piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
muralito (2016-12-06 13:36:51+00:00): This is not a case of "one feature, one osm element", is about where the feature/element is located.

The main activities of the restaurant are inside the main bulding,  food is cooked, ordered, and served in the main building. The light building has only seatings for customers, just like some other restaurants has seatings outside in a sidewalk or a pedestrian street.
trigpoint (2016-12-01 18:24:32+00:00): Hi, does the surgery have a actual name? Doctors Surgery is a description rather than a name.
And can I really take my car to an Ambulance Station to be repaired?
marc__marc (2024-08-17 22:23:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4530949914
Hola, ¿por qué tienen referencias de París (Francia) a un árbol de Argentina? Evidentemente, este árbol no se encuentra en el Jardin des Champs Elysés de París. Atentamente, Marc
--- message original que j'ai traduis automatiquement ----
Bonjour, pourquoi avez-vous des références de Paris (France) sur un arbre en Argentine ? Cet arbre n'est évidement pas dans le Jardin des champs élysés de Paris. Cordialement, Marc
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-18 18:18:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44496385 where the changeset comment is: Initial revert of some google.cn sourced data in Taiwan
muralito (2016-12-01 14:38:36+00:00): PLEASE STOP DELETING FUEL STATION NODES!
Ranger444 (2016-12-06 17:56:48+00:00): I have stopped the practice of combining Gas Station nodes with the roof at your request.
aharvey (2018-04-29 07:53:27+00:00): Primary schools are usually operated by the Department of Education, normally only preschools are operated by the local council, so this school is really operated by the local council?
Mapper9573096 (2021-07-29 07:34:22+00:00): I completely forgot that I added this many years ago. But yeah the operator probably should be changed to the Dept. of Education.
muralito (2016-12-01 02:09:59+00:00): This changeset broke 4 boundaries. Please be careful and DO NOT JOIN WAYS WITHOUT REASON AND WITHOUT CHECKING!
Velocimaptor (2016-12-01 17:27:48+00:00): I made adjustments to incorrectly drawn roads. Administrative boundaries should be separate layers from roads rather than being incorporated into the roads themselves. Avoid connecting boundaries to physical features. Sooner or later these features change in reality and get updated in OSM – but usually the shape of the boundary remains. An exception is if the boundary is legally defined to be the physical feature. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:boundary
muralito (2016-12-01 19:30:28+00:00): Are you sure McCain is a restaurant?
Its very small size for a saloon and McCain is a brand of frozen potatoes. Probably another type of shop.
Ranger444 (2016-12-06 17:59:01+00:00): This was ground surveyed and it was a restaurant. If you still disagree, I would encourage you to visit the site to double check it.
muralito (2016-12-07 14:01:24+00:00): I don't disagree, I just has some doubts.
JJJWegdam (2021-01-17 15:33:58+00:00): In this changeset you added the railway:ctc tag. I assume it is some sort of train protection system, but this tag is not present in the (quite extensive) train protection systems overview on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Train_protection_systems. Can you please explain what this tag means?
leojth (2021-01-19 16:31:13+00:00): Hi, its short for "Centralized Traffic Control" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Centralized_traffic_control) and the tag tells that traffic on the line is managed from a centralized train dispatcher's office.
JJJWegdam (2021-01-19 19:03:23+00:00): Thanks for clarifying!
muralito (2016-12-01 19:25:12+00:00): Sodimac is a very large store. The Bing aerial imagery is years old. Dont draw the old building.
Ranger444 (2016-12-01 19:30:08+00:00): It may be larger than what is shown in the aerial image, but, the north east corner still appears to be fields, not Sodimac.
Ranger444 (2016-12-01 19:30:40+00:00): PS I have stopped deleting Gas Station nodes
muralito (2016-12-01 20:02:48+00:00): Thanks. The 

Sodimac allotment is as large as the supermarket next to it. Both stores have connected their parking lots, have common entrance in the middle, and have main entrances from both streets, from the NE, from the SW and a small entrance from the NW.

