piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Timob81 (2022-06-30 18:47:26+00:00): Hi mani100,
Danke für deine beiden Infos. Aufgrund deines alten Kommentares hab ich grad die Wege stichprobenartig geprüft, scheint ja nun zu passen. warst du das dann? Was weißt du über das neue Konzept?
mani100 (2022-06-30 21:12:47+00:00): nichts Genaueres, soll im Juli 22 kommen - weiteres per PN
letihu (2021-04-07 19:52:35+00:00): Hier
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/915982777/history
fehlen noch tags
eggie (2021-03-11 20:05:58+00:00): Die doorsteekje geschikt ook voor fietsers kun je beter als highway=path surface= paved? taggen
Je hebt het nu op slot gezet met een bord verboden toegang.. (  access=no)  Dat beter verwijderen.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-03-12 07:32:06+00:00): aangepast .. access=no verwijderd
eggie (2021-03-11 20:07:14+00:00): Dag Geert... Wanneer de overgang gesloten is kan die inderdaad van de kaart.
MVG
eggie
Cleveland steamer (2022-01-10 17:34:21+00:00): not a building
Shaun das Schaf (2021-03-12 10:23:19+00:00): Hi klappradla,

are you sure the way you mapped is tracktype=grade5?
You say its a new and well maintained gravel road so it should propably be tracktype=grade2.

And if it really is tracktype=grade2, are you sure that the road is also mtb:scale=1? Most gravel roads are also passable without problems with a city bike. In this case I would remove the key mtb:scale completely.

Please change it if necessary.

Best regards,
Shaun das Schaf
klappradla (2021-03-12 11:51:49+00:00): Hey Shaun,

thanks for the feedback!

The road I extended was tagged as tracktype=grade5, so I thought it's best to just keep that. But you're absolutely right, from my experience it should be tracktype=grade3. I'd opt for grade3 as it's mostly a double track with eventually some grass in the middle. For tracktype=grade2 I'd expect the middle to be "free of plants". Please correct me if that's wrong.

For your suggestion on the MTB scale: I did some more research and again agree: it's "easier" than a 1. I'll remove it.

Thanks a ton!
Max
Cristoffs (2021-03-12 00:50:32+00:00): To narysuj drogę, a nie oznaczaj jej w ten sposób.
user_2066394 (2021-03-12 00:46:14+00:00): Sind da tatsächlich zwei Dunkin'-Donuts-Filialen am Ostbahnhof?
map per (2021-03-12 18:02:08+00:00): Ich hab nur die Note (https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2571776) umgesetzt. Frag am besten noch mal UWaMa
user_2066394 (2021-03-11 21:52:07+00:00): Was wurde verbessert?
Patchi (2021-03-12 21:13:27+00:00): Siehe WiKi bzgl. Abbiegebeschränkungen https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Relation:restriction 
Es sind ausschließlich Abbiegebeschränkungen zu erfassen, die sich aufgrund der lokalen Beschilderung oder aus Straßenmarkierungen ergeben! Es ist nicht Aufgabe eines Mappers, zu entscheiden, ob ein Fahrzeug in der Lage ist, an einer Kreuzung/Abzweigung tatsächlich abzubiegen oder nicht.
pitscheplatsch (2021-03-12 06:45:54+00:00): Hi Open Space Rangers, welcome to OSM.

May we know the reason behind deleting several mapped paths? Thanks.

Full changeset information: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=100863817#13/32.9348/-117.1724

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
Open Space Rangers (2021-03-12 22:58:28+00:00): Hi,
I am one of the park rangers that manages Los Penasquitos Canyon Preserve and adjacent preserves and open spaces for the CIty of San Diego. We have been trying to get a handle on illegal trail creation and use. It's been an age-long problem, but usership increased dramatically with COVID restrictions, and we've been noticing growing detriment to our habitats due to illegal trail use.

The trails I deleted are not legal trails. The ones that I left are official, approved trails, though I edited some for greater accuracy. We were directed to make edits to OpenStreetMap after a representative from AllTrails, whom we'd contacted to see if they would stop publicizing illegal trails, informed us of its existence.

