piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
JJWW (2021-07-11 10:29:42+00:00): Op basis van welke informatie heb je die "inham" in het water gemaakt? Volgens AHN4 en BGT is die er niet. En laatste keer dat ik ter plaatse was heb ik die ook niet gezien
padvinder (2021-07-12 12:03:18+00:00): Ik weet niet wat je precies met 'die "inham" ' bedoelt, maar de bewerking van de kaart hier is gedaan op basis van eigen observatie ter plaatse en meest aktueel luchtfotomateriaal van pdok.
JJWW (2021-07-12 12:45:15+00:00): Ik bedoel de inham van water die je hebt gemaakt onder dit gebouwtje
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/963057514

Volgens mij hebben ze daar niet recentelijk gegraven en volgens AHN en BGT is daar geen inham:
http://mijndev.openstreetmap.nl/~allroads/NLOSMOK/OSMOKNL/OSMOKNL.html#map=19.57/514011.85/6861990.19/0
padvinder (2021-07-12 13:57:15+00:00): complimenten voor je oplettendheid!
Precies op die plek ben ik niet geweest. Ik heb schaduw voor water aangezien. Intussen al gecorrigeerd. 
groet
JJWW (2021-07-12 15:03:31+00:00): Ja, water is nooit goed te zien op luchtfoto's, zeker niet als er bomen staan. Dan heb je AHN nodig
Carto_Ferret (2021-07-13 14:55:17+00:00): Source: Maxar Premium Imagery
lakedistrict (2021-07-10 15:08:07+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits in Arnside. For housenames, please enter this in the Housename field, under the Address section, rather than the generic Name section. Any questions feel free to send me a message through my profile. Happy mapping and hope to see more edits from you soon. :)
Carto_Ferret (2021-07-13 14:54:35+00:00): Source: Maxar Premium Imagery
Felipe Alves (2021-07-13 17:52:29+00:00): Oi, Donjivs. Tudo bem?

Vi que adicionou um endereço de e-mail como nome em vários elementos. Não sei o que desejava representar, mas está errado, então removi de todos eles.

Qualquer dúvida, avise.

Abs
jonorossi (2021-07-13 06:16:34+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

To guide you better mapping, you'll want to read more detail on the wiki as you go. You should not put descriptions into the name field (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions).

In this case, I assume the community centre acts as an emergency shelter only during an emergency. In that case you might like to just add the "emergency:social_facility=shelter" tag to the community centre building area and delete the point you added, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:emergency:

Jono
jonorossi (2021-07-13 06:18:34+00:00): That second link didn't work correctly, the colon on the end didn't link. This one will get you there: https://bit.ly/3ik3dZF
MxxCon (2021-07-10 04:20:04+00:00): Hello.
You drew these parking lot segments based on Bing satellite imagery. However, it appears to be pretty old and that parking lot no longer exists. If you use iD and switch to other available satellite imagery you'll see that there's now what appears to be a multi-story building.👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107729978
Michael Alvarez (2021-07-10 06:24:01+00:00): You are correct! Deleted the roads. However the building still needs to be filled in.
Enock4seth (2021-11-23 14:38:19+00:00): Thanks for mapping and `fixme`. Kindly avoid adding random names from other streets if you don't know. How did you come up with naming some road segments here as "George Walker Bush Highway" see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/963065590/history ?
Your Village Maps (2021-11-23 19:25:42+00:00): I believe I put the source of the information you're looking for in the source= tag. I don't normally map in this country, but I saw a post in a highway-related group on Facebook about the new interchange, and I decided I would help with mapping it. I believe the "George W Bush" name was mentioned in both a news article and in an official website for the interchange project. Perhaps it is just a commemorative name like "Harry Flood Byrd Highway" is for "Leesburg Pike" in Virginia? I'm also NO fan of the former president of the US, but since it was mentioned in the information, I assumed that's what it was called now. I think there's a tag, name:official or official_name that might be more appropriate for the George W Bush Highway.
Enock4seth (2021-11-23 20:24:45+00:00): Thanks for the clarification and taking the time to help map. I haven't seen any information in "source=*". "George W Bush" name mentioned in the articles/news publications I trust didn't refer to the interchange as being named so, but one of the roads nearby (South) that leads you here. 

And what I was saying earlier is for you not to assume in cases like this. "note=*" or "fixme=*" or email to talk-gh@osm list would have served the purpose of your  assumptions better rather than adding to living data invalid information. 

