piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aseerel4c26 (2019-03-01 18:48:25+00:00): @dieterdreist : Da bin ich prinzipiell sehr bei dir - aber mit dem Argument, dass boundary=administrative eben nunmal amtliche Grenzen bezeichnet, gehe ich bei Prince mit (alles was ich bisher gesehen habe, bezieht sich dieses Tag auf amtliche Grenzen). Dennoch sehe ich deswegen nicht, dass wir deswegen die Stadtteile löschen sollten - sondern eben passend umtaggen zu "inoffiziellen Stadtteilen" oder was auch immer (das würde ich vorerst gern noch offen halten). (s. auch Diskussion oben)
dieterdreist (2019-03-01 22:17:18+00:00): +1, ja klar, bei boundary=administrative geht es um offizielle Grenzen, bei place aber nicht. Muss man ggf umtaggen aber nicht löschen.
aseerel4c26 (2019-03-09 17:20:33+00:00): Es kam am 7.3. die Antwort vom Fachbereich "Zentrale Steuerung / Stadtplanung & -entwicklung": "die Kreisstadt Dietzenbach verfügt rein rechtlich über keine Stadtteile. Insoweit wir an der Erstellung von Kartenmaterial beteiligt werden, kommunizieren wir allerdings die Stadtgliederung Steinberg – Dietzenbach – Hexenberg. Dies ist rein informell und soll der besseren Orientierung im Stadtgebiet dienen."

Das deckt sich also mit dem, was Prince Kassad oben (22.2. 21:06 bzgl. HGO und Hauptsatzung von Dietzenbach herausfand. (Ich habe  übrigens im Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=DE:Grenze&diff=1819667 eine Klarstellung bzgl "amtlich" eingefügt.)

Dietzenbach hat also, rein verwaltungsrechtlich gesehen, keine Stadtteile. boundary=administrative bezeichnet solche verwaltungsrechtlichen Grenzen. Daher...

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67966173 gemacht: Die Objekte mit boundary=administrative AND admin_level=10 https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8420247 https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8420275 habe ich daher um diese beiden Tags bereinigt. place=suburb ist weiterhin (im Sinne von: davon sagt jeder Bewohner, dass es ein Stadtteil ist) an diesen Objekten getaggt - die Beschreibung auf deutscher und englischer Wikiseite passt (z.B. "unklare Grenzen" - was ja bei amtlichen Stadtteilen nicht vorkäme). (Bei Hexenberg fehlte place=suburb noch - habe ich angefügt.) Ein zusätzlich zu place=suburb passenderes Tag ist mir leider nicht bekannt. Zusätzlich habe ich wieder von Relation auf Way umgestellt - denn eine Relation wurde ja nur hier benutzt, damit es dem üblichen Mapping von type=boundary entsprach.  border_type=suburb habe ich auch gelöscht.

Ich danke euch für die zielführenden Diskussionsbeiträge und euer Engagement - frohes Mappen weiterhin! :-)
dieterdreist (2019-03-11 13:43:42+00:00): Ich danke Dir für das Nachhaken und bin einverstanden, dass es keine admin boundaries sind. 
Allerdings 2 Widersprüche, border_type sollte nicht unbedingt entfernt werden, da steht nicht, dass es nur für administrative Grenzen genutzt werden soll (allerdings sehe ich hier keinen Mehrwert). 
Dass es bei amtlichen Daten nie zu unklaren Situationen kommt, stimmt nicht (siehe Grenzstreitigkeiten, die gibt es nicht nur international).

Als Hinweis: man könnte auch place=quarter verwenden, wenn suburb hier umpassend erscheint (weil zu klein).
aseerel4c26 (2019-03-30 10:11:46+00:00): Nachtrag: Ich habe entspr. dieterdreists Einwand border_type nun wieder hinzugefügt ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67442563 ).

Übrigens habe ich entsprechend Diskussion (Mail) mit User sky-hub place=* an Nodes gehängt (u.a. für bessere Kompatibilität mit alten Renderern und eben der klassischen Benutzung dieses Keys) und den Flächenobjekten https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8420247 https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8420275  andere Tags gegeben (gegen Tag-Dopplung).
eggie (2019-02-21 20:51:57+00:00): Oke...
building=yes hoort niet op een node. Want de node staat immers in een gebouw. fee=no beter ook weghalen. 
Hoort meer bij een parkeerplaats oid. 
Gr Eggie
user_9430803 (2019-02-21 21:15:40+00:00): Oke, veranderd
BCNorwich (2019-02-22 07:34:47+00:00): Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

There's no need to duplicate the info on a building and a POI. So I've consolidated all info on the building, removing the POI as it's really just duplication.

