piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2021-12-13 13:31:49+00:00): Hi...  This was your edit.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=114194332
I think you shifted the map in editmodus  (and a node connected with a road) accidentally and loaded into the data of OSM.
No hard feelings  :)
What was your intention? 

Greetz,
eggie
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:54:34+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not in according to the HOT quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: Buildings not accurate drawn.
D: Connected nodes of different buildings or objects.
E: Buildings not squared.



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114194385
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:53:27+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not in according to the HOT quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:

A: Buildings not accurate drawn.
E: Buildings not squared.


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114194700
itineris (2021-11-26 10:34:09+00:00): Szia!

A számozott utaknak nem írjuk a nevébe, hogy "x. sz. főút", hanem csak a "ref" címkét használjuk. 
A 47-est és a 444-est most javítottam.
Mint ahogyan az általad berajzolt körforgalmak által kettészakított busz útvonal kapcsolatokat is.

Üdv:
Ákos
Henosb (2021-11-24 20:20:37+00:00): Yandex Panorama
vonrockos (2021-11-24 19:43:18+00:00): Несколько пруфов:
https://ibb.co/GsQmHfJ
https://ibb.co/BLmFjQ1
https://ibb.co/M1y4wQg
https://ibb.co/pnW5GDb
https://ibb.co/nB9G80D
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:49:12+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not in according to the HOT quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:


A: Buildings not accurate drawn.
D: Connected nodes of different buildings or objects.
E: Buildings not squared.
Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
More help information:
View this video's about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
More info can be found on https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/id-editor/


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114195167
GinaroZ (2021-11-25 00:01:04+00:00): Why did you remove the industrial tag?
ALu68 (2021-11-25 07:21:15+00:00): Have you checked the history for this landuse area?
I don't even know why it was changed to industrial.
GinaroZ (2021-11-25 13:49:16+00:00): Probably because landuse=commercial is not the correct tag - is there a better one? But I was querying why you removed "industrial=bu" as I'm assuming should have been "bus".
ALu68 (2021-11-25 14:36:32+00:00): bu=bus? Maybe

Please have a look to the Secondary & Tertiary sector of the economy: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secondary_sector_of_the_economy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tertiary_sector_of_the_economy

Secondary sector "... industries that produce a finished, usable product or are involved in construction" - landuse=industrial

Tertiary sector "... generally known as the service sector ... consists of the production of services instead of end products" - landuse=commercial

A bus depot offers service, no goods are produced.
ralley (2021-11-24 22:25:21+00:00): Why have you removed the golf course?  The change set comment "Remove block" is not very descriptive and certainly doesn't describe why this change was made.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114195726
ivanatora (2022-01-18 11:43:38+00:00): Hello,

Some of the ways you tagged as "highway=unclassified" (366258489, 1005958819, 288924625) look like dirt roads from satellite imagery.

I don't think they fall into "highway=unclassified" tagging scheme - they should not be generally purposed for motor cars and are more likely agricultural.

Can you switch them to tracks instead?

Regards,
Ivan
riskybiznu (2022-01-18 16:37:27+00:00): Hi Ivan,
Thank you so much for pointing this area back out to me and for expressing your concern. After reviewing my edits, I agree that my original tagging of unclassified was inappropriate for this area. I have updated tagging to reflect service and track roads. This should better reflect the area as a whole. Thank you again, RiskyBiznu
ivanatora (2022-01-19 06:31:56+00:00): Thanks!
CjMalone (2021-11-28 07:39:57+00:00): Hey, just a heads up house numbers go in `addr:housenumber` not `name`.

Fixed in #114315238
marczoutendijk (2021-11-24 20:25:51+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 114140174, 114140436, 114140993, 114142085, 114142210, 114145851, 114147094, 114192560.
MikeN (2021-11-25 03:07:51+00:00): What was the reason for changing these road classification?   It seems to be a different method than other local editors have used.
dreua (2021-12-05 18:42:17+00:00): Hallo jnk0,
ich finde es besser, geschlossene Elemente als "disused" zu taggen. So entsteht eine sinnvolle Historie zu dem Ort und StreetComplete kann außerdem nachfragen, ob hier etwas neues eröffnet wurde: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dvacant (shop=vacant würde ich allerdings nicht benutzen, das disused: Schema halte ich für besser).

Könntest du diesen Change rückgängig machen oder wäre es okay wenn ich das mache? (Danach natürlich auf disused setzen.)

