piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-09-07 00:59:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 110823595 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, and a discussion with the user, reverting some changesets that used Google as a source.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-09-07 00:59:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 110823595 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, and a discussion with the user, reverting some changesets that used Google as a source.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2021-09-07 00:59:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 110823595 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, and a discussion with the user, reverting some changesets that used Google as a source.
user_5359 (2019-09-07 20:01:58+00:00): Wlcome to OSM ! Did you see the way 31067180? I assume your entry is a duplicate.
cooloutac (2019-09-09 13:42:07+00:00): I dont' know what that means.  How do I see it?   Also how do people find my gps tracks I uploaded.  i can't seem to find those in a search either.
user_5359 (2019-09-09 14:26:13+00:00): Hello! Sorry about the short presentation for the information, that you generate a duplicate entry.

You add this https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6779620157
nearby you see the line marked with the same name https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31067180.
This is a part of the relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/142402 . Alle the information you add, must be moved to the relation.
cooloutac (2019-09-10 01:22:37+00:00): Yes that is rancocas state park.  But what I added was the rancocas nature center building.  I also wanted to share the trails in the park,  but It seems like this is too complicated for me and not worth it.
user_5359 (2019-09-10 03:52:03+00:00): Sorry if I was so persistent! The word building is the decisive clue!  Not everything that exists in a park is a park. I delete the tag leisure=park and add the building. I'm not sure about the great thing, but you could possibly add a tourism=information (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dinformation) and information=office (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Doffice).
user_5359 (2019-09-10 04:04:39+00:00): By the way, I see that if you display the publicly available GPS tracks, four GPX tracks of which two are from you. The file names are Red_Meadow_View_Trail.gpx (642.4 m) and Blue_Deer_Run_Trail.gpx (1,160 m). Both don't seem to be transferred to an OSM object (paths) yet. But just for warning: I don't use the editor iD, I can't tell you directly how to show and draw the GPX track there (think about the location inaccuracy of GPS tracks).
itineris (2019-10-31 10:52:52+00:00): Szia!

Volt valami oka, hogy Bibervárról lekerült a tourism=attraction címke?

Üdv:
Ákos
zsolt d (2019-11-01 13:37:34+00:00): Valami bozótirtásomnak esett áldozatul.... De már ismét turisztikai célpont a kis romterület.
kösz
Zsolt
freebeer (2019-09-08 10:40:30+00:00): this does not match the 2018 tiger data.  nor does it particularly match any of the relatively poor aerial imageries
jpennycook (2019-09-07 21:39:46+00:00): Hello.

You've added a node named "Parking" (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6779650372#map=21/51.04962/-1.31120&layers=C) in the middle of an existing car park (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9417973#map=20/51.04967/-1.31127&layers=C).  It looks like this addition is redundant.
In addition, the "name" part is used for things with names (in the case, it would be "Garnier Road car park") not to describe the thing being added.

Jon
1234andyroberts (2019-09-09 06:00:03+00:00): Yes agreed, map on osmand only showed the bike parking until fully zoomed in (that I've only just done. My mistake.
iWowik (2019-11-23 18:32:16+00:00): Рад вас приветствовать в проекте!
Вы ставите номера домов, а их обычно не просто найти.
Скажите, пожалуйста, а откуда вы их берете?
mmahmud (2019-09-10 06:09:45+00:00): What is the point of adding addr:suburb in V2 in 2080 buildings?
Sawan Shariar (2019-09-10 10:23:06+00:00): Sorry for this mistake to use shortcut keyboard. Will have it resolved. will be careful about it. Thanks for the comment.
mmahmud (2019-09-10 12:43:08+00:00): Okay. Which keyboard shortcut were you using that will make such a mistake?
Hjart (2019-09-07 19:12:07+00:00): Is this an actual camp site?  Please note that aerial imagery shows nothing but trees here.
Alex&Jule (2019-09-07 19:18:01+00:00): It's a small free Campsite for maybe 4 tents. At this place is also a small hit.
Hjart (2019-09-07 19:41:08+00:00): Ok, I found an official description: http://udinaturen.dk/facilitet/Bunken-Klitplantage---Bamsehuset/21131

