piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Joseph R P (2022-01-03 16:03:05+00:00): I should also mention that roads should not be classified by their speed limit and road markings, because surface-based classification just circles us back to the trunk = expressway issue. I've never heard of holding in-person meetings or talking with local government on how the roads should be classified on OSM, since that's a better matter to discuss with others on Slack to get opinions of people from other states as a way to avoid a local bias of how things should be done. That's sort of an issue we've been having in other states like Oklahoma, where the primary editor is keeping people from outside the state from fixing the road classification issues.

I'd suggest that, if you go to meet with locals, discussing road classification on the basis of what a road connects rather than how much traffic uses it or what it's like on the surface. Having a cluster of minor roads can sometimes form a zigzag route for traffic through residential areas rather than a simple route along a couple collector roads towards their destination. You can use OSM's navigation system to see where drivers will be taken through if they use OSM for navigation. Remember to help make the map understandable to people from all over.
TheConductor (2022-01-03 17:42:53+00:00): I think you’re failing to understand the point here which is that your classification changes that you made do NOT make sense based on how the city is set up. If we were to move forward with the class changes you made to the residential roads, you would be routing people through neighborhoods (creating the zig-zag effect that you’re warning me about) when there are several very clear through routes that provide access from central business district to surrounding neighborhoods and schools. 

I will also be very clear that there is no local bias here. I am happy to have others provide quality edits however I will not stand idly by and let others with  NO local knowledge of the area make edits that do not make sense. Local knowledge and survey data is prioritized over out-of-state editor knowledge. Survey is the highest quality data we can contribute to OSM. Also, just because you haven’t heard of someone doing something doesn’t mean it isn’t an acceptable form of “local knowledge.” You would be wise to focus your efforts in areas where there isn’t an active editor base. I’d be happy to provide you with a list of places that do not currently have active editors contributing that could use some OSM TLC.
TheConductor (2022-01-03 17:54:46+00:00): I’ll just add that it would be preferable if you avoided tweaking classification in Nevada until we can come to consensus guidelines. There will be a draft of Nevada guidelines coming out soon. Thanks!
jarno_o-GRB (2021-12-31 21:50:06+00:00): "AIV Flanders  aerial imagery" -> "AIV Flanders most recent aerial imagery"
syntex (2022-03-09 11:33:31+00:00): Te sklejone obszary trawy z chodnikami są do skasowania lub poprawienia
MarcoR (2022-01-02 11:03:53+00:00): Ciao!
Non sono del posto ma ho dato un'occhiata e non ho trovato errori (il nodo  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9382692348 che hai inserito sul percorso esistente è inutile ma non dannoso)

Attenzione alle fonti che usi (non tutte sono utilizzabili per inserire dati su OpenStreetMap); è consigliabile specificare la fonte dei dati in ogni gruppo di modifiche.

A presto,
Marco.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115622563
Larmax (2022-01-01 10:14:05+00:00): Hi, OSM is a map for for features that exist on the ground. You added features that don't actually exist so I'll have to revert the changes you made. Sites like https://opengeofiction.net are for fiction edits like this one.
Temat-Droga (2021-12-31 22:18:19+00:00): Prawdopodobnie ostatnia zmiana w 2021 roku!!!
maraf24 (2022-01-01 16:30:03+00:00): Na pewno nie jest to główny łącznik Środy Śląskiej z A4.
Larmax (2022-01-01 10:18:51+00:00): Moi, onko tuossa oikeasti käytöstä poistunut junarata?
ahoiuiaduigfadugiadguyadgadgsda (2022-01-01 14:10:07+00:00): Ei ollut, olin lukenut niin jostain artikkelista, mutta fakta oli väärin. Poistin radan
compdude (2022-01-27 20:32:16+00:00): Wilderness areas should not have the natural=wood tag. Not every square foot of area in these protected areas is covered in forest, so this tag is inaccurate and I am going to remove it.
Polarbear (2022-10-29 23:19:52+00:00): Und das Klohäuschen steht mitten auf dem Fußweg?