Our thinking is that if these unauthorized trails are not shown as routable trail options, or even dotted lines on their maps, people, especially first time area users, will be less likely to travel the unauthorized trails and thereby continue the cycle of damage. Our preserves allow recreational use, but are foremost ecological preserves.

M. Fontana, Park Ranger
pitscheplatsch (2021-03-13 16:13:18+00:00): Hello, thank you for your answer.

IMHO you should correct the existing tags or add further tags for routing and access restrictions. You can find them here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions

You can find some useful information about the topic of "Illegal trails" in OpenStreetMap here: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/77055/illegal-trails

Finally, can you please revert your map changes? Thanks.
Open Space Rangers (2021-04-08 17:35:47+00:00): Hi @pitscheplatsch,
I read the information you posted, and conferred with my supervisor. We don't really agree with leaving illegal trails on the map, in our experience if people see them even as dotted lines in the background, it validates them in their minds without them looking at the details. That being said, we don't want to cause any problems. I'm trying to find how to undo the changeset, but I don't see it anywhere. I apologize, this arena isn't my strong suit. I also made a lot of changes to legal trails to simply make them more accurate. Will all of that have to be redone?

M. Fontana
lonnez (2022-08-01 16:25:02+00:00): Hey. I see this is a pretty old thread, but just wanted to give a +1 on leaving any visible trails, even if people are not allowed on them, then giving them access=no. You might find it an uphill battle repeatedly deleting these trails, since people will come along, see the trail is unmapped, and map it, with no knowledge they were previously removed.
!bm (2021-03-11 22:53:03+00:00): Hallo E_ka,

was hat dir OsmAnd hier angezeigt? Einen Baum oder etwas anderes? 

Der Grund, weshalb ich nachfrage: Du hast hier und in drei weiteren Cs (100863951,100863934,100863919,100863899) Knoten gelöscht, die erst wenige Tagen davor mit removed:natural=tree getaggt wurden. Der Mapper hat sich offensichtlich etwas dabei gedacht, sonst hätte er die Bäume wohl selbst gelöscht. Daher habe ich es in [1] wiederhergestellt. 

Nutzt du OsmAnd live und hattest du die OSM-Daten damit vor deinen Änderungen aktualisiert? (Oder war  vielleicht war noch eine alte Version der Knoten vorhanden? Evt handelt es sich auch nur um einen Bug in OSMand 3.9.10.) 

Bitte um kurze Rückmeldung!

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/100867353

--besteGrüße!bm
E_ka (2021-03-14 20:46:31+00:00): Hey !lbm,

danke für den Hinweis, ich bin gar nicht auf die Idee gekommen, dass es einen Tag wie "removed" gibt und deswegen von ausgegangen, dass die Bäume alle noch fälschlich angezeigt wurden. In der Tat ist in OsmAnd "removed" hinterlegt, der POI wurde mir dort als Baum angezeigt.

Also die "removed trees" gerne wieder herstellen.

Gibt es denn eine Richtlinie, wann "removed" hinterlegt wird und wann gelöscht?  

Viele Grüße!
!bm (2021-03-14 21:11:41+00:00): Hallo E_ka,

ja, wie schon erwähnt, wiederhergestellt in [1] (s.o.).

Das mit OsmAnd ist mir ein Rätsel – die Version scheint sehr neu zu sein und wird mir in F-Droid (immer etwas hinten nach) noch nicht angeboten. (Das Verhalten konnte ich mit einer früheren nicht reproduzieren.)

Ganz allgemein: Statt Löschen (eines leerstehenden Geschäftslokals u.a. POI, Gebäuden etc) ist es in den allermeisten Fällen besser, ein passendes Lifecycle-Prefix[2] zu nutzen.

Der Grund ist ganz einfach, dass die Chronik erhalten werden soll.[3][4]

Eine Richtlinie zur Verwendung gibt es nicht – bei Gebäuden oder anderen Geometrien, die auf Luftbildern (noch) ersichtlich sind, kann es zB nachkommende Mapper davon abhalten, hier bereits Entferntes irrenderweise neu einzuzeichnen. 