I added the website and amended the address and opening time to suit OSM practice.
Squared up the building, does it really narrow to the street like that?

Regards Bernard
Jaygymspot (2019-02-22 19:36:42+00:00): Yes as the gym is at the end of a little alleyway
aseerel4c26 (2019-02-22 07:01:29+00:00): revertiert mit  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67454813 siehe Diskussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67442563
MrKrisKrisu (2019-03-08 00:00:44+00:00): Ich kenne mich in Celle nicht aus, aber ich bezweifle tatsächlich, dass alle diese Bushaltestellen nicht mehr existieren. Oder kannst du da zufällig eine Quelle aufzeigen?
MrKrisKrisu (2019-03-08 15:49:45+00:00): Es wurden alle Plattformen von Bushaltestellen im nord-westen von Celle gelöscht. Haltepositionen sind verblieben.

Laut efa.de existieren sie noch (Stichprobenartig 5 von mir geprüft).

Daher habe ich reverted:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67927900
majkaz (2019-02-22 08:11:58+00:00): Ahoj, to přesunutí adresního bodu [Novohradská 4](https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/296723835) do křižovatky s Alšovkou je omylem, nebo ne?
prof2 (2019-03-02 10:23:07+00:00): Jo, jistě.
prof2 (2019-03-02 10:43:10+00:00): Děkuju za všímavost a za opravu.
MrKrisKrisu (2019-03-08 15:45:24+00:00): Du hast hier die Plattformen von Bushaltestellen gelöscht (aber die Haltepositionen belassen). Außerdem einen Routenverlauf der Linie 500.

Laut efa.de existieren die Haltestellen noch und die Linie 500 fährt auch noch. 

Daher reverted: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67927618
woodpeck (2019-02-22 09:01:36+00:00): Hello SteffiB, hello yaelb, I notice that you have recently done a lot of "Pjs mapping" in South Africa, but you're using OSM tags in a very unusual way. You give strange names to buildings (maybe these are reference numbers but certainly not names). You use the name tag for other descriptive things (e.g. name=community leader) or you mark private gardens as landuse=allotments name=Private Yard. Please seehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only . You use the tags "door" and "gate" with a value of "1". All this is so non-standard that it really needs some explanation: What exactly are you doing here, and for what purpose? However, neither your changeset comments ("Pjs mapping") nor your user profiles point to any explanation of this project that you're doing. Who is organising this? Which documentation are you following that tells you to use things like "door=1" or "name=628/DN-016"? What is the extent of your project? Please get in touch with the Data Working Group at data@osmfoundation.org to discuss before you make any further edits. Thank you!
SteffiB (2019-02-22 15:19:43+00:00): Hi there Woodpeck, 

We are doing work in an informal settlement mapping the area for a doctoral research project at a university in Switzerland. Some of the labels you refer to such as, door=1, gate=1 and community leader is because we are using a free app to map called Go Map and this app does not allow us to tag correctly, such as an entrance/exit, fence or path. Or perhaps we haven’t been able to figure out how to do this on the app in an effective way while in the field. What we do is fix all these tags every night when we get home to the correct tags. 

Regarding the allotments, we agree, we haven’t been able to figure out a decent way of tagging these and we will be in touch with the OSM team. We will in the mean time change the private yard to, private garden. 

Lastly, the name tags we will change these to reference numbers. They are for a survey we are planning to do. We will make sure to be a bit more specific when we
Make changes and hope you have a clearing idea. Thank you for writing us and informing us of the issues, we will do our best to work as closely to the standards as possible. 