Better still, could you please point me to this official website of the interchange, which states its name as "George W Bush Highway"?
user_11418917 (2021-07-10 04:00:33+00:00): Reverted. you added a duplicated round about. And its also not matching the road. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/963068847
DressyPear4 (2021-07-10 13:34:37+00:00): Adicione apenas o que existe, parques adicionados dessa forma serão removidos.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107730533
mariotomo (2021-11-19 13:50:39+00:00): hola. si se encuentra en la zona y no piensa poder editar directamente, también tiene la oportunidad de apoyar el proyecto OSM con información, que otros puedan procesar. los invito a conocer la comunidad OSM, por ejemplo en el foro https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=61 o en las listas de correo https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/
cheatach (2021-07-11 19:42:01+00:00): Cześć, dzięki za wkład w OSM. Staraj się proszę rysować dokładniej - przesunąłeś poprawnie narysowane ulice Kolbego i Prymasa Tysiąclecia. Droga wewnętrzna do bloków 4a i 4b powinna być dojazdową a nie osiedlową. W drugim swoim zestawie zmian na tym obszarze nr 107763478, ulica i chodnik również są niedokładnie narysowane, a jak poprawnie zrobić tunel możesz przeczytać tu https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:tunnel#tunnel.3Dbuilding_passage . Na tej wiki znajdziesz sporo na temat zasad rysowania każdego obiektu. Zachęcam do poprawy ww błędów :) pozdrawiam
maraf24 (2021-07-31 12:24:46+00:00): Nic nie poprawił.
DressyPear4 (2021-07-10 13:29:24+00:00): Evite deslocar nós das vias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107733604
Glassman (2021-07-11 18:22:13+00:00): The location of the coffee shop appears to be on the sidewalk. Can you adjust the node to the correct location? I'm guessing it's the building just to the east.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107733606
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:42:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
yrtimiD (2021-09-05 17:35:54+00:00): Hi, you added drain 2 months ago (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/963123748), I just was here and did not saw anything similar. What was your source?
Tsur Halamish (2021-09-05 19:31:10+00:00): Seemed like it from an aerial photo. if its a mistake, can be deleted
yrtimiD (2021-09-06 13:55:24+00:00): aerial photos are usually very old, I'd not advise using them without local knowledge
Ze0zohk1 (2021-07-10 07:13:51+00:00): Ich habe die Changesets hier durcheinander gebracht: Mein review_requested bezieht sich auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/42995730/history, Version 5
pyram (2021-08-26 21:38:39+00:00): Hallo Stefan-Nbg.,
darf man fragen, warum Du die Adresse geändert hast? Siehe "note":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/38591431/history
Außerdem würden wir mehrere Adressen nicht mit "4-6" erfassen, da es in diesem Fall zwei einzelne Adressen wären, also zwei Punkte mit jeweils "4" und "6". Idealerweise dort, wo man sie findet (idealerweise an der jeweiligen Eingangstür).
Stefan-Nbg (2021-08-28 08:20:13+00:00): Hallo,
es gibt hier eine Hausnummer 4 und 6.
In MapsMe konnte ich die Nummern nicht richtig eintragen. Sorry. Ja, es sollten 2 einzelne Adressen sein.
pyram (2021-08-28 08:26:49+00:00): Die Quelle ist aber dann nicht Vor-Ort-Besichtigung, sondern...?
Ich hatte damals auch an "Blütenstraße" gezweifelt und mir das intensiv vor Ort angeschaut!
pyram (2021-08-28 08:30:58+00:00): Soory, sehe gerade, dass Du die Quelle mit angegeben hast. Danke.
Stefan-Nbg (2021-08-28 08:35:43+00:00): Sorry, habe von dem Technischen wenig Ahnung, wollte nur die Adresse berichtigen. Ich arbeite bei der Stadt an den Hausnummern. Danke.
pyram (2021-08-28 14:34:03+00:00): Soweit ich weiß will die Stadt nicht einmal die Straßennamenliste für OSM freigeben. Sollte sich das ändern und sogar Hausnummern freigegeben werden, würde mich das sehr interessieren :-)

Nebenbei:
Wir von OSM legen großen Wert auf die On-The-Ground-Regel
Und ich kann Dir versichern, dass Vor Ort keine Hausnummer 6 angebracht ist! Oder ich bin blind.
Stefan-Nbg (2021-08-29 08:13:43+00:00): Ok, können wir das per Mail abklären?
bumbum@nefkom.net
Richtig, mein Fehler, die 6 wurde Anfang August gelöscht. Also nur die 4. Blüten 91 gibt es nicht.
pyram (2021-08-29 11:07:24+00:00): OK. Ich habe das jetzt entsprechend der Vor-Ort-Lage eingepflegt.
PN folgt.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:43:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
Pink Duck (2022-01-16 14:39:24+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_.28don.27t_do_it.29
Robert Whittaker (2022-01-16 14:54:14+00:00): Yes, I'm aware of that. But if the official name is "St Benedicts Street", then then "St" in the OSM tag isn't an abbreviation of the name.