Im konkreten Fall sind die Bäume weg, aber die Baumscheiben noch da. Dh, es könnten hier wieder welche gesetzt werden und durch das Tagging gehen uns diese potenziellen Standorte nicht verloren. Außerdem lässt sich so feststellen, dass hier wirklich keine Bäume sind – und nicht bloß keine eingetragen. 

Tagging, wenn von einem Baum (anders als hier) nur noch der Baumstumpf übrig ist: natural=tree_stump.

[2] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix 
[3] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Erhalte_die_Chronik
[4] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

--besteGrüße!bm
E_ka (2021-03-14 21:33:05+00:00): Alles klar, danke! Und ja, dann muss das ein Bug sein, hatte die Karte topneu gerade heruntergeladen, Android 10 mit  OsmAnd 3.9.10
CoyKoi (2021-03-11 21:11:06+00:00): #arthurgreylowtrafficarea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100863998
maraf24 (2021-03-11 22:57:36+00:00): shop=curtain
jumbanho (2021-03-12 17:09:12+00:00): Thanks for mapping and your help in conflict resolution!
jumbanho (2021-03-12 17:09:38+00:00): Thanks for your help in conflict resolution and mapping!
jmoran314 (2021-03-12 23:17:46+00:00): Thanks for this.  Be warned though, you're taking on a lot trying to map our trees. :-)  The HOA did a partial survey and burned out after the first ~300 trees, maybe 20% of the total.  All of Woodcroft is heavily wooded.
jmoran314 (2021-03-12 23:36:00+00:00): Just a few more notes.  As Frederik suggested, the additional parking helps dispel the impression that HP3 104-106 parking was special or unique somehow.  Thanks for adding that.  And Frederik was correct, I overstated the HOA's legal position.  The additions pretty much resolve the matter as far as the HOA is concerned.
jmoran314 (2021-03-15 14:06:55+00:00): The walkways here show on the Transit Map layer, same as the Woodcroft Trail and American Tobacco Trail.  Is this necessary?  The Woodcroft Trail is public and maintained by the WCA.  The ATT is public and maintained by the City of Durham.  Google Maps show both of them. But our walkways are private, maintained by us, and not shown by Google.  So it seems weird to have them appear on the Transit Map same as the two public trails.
jc86035 (2021-03-23 14:29:06+00:00): Hi, this changeset caused several issues with rendering and metadata (you removed the information that indicates that the northbound railway track is on a bridge). Please be more careful with your edits and don't ignore the warnings in iD.
मानचित्रकार (2021-03-12 15:12:55+00:00): Hello, could you please tell what exactly you have changed and why?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/100865853
VLD161 (2021-03-12 17:16:44+00:00): Hi मानचित्रकार,

The two polygons making up this relation were previously overlapping each other slightly causing the feature to not render properly. 

This edit just fixed the overlap which resolved the rendering issue.
मानचित्रकार (2021-03-13 00:19:36+00:00): I see!
धन्यवाद! :)
lostmike (2021-03-18 12:45:38+00:00): Nice one.

"Suspect that one-way road out to Northfield Road is obsolete" It's wide enough for a wheel chair I'd say. It was narrowed a year to two back.  I have to go there today, then I'll edit it.
Tómas Ingi (2021-03-11 22:16:52+00:00): Hi,

I'm wondering why you changed Iceland from a 'country' to a 'city'?

Best regards,
Tómas Ingi
flother (2021-03-12 10:55:33+00:00): And lots of others, which I reverted en masse: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/100901895
skorpion62 (2021-05-18 07:12:52+00:00): Hallo Fippe

Du hast vor einiger Zeit im Bereich Quakenbrück Grenzen eingetragen.

An diesen beiden Grenzverläufen zeigt das Programm Osmose 
diesen Fehler an: boundary=administrative ohne admin_level 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916022089

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916023967

Da ich keine Ahnung von Grenzen habe, bitte ich Dich diese Fehler zu korrigieren.
Vielen Dank.