The building of Sodimac is also larger than the building of the supermarket.
Mike Baggaley (2016-12-02 14:59:22+00:00): Hi way 23563067 several adjoining roads appear to have a ref of A574 but have been changed to secondary. If the roads have been downgraded, please remove the A road ref. If not, please set the highway back to primary.

Thanks,
Mike
Pete Owens (2016-12-02 16:45:39+00:00): Changed back - but the designation is historic. These roads do not form part of Warrington's primary network anymore and are not signed on the ground.
Mike Baggaley (2016-12-02 16:57:38+00:00): If the reference no longer applies, it might be better to put the reference in the old_ref tag and put highway as tertiary (if secondary it ought to have a B ref).

Cheers,
Mike
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-20 01:40:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44529328 where the changeset comment is: revert accidental upload of 'lanelet' data to OSM which is meant to be uploaded to a private server only. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44184590 for discussion.
To clubber up (2020-03-11 05:59:07+00:00): To destroy
Vildeu (2022-06-20 21:39:50+00:00): Please create a relation and don't add the Wikidata ID to a single river segment.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-18 18:18:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44496385 where the changeset comment is: Initial revert of some google.cn sourced data in Taiwan
cxc (2018-08-01 18:00:08+00:00): Hi, sorry for my bad english.
i see this... is correct?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/42928
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-20 01:39:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44529328 where the changeset comment is: revert accidental upload of 'lanelet' data to OSM which is meant to be uploaded to a private server only. See http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44184590 for discussion.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-18 18:18:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44496385 where the changeset comment is: Initial revert of some google.cn sourced data in Taiwan
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-18 18:18:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 44496385 where the changeset comment is: Initial revert of some google.cn sourced data in Taiwan
Supaplex (2016-12-01 05:29:57+00:00): 可以切換使用Mapbox，會比Bing新一些
user_5359 (2016-12-01 05:05:05+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Did you see the building https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26228348 ? Your entry is a duplicaze entry, I have deleted yours.
Chetan_Gowda (2016-12-01 04:02:00+00:00): Hi J-ar, Nice to see that you are adding farm fields. The correct tag is "landuse=farmland" http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dfarmland. I think you added right one before and you changed to deprecated tag. Please retag it. Thank you.
GOwin (2016-12-01 04:09:07+00:00): Hi there. I noticed that several of your recent change sets are adding duplicated buildings in the same area, especially here: http://osm.org/go/4yf~ArRjN?way=456876405

Could you please validate with JOSM?
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-16 20:49:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footprint imports. Please adhere to import guidelines, and discuss BEFORE you import.
stephankn (2017-11-18 07:32:55+00:00): this is clearly a mechanical edit. I do not see any documented prior discussion. Please give some details, as I am not convinced that replacing addr:* with is_in:* is the current standard.
thailand-edits (2017-11-18 18:40:48+00:00): This wasn't a mechanical edit but a mass JOSM edit based on towns which contained addr:* tags.

I agree this was a large changeset, however each case was properly inspected.

Could you point out which nodes were mistagged? If you find a lot of them we can always revert this changeset, however to my understanding towns shouldn't have addr:* tags.

Most of these edits replaced addr:country=TH => is_in:country_code=TH

If you are not convinced with the current standard, I was looking at the Town OSM Wiki page and it doesn't mention anything with addr:* (might be outdated and needs an update).

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dtown
stephankn (2017-11-19 23:02:21+00:00): Thanks for responding to the comment.

Doing a mass change of tags is considered a mechanical edit. Whether you are using JOSM or other tools is not relevant in this context.

It seems this change was not discussed with the community. Or was it somewhere?

I see the problem that some details had not been migrated when you changed the tagging.

For example here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1684727085/history

you have removed other details, eg:
addr:district 	หนองสองห้อง

So you could argue that this can be derived from the admin polygones. But same is true for the is_in structure you had added.