I can rename/retag accordingly
Alex&Jule (2019-09-07 19:44:51+00:00): OK, thanks.
mavl (2019-12-04 09:01:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 77913960, 77919406, 77910048, 77905960 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: an incompatible source].
watmildon (2023-02-28 04:30:55+00:00): You mistakenly marked on to the RV parks here (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/33007040/history) as admin_level=8. I've fixed it up easily I thought you may find this small edit error amusing.
!bm (2019-09-07 22:04:14+00:00): Hi Ines, Dosha had already been mapped, so I have updated it (mostly) with your data. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/74215365
best regards b.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74212459
freebeer (2019-09-16 20:52:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74550103 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 20:49:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74549960 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 20:43:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74549446 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 20:23:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74549325 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 19:54:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74548263 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
thatoneiowan (2019-09-08 03:11:34+00:00): i think they also took out most of the driveway that used to lead to the front doors and put the addition there, but i havent been in the area to actually take a look at what all they did
cjseeger-LVM (2019-09-08 03:46:44+00:00): yes - there is an addition. As soon as I can get an aerial of this it can be added along with the transportation changes. Also it is now a High school and Middle School
cjseeger-LVM (2019-09-08 03:49:32+00:00): I understand that Bulldog Boulevard is now a oneway all the way to the east to Southwest 5th Street but I need to confirm with school.  The North entrance to the school opens this Monday as that road for dropping off kids is now complete
thatoneiowan (2019-09-12 23:03:49+00:00): i was in town today, the northwest entrance is open right now. i did not see any do not enter signs on the east end of bulldog blvd and as of right now it still looks to be two-way between sw 5th and the first parking lot drive thru. they re-routed bulldog blvd a bit to the north, and additionally took out the 4 or so parking spaces that was near the east end of the building. there was some sort of sign for parking on the north side of the road but didn't get a good look at it. would have taken an openstreetcam track but it was pouring rain today
mavl (2019-10-02 09:36:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 75178838, 75179998, 75177624, 75175920, 75181338, 75182839 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the deleting of valid data - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3185].
freebeer (2019-09-16 19:35:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74547254 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
Gas & Electric (2019-09-27 14:24:37+00:00): @Guylamar2006 If you want to change something globally, ask for permission and then let it be done by a bot.
(Undeclared) mechanical tag changing is not only not permissible – it also a waste of your precious time.
freebeer (2019-09-28 23:32:29+00:00): to be precise, the multiple changesets i reverted were limited to the continental untied snakes and i badly need a new kezboard.

the huge number of FIXMEs should be a clue that this is not a trivial change.  and i stick behind my stance that when i write FIXME, the best change i'll accept would be to convert it into a grammatically correct, but invalid for OSM syntax, FIX ME.  so, not sure why i bother.
freebeer (2019-09-16 18:26:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74543946 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 18:54:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74546277 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
muralito (2019-11-05 22:45:17+00:00): Hola. ¿como confirmaste que este tramo estuviera flechado?
NunoLava1998 (2019-09-09 09:13:42+00:00): Só quero dizer que a ER109 é a VE8:
https://www.madeira.gov.pt/drestradas/Estrutura/DRE/ctl/Read/mid/3731/InformacaoId/51488/UnidadeOrganicaId/22
Não sei porque está marcada como uma estrada terciária.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-09 12:42:17+00:00): Viva, está marcada como terciária, já que a VE8 não está concluída e obedece à regras estabelecidas em portugal para a classificação.
NunoLava1998 (2019-09-11 19:28:50+00:00): A VE8 está completamente concluida até o Caminho da Ribeira Grande; até está completamente pintado. Visitei hoje. A parte em construção é entre o Caminho da Ribeira Grande e a Fundoa, que está na 1ª fase.