Viele Grüße skorpion62
aharvey (2025-01-01 08:52:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/916024901/history is now paved
andrewwiseman (2021-05-18 00:08:15+00:00): I noticed on this changeset (https://osmcha.org/changesets/100866985/) and others such as https://osmcha.org/changesets/100864024/ and https://osmcha.org/changesets/103511884/ that the policy you are following is creating inconsistent classifications and some abrupt changes along motorway and trunk routes. A Mexico OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:México/Etiquetado_de_v%C3%ADas#Clasificaci.C3.B3n) discusses the use of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motorroad for examples where trunk might be a better classification to use, plus adding the tag motorroad=yes. I think this might help make a more consistent network, especially in junctions like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1930164930 that do not normally occur on motorways. What do you think?

Noté en este conjunto de cambios (https://osmcha.org/changesets/100866985/) y otros como https://osmcha.org/changesets/100864024/ y https://osmcha.org/changesets/103511884/ que el La política que está siguiendo es la creación de clasificaciones inconsistentes y algunos cambios abruptos a lo largo de las rutas de autopistas y troncales. Una wiki de OSM de México (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:México/Etiquetado_de_v%C3%ADas#Clasificaci.C3.B3n) analiza el uso de https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key : motorroad para ver ejemplos en los que troncal podría ser una mejor clasificación para usar, además de agregar la etiqueta motorroad = yes. Creo que esto podría ayudar a crear una red más consistente, especialmente en cruces como https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1930164930 que normalmente no ocurren en las autopistas. ¿Qué piensas?
user_5359 (2021-03-12 05:52:13+00:00): Welocme to OSM! Please have a look on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/COVID-19_-_How_to_Map
jleedev (2021-03-22 18:42:43+00:00): > Does `amenity=bus_station` imply that this is a bus terminal?

The wiki says "A bus station consists of several bus stops, usually allowing people to travel in many different directions."

This is true of all the East Busway stops in a very narrow sense: Each stop consists of two stops about 200 feet apart; the routes which pick up and drop off along the busway use a different stop than the ones which are pick-up/discharge only.

This is also true of East Liberty Station in a different sense, as one may connect to the 75 on Ellsworth Avenue just in front of the busway station.

Similar to how "Dormont Junction" is technically a "Junction" because it contains a bus loop, even though the Red Line does not terminate or transfer to any other light rail there.

Not sure if this helps; my instinct would be to label this as "A big fancy bus stop", whatever that means, since it's ultimately just another stop along a linear corridor, albeit a high volume one.
jleedev (2021-03-22 18:48:40+00:00): It also may constitute tagging for the renderer, but I would find it perfectly reasonable to give the Busway stops more prominence than bus stops on surface streets. There's some value in distinguishing these from regular bus stops.
colgza (2021-03-23 15:45:28+00:00): BRT systems in general seem to do a great job at raising edge cases for OpenStreetMap. I was going to try to write a proposal for `station=busway`, but I ultimately gave up on that idea when I could not come up with a distinctive way to differentiate between a busway station, and a big fancy bus stop.
colgza (2021-03-23 15:49:45+00:00): Luckily for me, `public_transport=station` exists, and is general enough to include busway stations.

However, iD automatically wants to add `amenity=bus_station` whenever I already have `public_transport=station`+`bus=yes`, so I don't completely know how to handle it.
flother (2021-03-12 10:50:23+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

I've reverted your changesets that removed place=country and place=city from various countries and cities around the world, since the original tags contain useful information.

If you need any help with further edits, please don't hestiate to ask.
Note_Fixer (2021-03-11 23:00:10+00:00): Note 1355148
Note_Fixer (2021-03-11 23:13:37+00:00): Note 2328972
PT-53 (2021-03-13 09:02:01+00:00): Hallo ChrisFromRV,
mit der Merkmalkombination
highway=construction
construction=pedestrian
ist die Fußgängerzone bereits vollständig und ausreichend gesperrt. Ein
access=no
ist da unnötig und redudant.
Grüße
VA00 (2021-03-12 10:33:13+00:00): To który most wyburzyli?
olo81 (2021-03-12 13:47:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=50.21316&mlon=19.17051#map=17/50.21316/19.17051
user_5359 (2021-03-12 05:50:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice: the minimum keys for an address is addr:street and addr:housenumber! Can you add the value for the house number, please?
eggie (2021-03-12 07:27:08+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht. 

feedback.. Probeer svp het gebied van je edits iets kleiner te houden.