Would be great if you could respond in the forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=60482
Opinions are mixed, so certainly something which should be discussed. There is also the option to first revert and then to re-apply the change and this time preventing the loss of details. Or maybe only reverting it partially based on criteria we can define.
thailand-edits (2017-11-20 08:04:40+00:00): I agree, this changeset is a bit large for a mass edit, but it was discussed and posted on the OSM mailing list, I can't find the exact thread but I've got a response from Miroff which was one of the users who added the addr:* in the first place.

https://github.com/osmottawa/osm-changesets/issues/3

@Stephan, feel free to revert and update or simply revert this changeset. But it would be nice to have some consistency on the addr:* tags which don't belong on place=town nodes.
stephankn (2017-11-20 13:00:41+00:00): I recommend to move the discussion to the forum thread mentioned above. That way we can document the decision better.

Might be an interesting decision whether to go for addr:*. is_in:* or completely remove those where admin boundaries are available.

I am not too keen on investing time to do a proper revert of something which also took you time to do. 

I am personally undecided whether is_in is better or worse than addr tags in this situation. I always considered them only being a mid-term solution on the way to admin boundaries.

The thing to worry about is that some details are lost due to the tag change.

So please let's bring all those details to the forum.
Johnny Carlsen (2019-02-02 14:34:04+00:00): I just noticed that "is_in:state" does not contain the local language. Shouldn't "is_in:state" be in Thai?
Johnny Carlsen (2024-03-29 03:38:02+00:00): I was just looking at this changeset again and I can see a lot of valuable information were removed by it.

Before:
addr:continent	Asia
addr:country	TH
addr:district	เมืองอุดรธานี
addr:district:en	Mueang Udon Thani
addr:hamlet	หมู่ที่ 3
addr:province	อุดรธานี
addr:province:en	Udon Thani
addr:subdistrict	บ้านจั่น
addr:subdistrict:en	Ban Chan
name	บ้านคำกลิ้ง
name:en	Ban Kham Kling
place	village
source	Bing; sign

After:

is_in:continent	Asia
is_in:country	Thailand
is_in:country_code	TH
is_in:iso_3166_2	TH-41
is_in:state	Udon Thani
is_in:state_code	41
name	บ้านคำกลิ้ง
name:en	Ban Kham Kling
place	village
source	Bing; sign

Why remove this much data? Even if mistagged, that was still really useful information.
andi9876 (2016-12-02 03:47:59+00:00): This is no attraction, tag deleted.
Supaplex (2016-12-03 04:52:31+00:00): For the one who doesn't know why the mass deletion. TaiwanMap use Google as the source image to trace track.
We warmed him in these changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44053002
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44056824
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44052700
Supaplex (2016-12-02 17:40:47+00:00): For the one who doesn't know why the mass deletion. TaiwanMap use Google as the source image to trace track.
We warmed him in these changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44053002
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44056824
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44052700
ToniE (2016-12-01 09:59:07+00:00): Hello Josef,

welcome to OSM.

I have a question about this hotel in Oberpframmern.
Are you sure that tthere is actually a hotel?
I can't find any other information about this.
What's the name of the hotel for instance?

What about the hospital in Munich? Do you have any further information about this?

Best regards
Toni
BeKri (2016-12-01 18:01:31+00:00): Servus Toni,
typische LECKS.ME Müllablade ...
Hotel am Bürgersteig und Krankenhaus in der Ecke ...
Habe beides wieder rausgeschmissen weil ich solche Informationen für "Desinformation" halte.
OSM ist keine Müllhalde
Gruss BeKri
ToniE (2016-12-01 19:07:54+00:00): Servus BeKri

"OSM ist keine Müllhalde"

sehr whr.