Grüße
David
jnk0 (2021-12-05 19:06:51+00:00): Bin bei Dir. Habe das Changeset zurückgerollt und das Objekt als disused getaggt.
dreua (2021-12-05 21:09:32+00:00): Super, danke dir! :)
SomeoneElse (2021-11-24 20:40:25+00:00): Note that many of the spurs shown by https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=7342961 appear to be legitimate, as the go to "way stations" on the route.
marczoutendijk (2021-11-24 20:38:26+00:00): But you could add the building inside that area...
spiregrain (2021-11-25 13:21:32+00:00): This changeset swaps highway=footway to highway=cycleway for many ways.   In some cases with foot access tagging, in others without.  Was that the intent?   Is there a source for this change - in-person and on the ground these ways feel more like footways open to bikes, than cycleways open to pedestrians.
rskedgell (2021-11-26 10:11:32+00:00): Last year someone changed the whole lot to footway due to a misguided idea about pedestrian priority (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/89374914 ), so this is part of a gradual return to the status quo ante.

In general, almost every path in QEOP appears to be a permissive shared cycleway, most of which are 3m or more wide (and should probably also be tagged with motor_vehicle=private as they are used as such by service and event vehicles). From a routing or other data consumer's point of view, it doesn't matter which value is used.

Preferring cycleway could certainly be accused of tagging for the OSM Carto renderer, but I would argue that it's also compatible with the use described in
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Duck_tagging

If you're particularly unhappy with it, I'm happy to revert and just keep the "main" paths as highway=cycleway|pedestrian + segregate=no + foot=permissive + bicycle=permissive + motor_vehicle=private
spiregrain (2021-11-26 10:40:30+00:00): Thanks for your response.   I think you're right that my uneasiness stems from the fact that the default osm.org presentation doesn't distinguish cycleways that are unfriendly to pedestrians with those that are perfectly well shared.  I always think it's a pity to see nice paths for strolling turning 'blue' for that reason.   The 'Map Key' of the right hand side just says BLUE MEANS BIKES, and reasonable people looking at osm.org would assume that these paths are off-limits to walkers as a result. Perhaps I'll get motivated to propose some changes to the renderer for cases like this.
rskedgell (2021-11-26 13:04:21+00:00): I can understand that, as I tend to map more pedestrian than cycling infrastructure. Something to render a dedicated cycle track would help, but we're hindered in the UK by almost never being able to truthfully tag a cycleway as foot=no. There doesn't really seem an appropriate value of cycleway=*  to cover it.

I've reverted this changeset in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/114262230

Perhaps the following might work for QEOP:

1) Named ways >=3m wide:
highway=pedestrian + motor_vehicle=private + bicycle=permissive + foot=permissive + segregated=no

2) Ways <3m wide:
highway=footway + bicycle=permissive + foot=permissive + segregated=no

3) Ways 3m wide, unless a dead end for cyclists:
highway=cycleway + motor_vehicle=private + bicycle=permissive + foot=permissive + segregated=no
spiregrain (2021-11-27 14:29:05+00:00): That tagging and taxonomy makes sense to me for 1) and 2).   But what's the difference in real-life feature that distinguishes 1) from 3)?
user_5359 (2021-11-25 08:03:35+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9281487517/history. You add the key wheelchair with an empty value!
scratera (2021-11-24 21:05:00+00:00): scusa ma non si trova li è entrato a far parte di vitaminabc e per la precisione al numero 68 cioa paolo
drazde (2021-11-24 21:36:28+00:00): Ah, ok Paolo, correggi pure, non mi sembrava nello stesso stabile mi sarò sbagliato.
A isera non è più da un po di tempo
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:47:54+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114196935
carfog81 (2021-11-25 21:23:41+00:00): Hello. Please do not damage the multipolygon or administrative boundary relationships. This is a very common damage from Kaart mappers
RadMapper (2021-11-30 19:41:57+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to my attention and making the necessary updates.
CurlingMan13 (2023-03-12 20:47:19+00:00): Rather than just trying to clear an error flag, you should really check to see if a feature even exists.  For example, this one doesn't exist, yet you just put effort in to clear a flag, rather than resolve the underlying issue.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/784821441
JuanjoMC (2021-11-25 10:30:46+00:00): Hi,

I really dont know where you take the information but this building is clearly an apartments one, certainly not a notary office.

A quick internet search reveals that Sandry Gypens office is located 52 Sint-Amandsstraat, see here (in french): https://notaries-europe.com/fr/belgique/strombeek-bever/notaire-sandry-gypens

Again, as I already mentioned to you, do not name whole buildings as per one of the businesses being hosted there unless it is the only purpose of the building.

