piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Kovoschiz (2022-04-04 15:34:55+00:00): Please only add the reality as in common use by the public. Put historic concepts in OHM. 

N-th reminder: `name=` and `place=` are the existing common name and concepts in public use, not what you think should be correct or proper. Use `old_name=` as needed, which says it's the original, not whether something is correct or wrong. Put historic names and locations  in OpenHistoricalMap, not OSM. Discuss with the community, where the Discord server (https://discord.com/invite/CyG9zte) has been made available in OSM Community Index for a long time already, and there is a wiki project (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hong_Kong). Use descriptive changeset comments. Don't use changeset comments for expressing your opinion in a debate. Respect the  One Feature, One Object rule, not mixing features up.
Kovoschiz (2022-04-04 15:38:11+00:00): See https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1000961987
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 07:21:13+00:00): Stop vandalism

On the ground principle
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground read
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 07:25:00+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories Dokdo is korea territories not Takeshima just rules is On the ground principle
protectrule (2022-04-05 07:29:40+00:00): @bobertko2
No clear evidence has been presented by the Korean side to show that Korea had effective control over Takeshima prior to 1905, when Japan reaffirmed its effective control and territorial rights over the island.
protectrule (2022-04-05 07:32:26+00:00): South Korea refuses to debate the issue in an international tribunal. This is because Korea has no grounds to deny that Takeshima is Japanese territory and not Korean territory. If it really is Korea's territory, it can be debated in an international tribunal, but Korea will not do that.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:04:07+00:00): Draw things as they are on the ground. Do not enter incorrect data or remove correct data just because it will help a map renderer, a navigation system or some other data consumer which has problem with the correct data. They are continually improving, don't bend the data to make it look prettier, just be patient, try a different data consumer or report the issue to the data consumer it concerns (example for the Openstreetmap-Carto style) .
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:04:37+00:00): https://dokdo.mofa.go.kr/eng/?pc_m=Y
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:06:04+00:00): On the ground principal, Dokdo is currently effectively controlled by the Korean government. The Japanese cannot go to Dokdo.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:06:37+00:00): Since the current physical situation must be indicated, information must be indicated based on the criteria of the effective control of any dispute. # Netizens from all over the world oppose it with patriotism and national sentiment, but the Open Street Map only marks it as the territory of the country if the occupation exists and the residents of the occupied area acknowledge it.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:07:30+00:00): The 2013 OSMF position paper, Information for officials and diplomats of countries and entities with disputed territories, does not truly establish any new rules for mappers, but simply refers to the on the ground principle.

Currently, we record one set that, in OpenStreetMap contributor opinion, is most widely internationally recognised and best meets realities on the ground, generally meaning physical control. In areas without clearly defined borders, the line is approximate. Our database structure enables map makers to easily ignore this set and substitute another more appropriate to your needs.
— OSMF, 2013
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:09:12+00:00): This is a regional notice announcing the incorporation of Dokdo into Japanese territory.

Japan had been at war with Russia over its interests in Manchuria and the Korean peninsula since 1904, and needed the island to meet its military needs in the face of possible maritime clashes with Russia in the East Sea. Japan thus attempted to incorporate Dokdo in 1905 through this notice, claiming that the island was terra nullius.

However, Shimane Prefecture Public Notice No. 40 was issued as part of Japan’s gradual aggression against Korea’s sovereign rights. Because the issuance of the regional notice was an illegal act that infringed on Korea’s territorial sovereignty over Dokdo, which Korea had firmly established historically, the notice had no legal force under international law.
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:09:31+00:00): https://www.kr.emb-japan.go.jp/territory/takeshima/index.html
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:19:31+00:00): In the drafting process of the San Francisco Treaty, Korea requested the U.S., which had drafted the treaty, to include Takeshima in the area to be abandoned by Japan. However, the U.S. explicitly rejected Korea's request, stating that Takeshima was not to be treated as part of Chosun but as Japanese territory. This is made clear by diplomatic documents released by the U.S. government.
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:23:25+00:00): From 1954 to the present, we have suggested three times that the matter be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ), but the Korean side has refused on all occasions. It is extremely regrettable that Korea, which plays an important role in various international fora, is turning its back on solutions based on international law.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:37:36+00:00): January 29, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers Index Number (SCAPIN) 677

This is a memorandum which mandated the governmental and administrative separation of Dokdo from Japan after the end of World War II.

The Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers mandated that “…Japan is defined to include … excluding (a) Utsuryo (Ullung) Island, Liancourt Rocks (Take Island) [Dokdo] and Quelpart (Saishu or Cheju) Island …”

June 22, Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers Index Number (SCAPIN) 1033

This is a memorandum following SCAPIN 677, mandating the prohibition of Japanese vessels or personnel from coming within 12 nautical miles from Dokdo.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 08:37:50+00:00): Conclusion of the Treaty of Peace with Japan

The Treaty of Peace with Japan is a treaty which the Allied Powers concluded with Japan at the close of World War II.

Article 2(a) provides that “Japan recognizing the independence of Korea, renounces all right title and claim to Korea, including the islands of Quelpart, Port Hamilton and Dagelet.”

Among Korea’s approximately 3,000 islands, these three islands have been referred to as examples, and therefore, the mere fact that Dokdo is not named explicitly in the said article, does not suggest that Dokdo is not included among those territories of Korea that have been separated from Japan.
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:41:46+00:00): The absence of Takeshima in the said treaty is proof that Japan has not renounced it. It is a dangerous idea to interpret something that is not mentioned in the treaty without permission.
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:48:25+00:00): The Korean side claims that the Allied Powers did not recognize Takeshima as Japan's territory with the above-mentioned SCAPIN as one of the grounds for Korea's territorial claims to Takeshima. However, it is clearly stated in both SCAPINs that the SCAPINs should not be interpreted as indicating the policy of the Allied Powers regarding the final determination of territorial ownership, and such a point of view is not true at all.
protectrule (2022-04-05 08:49:39+00:00): The San Francisco Peace Treaty, which came into effect afterwards, established the territory of Japan. It is clear from this that the issue of ownership of Takeshima is not affected by the treatment of Takeshima prior to the entry into force of the said Treaty.
user_5239402 (2022-04-05 10:16:24+00:00): SCAPIN
The definition of Japan contained in this directive shall also apply to all future directives, memoranda and orders from this Headquarters unless otherwise specified therein.
AG 091 (29 Jan 46)GS
SCAPIN 677/1
MEMORANDUM FOR : JAPANESE GOVERNMENT
SUBJECT : Governmental and Administrative Separation of Certain Outlying Areas from Japan

1. Reference:
- a. Memorandum for the Japanese Government, AG 091(29 Jan 46)GS(SCAPIN 677), 29 January 1946, subject, "Governmental and Administraive Separation of Certain Outlying Areas from Japan".
- b. Memorandum for the Japanese Government, AG 091(26 Mar 46)GS(SCAPIN 841), 26 March 1946, subject, "Governmental and Administraive Separation of Certain Outlying Areas from Japan".

2. Paragraph 3 of reference a, as amended by reference b, is further amended so that the Ryukyu (Nansei) Islands north of 29° north latitude are included within the area defined as Japan for the purpose of that directive.
3. The Japanese Government is directed to resume governmental and administrative jurisdiction over these islands, subject to the authority of the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers.
protectrule (2022-04-05 10:18:05+00:00): Do not present it as a credible source with only a convenient interpretation.
protectrule (2022-04-05 11:13:14+00:00): The "MacArthur Line" was abolished on April 25, 1952, and three days later, on April 28, 1952, the Peace Treaty came into effect, which inevitably made the order to suspend administrative authority and other measures ineffective.
The Korean side claims that the Allied Powers did not recognize Takeshima as Japan's territory based on the above-mentioned SCAPIN, and this is one of the grounds for Korea's territorial rights over Takeshima. However, it is clearly stated in both SCAPINs that the SCAPINs should not be interpreted as indicating the policy of the Allied Powers regarding the final determination of territorial ownership, and such a point of view is not true at all.
hanchao (2022-04-06 02:54:38+00:00): 不用添加不存在的数据，已回退
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119365514
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-05-20 21:07:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 121260282 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, reverting some implausible mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5998 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6004 .
woodpeck_repair (2022-05-12 18:13:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120901144 where the changeset comment is: revert PeckerHead vandalism (DWG Ticket#2022050610000189)
Frans S (2022-04-19 13:00:23+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
F: buildings partially hidden under trees not drawn correctly.


