piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
WAM_SNZ144_ZCH (2022-02-27 21:55:56+00:00): Wie würde ich denn das Perron mit dem Wegnetz verbinden damit es Sinn macht ? Per Relation oder mit einer Linienverbindung ?
datendelphin (2022-02-28 06:44:45+00:00): Mit einer Linie (Wegstück).
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-23 18:17:09+00:00): To remove a road you should delete. Not just add an access tag
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117658932
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:39:19+00:00): Here, you moved some businesses outside of the building they're in, and added yet another "Fade Faktory" location. Reverting.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659164
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:43:21+00:00): Hi,

It looks like you moved an address node from a house to the middle of the woods, and moved the fountain to somewhere it's not. Reverting.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659174
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:26:41+00:00): You've created a building inside of another building. Please don't do that. Since this is also a duplicate (you created another one of it in your next changeset), I will remove both, and then you can add it back in the correct location.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659206
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:22:31+00:00): Please specify a source for your additions.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659570
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:25:45+00:00): It looks like you added a duplicate of the same place across the street. That is, unless there are two of these places within such a close distance, but this seems improbable. Please let me know where this place is.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659570
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:20:11+00:00): Hi,

It looks like another user has corrected this mistake, but you used the wrong tag here. The "recreation ground" tag you used is for open spaces with equipment, not a building.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659579
user_5359 (2022-02-22 07:39:58+00:00): Welcome to OSM! For a better description of the golf course have a look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course, please. Use ref instead of name.

Please look also on http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1033632394. What is the meaning of the tag #7 Womens Tee = #7 Womens Tee?
MxxCon (2022-02-21 03:50:58+00:00): Hello.
Could you please elaborate why did you draw building outline that match any of the available satellite imagery?
Additionally, since you mapped this as a Chase bank, iD editor has a preset for it with a lot of necessary tags automatically filled in.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659784
Enock4seth (2022-02-21 21:05:34+00:00): Hi, 

Thanks for mapping, the `building=*` is to be used for building outlines. This entire area is not a footprint of a building like you changed in Version #3 here https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/496501785

I have modified this now and can be seen in Version #4 of link above.

Happy Mapping!
Enock
MxxCon (2022-02-21 04:00:18+00:00): Hello.
It is inappropriate to use "name" field to describe an object. Please see this article for a more detailed explanation: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659927
Kovoschiz (2022-02-21 09:28:44+00:00): Please check that the existing slip roads will be used. Don't add new ones.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-23 18:10:12+00:00): Welcome to OSM!
Could you provide a source for this building?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660159
MxxCon (2022-02-21 04:06:29+00:00): Hello.
It seems like you move an address node in the middle of a golf course. That is most definitely incorrect. As such this edit will be reverted.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660318
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-19 14:25:33+00:00): Jesteś pewien że https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1033676205/history w budowie jest? Co tu za taki wyrwany kawałek budowy jest?
B_KSL (2022-10-22 07:16:03+00:00): Nie jestem. Nigdy tam nie byłem i tego nie widziałem. Wygląda jakbym ja to wymyślił choć w rzeczywistości - jak w opisie - usunąłem kawałek drogi nałożony na inną. Wygodniej było postawić dwa punkty od nowa (i oznaczyć jak było) niż bawić się w cięcie starej linii. Jako budowę oznaczył to wcześniej kolega lokalson. Trochę dłuższy kawałek ale j.w - na innych drogach. Prawdopodobnie są tu do usunięcia równoległe do chodnika ścieżki, może i ten kawałek w budowie. Nie jestem przekonany że kolega malując to, wiedział co robi.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-22 07:43:05+00:00): może chodziło o to że https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/999959421 jest zablokowana przez plac budowy?
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-10-22 07:43:51+00:00): zamieniłem w https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3408652
B_KSL (2022-10-22 09:59:48+00:00): Pooglądałem to jeszcze raz. Kolega lokalson poprawił już później po mnie fragment tej drogi (od pomnika na zachód) usuwając construction i dokładając dodatkowo nawierzchnię. Na wschód od pomnika zostawił jak było. Więc albo przeoczył albo to dalej w budowie. Usunę jeszcze ścieżkę równoległą do chodnika. To nieprawdopodobne, że są tam obie. Pewnie ktoś kto to wstawił nie chciał rujnować relacji szlaku i domalował drugą.
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:18:09+00:00): Hi,

Welcome to OSM! In the future, please try to use more descriptive changeset comments. For example, "Add Ossining Pizza". Also, please try to include a source in your changeset. If you're a local to the area, you can make the source "local knowledge" to convey that. If you went to the area specifically to collect information to map, you can make your source "survey".

Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660547
ZLima12 (2022-03-25 17:30:43+00:00): Actually, I just noticed that you made the entire place, including the parking lot, a restaurant building. This is not correct. I will remove this way, but leave the node on the building.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660547
Frans S (2022-02-22 10:23:53+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Each building needs to be mapped individually. Not only mapped with a residential landuse tag,
Best regards
jleedev (2022-02-21 11:49:09+00:00): Does the building still exist?
MxxCon (2022-02-21 04:12:06+00:00): Hello.
I do not see this pond on any of the available satellite imagery. As such it will be deleted.

Please note that intentionally mapping non-existing features on the map is considered vandalism.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660808
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-23 18:03:31+00:00): Welcome to OSM!
Please don't add duplicate features
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660859
watmildon (2022-12-11 21:41:59+00:00): Hello! I am doing an import of address data for Indianapolis and noticed that this changeset has several features that I think are incorrectly addressed. In particular, I think the buildings near Medina Drive (bottom middle of the box) appear in the imagery to be duplexes and will need both address nodes. It's a bit tricky as the main clue is the double set of driveways. Anyhow, I'll clean it up as I go through but figured I'd let you know in case you see other instances of it in the future.
svance92 (2022-12-11 23:41:02+00:00): No worries! I see what you are saying with duplex split. Looks like the Eastern-most numbers are what were in the ESRI data. I didn't make any alterations to the buildings from that dataset - unless something was obviously different. You might try using the MapWithAI addresses overlay to more quickly see multi-tenant buildings - https://mapwith.ai/rapid#background=Maxar-Premium&datasets=ee94bff339fe402da93658815ac73497&disable_features=boundaries&map=17.74/39.70547/-86.15705. I was just trying to get the base building geometries in as a starting point.
watmildon (2022-12-12 07:40:30+00:00): Definitely. The first place I checked was  RapiD as this is a pretty common thing. Like I said, no worries at all just wanted to give ya a heads up. I'm actually using the MapWithAI plugin to get the address data into JOSM and should have all this patch up in a couple of weeks. Definitely let me know if you see anything amiss!
watmildon (2022-12-12 07:43:50+00:00): Here's my first evening of work: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/129987947
Lyon-St-Clair (2022-04-03 11:59:33+00:00): If it's you using highway=busway, please, stop it : the road disappear with this and it's problematic. Use highway=service + psv=yes + bus=yes instad. And busway refers to BRT, but Luxembourg doesn't have BRT.
Stereo (2022-05-28 13:53:14+00:00): Sorry I missed your comment. Works for me!
Stereo (2022-05-28 13:53:36+00:00): I mean, tagging as highway=service and psv=yes and bus=yes instead of highway=busway works for me.
Lyon-St-Clair (2022-05-29 17:55:15+00:00): No problem, thanks!
ScantLeopard336 (2022-03-17 08:43:55+00:00): I just noticed the other 2 BU campuses aren't included within the university's boundaries. Would adding them together into a relation mess with the new boundary=census tag? Should the Nature Preserve and Nuthatch Hollow also be added? It might also be worth separating the Innovative Technologies Complex (the part east of Murray Hill Road) from the main campus while we're at it.
ke9tv (2022-03-17 13:20:20+00:00): I can separate the Census-Determined Place into its own relation using the same boundary ways, which would mean that we won't collide if you want to change the definition of what the university includes. I'm in the middle of a few other things at the moment, but I'll do that today.

As far as what it ought to include, I'd recommend asking on the talk-us mailing list, or on Slack (osmus.slack.com) or Discord.  I don't have a strong feeling one way or the other about satellite campuses.  My inclination would be NOT to include the preserves, but simply identify using the `operator=*` tag that they are run by the university.  They appear to be at least as much for resource protection and public recreation as they are for education and research.  (I made the opposite determination for the Pack Demonstration Forest and some of the SUNY-ESF properties, which are primarily there to teach forestry, but it was a close call.) You'll find more diverse - and possibly better informed - opinions in the places I mentioned.  Unlike the `tagging` mailing list, they're pretty friendly.
ke9tv (2022-03-17 13:43:19+00:00): University and CDP are now separate multipolygons, so that satellite campuses, nature reserves and the like can be added to the university without affecting the CDP.  Be careful with shared ways, and ask for help if you need it.
ScantLeopard336 (2022-03-17 20:12:41+00:00): Thanks for the quick response! This wasn't urgent, so you didn't need to prioritize this over your other projects. I just happened to notice the Pharmacy Campus hasn't even been mapped yet.