(So this is different from e.g. taking "West Main Street" and abbreviating it in OSM to "W Main St")
Pink Duck (2022-01-16 14:58:21+00:00): You're welcome to use official_name tag for that, but really the reason for not abbreviating is to avoid losing word expansion meaning and for the render agents to compress as required. There's no guarantee the sign, nor the council, are right on this. St Benedict was a saint after all and St is the contraction. It's spoken as 'Saint' too.
Pink Duck (2022-01-16 18:20:25+00:00): Plus note Nominatim search for "Saint Benedicts Street, Norwich" has since yielded no highway results.
Pink Duck (2022-01-16 20:32:48+00:00): Having taken a look at more street names in a similar format, what seems consistent is that on the ground signs often start "St.", sometimes with the dot under the t, sometimes without space, but all contractions for 'Saint'. The council list of streets for these appears to have standardised on excluding dots and includes space. Yet the council issues the signage. So it seems that perhaps the database reduced form isn't the ideal source for naming into OSM. I reckon the signed short form best suited to short_name tag, and council form captured into official_name where differing.
Robert Whittaker (2022-01-16 23:00:10+00:00): As the street naming authority, the name according to the council is by definition correct. The street name from the council will also be used in addresses by Royal Mail, and we want those to match the street name too.

In this case, "Saint Benedicts Street" is arguably incorrect, despite the etymology.

That said, I'd regard it as a bug in Nominatim that a search for that doesn't find the street. Equally, it seems that a search for "Saint Swithin's Road, Norwich" (with a grammatically correct apostrophe in it, which is missing from the name in OSM) returns no results. I'd also regard as a bug in Nominatim.
Pink Duck (2022-01-17 09:45:48+00:00): Try a search for "St Stephens Square, Norwich", which works, as does "Saint Stephens Square, Norwich". I see Nominatim more as a working reference implementation on the guidelines for OSM as defined. Admittedly not a great one, per its lack of stemming for your example.

Norfolk CC are indeed the naming authority. I just doubt the quality of their database (not the first time). I'll email them about this to better understand their intent. If they've just removed the dots for brevity, or if it's a definitive form mismatching the signs.

I've seen around 30 businesses list their addresses in Companies House with 'Saint Stephens Street', so real-world use is messy. Royal Mail lists it as "St. Stephens Street", like the signage (contracted).

Norwich CC is the signing authority, where the ground truth on most of these is arguably clearer than "Rd" or "Ave" suffixes.
Pink Duck (2022-01-17 10:35:05+00:00): Just noticed that the the description fields from your FOI Request include full forms such as "SAINT STEPHENS STREET", but I'll await the response from NCC for now.
Pink Duck (2022-01-17 21:07:07+00:00): Easy to miss but there's a road sign "St. Benedicts Street" at the junction corner with "St.Margarets Street", plus:

NCC: "POTTERGATE TO SAINT BENEDICTS STREET"
Section Ref: 4F199

Other oddities:
NCC: Saint John Maddermarket
Signed: St. John Maddermarket

NCC: St John Street
Signed: St. Johns Street
Pink Duck (2022-02-22 11:52:57+00:00): Since your July 2014 FOI request itself contains 18 cell ref to "Saint Benedict", including "Saint Benedicts Street" (C854), but only 4 cell ref to "St Benedict" - one a foot path, the other a close, then I believe this should be returned to the ground truth.

Also in my findings with the council databases it became apparent that as suspected their admin is largely a mess. In the years since some "Saint" prefixes have become "St" while others changed from "St" to "Saint", pretty much arbitrarily. The only stable thing is the ground truth and the wiki naming rules, which are more readily verifiable than repeat FOI requests.
Robert Whittaker (2022-02-23 08:31:53+00:00): On the other hand, most of the businesses along there list there address as "St Benedicts Street" or "St Benedict's Street". Given the discrepancies, I think we need to determine the official name from Norwich City Council, and use that.

Regarding the list of streets the references to "Saint" are all in the description fields of other road segments. It's quite common elsewhere for the road names in descriptions to be out of date, so I would conclude that the descriptions aren't always updated when road names change. It's quite likely someone has decided to standardise the names in the name column, the question is whether or not that was done officially by Norwich CC.