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


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119306772
gscholz (2022-04-08 04:18:37+00:00): Hi DianaRamirez015,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-57.51795&lat=-25.29484&zoom=15&overlays=self_intersection_ways,self_intersection_points,single_node_in_way,duplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=119306780

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2022-04-11 04:12:18+00:00): Hi DianaRamirez015, 
your errors still exit, can I get your feedback here?
Guido
os-emmer (2023-06-18 15:42:45+00:00): Hi Kovoschiz,
you mapped a road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116287469) with turning_loop=yes and usage=link.

I have seen you use the turning_circle/turning_loop tags wrong several times in the area of Hong Kong. Please have a look in the wiki for how to use these tags:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_circle
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dturning_loop

Based on the satelite-image I can't tell if this place needs a node with highway=turning_circle or if there are realy two seperate roads. In any case the turning_loop=yes needs to be removed. Can you help me with finding out the exact situation here?

And beside this, I am not realy shure about the "usage" tag. What do you want to say with usage=link? I can't find a use for usage=* in the wiki for roads at all. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:usage
Kovoschiz (2023-06-18 17:33:24+00:00): @os-emmer Please take a closer look as wiki only stipulates its usage with `highway=turning_loop`. There is nothing wrong about using it when it is separately drawn. 
I feel `usage=` is a better solution for `=unclassified` and `=residential` not having a `=*_link`. It may also be used for frontage roads and other types of roadways.
Patr1k_P (2022-04-06 13:19:48+00:00): tu si spravil duplikaciu a aj tu

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9639820242
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-05-14 13:07:24+00:00): Please don't map extra ways for turns
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-03 04:36:02+00:00): I know this was a while ago, but please do not name buildings with descriptive tags, such as "abandoned" or "destroyed" when that is not their official name, just a description which can best be placed in a tag field.
DUGA (2024-11-10 06:05:26+00:00): Your living street tag has been reverted.

This tag is not often used in the USA and this place does not meet the standard. Baltimore has lots of neighborhoods with speed limit set to 25mph. Nothing special here.
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2022-04-04 16:26:34+00:00): Je viens de faire la vérification : ça m’a l’air bon.
mavl (2022-04-05 16:26:47+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок удаляет со здания детского сада тег здания building. Этот тег не нужно удалять со зданий.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26725498/history  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:building  
  
Также этот пакет правок добавляет на это здание теги детского сада. Так не нужно делать, потому что детский сад уже обозначен.  
  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/875113266  
  