Repariert.
tsp15 (2022-01-05 16:12:59+00:00): Ciąg pieszo-rowerowy wzdłuż ul. Ostrogórskiej jest nadal w budowie.
olo81 (2022-01-05 18:25:12+00:00): Ktoś dał komentarz że już zakończone i otworzyłem. A jak zobaczyłem zdjęcia zorze dni to zastanawiam się czy nie dać dalej remontu z Access=yes :D
user_5359 (2022-01-01 08:20:06+00:00): Hello! You added two new keys 
coriegated
corrugated
(see http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eFp).
Can you please explain the meaning?
Kartiernix (2022-02-20 18:04:07+00:00): Hello angolasandy,
you deleted a road here based on satelite imagery.
I added the road based on data of the Digital Namibia platform:
https://digitalnamibia.nsa.org.na/
Check the layer "Transportation Networks".
I don't know how reliable digitalnamibia is, but since it is provided by the Namibia Statistics Agency, I would think, it should be the official data.
Are you sure, that this road does not exist?
VisibleSouth (2022-02-22 08:42:14+00:00): Hello Kartiernix,

yes, that's for sure: this road does not exist.

Of course, Digital Namibia is very helpful, but the layer "Transportation Networks" also uses plans that are often to be understood as declarations of intent.

Googlemaps also takes over all planning and has the habit to show such desired road connections (here specifically: a District Road to Khaudum National Park, whose access is being improved in the north) as already existing.

The reason I made the correction, by the way, was that a friend from Odangwa was there and was glad to have four-wheel drive in his car south of Kandjara. The reception at Cwiba River was lonely but still exists.

Many greetings, Sandy
todeveni (2022-01-01 11:45:58+00:00): Trolliväylä oli aimmin tägätty highway=proposed. Kyseessä on Espoon kaupungin ehdotus Lintulaaksontien jatkosta/linjauksesta.
Palautin tekemäsi muutokset tässä changesetissä.
pyram (2022-01-03 21:10:22+00:00): Hi EndlessRoundabout,
somtimes i fix technical errors.
Here are some things, I can't fix, because the used aerial photo (Bing) and OSM do not fit together.
You added "trunk_links" intersecting the trunk without "bridge" or "shared node" (e. g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1017246377 ).

Furthermore routing problems:
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=103.62542&lat=17.41438&zoom=15&overlays=islands,islands_car,islands_bicycle,islands_all,snap_points,unconnected_open_ends_1,unconnected_open_ends_2,unconnected_open_ends_3,unconnected_open_ends_4,unconnected_open_ends_5,unconnected_open_ends_6
and "one node ways":
http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=103.61988&lat=17.41588&zoom=16&overlays=single_node_in_way

It would be nice, if you could fix them.

Best regards
pyram
maraf24 (2022-01-01 16:27:56+00:00): Podaj źródło o zmianach nazw węzłów?
Temat-Droga (2022-01-02 10:24:40+00:00): Zlikwidowanie wsi Huta Zawadzka. 
Według mnie może być to argument ale mogę się mylić więc wycofajcie jak tak.
maraf24 (2022-01-02 11:12:16+00:00): Czyli sobie wymyśliłeś te nazwy?
Temat-Droga (2022-01-02 12:06:52+00:00): Prawdopodobnie tak te węzły będą się nazywać. możliwe też że węzeł A2 będzie węzłem Łowicz a S8 Skierniewice.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-01-02 13:14:54+00:00): > Prawdopodobnie tak te węzły będą się nazywać

Mapujemy aktualne nazwy a nie te zgadywane czy przewidywane.

Jak nazwy się zmienią to wtedy można zmienić.

Nie zmieniaj tylko dlatego bo zgadujesz że nastąpi zmiana nazwy.
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-01-02 13:16:22+00:00): Edycja wycofana w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/115669131
syntex (2022-03-01 14:47:46+00:00): Nadal nic nie zostało zmienione, na znakach ciągle jest Huta Zawadzka
Tomasz_R (2022-01-01 20:44:16+00:00): Witaj, zmieniłeś nazwę wsi Nadolniki na Nadolnik. Nie zrobiłeś przypadkiem błędu? 
Na mapie: 
https://szamocin.e-mapa.net/ 
są Nadolniki.
syntex (2022-01-01 21:44:55+00:00): 1 stycznia 2022 zmieniono nazwę miejscowości na Nadolnik. http://isap.sejm.gov.pl/isap.nsf/DocDetails.xsp?id=WDU20210002308
Tomasz_R (2022-01-02 18:48:45+00:00): OK. Zmieniłem nazwę miejscowości w adresach (Nadolnik).
surveyor54 (2022-01-03 23:23:19+00:00): Kombinierte Fuß- Radweg mit dem Verkehrszeichen 240 werden in OSM 
bicycle = designated
foot = designated
highway = path
getaggt.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway=path#Verwendung_als_Universal-Tag