I removed the office stuff.

Cheers
Tom Ameye (2021-11-25 13:22:35+00:00): Dear Juanjo, please find the source of this information: https://www.grimbergen.be/openbare-verkoop
"notariskantoor Sandry GYPENS (Otto de Mentockplein 19 te 1853 Grimbergen)"
Tom Ameye (2021-11-25 13:41:49+00:00): As you may have seen, I added the office "stuff" back.
Best regards,
Tom
JuanjoMC (2021-11-25 13:57:47+00:00): This building has been completely rebuilt a few years ago,  transformed into apartments. This is why I was asking.

But it seems that you are right here, it may be that there are some offices on the ground floor.

As I said, in this case you must use a node for businesses hosted there instead of naming the whole building. What if there is more than one business?

Feel free to put back the notary office (on a node :-)
eggie (2021-11-24 22:20:15+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback Wat je wellicht nog niet weet is dat hier een fietsknooppuntroute loopt die nu is onderbroken.
Vraag hulp op het forum als je zoiets ingewikkelds wilt aanpakken. 
Met editor iD kun je eigenlijk ook geen fiets en wandelroutes bewerken. 
Ik kijk even of het simpel is te herstellen.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2021-11-24 22:22:54+00:00): Het parallelfietspad was hier al opgenomen in de hoofdrijbaan als cycleway=track
Dat geeft op fietskaarten het effect van een aanliggen fietspad.
Is de situatie hier veranderd?
eggie (2021-11-24 22:49:06+00:00): reverted by changeset  #114199765

Je changeset heb ik voorlopig even teruggedraaid om de routes te herstellen..
eggie (2021-11-24 23:00:50+00:00): Het fietspad heb ik ingetekend met behoud van de wandel- en fietsroutes.
Veel plezier met mappen verder. 
eggie
eggie (2021-11-24 22:25:58+00:00): Je edits.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=114197852
Je bedoeling is natuurlijk goed.
Elk begin is moeilijk en mappen in OSM wel in het bijzonder. Het lijkt simpel, maar is het zeker niet. 
Het fietspad zit hier vastgeplakt aan de leisure=park Plakken kun je voorkomen door de linker alttoets te gebruiken bij intekenen.
mvg
eggie
eggie (2021-11-24 22:46:31+00:00): reverted by changeset  #114199725

Ik heb deze changeset even teruggedraaid om de routerelaties te herstellen (fiets- en wandelroutes)
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:46:07+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114197894
InsertUser (2021-11-26 04:37:25+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap. You have indicated that the name of road w721945004 is "private road". this seems like a description rather than a name. Unless this road is signposted or know locally as "Private Road" this should not be in the name tag. Access should normally be indicated by an appropriate access tag. rather than putting a description in the name. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114198114
gabro00 (2021-11-25 22:56:18+00:00): Szia!
A járatszám a sínhez tartozik? Nekem logikusabbnak tűnik a kapcsolat adatai között szerepeltetni, bár nem néztem utána tüzetesen.
leveskockaa (2021-11-26 00:21:07+00:00): Szia!
A járat száma szerepel a kapcsolatban is, de villamosvonalak esetében vonalszám híján meg volt adva régen az infrastruktúrán is, ahol annak nincs külön ismert száma. Ezek törölve lettek, sajnos lemaradtam a megbeszélésről, így 0 inputom volt a törléssel kapcsolatban. Mivel hasznos információról van szó, Budapesten például visszacsináltam azzal a lényeges különbséggel, hogy a ref kulcs értékébe került a szám. Így az információ nem vész el, csak a legtöbb helyen láthatatlan, ami az eredeti célja volt a törlésnek. Szerkesztésre, OpenRailwayMap-en megtekintésre így is alkalmas. Ugyanezen dolgozom a metróvonalak és nagyvasúti pályák esetében országszerte is, mivel "name is the name only". Szóval röviden, ha van az infrának azonosítója, az ref és nem name, ha nincs akkor az eddigi gyakorlatnak megfelelően célszerűségi okokból a járat azonosítóját megkaphatja, lásd villamos és metróvonalak. Jelenleg szerintem rendben van, de folyamatosan igyekszem ellenőrizni az ilyesmit.
gabro00 (2021-11-26 10:07:02+00:00): Erre a módosításra gondolsz? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/98804395 Valami olyasmire emlékszem, hogy a PTv2 sémába nem illik, ezért törölték a címkéket országszerte.
Egyébként valahol megértem, mert ezeket az információkat ki lehet nyerni a kapcsolatokból is, másképp mondva, amit most (feltételezem kézzel csinálsz), az automatizálható lenne és pont ezért kérdéses, hogy ad-e valamit az adatbázishoz.
Nekem jó így is, úgy is, nem fogom átírni, csak kicsit furcsállom hogy nincs egyetértés.
leveskockaa (2021-11-26 12:22:22+00:00): https://groups.google.com/g/openstreetmap-hungary/c/IRm-evZHT3g/m/nDP4gZQIBQAJ