Não vejo nada que faça aquilo terciário; eu acho que é secundário (não primário).
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 21:21:04+00:00): conforme mencionei, não obedece as regras padronizadas para Portugal. No caso , liga a uma estrada residencial, logo não pode ser classificada como secundário.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-11 21:33:50+00:00): E correcção, não liga ao Caminho da Ribeira Grande, mas ao Caminho do Campo do Andorinha.
NunoLava1998 (2019-09-12 14:25:01+00:00): Eu foi lá na vida real 2 vezes. Parece que antigamente o Caminho do Campo da Andorinha era o seu caminho, mas agora liga-se à ER109/VE8.
E acabei de lembrar-me que aquilo não acaba no Caminho da Ribeira Grande; até acaba no Comandante Camacho de Freitas. Fiz uma imagem demonstrando como é: https://imgur.com/a/sCQ7k6N
NunoLava1998 (2019-09-12 14:27:41+00:00): Mas isto é temporário e só uma solução até a extensão para São Roque e a Fundoa seja construida. Isso é porque que o mapa DRE não mostra.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-12 14:30:04+00:00): a menos que encontre no JORAM a alteração do Caminho da Ribeira Grande e parte do Caminho do Campo do Andorinha para estrada regional, as estradas continuam a ser municipais. logo não fazem parte
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-12 14:33:56+00:00): Acabei de confirmar nas imagens nas images que fiz no Sábado. a placa de toponímia da Rua Campo do Andorinha continua na mesma localização em https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/32.67978/-16.93475
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-12 14:36:08+00:00): Aí tens a imagem https://ibb.co/6Bb27zm
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-12 14:38:08+00:00): e a imagem da placa toponímia do Caminho da Ribeira Grande https://ibb.co/TrHQJpq
NunoLava1998 (2019-09-12 14:49:45+00:00): Ok, mesmo assim mudava o túnel entre a ER107 e a Rotunda Cota 500 para secundário, e possívelmente até o último túnel (onde têm a paragem de auto carro que é o fim da linha 10A: http://www.horariosdofunchal.pt/images/stories/pdf/mapaurbano.pdf)
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-09-12 14:51:30+00:00): mas isso vai contra as regras. Não faz sentido classificares dessa forma.
freebeer (2019-09-16 23:31:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74552524 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 22:52:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74552428 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
SomeoneElse (2019-09-13 15:36:12+00:00): Hello,
Please don't make automated edits like this that really don't add any value to OSM..
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
freebeer (2019-09-16 16:19:22+00:00): i would even go so far as to claim in some cases, like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/252570658 , before i restored the tagging a mapper presumably chose to use (i don't have a preset either way), the changed fixme had disappeared off the first screen and out of casual view of a mapper inspecting the item who could simply update the object against new imagery where available.

tools don't update the map, mappers do, and in these strings of automated edits, all the few items i investigated, often with multiple passes, still were not correctly fully tagged as would have been obvious to a human mapper, others obviously wrong, the danger of automatically hiding a few obvious beginner errors without review.
freebeer (2019-09-17 02:03:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74554216 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 16:32:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74541354 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 16:01:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74538960 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 16:23:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74540460 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 15:21:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74537944 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
user_5359 (2019-09-08 05:25:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM! So I don't suppose the guests will be accommodated on the street? I have drawn in some details and deleted the simplification.
ACarlotti (2019-09-08 01:12:26+00:00): The combination of this change and the previous change has created a new way that replaces the original way for the start of the history - this effectively hides most of the history of that way. In future, when merging ways, try to keep the one with the most informative history - especially if the other one was one you just created.
Also, I have no idea why you set part of the A1307 slip road as 'trunk' instead of 'trunk_link' - it seems obviously wrong to me.
mavl (2019-10-02 09:36:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 75178838, 75179998, 75177624, 75175920, 75181338, 75182839 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: the deleting of valid data - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/3185].
freebeer (2019-09-16 15:02:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74537719 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 17:24:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74543133 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
edathy (2019-09-11 14:37:12+00:00): Why are these tools not getting adapted?
freebeer (2019-09-12 15:14:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74397879 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
SomeoneElse (2019-09-13 15:49:53+00:00): @edathy - tools are entirely capable of detecting "fixme", "FIXME" or any case insensitive version.  If there is one that @Guylamar2006 uses that doesn't, a pull request to it would be a far better use of their time than numerous tagfiddling changesets like this one.
Best Regards,
Andy
kreuzschnabel (2020-05-07 06:37:22+00:00): When splitting the ways at Drygrange Mains, you made the single-carriageway connecting to the north a oneway, too, making northbound routing impossible. Please take care to add the oneway tag to the dual carriageway sections only :) and please, don’t use oneway=-1. Turn the way instead. Thanks!
pittrichimica (2020-06-10 17:26:32+00:00): It seems you have done the corrections already, so I won't touch this piece anymore. Thanks for the hint and corrections.
kreuzschnabel (2020-06-10 17:29:29+00:00): Yup, this is finished. Thanks for your work!
user_5359 (2019-09-08 05:30:09+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? Add I correct the boundary of the house, because it was to big.
aharvey (2025-02-09 04:42:45+00:00): hi as recently extensively discussed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158917740 skyscrapercenter.com is not an acceptable source for use in OSM. I reached out and they confirmed no commercial use is permitted, so it's definitely a no for OSM. I've had to revert a whole bunch of these added already due to this and it's causing some mess, but we need to ensure we have a 100% clean dataset in OSM from a licensing point of view.