For what it's worth, OS Open Roads (which should be authoritative) also lists the name as "St Benedicts Street". Have you contacted the City Council yet and got a response?
Pink Duck (2022-02-23 09:53:11+00:00): The C854/12 “Saint Benedicts Street” I mentioned was from the Road Name column in your XLS. It also contains 403 "Saint " prefixes vs 188 "St " prefix in the same column (including footpath descriptors). Since this changeset was all about standardising on the List of Streets.

I don't think OS Open Roads is actually authoritative, as that's a derived product with the multitude of individual naming authorities having final say. Their claim is "definitive road information". I'm still waiting to hear back from Norwich City Council, but will let you know if/what they say.

OS themselves have a history of gathering their own road name sources, independent of councils (sometimes out-of-sync with them too).

I sometimes find companies own published addresses aren't that helpful, with incorrect street names/postcodes and inconsistency with adjacent businesses address formatting, but do accept for a lot of people its their go-to form.
eggie (2021-07-10 08:51:56+00:00): Dag Jffry  Lijkt me oke.. mits het nieuwe stuk Berchvliet  als open is gesteld.
Is dat wel het geval? 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-07-10 08:56:46+00:00): Het nieuwe fietspad is volgens mij een (brom)fietspad.
Ik heb de tagging aangepast.
Is het in werkelijk al aanwezig anders
highway=construction
construction=cycleway

en bij alleen plannen zelfs proposed gebruiken ipv construction. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-07-10 09:04:37+00:00): Kleinigheidje.. Je fietspad loopt door een sloot tz van de pas aangelegde duiker. Zal het niet iets noordelijker lopen?
eggie (2021-07-10 09:08:19+00:00): Welli cht heb je hier iets aan.
Denk ook dat de 'draai' aan het eind niet meer bestaat. 
https://www.satellietdataportaal.nl/?base=luchtfoto2019&res=0.5&datemin=10-07-2020&q=jarmuiden+10&loc=52.39224%2C4.794808%2C18z&overlay=mos-0
Jffry101 (2021-07-10 11:46:18+00:00): Ze zijn momenteel op de Australiëhavenweg aan het werk. Het stuk vanaf de rotonde met de Sierenborch tot aan Bornhout is alleen toegankelijk voor het sorteercentrum. Construction lijkt me voor de volledige situatie rondom het gebied wel logisch, aangezien de werkzaamheden tot september lijken te gaan duren.
eggie (2021-07-10 11:55:08+00:00): Up to you...
September is ook al weer dichtbij..  
Wanneer wegen tijdelijk zijn afgesloten dan gebruiken we geen highway=construction, maar conditionaltagging

Bv access:conditional=no @ (2021 Jan 20-2021 Apr 3) 
Het voordeel is dat na de einddatum het gewoon weer routeert.
Dit ook omdat kaarten soms gedownload worden voor gps apparatuur. Je heb anders een gemankeerde kaart.

Gr eggie
Владимир К (2021-09-16 10:00:18+00:00): Добрый день!
Прежде чем двигать объекты по космоснимку, необходимо убедиться, что смещение снимка в этом месте правильное.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%98%D1%81%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B0%D1%8D%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%84%D0%BE%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2#.D0.A1.D0.BC.D0.B5.D1.89.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5_.D1.81.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.BC.D0.BA.D0.BE.D0.B2_.D0.B2_.D1.80.D0.B5.D0.B4.D0.B0.D0.BA.D1.82.D0.BE.D1.80.D0.B5
вот тут есть инструкция, как это делать.

А еще вот здесь https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/86847730 зачем то дома на по крыше подвинули. дома надо обводить по основанию, а не по крыше
Dilon Pait (2021-09-16 16:08:59+00:00): Здравствуйте. Потому что эти дома и так не по основанию стоят. Смотрите там на дороги и деревья, непропорционально расположены. А дорога там вплотную к подъезду! И где правда? Я же не стану там трекер включать, чтоб перепроверить дорогу. Тем более точность трекера оставляет желать лучшего
Владимир К (2021-09-16 19:16:56+00:00): ну значит и дорога неверно нарисована была. я исправил.
Чтобы выставить смещение, не надо по конкретной дороге проходить, достаточно выравнять по уже имеющимся трекам на перекрестке например Батенчука и Джалиля. я там определил смещение в 2.39; 5.37
Dilon Pait (2021-09-20 15:19:28+00:00): Это смещение каждый раз будет слетать, как перезайдёшь в редактор. ,Это огорчило низнай как!
Владимир К (2021-09-20 20:03:28+00:00): в редакторе JOSM есть варианты сохранять смещение
Vinber (2021-07-19 17:17:48+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue,

Merci d'avoir contribué à OpenStreetMap.
Je vous invite à lire cette page où vous pourrez trouver de nombreuses informations utiles https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:France/bienvenue

Bonne journée
ChrissW-R1 (2025-01-02 04:58:40+00:00): Please check changeset #97231709: https://osm.org/changeset/97231709
TrickyFoxy (2022-09-07 21:42:14+00:00): building=house на церковь? 🤨
iWowik (2021-07-10 10:10:15+00:00): Здравствуйте!