Igen, erre gondoltam. Egyelőre senkit sem zavart, de meglátjuk.
hatul (2021-11-24 21:37:58+00:00): מקור: https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/shvilisrael/4-1-9-20-t3627.html#p12979
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-29 01:50:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 114341892 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some fantasy mapping in Scotland and Brazil.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5480 .
Allison P (2021-11-24 22:55:54+00:00): Had not heard of that landuse tag! Will keep it in mind.
carfog81 (2021-11-25 21:04:07+00:00): Hello. Please do not damage the multipolygon or administrative boundary relationships. This is a very common damage from Kaart mappers
(Inactive) hayduke1275 (2021-11-30 22:43:26+00:00): Thanks for bringing this to our attention and making the necessary updates.
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:38:27+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114198931
pesec (2021-11-25 03:55:30+00:00): В режиме правки используйте различные слои спутниковых снимков для сверки данных. На сегодняшний день наиболее актуальные данные по г.Тюмень у Esri.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-14 20:36:50+00:00): speed is missing the mph
nevw (2021-11-25 12:55:43+00:00): Hi
you have moved the atm from next to the Allora butchery on Herbert St to near Forde St.
Was this accidental and are you able place it back where it should be.
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=114199363
nevw (2021-11-27 03:02:44+00:00): no response so I shifted presumed accidental move of Redi ATM back to previous position at the Warwick Credit Union.
GeorgeRSmith (2021-11-28 20:16:26+00:00): Yes, apologies the ATM move was unintentional.  The only change was to Reppels B&b as described
eggie (2021-11-24 23:44:07+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback   
tracktype=grade2 is eigenlijk geen surface=dirt  Dat is half verhard  Bv gravel. Wellicht dan tracktype=grade3 (of 4)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:NL:Map_Features:tracktype
barrier=chain is volgens mij oke. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dchain
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
MarcoR (2021-11-29 16:55:05+00:00): Ciao! Non tutte le foto aeree sono correttamente allineate (in gergo tecnico "ortorettificate"), quindi è possibile che le strade appaiono tutte "sfalsate" su Bing ma meno con altre; in genere vengono considerate attendibili le PCN2006 (purtroppo vecchie di 15 anni) seguite dalle PCN2012; nei casi dubbi si guardano le tracce GPS pubbliche (anche quelle di Strava possono essere usate) oppure bisognerebbe effettuare un sopralluogo con un dispositivo GPS di qualità.

A presto,
Marco
eggie (2021-11-24 23:48:10+00:00): Oke... maar... 
Tip  Je kunt ook (beter) specifiek taggen
asphalt  paving_stones e.d. 
Zie wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Key:surface
Mapse
eggie
Frans S (2021-11-25 11:34:27+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
PLease do not connect buildings to each other with their nodes.
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/114199763
ScottNelson (2023-02-04 07:03:16+00:00): It seems to me like a couple ways (900960509 and 900960508) ought to be named "Carl Wylie" rather than "Black Prince" to follow the Sovereign Lake trail map.  However I don't know what the signs on the ground say for these trails.
BasKisk (2023-02-05 14:02:01+00:00): These changes were done with the managerial team at Sovereign Lake and reflect the way they want it labeled. They sometimes are a bit behind with the maps on their site...
user_5359 (2021-11-26 13:28:24+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9281707804! What is the meaning of the key change_me? We use for this type information a note. 

And please use the correct character set...
izolight_import (2021-11-27 11:27:30+00:00): Sorry, i forgot to clean up this node.
It contained the list of amenities (ATM etc.) from the dataset, from which i created seperate nodes.
izolight_import (2021-11-27 11:30:16+00:00): Also what do you mean with correct character set? Everything should be UTF-8, i checked it on a different machine at it looks fine.
opendcc (2021-11-25 11:59:45+00:00): Hallo,

bist Du da sicher? Ich war da im Sommer vor Ort und habe das nachgesehen - da war damals schon eine Note ...

Servus