Best regards,
Steffib
seichter (2019-02-22 18:22:21+00:00): If you aren't able to map correctly with Go Map, you are perhaps using the wrong tool (I'm not using it). There are low-entry-tools like iD which allow correct mapping.
BTW: On of the objectives of a thesis should be to find out appropriate tools for a given (sub)task.
SteffiB (2019-02-22 20:17:08+00:00): Thank you for suggesting the iD app seichter. I will have a look. Additionally, I do not think it is necessary make unconstructive BTW comments regarding what one should and should not learn during ones thesis. OSM is a platform where people work together in a constructive manner to assist one another in gathering better data.
seichter (2019-02-22 20:26:25+00:00): Sorry if you understood my comment as criticism. I considered it as constructive comment since I had to do with many thesis during my worklife.
hsc666 (2019-02-23 20:25:51+00:00): @SteffiB: No matter whether these cryptic labels are in ref or name or housename: what's that supposed to be? Are these really real, verifiable properties of the buildings? Your remark from above makes me wonder, that they are for a survey you are planning to do. So if these are just any private markers that are not checkable on the ground, I don't think these data should be in OSM. Please clarify what kind of label it is! Thanks!
SteffiB (2019-02-23 22:20:37+00:00): Yes these are real and variable by the residents who live in these houses. Please remember this is an informal settlement. These markers are checkabke on the ground. I can send photographs of the marker if you would like evidence.
captain_slow (2019-02-23 23:24:59+00:00): @SteffiB: You can enter tags with the app Go Map!! as you like, not just the ones from the preset.
Mark the object you want to add a tag to, choose "Tags" and then choose "Node Tags" (or "Way Tags" respectively) from the bottom menu instead of "Common Tags". There you can enter key value pairs as you like. I hope this helps.
Taya_S (2023-08-07 08:42:07+00:00): Hello SiHollett,

A while ago I untagled the coastline from the Solway Coast AONB boundary, as the mapped coastline did not match up with the current coastline anymore. But I was wondering whether the AONB Boundary (specifically around Rockcliffe Marsh) is still accurate? And what the source of the boundary is. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9346927#map=13/54.9479/-3.0758

Sincerely, Taya
aseerel4c26 (2019-02-22 07:01:34+00:00): revertiert mit  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67454813 siehe Diskussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67442563
czubi (2019-02-22 11:55:17+00:00): Bitte Groß-und Kleinschreibung verwenden.
Bitte denn node auf das betreffende Gebäude verschieben.
Bitte club=computer ändern. Club ist ein Verein.
Das Impressum deiner Seite geht nicht und auch die meisten deiner Links.
czubi (2019-02-22 11:56:51+00:00): Such dir bitte von der Craft Seite was passendes aus 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:craft
czubi (2019-02-22 11:58:28+00:00): vermutlich das
craft=electronics_repair
PC-NOTDIENST ERFURT (2019-02-23 15:28:09+00:00): vermutlich ist nicht ganz richtig..

computer emergency service  ist der englische Begriff dafür, kann man den anlegen (lassen) ?
czubi (2019-03-01 16:23:00+00:00): benutze den Begriff einfach, wenn der dir besser gefällt. Aber dann bitte mit einem "_" anstatt den Leerzeichen. Die anderen Sachen sind noch offen.
czubi (2019-03-03 16:05:31+00:00): Der Standort des node auf der Webseite und in OSM weichen erheblich ab. Welcher stimmt denn nur?
czubi (2019-03-03 16:07:30+00:00): Ich habe die Sachen eingebessert nur den Standort musst du selbst korregieren. 
Immer noch ohne Adresse im Impressum?
Carto'Cité (2019-02-28 09:24:09+00:00): Bonjour sgom,

Je me permet de te contacter sur ce changeset pour t'inviter à te méfier des propositions de StreetComplete sur les aménagements cyclables. cycleway:both=no n'est pas adaptée par exemple pour https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25034670 car il s'agit d'un double sens cyclable (DSC). Un DSC, même s'il ne s'agit pas d'un aménagement au sens propre, utilise le tag cycleway=opposite ce qui n'est pas cohérent avec le cycleway:both=no qu'invite à utiliser StreetComplete. Je me suis permis de corrigé dans ce sens.
N'hésite pas à me contacter si tu as des questions ou des remarques à ce sujet.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
Jarek 🚲 (2019-02-21 23:40:47+00:00): Hi, this edit changed classification of one block of Yonge Street from "secondary" to "primary". Generally speaking classification should be consistent: not change without a reason, and match other streets in the area. All the major roads in Toronto are currently "secondary", and any change to that would have to be done on a much larger scale. Because of this I have undone this edit in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/67446915
MrManny (2020-06-05 08:44:51+00:00): Bitte kurz einen Blick auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2200540 werfen
acet2ngaia (2019-02-22 03:14:32+00:00): Hey, I think you reimported the old alignment of Bali Hai Road. It's recently been redone alongside the construction of the new schools. I recently drew in the new alignment from GPS trace (minus the roundabout, since I lack imagery/GPS trace covering that as well as the knowledge on how to map roundabouts). Do you know if it would be easy to revert that one change (to the road shape), or would I need to draw it back again?