I know you're very extensively been mapping buildings in Sydney, so can you please confirm if you had added any other data from the proprietary skypscrapercenter.com database?
Hjart (2019-09-08 07:04:11+00:00): Jeg fandt billeder af statuen på Commons som jeg har linket til ;-)
freebeer (2019-09-16 17:05:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74542841 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
!bm (2019-09-07 22:11:44+00:00): Is the name to be "Kantshop"? What kind of things/goods will be sold? Because "Post/Postbank" does not seem to be valid. Also, for now, opening_hours should be set as "closed". --best regards !bm
freebeer (2019-09-16 16:39:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74541751 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
eserte (2019-09-08 06:15:36+00:00): Hallo geoMichael,

wenn du highway=construction an der Brücke 15 weggenommen hast, dann musst du auch etwas mit dem construction=*-Tag machen.
freebeer (2019-09-16 14:58:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74537160 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
edathy (2019-09-11 10:29:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments improve everyone!
freebeer (2019-09-16 14:46:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74535674 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
Glassman (2019-09-07 23:34:25+00:00): It looks like the building has atriums. You can create them by drawing in each atrium then select all the objects, right click and use the + to create a multipolygon. Let me know if you need help.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74215259
freebeer (2019-09-16 13:59:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74528003 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
Glassman (2019-09-07 23:31:29+00:00): It looks like someone else placed the bus stop in the middle of the road. Can you move it to the correction location?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/74215314
freebeer (2019-09-16 11:55:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74527488 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
woodpeck (2020-03-28 23:00:49+00:00): Hi, what is your source for these Macedonian names in Liechtenstein? Are you sure these towns and villages really *have* Macedonian names?
bjankuloski (2020-03-28 23:13:59+00:00): Hello. There are no uniquely Macedonian names for these places, of course. What is meant by it is the transcription of their original names in Macedonian cyrillic. That's what's been done here, and anywhere else, in any language with a non-Latin alphabet (with some exceptions, where a language may indeed have its own name for a foreign place, but that's rarer. There are rules governing this transcription of languages in Macedonian, and it is found in the latest (2017) edition of Orthography of the Macedonian Language (section 'Representation of Foreign Names'). I am translating these as the book is obviously only available in Macedonian.
Have a great day.
woodpeck (2020-03-29 17:24:52+00:00): Thank you for the explanation. Please stop doing that (adding rule-based transliterations for places that don't actually have a name in that language). It has the capacity to tremendously inflate OSM's database without real value added. (What's to stop someone else applying the same rules to, say, every single street in New York City?)  -- See also: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Avoid_transliteration
freebeer (2019-09-16 11:45:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74527429 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
freebeer (2019-09-16 11:44:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 74527055 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed automated retagging of objects where i have presented reasons to keep existing tagging
nevw (2019-09-08 00:43:00+00:00): Hi Aleksie
I think you may have misspelt the street name in the addr tag
InsertUser (2019-09-08 07:26:10+00:00): Hello,
OpenStreetMap follows the principle of "One feature, one OSM element." This means Parking etc. Should be mapped as *either* a node or a way, but not both.
Dutch_Dana (2019-09-08 11:18:55+00:00): Alright, I did not know this.