Этот пакет правок частично отменён.
jcr83 (2022-04-04 16:14:21+00:00): Tour du Gère
abakus_uploader (2022-04-04 22:30:53+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
Ti_Ru (2022-04-07 06:33:38+00:00): Why have you removed one way traffic tags in Madurai Roads, esp. Race Course Road and Goripalayam area? You have any new local knowledge?
kubahahaha (2022-04-06 22:53:03+00:00): Hej, możesz podlinkować skąd się wzięła wasz inicjatywa? Kilku nowych użytkowników zauważyłem
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 16:04:42+00:00): Please do reply to the questions that other mappers have asked about the sources of your data.
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 18:34:48+00:00): Mexx closed down long ago, now Dollarama
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 18:50:07+00:00): What is your source for this - local survey, something else?
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 18:55:20+00:00): Dollarama says so themselves
dollarama.com/en-CA/locations/mb/winnipeg-1589-kenaston-blvd/
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-04 18:56:38+00:00): It is sourced from local knowledge and  mexx filed for bankruptcy
says here
https://www.cbc.ca/news/business/mexx-canada-to-liquidate-stores-before-closing-by-end-of-february-1.2900539
SomeoneElse (2022-04-04 19:10:21+00:00): When you say "local knowledge" do you mean that you have personally visited the shop?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-04 23:09:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 119319346 where the changeset comment is: Following numerous complaints to the DWG, reverting some data believed not to be licence-compatible.  Meaningful communication with the mapper failed.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5881 and previous blocks.
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-07 22:09:26+00:00): yes
PopeyePopcord (2022-04-07 22:10:21+00:00): response to someoneelse's comment
When you say "local knowledge" do you mean that you have personally 
visited the shop?

yes
SomeoneElse (2022-04-07 22:10:50+00:00): Thanks!
Geaquinto (2022-04-26 00:45:17+00:00): The relation is still broken. Now, the national park is triplicated and the German name is being prioritised instead of the local name (Brazilian Portuguese).
Unpocoloco (2022-04-27 08:20:52+00:00): I corrected the name issue. Don´t understand about the triplicate. Can you pleas explain to me or fix it yourself?
Frans S (2022-04-07 10:30:58+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Your mappings are not always accurate mapped and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention on these points:
A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extentions).
C: multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
D: nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.
E: Rectangular Buildings not always squared. They are mostly strickt rectangular.


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


Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/119308537
user_5359 (2022-04-06 05:36:58+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You forgot to mark a street with the key highway. You use only name and surface.
iriman (2022-04-09 22:47:27+00:00): سلام دوست عزیز. به اوپن‌استریت‌مپ خوش آمدید. :)
برای اصلاح نام خیابان‌های موجود نیازی نیست دوباره خیابان را رسم کنید. 
بعضی خیابان‌ها یک‌تکه هستند اما قسمت‌های مختلف نام خودش را دارد (مثل اینجا). در این صورت با ابزار قیچی خیابان را از نقاط مورد نظر قیچی می‌کنیم و سپس برای هر تکه از خیابان، نام را تغییر می‌دهیم و دیگر نیازی به رسم مجدد نیست.
مثلا اینجا چهار بار خیابان هامون هجده را روی هم رسم کردید که کاملا اشتباه است.
(مشکل اینجا را بنده برطرف کردم.)
موفق باشید
literan (2022-04-04 17:01:36+00:00): на русском языке у нас тегов нет, так что такие теги я удалил. Попробуйте еще раз, как положено, на английском
wireguy (2022-04-05 10:55:59+00:00): Hi Sam, welcome to OSM.  I've replaced the incorrect info you added, and added some real/actual buildings to the area.   If you have any q's, just ask.   Continue mapping the area.
DaveF (2022-04-05 09:58:00+00:00): Hi
You've double up on 'railway=station'
All railway stations are mapped as nodes. One per station.
Any buildings are tagged as building=train_station.
Nice but Tim (2022-04-06 09:58:41+00:00): Hi DaveF, thanks for spotting and correcting this.  Tim.
user_5359 (2022-04-05 06:40:34+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have revert your SEO SPAM (mostly no standard keys, no verifiable data, not positive verifiable address data, destroying data). If this is an error, you can report it here, then we will be happy to help restore the data. For the most information in the description we have own keys. Please have look on the website http://wiki.openstreetmap.org.
ToniE (2022-05-23 09:26:13+00:00): Hi TravelerHiker,

'oneway' auf dem Bahnhofplatz - egal in welche Richtung?

Irgendwie komisch, oder? Wie komme ich dort hin, wie komme ich dort wieder weg - als Autofahrer?

Wie kommen die Behwohler von Haus '1' dorthin/weg?

