:00): A major change like this could have deserved a changeset description. Especially when it is done by a user who did not edit anything before.

Based on the physical road characteristics as visible from aerial imagery and the road also being part of the AH network the upgrade itself seems reasonable.

Did you notice that you have missed dozens of secondary_link ways when changing the classification?
AlaskaDave (2014-12-10 08:10:57+00:00): I agree with the previous comment. I am aware that highway 101 is being upgraded and perhaps deserves the reclassification but there is more to it than that. Reclassifying the links, making sure bridges also get the changed ref number and classification is part of the process. Such "loose ends" have to be dealt with.
tyr_asd (2014-12-03 12:35:41+00:00): Hallo. Ein Hinweis: In den "Name"-Tag gehören nur wirkliche Namen von Objekten, und keine Beschreibungen. Zum Beispiel ist hier das "Apfelbäume - meli" kein Name. Hier speziell sollte man stattdessen einfach den typ der Plantage auf "trees=apple_trees" setzen.
Liebe Grüße
tyr_asd (2014-12-03 12:35:58+00:00): Siehe: http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/279224
emacsen (2014-12-02 21:12:21+00:00): Thanks for adding the banks and ATMs!

One way to make your edits even better is to add a changeset comment when you add. I don't know Go Maps, but usually it's an option when you hit Save or Upload.
skquinn (2014-12-02 07:32:59+00:00): Ad copy is just not necessary in a changeset comment. That's what your website is for.
nubs (2014-12-02 19:24:55+00:00): I'm reverting this changeset for now.  It breaks things pretty significantly in this heavily trafficked area.  Please send me a message if you want some help fixing things the right way.

Thanks!
Hjart (2014-12-02 18:26:27+00:00): Har du gps-spor for det stykke af Kielersvej du har lavet? Desuden behøvede du ikke tagge det stykke tunnel særskilt. Vejene over er jo tagget som broer, så det stykke af Kielersvej der går under vel ikke er at betragte som en egentlig tunnel.
k1wi (2014-12-03 15:39:30+00:00): No pongas de nombre "no me acuerdo".
k1wi (2014-12-03 15:35:03+00:00): Por favor, ten más cuidado al borrar cosas. Has borrado el colegio Elorri.
Durko_freemap (2014-12-05 21:20:51+00:00): Zdravim lajos-atya,

ak mate miestnu znalost, ze tie vchody mali byt zaznacene opacne, stacilo len navzajom zmenit polohu tych bodov. Vy ste zmenil v bodoch len housenumber, zmente prosim aj cislo v streetnumber, aby bola zmena korektna. Dakujem.
Jose Riha (2014-12-05 21:24:56+00:00): pripadne skuste investovat cas do spoznavania editoru josm. vyplati sa to
lajos-atya (2014-12-05 21:42:18+00:00): a javítás jó. így pontos. köszi a javítást!
Jose Riha (2014-12-05 21:43:25+00:00): super, dakujeme!
Durko_freemap (2014-12-05 21:12:51+00:00): Zdravim lajos-atya,
nepoznam toto mesto, ale napriek tomu viem, ze takto ta ulica Radnicne namestie nemoze byt zaznacena, pretoze by sa ziadne auto odtial nedostalo. Zrejme medzi budovami 374/6 a 6402/1 je ta ulica obojsmerna a zvysok moze byt jednosmerny. Ak si na opravu netrufate, staci mi napisat, ze to tak je lebo to poznate a ja to opravim.
lajos-atya (2014-12-05 21:40:57+00:00): jó!!! nem kelljavítani
Durko_freemap (2014-12-05 22:30:35+00:00): Zaciatok ulice som upravil. Je to takto spravne?
lajos-atya (2014-12-06 06:50:06+00:00): OK!!! Ez így jó
*Martin* (2014-12-06 20:08:07+00:00): Guys, is google translate or something between your parties? :-D
Tbj (2014-12-02 09:20:17+00:00): edit : noexist ->noexit
geevee (2017-05-22 10:38:34+00:00): In this changeset, you added the Silo Tower as a tourism=viewpoint. But it doesn't seem to be publicly accessible. It is only accessible in combination of a guided harbour tour. The door is closed with lock with that notice on the door.

Maybe it would be better to remove the viewpoint tag, but keep the link to Wikipedia and building name?
emacsen (2014-12-02 21:16:18+00:00): Hi,

Just want to say these are great edits!
Nicolas Love (2015-01-31 23:50:47+00:00): Thank you.
ToniE (2014-12-02 10:58:34+00:00): Halo alx,

der Roundabout war mit Absicht in (mindestens) zwei Teile gespalten, da hier zwei Buslinen (5 Teilrouten) nur Teile des Kreisels durchfahren. 

Gruß,
Toni
alx (2014-12-03 11:51:11+00:00): ok, bitte um Entschuldigung
ToniE (2014-12-03 12:02:10+00:00): Hallo alx,

kein Problem. Der roundabout schien auch vorher schon nicht OK gewesen zu sein.