Но букву Ё никто не отменял
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/793010473/history
SGorskiy (2021-07-10 08:10:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107737897

Проверяй
Polarbear-repair (2022-06-01 18:18:41+00:00): Hallo DoubleA,
ich habe ein Frage zu 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199541920

Du hast hier parking=street_side hinzugefügt, obwohl es sich anhand des Luftbildes um eine von der Strasse getrennte Fläche und nicht um eine strassenbegleitende Bucht handelt. 
Worauf begründet sich dieses Tagging?
Was heisst "mit Osmose repariert" - was war kaputt?
Hast du geprüft, ob es sich überhaupt um einen öffentlichen Parkplatz handelt?

Viele Grüsse
Polarbear-repair (2022-06-02 07:27:07+00:00): Nach weiteren Recherchen handelt es sich um den Kundenparkplatz der angrenzenden Hundeschule. 
Kann es sein, dass du mechanisch Taggings veränderst, ohne die Situation konkret zu prüfen?
Das verschlechtert die OSM-Daten.
Andrea Musuruane (2021-07-11 07:58:50+00:00): Ciao. Per favore, non usare le immagini aeree di Bing perché non sono ben allineate nelle nostre zone. Meglio usare Esri Clarity. Per cambiare sfondo con iD, prova a guardare questo screenshot: https://imgur.com/1wjkVbr Oppure, se vuoi usare le Bing, le devi riallinearle manualmente usando la funzione "Offset delle immagini" in iD: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_Imagery#iD Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107738195
glemco (2021-07-11 10:56:19+00:00): Ciao, grazie del consiglio. Mi sembrava ben allineato guardando le strade (molto meglio di mapbox quantomeno, esri sembra comparabile).
Vedrò di correggere basandolo su quello allora!
DD1GJ (2021-07-10 08:39:06+00:00): Hallo berlin_agenda, willkommen bei OSM. Ich habe Deinen Eintrag wieder gelöscht, da der Friedhofspark bereits als Fläche vorhanden ist: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31990753

Weitere Informationen für Deinen Einstieg in OSM findest Du z. B. bei https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

Viele Grüße, Joachim
tastrax (2021-07-13 01:58:04+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Eric S (2023-02-24 11:09:23+00:00): You added cycle lanes on the D902 near Montgauvie hamlet. I don't see any marking on the road in that area. See : 
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=3451351561858446
useredf816343045912f6 (2023-02-24 11:13:51+00:00): I saw some cyclists driving right of the dashed lines, so I was assuming those were very thin cycle paths. But I'm likely wrong.
Eric S (2023-02-24 13:24:37+00:00): Ok. No, thus are not cycleways. Will try to correct the area later. Thanks for your answer.
SafetyIng (2021-07-10 13:42:58+00:00): Hallo, 

warum hat denn der Grundstückeigentümer um Löschung gebeten? 
Es ist eigentlich nicht der Standard, dass solche Daten aus OSM einfach gelöscht werden.
Supaplex030 (2021-07-10 15:57:03+00:00): Hallo styff, bitte unterlasse es zukünftig, diese Daten aus OpenStreetMap zu löschen. Wie du bereits gemerkt hast, werden sie ohnehin früher oder später wieder eingetragen. Die Existenz des Gebäudes, der Adresse und der Zufahrt sind kein Geheimnis, vor Ort, auf Luftbildern oder anderen öffentlichen Quellen überprüfbar und gehören daher auch in OSM (so wie sie auch in anderen Kartenwerken auftauchen). Es gibt kein berechtigtes privates Interesse, dass solche Informationen gelöscht werden können.
WoodWoseWulf (2021-07-11 21:53:09+00:00): Hi Adam_Kocur,

Welcome to OSM!

The correct way to tag a university campus is as amenity=university. The tag amenity=school should be used for primary, middle and high schools (or their equivalents.)

I've fixed this one for you :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-04-24 14:29:48+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3658287 ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-07-12 20:33:26+00:00): Dzięki za aktualizacje!

Ale cycleway:left=lane zdejmę bo nie ma tam kontrapasa, jest tylko kontraruch