I'll leave the nature preserves out of it for now to keep things simple. There's maybe an argument to add Nuthatch Hollow in the future though, as it's closed to the public and only used for research. I believe there's plans to one day open it for general recreation, not that those plans are moving very fast though.
ke9tv (2022-03-17 20:35:15+00:00): No trouble at all - spiltting the relations was a two-minute job! I'll let you make the call on local land use - you have boots on the ground and I don't - Binghamton is a bit outside my usual range for mapping the details.
ScantLeopard336 (2022-03-17 23:55:10+00:00): No boots on the ground anymore - I graduated a few years ago, but I still know the area like the back of my hand. I learned OSM by mapping BU, so I like to come back and further improve this area from time to time.
WoodWoseWulf (2022-02-22 23:20:15+00:00): Hi Sam,

You added a park in this changeset. This is a private yard, so that tag isn't accurate. I can't see the pool you were trying to add.

I have removed the park.
mavl (2022-02-24 02:52:23+00:00): Hello. This changeset adds the unreal building. This building was deleted. Please, mark on the map the real objects.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-23 17:48:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You tagged a graveyard as a building which is incorrect.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117661788
DUGA (2022-09-19 16:23:37+00:00): OSM does not allow abbreviation.

Please carefully read our mapping practices before adding further changesets.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_(don't_do_it)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1033696027#map=19/41.64888/-75.46897
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-06-23 00:12:22+00:00): why you deleted this road here? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/375291023
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=117662521
voltairovicz (2022-02-21 17:46:26+00:00): Witaj Piotrze, bardzo się cieszę, że edytujesz, ale mam lekko uwagę i prośbę na przyszłość. Na połdunie od firmy narysowałeś obszar zabudowany (residential) dla jednego z domów. Przykleiłeś ten obszar do dróg obok. Jest to praktyka, której w OSM nie robimy, prawidłowo rysujemy wzdłuż linii ogrodzenia, działki, nie wzdłuż otaczających ulic. Mam nadzieję, że zapamiętasz. Tymczasem życzę dalszego miłego mapowania. Jak coś to służę pomocą i wskazówkami, pozdrawiam
Piotr_PL (2022-02-21 18:00:39+00:00): Ok, dziękuję za wskazówkę. Również pozdrawiam
mavl (2022-05-20 15:33:57+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
mavl (2022-05-20 15:33:49+00:00): This changeset was redacted. Reason: an incompatible source.
VA00 (2022-02-23 13:02:33+00:00): Jezioro do skasowania, niepoprawnie zaznaczone pasy trzcin.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-02-23 18:55:44+00:00): czemu do skasowania? Zasypane zostało?
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-09 00:35:37+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/347339490

Jakie jest źródło tej nazwy?

Pzry okazji, jest https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=857389#p857389 na twój temat
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-03-09 12:10:50+00:00): W szczególności: skąd wiesz że nazwa jest nadal używana?
zluuzki (2022-02-21 12:54:20+00:00): Hello, thanks for your contributions! However, you shouldn't tag every building as "prison". It would be better if you create an area for the entire prison, select "Prison", and add the name/adresss there. Otherwise: If someone queries the database for prisons, it looks like here are twenty prisons (since "amenity=prison" is used so often) - but here are only two. Same goes for the police station.
CraigPrusansky (2022-03-07 07:50:08+00:00): @Hiausirg Thank you for the comment and suggestion.  This was done due to me being new at editing and not fully understanding the "best practices" yet.  I have edited this area to put your suggestion in place.  Please let me know if this is better or if something else should be done.  Thanks.
zluuzki (2022-03-08 13:58:21+00:00): Looks good now, thanks!
Frans S (2022-02-21 10:09:34+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117664445
Frans S (2022-02-21 10:08:20+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator 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).