Any other tips you might have (re: roads or anything else) would be appreciated. Thanks!
kwametedros (2019-02-26 17:16:47+00:00): Hello acet2ngaiia, thanks for letting me know.  The changeset has been reverted to the previous alignment for the road. Thanks.
acet2ngaia (2019-03-04 08:03:31+00:00): Thank you!
viloan (2019-02-21 21:48:07+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
PT-53 (2019-02-24 07:17:24+00:00): Änderungssatzkommentar ?
Revolta Gardy (2019-02-22 01:07:12+00:00): Você precisa ser educado
wille (2019-02-28 09:13:56+00:00): Hola,
Creo que la alteración que hiciste en la "Carretera San Luis Potosí-Ciudad Valles" está mal. Podrías revisar esto por favor?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/67444953
RoterEmil (2019-05-14 13:01:07+00:00): Hi, ein Clubhaus ist keine Regierungseinrichtung und "Geschoss Fangkörbe für Artillerie Prüfstand" sind keine allgemeine touristische Attraktion. Habe beides korrigiert. Bitte versuche etwas genauer auszuwählen/einzutragen. Auch fast alle Deine übrigen Eintragungen benötigten starke Überarbeitung. Das ist in einem Projekt von vielen Freiwilligen leider nicht hilfreich. Es funktioniert ja nur, wenn alle versuchen qualitativ möglichst hochwertige Ergänzungen beizutragen. Schöne Grüße
PT-53 (2019-02-24 07:16:02+00:00): Hallo OSMchecker,
der Tunnel war als geplant eingetragen, was so weit in Odnung war.
Ich habe Deine Löschung daher wieder zurückgesetzt.
Bitte halte Dich künftig mit solchen Löschungen zurück.
Akkurator (2019-02-24 09:18:16+00:00): Danke!
Dimacn (2019-02-22 05:16:37+00:00): Пожалуйста, верните на здание школы тег building. Это здание и этот тег там должен быть.
Adamant1 (2019-04-24 08:12:36+00:00): I'm wondering why you put "UP" in the name of the railroad segment. UP is an abbreviation of the operator and the operator name should stay in the operator tag. The name of the line is Valley Subdivision. It was that way for years and it was fine (not to mention, that's just it's name is). For someone that goes off about keeping "legacy" tagging so much, it's odd you'd forgo it here to add something that's clearly wrong. Or is something like that only relevant when its something you don't want changed? Also, did you consult anyone from the local community or get their consensus before you re-tagged things? Or is that another thing that's only relevant when it comes to stuff where you live? 

(Btw, in bringing up those things, it's solely to point out your obvious hypocrisy in using arguments against doing something that you don't even apply to your own actions. The main thing is, that it's just wrong name tagging. Although the hypocrisy is important also).
stevea (2019-04-24 12:36:39+00:00): There are two Valley Subdivisions in California, that's why.  See https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/California/Railroads, or https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/WikiProject_United_States_railways, where you can read about the "proximity exception" for nearby similarly-named railways by different operators.

You prove once again you cannot say something without insults, and you deepen your slide into "poor OSM mapper" by not performing the simple step of reading the appropriate wiki to answer your question.
Adamant1 (2019-04-24 15:34:04+00:00): Like I didn't already know that. I didn't ask for links to a wiki. I asked why you did it. Referring me to something I've already read isn't answering the question. 

To quote you "There are two Valley Subdivisions in California." Notice IN CALIFORNIA. Now, to quote the thing about proximity that I'm pretty sure you read already since you supposedly know more then I do about all things OpenStreetMap "It is OK to precede a railroad name with an operator when two or more otherwise-identically named lines in close proximity would create serious confusion." Notice it says it's OK to do in cases there might be a case of "SERIOUS CONFUSION" due to CLOSE proximity. One is in the Chico area and the other is in LA. Not only is that not "close proximity" (their about the same distance away as some European countries) there's also zero chance of anyone being confused about which one is which. Again, it hasn't had the UP on it forever now and it's been fine. 

Also note the wiki says its fine to do "for now until the operator and owner tags become more widespread." Which they clearly are now, the particular exception of putting the operator in the name was suggested before they were, it's clear it wasn't meant to continue after they are widespread. Let alone be added back after they become that way. 