MVG, 

Eggie 
namens de OSM Community
canfe (2021-03-12 05:13:55+00:00): Il tag industrial=cooling quasi non esiste e non è documentato.
Vedere se si possono applicare queste linee guida:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tower:type%3Dcooling

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcooling_tower

Si raccomanda di non inventare ex novo nuovi tag anche se "suonano bene".
APneunzehn74 (2022-01-07 13:32:51+00:00): Hallo, hab gerade zufällig entdeckt. Der Ort Kellburg ist unter zwei mal eingetragen. Einmal als Dorf und einmal als Weiler. Denke das ist ein versehen, welcher kann ggf weg?
Grüße Andreas
gsperb (2022-01-09 08:50:14+00:00): Keine Ahnung weshalb da zwei Ortsbezeichnungen exakt übereinander waren
keithonearth (2021-03-12 17:17:22+00:00): Thanks for the work on sidewalks! Looks good. I was wondering if you have looked at the Esri imagery? It seems quite a bit better than the Bing Imagery you've been using. You can find it in the background settings in iD.
seattlefyi (2021-03-12 05:32:22+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edit! Really useful! Just so you know, I just expanded the "NE" on the name you added since writing all of those out is the norm (easier to contract than expand automatically). Thanks again, hope to see more edits!
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:02:22+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:02:45+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:22:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
user_5359 (2021-03-12 05:48:47+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/48503591/history. You change the way from highway=secondary to railway=rail. What is the reason for this chnage?
kartonage (2021-05-26 07:21:00+00:00): I have restored the previous versions from this changeset and the next one (#100871064). I suppose the first steps were somewhat precariously but advise to be more careful in the future. The changesets after seem correct.
Supaplex (2021-04-17 09:03:09+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features
給Pokemon Go玩家的建議：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
組織性編輯指南：https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 https://osm.tw/
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/openstreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Telegram OpenStreetMap Taiwan https://t.me/joinchat/Aqu2IgnTuIidMfREdNmomQ
Telegram OpenStreetMap Asia https://t.me/OpenStreetMapAsia
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:23:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-15 01:54:47+00:00): Please don't add golf tags to ways where they don't apply for any reason.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Problematic_mapping/golf
pitscheplatsch (2021-03-12 06:43:00+00:00): Hi Jrinman, welcome to OSM.

May we know the reason behind deleting existing ways, which are visible in the satellite imagery? Thanks.

Full changeset information: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=100871356#12/34.7355/-87.5224

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
Jrinman (2021-03-12 15:16:44+00:00): Hi. There were a number of ways that needed to be modified or removed in this area for one of the following reasons:
1) Dirt trails that are not usable for typical vehicular use. (Useful for farming equipment or recreational vehicles, perhaps.)
2) Some of the ways were drive ways (sometimes long drive ways) leading to someone's home.
3) The roads either did not loop back to main roads, or in some cases did not exist at all.
pitscheplatsch (2021-03-13 16:03:27+00:00): Thanks for your answer.

IMHO you should only delete none existing ways. All other mentioned ways need some more tagging, e.g. access=no if it's a private way. For dirt ways you should e.g. use the tracktype key. Can you please revert your map edits?
Jrinman (2021-03-13 20:27:29+00:00): I'm presuming you are a moderator for this. FYI: I do not know how to undo changes. I am still very new to this.
mariotomo (2021-03-12 20:15:24+00:00): hola.  pregunta: la ley 53 describe el límite administrativo como "Desde el entronque de la Carretera Interamericana con la carretera que va de Los Cerros a la población de Atalaya, se continua en línea recta con dirección Noroeste hasta la cima del cerro Atalaya".
porqué dibujaste esta línea con 17 puntos intermedios?
tastrax (2021-03-16 06:52:15+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format +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
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-11-05 14:22:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 113411678 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some personal markers in the Philippines.  An attempt to contact the mapper failed.