Gruß,
Toni
trigpoint (2014-12-02 13:45:50+00:00): Including the phone number in the name field makes this changeset look like spam.
Please remember that openstreetmap is a map/geographical database , not a business directory .
Please remove the phone number from the name field and only include the name if it is clearly signed.
trigpoint (2014-12-02 18:57:45+00:00): No response, so reverting
cleary (2016-07-10 01:57:45+00:00): Hi. I notice you moved bus stop location (node 2626663623). I haven't caught that bus route to Blacktown for a while but I'm fairly certain it does not go down Humphries Lane. Can you please look at this again? Thanks.
Derick Rethans (2014-12-02 12:19:57+00:00): Hi! Please don't add a new node for something that already exists (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/50059498). In this case, you probably want to map an *entrance* point, and not the whole building again. I've changed that for you.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-22 18:24:38+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3215549198 needs a main tag to say what sort of thing it is.  From the name I suspect that it is one of these:

http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=beauty
trigpoint (2014-12-02 11:52:30+00:00): You appear to have added your business to, and renamed the Maidstone boundary relation, I assume that was accidental .
You seem to have added your office in a residential area, please can you confirm the office is clearly signed and not a work from home business .
trigpoint (2014-12-02 18:14:39+00:00): No response recieved so changes have been reverted
ViriatoLusitano (2014-12-02 12:52:25+00:00): Têm a certeza que as coordenadas estão perfeitas? Experimentei meter as três coordenadas para os geradores eólicos de Achada Torres Vedras e elas dão-me desvios não uniformes. Isto é não é tudo para um lado, às vezes está desviado para à esquerda da imagem de fundo, outras vezes para cima. Isto num espaço de centenas de metros.
topolusitania (2014-12-03 18:48:27+00:00): Olá
As coordenadas são as dadas pelo manual VFR da NAV e são as coordenadas oficiais para obstáculos com mais de 60 m que representam perigos para a navegação aérea. 
São dadas no formato GGmmss mas não vão à precisão das décimas de segundo, o que obviamente implica um dado erro na implantação no terreno.
Só com décimas de segundo é que a implantação no terreno dará erros na ordem da dezena de metros.
Já encontrámos erros entre as coordenadas do Manual VFR e a realidade no terreno que foram comunicados à NAV.
Para este Parque eólico não conseguimos encontrar o EIA para confrontar as coordenadas...
topolusitania (2014-12-03 22:53:37+00:00): Comentário 2 - De facto as coordenadas para esse parque eólico parecem estar erradas, Mas testámos noutro parque - Alto Folgorosa - e pelo menos para o N5 as coordenadas estão ok
ViriatoLusitano (2014-12-03 23:24:34+00:00): Obrigado por verificarem.
topolusitania (2014-12-04 00:55:05+00:00): Olá
A NAV já corrigiu o erro, numa revisão  posterior do Manual VFR 
Eis os novos dados:

ACHADA
TORRES VEDRAS
Gerador Eólico
WINDMILL
(1/3)
390631N 0091147W 406M / 179M
RED STRIPS
Fixed Red
ACHADA
TORRES VEDRAS
Gerador Eólico
WINDMILL
(2/3)
390631N 0091137W 419M / 125M
RED STRIPS
Fixed Red
ACHADA
TORRES VEDRAS
Gerador Eólico
WINDMILL
(3/3)
390631N 0091127W 413M / 125M
RED STRIPS
Fixed Red

A NAV publica emendas / alterações ao manual 1 vez por mês. 
Podes verificar as emendas aqui:
http://www.nav.pt/ais/VFRs/Amdt_015-2014%202.pdf
ViriatoLusitano (2014-12-04 01:17:23+00:00): Acho que essa revisão é a tal que está incorreta. Comparei com os dados que enviaram para a mailing list e são os mesmos. :)
rickmastfan67 (2014-12-10 06:00:19+00:00): Just a quick reminder for ya abbafei, but when you add the 'turn:lanes' info to a way, don't forget to add the lane count at the same time. ;)
abbafei (2014-12-10 06:50:53+00:00): Recently (as in last week or so) I have been adding the `lanes` count at least for the direction with the `turn:lanes`. However sometimes I don't remember or know the total lanecount, so I leave `lanes` empty and only fill out the directional `lanes:`.
SomeoneElse (2014-12-03 00:56:15+00:00): HI - I think that something went a bit wrong here.  This node:

http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/245655162

got dragged to the east by accident.  I've moved it back.

Anyway - hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help. If you have any questions please feel free to drop me a message.
sdoerr (2014-12-02 16:18:50+00:00): #hotosm-task-717?
Otnow (2014-12-02 17:36:56+00:00): Этот дом имеет номер именно 22А (табличка на доме).
aceman444 (2014-12-13 00:02:21+00:00): Dobry den, dokoncite tu relaciu 4205717 PSC? Je neuzavreta. Dakujem.
Otnow (2014-12-02 14:46:48+00:00): Здравствуйте.

Спасибо за ваш вклад.

Обратите внимание, что номера домов нужно обозначать так: "19 к. А" -> "19А", т.е. без "к." и без пробелов, т.к. в данном случае дома не являются корпусами.
Graf Westerholt (2017-01-07 10:33:20+00:00): Bitte darauf achten, dass Namen richtig geschrieben werden, das ist sehr wichtig, damit sie auch über auch über eine Suchfunktion gefunden werden können. Habe den Namen korrigiert.
tuxayo (2015-03-02 20:39:08+00:00): Attention t'avais mit landuse=retail alors que landuse c'est pour des zones, pas un bâtiment en particulier (sauf énorme truc industriel par exemple) voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:landuse