Gruß
Toni
ToniE (2022-05-23 09:26:38+00:00): Behwohler -> Bewohner
gurglypipe (2022-04-04 19:12:06+00:00): Heya. If you can (if you’ve surveyed the data), it’s probably better to tag these with the power output of the station or individual sockets: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station#Power_output

That avoids using the name= tag as a description, and means the power data is machine readable for if someone wanted to render high-power charging stations differently in a map or something like that.
Welshie (2022-04-04 19:18:26+00:00): It's a new feature that a collection of charge points from the same provider has two different installations with different features at different locations on the same site. The pricing is different for the different facilities, so there needs to be some sort of obvious differentiation here. Yes. They probably should have more tags, which I'll get around to doing once I've further researched.
gurglypipe (2022-04-04 19:20:15+00:00): 👍 thanks for your work on this!
Emmanuel Arrechea (2023-11-23 16:30:48+00:00): Bonjour,
Une amie a rencontré des difficultés pour trouver sa location avec l'adresse Route du Bord de l'Adour. Il semble que la bonne adresse soit Route des Berges. Vous qui avez mis le vocable en occitan, en savez-vous plus ?
Duja (2022-04-05 09:24:53+00:00): Hvala, živ bio. Gledam u to čudovište već mesec dana i sve se nadam neko će ga drugi opraviti. :)
DUGA (2022-08-27 14:21:47+00:00): OSM has a limit of each segment not exceeding 2000 nodes.

You do not need to use 1200 nodes for this creek which can be done in less than 200. Water features change all the time, these redundant nodes will be removed eventually by future mappers.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/970223550#map=13/42.0239/-75.7178
DUGA (2022-08-27 14:22:24+00:00): Ignore this comment, sent to the wrong person.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-04-25 15:00:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120169497 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for deleting and editing buildings without prior contact with the original mappers
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:09+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
kartler175 (2022-04-05 08:59:10+00:00): Bitte überprüfe deine Änderungen:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=10.95323&lat=47.14774&zoom=12&opacity=0.95
Mtngy (2022-04-05 13:30:59+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Habe versucht auszubessern was mir mit Id und Osm-können möglich ist.
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:18+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
ligfietser (2022-04-20 15:43:33+00:00): Jammer dat je de verouderde luchtfoto's hebt overgetrokken, de situatie is inmiddels gewijzigd en stond goed ingetekend op OSM!
Gebruik aub de meest recente, zie satellietdataportaal.nl (van maart 2022)
Jonathon Of The Creators of all creators! (2022-11-30 02:42:25+00:00): ok i am extremely sorry for deleting this joes level of buildings i am sorry pls forgive 😭😭😭😭
kubahahaha (2022-04-06 22:51:41+00:00): Dzięki za dodanie tych ścieżek!
demon_box (2022-04-04 19:34:13+00:00): ciao Ennio, ma il nome corretto è "Baorsi" o "Baorsì" (con l'accento)?
grazie
eggie (2022-04-04 18:32:14+00:00): Dag Carla...  access=no betekent Verboden Toegang.
Hier mag dus niemand overheen.
Dat zal haast niet. 
Er staat een conditionaltag op dat je als voetganger maar van één kant  mag komen. Die hebt je laten staan.
Ik zal wat aanpassen.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=119305113
MVG
eggie
Carla van den Ouweland (2022-04-04 18:44:21+00:00): Dag Eggie,
Bedankt voor je reactie en aanpassing.
Groet, Carla
eggie (2022-04-04 18:44:40+00:00): access=no verwijderd.. vehicle=no toegevoegd.
conditionaltagging verwijderd.
gr eggie
eggie (2022-04-04 18:53:46+00:00): Het zal over een dag of twee wel gaan routeren in de diverse routers. De routing-engine loopt altijd wat achter.
Carla van den Ouweland (2022-04-04 19:05:08+00:00): Beste Eggie,
Over een paar dagen is geen probleem. Nogmaals bedankt.
Groet, Carla