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/117664582
archpdx (2022-02-21 06:59:33+00:00): Hi,
I appreciate your work in Centralia, but after looking through these changes, I noticed some issues in both this changeset and others that should be addressed. For example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220488138 should be rectangular to reflect what the shape of the field is likely like on the ground. I also noticed multipolygons such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13812953. Even the non-grass area is still part of the baseball field. I also found some duplicate features represented as an area and a node, such as how https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9523438796 should be removed as the dog park is already represented in https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1033716739.
CarniLvr79 (2022-02-21 07:23:36+00:00): Thanks for you concern, but your concerns are really not a concern and it would seem you don't understand what I have done with the dog park.

Do you not know how to cut shapes out? 

Is this showing up as an error in the error finding program?

As for the soccer field, it literally does not matter! Everyone knows the shape of a soccer field is rectangular. What I have done is simply a personal preference and it does not matter what is happened here.

I just do not think you understand what I have done. If it does not show up as an error in the error program, then it is simply a personal preference.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-21 18:43:29+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117695635
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117664623
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-21 18:53:38+00:00): Reverted for refusal to follow established norms.
Glassman (2022-02-21 23:04:56+00:00): @Spaghetti Monster - can you please define the norms you are talking about? Reverting an edit should be a last resort.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117664623
CarniLvr79 (2022-02-22 01:17:09+00:00): Lookie here sir douchebaggery. What exactly are you even tripping about? NOTHING I HAVE DONE HAS TRIPPED ANY ERRORS! Do you go over to India, China, or Germany and gripe about how they over there are not conforming to what you believe are the norms? That is the beauty of this 'project' is that so long as there are no errors, then each individual's style and artistery is allowed to coe through. 

You have absolutely over stepped your boundaries - because you are not comprehending what I have done.

AGAIN! IF THERE WERE ERRORS! THEN I WILL ACCEPT THE CRITICISM! BUT THERE AREN'T! So buzz off!

I have meticulously made sure the accuracy of what I have put into this... is absolutely as precise as possible. Grow up dude!
ezekielf (2022-02-22 01:54:52+00:00): 1. Don't call people "sir douchebaggery"
2. A lack of errors in an error reporting tool does not mean this mapping is high quality (it is not)
3. OSM is not an art project.  Individual style is fine as long as the resulting data is reasonably correct.  Parks, sports fields, buildings, etc with pieces missing and holes cut out of them are not correct data.
CarniLvr79 (2022-02-22 03:10:10+00:00): 1. Dont tell me what I can and cannot say when a spade is a spade. 
2. Yes... yes it does. It means the community standards are met and everything beyond that is personal preference arguements. CLearly, and that is what your opinion is... it is your opinion it is 'not high quality' and I dont care about your opinion when you come at me like this. Personally, your mapping sucks. I looked. 
3. Cutting stuff out of a baseball field to make it look like a baseball field... as freaking awesome and should be the standard. There is NOTHING wrong with me doing it this way. Go back to your hole! Its a 100% volunteer project for fricks sake! You get what you pay for!

Finally, reverting the ENTIRE CHANGE set is childish at BEST! take issue with your issue. You reverted the roads and walk ways and paths I painstakingly spent HOURS on ensuring were precise!

SO screw off! Yeah I am pissed! You are all a bunch of imature children taking issue with something that is hardly even remotely a freaking problem!
ezekielf (2022-02-22 03:41:04+00:00): There's not need to cut stuff out of a baseball field to make it look the way you want.  You can just draw the sand parts on top like I've just done with this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/220484121
ElliottPlack (2022-02-22 17:43:36+00:00): CarniLvr79, you have been blocked for your comments and practices, please review: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5709 Please refrain from 'cutting out' things with the tree cover.

Spaghetti Monster, you have already admitted that the hasty revert should have been prefaced by a comment, so the following is somewhat redundant. As a matter of procedure, please reach out via changeset comment to the mapper. The only exception is for matters of unmistakable vandalism, e.g., adding something fake to the map (in which case please also report the user via their profile). When dealing with things that are somewhat subjective, best to discuss first.
ElliottPlack (2022-02-22 17:44:24+00:00): Signed,

– Elliott Plack
OSM Foundation
Data Working Group
Mordechai23 (2022-02-21 08:32:43+00:00): źle opisany zestaw zmian. Co tu zrobiłeś?
heretofore (2023-02-27 17:27:50+00:00): Can you comment on why the access=destination tag was removed? The road clearly says it's only for Airport traffic.