Gruß
Toni
Supaplex (2016-12-03 04:52:15+00:00): For the one who doesn't know why the mass deletion. TaiwanMap use Google as the source image to trace track.
We warmed him in these changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44053002
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44056824
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44052700
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-16 20:49:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footprint imports. Please adhere to import guidelines, and discuss BEFORE you import.
Supaplex (2016-12-02 17:40:22+00:00): For the one who doesn't know why the mass deletion. TaiwanMap use Google as the source image to trace track.
We warmed him in these changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44053002
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44056824
http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/44052700
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-16 20:49:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footprint imports. Please adhere to import guidelines, and discuss BEFORE you import.
pitscheplatsch (2016-12-01 22:30:23+00:00): Hi J-ar, welcome to the OpenStreetMap project. May I know the reason behind deleting many several buildings in this changeset. See http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=44076868
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-16 20:49:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footprint imports. Please adhere to import guidelines, and discuss BEFORE you import.
johnny_1982 (2018-04-13 22:22:37+00:00): Dieser Änderungssatz entfernt von diesem Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/251880732 den Namen "Avenue Peng". Ich weiß, das sieht komisch aus, aber ich habe ein Foto im Juni 2015 gemacht. Dort ist ein "offiziell ausehendes" Straßenschild. Gibt es einen Grund dafür, den Namen zu löschen? Gemäß der Regel "map whats on the ground" sollte er wohl da bleiben.
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:57:45+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:56:59+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:10:44+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
dgitto (2016-12-01 06:51:05+00:00): actually is a wine shop. only wine
woodpeck_repair (2016-12-16 20:49:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44426389, 44387070, 44397974, 44390906, 44369720, 44363338, 44378632, 44444558, 44417849, 44406784, 44334110, 44452814, 44434181, 44359830, 44348987, 44437957, 44412921 where the changeset comment is: Revert un-discussed building footprint imports. Please adhere to import guidelines, and discuss BEFORE you import.
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:55:42+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:11:22+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:53:06+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:52:39+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:16:29+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
user_5359 (2016-12-02 19:52:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For better description of your business please read http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:healthcare and http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0 .
SomeoneElse (2016-12-01 10:39:25+00:00): Please don't create "worldwide" changesets like this.  You've copied data from wikipedia from multiple continents here.  Local mappers will have to check all your work, and its much harder for them to do that if a changeset spans most of the globe.
user_5359 (2016-12-01 20:51:39+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:15:57+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
user_5359 (2016-12-01 20:50:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please check the opening_hours!
user_5359 (2016-12-01 20:44:31+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:15:26+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
mueschel (2017-01-01 18:26:50+00:00): Hallo,
hier ist beim Erstellen der Multipolygone einiges schief gegangen. Die Wege selbst dürfen keine Tags mehr haben, z.B. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/456955625

Siehe auch: 
http://keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=12&lat=50.62574&lon=10.13123&layers=B0T&ch=0%2C30&show_ign=1&show_tmpign=1
Supaplex (2016-12-01 17:54:10+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
freeExec (2016-12-01 14:01:08+00:00): Там на одной дороге поставили, что она односторонняя, очевидно это не так. Поправьте.
user_5359 (2016-12-01 20:36:06+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:14:53+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
literan (2016-12-01 14:33:57+00:00): опять теги от балды. Какое там military?
user_5359 (2016-12-01 20:35:39+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2017-01-05 10:14:27+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
ionutr_telenav (2017-02-17 13:48:54+00:00): Hello! I notice you are adding restriction, for example in this intersection: 53.5409999, -113.4937156 . I can't find signs for the ones you added, and I want to know the reason why you added them
Mesowhite (2017-02-17 23:57:20+00:00): That was my first time editing restrictions if there is mistakes made with any of them go ahead and change/fix them. Cheers
*Martin* (2016-12-01 19:38:30+00:00): ahoj. je to oficialny kemping s nazvom "rybačka"?
az09 (2016-12-02 05:04:20+00:00): Удаленные POI - их правда больше нет?
chnav (2016-12-04 05:57:20+00:00): Здравствуйте,
в этой правке вы удалили существующее здание. Типичная ошибка новичков в ОСМ - удаление объектов и отрисовка их заново. У нас так не принято.
Пожалуйста ничего не удаляйте без серьезной на то причины.
Здание восстановил https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/395487862/history
Geography Canada (2016-12-06 01:10:42+00:00): May I ask: 

Why :D?
glglgl (2016-12-06 08:03:39+00:00): Somewhere I read about buggy software which erroneously uses low IDs for internal reasons. In order to prevent problems related to this, I tried to remove as many low IDs as possible.
Geography Canada (2016-12-06 15:12:01+00:00): Oh, okay. I didn't know that! Thanks for your kind reply :)!
tyr_asd (2016-12-09 13:50:53+00:00): Wieso?
Geography Canada (2016-12-09 15:57:48+00:00): Perhaps you should bring back the node 1. It is very special :D!