Also note that while I just said this particular thing you mapped was mapped wrong, your attacking me as a mapper overall, once again just for asking you a question none the less. So again, you make things highly personal while claiming to be the civil one. I'd also like to know me asking about something you did is "mapping." So while your the person going off others word salad, your the one saying none sense like that asking a question about something makes me a bad "mapper" some how. 

Lastly, again, I thought it is "all about the local community dude." So where did you consult the local community in the Chico to see if it was OK to change the names before you did it? Or again, does that only apply to you and parks in Santa Cruz?
Adamant1 (2019-04-24 15:40:05+00:00): BTW, now that the wiki contradicts you, ten bucks says you'll either deflect away from it by either ignoring it completely or going on thing about how it's "all ambiguous anyway man." Or you'll have some other B.S. reason why it should be discounted. Just like you did with the park thing, were the wiki was a cool source to use until it turned out it actually didn't support your opinion.
stevea (2019-04-24 16:15:59+00:00): I haven't any clue what you know or don't know.  If giving you links to a wiki answers your question as I do my best to remain polite in the face of your continuing verbal abuse, that's what I'm going to do:  refer you to a wiki.  So, RTFM.  Prefixing with UP is not "clearly wrong," though it may be "wrong" in your opinion.  Find a way to say that and suggest that it be changed for a good reason:  see where that gets you.

(There are a fair number of rail mappers in California in OSM, we work together to achieve harmony in the wiki and the map and naming this "UP Valley Subdivision" was a consensus that emerged among us, the results of this are documented in the wiki.  Yet I do patiently listen to your opinions about why you think it shouldn't be the way it is).

Not only did I read "the proximity rule" I referred you to, I wrote it.  If you think it needs re-writing or disagree with it, OK, "do the right OSM thing about that."

If you think that "IN CALIFORNIA" is somehow a "wrong distance" to apply proximity (it does disambiguate them in the state rail wiki), then how about you say something like "Naming UP Valley Subdivision in Northern California by prefixing with UP isn't necessary in my opinion, as it isn't especially proximate to the SCRRA Valley Subdivision in Southern California.  I propose we remove the owner/operator prefixing these, naming them both 'Valley Subdivision.'"  I don't want to put words in your mouth, but that might work!

I could even get behind something like that, worded in that sort of positive-suggestion, how-about-this? sort of way.  But you didn't (yet still might).  See:  mapping (being a mapper in OSM) isn't 100% about nodes, ways and geometry marrying geography.  In this project, mapping includes reading (and sometimes contributing to) wiki, talking with other mappers (in civil tones, with humility and a polite demeanor) and reaching agreement.

"Reaching agreement" is something you repeatedly have proven to me and others you have difficulty achieving.  Your rancorous tantrums so frequently red-line into verbal abuse that I had no choice but to disengage from you.  This (changeset) seemed a simple "RTFM" reply I could make which broke my "No Contact," yet your petulant, bitchy, argumentativeness once again emerges.  Please, find better methods to act civil and people will likely treat you that way in return.

Try it!  Right here and now, take me up on my suggestion above (using your own words).  I'll bounce it off a couple of relevant people (maybe I bring in happy5214 and Clorox into the dialog) and perhaps we nod our heads at what you say, agree with you and then you might get what you want.  But with a temper tantrum like above, no.

While writing this reply, I was interrupted by yet another post by you to this changeset:  you proved you couldn't wait six minutes for me to answer, (wrongly) predicting something I'll do so you'll lose a ten buck bet.  Wow, man.  Your days here are likely numbered unless you lose the bad attitude and constantly abusing people.  I'm about to click the Comment button, but it feels like a mistake engaging with you at all.
Adamant1 (2019-04-24 23:08:50+00:00): You seem to have an extremely miss guided opinion to that things decided in a "group" (whatever that means), can circumvent already more established and fundamental guidelines. Which is patently wrong. The rules about name tagging is a basic core thing to OSM and isn't ignored in mapping because a small group of people decided they were going to ignore it. For instance, a group of people who like dogs can't unilaterally decide to go around and re-tag everything with the name of dog breeds just "because consensus." Which I doubt you got in the first place for your "rule" anyway.
Adamant1 (2019-04-24 23:11:33+00:00): Since you didn't post anything about it on the talk page of the naming article before it was added to it or the rails article. So, yet again something else you don't do yourself but expect everyone else to.