Gruß
surveyor54
RedAuburn (2022-01-01 00:22:23+00:00): congrats on the last changeset of 2021!
RedAuburn (2022-01-01 00:22:45+00:00): congrats on the first changeset of 2022!
Lejun (2022-01-01 10:08:07+00:00): I mean, I’d have expected the first changeset to be in the east asian area but congrats for it nonetheless!
bxl-forever (2022-01-01 10:27:04+00:00): Thanks, everyone.  I didn’t expect that small changeset to become famous.  An ordinary change at 1:00 a.m. in my timezone. ;-)
archpdx (2022-01-01 01:31:23+00:00): Hey there,
Thanks for updating this defunct business. However, note that it's discouraged to use the disused tag for shops: the disused lifecycle prefix (in this case disused:shop=bicicyle) or shop=vacant is preferred. You can read more here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused

If you have any questions please feel free to respond to my comment.
baumann3141 (2022-01-03 02:24:36+00:00): What happened to the outline of Michigan State University? This looks like it got messed up!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115625037
rayhem (2022-01-03 03:39:45+00:00): I honestly have no idea how this got re-attached like this. Possibly an errant mouse click or keypress that adjusted something selected out-of-view? Regardless, I saw the messed up outline later and re-attached it correctly.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115625037
baumann3141 (2022-01-03 15:02:54+00:00): Did nodes get deleted that might have been connected to Grand River? You can check the history visually here: 
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/25822326
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115625037
rayhem (2022-01-03 15:39:34+00:00): Fixed in 115717299 - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25822326
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115625037
Falsernet (2022-01-01 00:51:10+00:00): ^^^Also circularised roundabout
syntex (2022-01-01 16:40:49+00:00): Nie zostawiłeś nawet jako locality?
pio2_122 (2022-01-01 18:23:32+00:00): Znalazłem szczegółowe informacje o konsultacjach społecznych dot. zniesienia nazw Małolesie, Binówko, Modrzewko i Węglino – mieszkańcy tych miejscowości, którzy de facto są mieszkańcami miejscowości nadrzędnych byli jednogłośnie na „tak”. Jest tam także potwierdzenie, że  znajduje to odzwierciedlenie „w obiegu publicznym stosowanym przez miejscową ludność i instytucje”. Źródło: https://www.stareczarnowo.pl/aktualnosci/pokaz/1452_zniesienie_nazwy_miejscowosci_malolesie https://www.stareczarnowo.pl/aktualnosci/pokaz/1451_zniesienie_nazw_miejscowosci_binowko_modrzewko_i_weglino
Wydaje mi się, że w przypadku Lisiej Miedzy i Będogoszczy z jakiegoś powodu nie było konieczności przeprowadzania konsultacji. Wszystkie te „miejscowości” są związane z pojedynczymi, często opuszczonymi, budynkami (szczególnie: Będogoszcz i Małolesie).
Według mnie, są to więc definitywnie martwe nazwy, które nie łapią się nawet na locality.
Zauważyłem jednak, że w przypadku ex-miejscowości Lisia Miedza, wg Systemu Informacji Przestrzennej gminy nadal istnieje adres „Lisia Miedza 1”. Zapewne niedługo nastąpi tam zmiana lub likwidacja adresu (według uchwały rady gminy w tych miejscowościach nikt nie jest zameldowany), jednak dla pewności wysłałem zgłoszenie w tej sprawie.
syntex (2022-01-01 18:31:17+00:00): A to w porządku, dzięki za informację!
pitscheplatsch (2022-01-01 13:03:04+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Just a test or what's the source of your mapping activity? Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
mtorrestest (2022-01-02 18:50:03+00:00): I just started doing some tests about the functionality of OSM and, to be completely honest, I didn't know how to undo them. I'm deleting them already. I apologize.
pitscheplatsch (2022-01-03 07:59:09+00:00): Thanks for your answer.
mariotomo (2022-04-04 16:58:02+00:00): hola y bienvenido a OpenStreetMap. if you have the chance to keep editing, there's so few mappers in the country, that any single one of us can have a huge relative impact.
TomPar (2022-01-01 18:47:23+00:00): Hello.  Per the wiki, and local mapping convention, landuse=forest is for parcels that are "Managed woodland or tree plantation maintained by human to obtain forest products".  I'm fairly certain this land is not regularly cut for timber and thus this tagging does not apply.  Please let me know your thoughts on this feedback.  Thanks.
Cosk (2022-01-01 22:46:22+00:00): Thanks TomPar.  You are correct, this area is not cut for timber.  This is wooded area with trails;  Camp Acton also has campsites.  Would "natural=wood" be more appropriate per the local mapping convention"?  I reviewed https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Forest for guidance, but could not find any reference as to what the local convention is.
TomPar (2022-01-02 01:03:21+00:00): This is a bit outdated but still a good read:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Massachusetts/Conservation

And:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Public_lands

Generally speaking, you should NOT place a landuse/landcover tag on the same closed way or multipolygon relation that defines the cadastre or property boundary.  These boundaries are virtual as they exist in a GIS tax map.  (of course, sometimes the property boundary is a physical feature like a stone wall or river edge, but...)  Whereas, landcover/landuse is directly related to what's on the ground.  Ideally, OSM would have a different layer each for cadastre, land cover, etc but alas it's all just one jumble.

Having said that, I used to do detailed woods mapping that was bounded to the "public land" property boundary.  See here for an example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11873101

I have stopped doing this because I think it's just "tagging for the renderer" because I wanted the area to show up darker green on the standard OSM carto map.  Furthermore, for me, woods mapping in New England is not the highest priority as almost everything is covered with "woods" nominally.

If you felt compelled to land cover or land use map, please create a new multipolgon.  This will allow you to "cut out" ponds, parking lots, swamps, etc that are not covered with "woods"...and have this "cutting out" not affect the definition of the property boundary.

Another example of this, which I did, is the Middlesex Fells:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11875172

I'm happy to chat more about this or other mapping topics.  I'm active on the OSM Slack channel if you're so inclined.  https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Happy mapping...
Cosk (2022-01-02 01:53:17+00:00): OK, Spring Hill is the only one of the four that does not have any parking lots or water features within the multipolygon, so I replaced landuse=forest by natural=wood for Spring Hill and reverted my changes for the other three.

What do you think about Whittier area - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29777918 ?  This land is owned by the state rather than the town, does not have maintained trails, and is open for hunting/trapping.  There is no cutting for timber.  Should I remove landuse=forest from that area too?
TheSwavu (2024-06-19 10:42:15+00:00): I know it was two years ago but... can you remember which roads had the traffic lights on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8735701218
are they only on Clarence Loop Road or does the crossing road also have lights?

Thanks.
mrpulley (2024-06-19 13:59:44+00:00): Definitely Clarence Loop Road, presumably for the crossing road as well (it's been a while!)
TheSwavu (2024-06-19 23:00:41+00:00): Thanks. I'm doing a bit of detail adding at intersection s at present.
mrpulley (2025-03-04 12:41:26+00:00): I've surveyed this junction again, and the traffic lights are only on Clarence Loop Road (the private crossing road has stop signs and gates, but no lights). I've updated this at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163200029
user_5359 (2022-01-01 13:46:46+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Why did you add the two ways to the relation? Should this parking area part of the golf course or not?
Bob42nd (2022-01-03 09:07:03+00:00): Heya, this was mapped as an informal/desire path, and strava heatmap data shows that it is indeed trafficked.
tonyf1 (2022-05-15 01:16:45+00:00): Sebastian, please reply to  Bob42nd
HighRouleur (2022-05-15 03:12:58+00:00): Bob42nd we shouldn’t be mapping based on a Strava heat map as it doesn’t not determine that transiting in permissible. The heat map indicates that people have used it but we should be mapping on the ground with what form of transport is permitted.
tonyf1 (2022-05-15 04:00:04+00:00): see talk-au
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 05:10:07+00:00): 1. Please don't remove names. Move them to other tags. 
2. `name=` is the common name used. Please don't use it to show what you think should be correct.
user_3323986 (2022-01-01 06:29:08+00:00): That is the what it is. The hill has been incorrectly captioned on Wikipedia, hence the error here.
user_3323986 (2022-01-01 06:31:25+00:00): This is not what I think is correct, This is well documented in maps and various accounts. You are the one thinking what is correct.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-14 21:43:59+00:00): Have you even checked https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7165819489 ?
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 05:07:26+00:00): Please check that `name=` means the common names. Languages and phoentics can be accomodated with other tags.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 05:05:47+00:00): Please check https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/255829293 . This is to represent the reclaimed bay, like HMS Tamar.
ralley (2022-01-01 09:09:18+00:00): If this is a drive way it should be tagged as highway=service and service=driveway and does not need the addr tags, those go on the address nodes (as already done)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115626943
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 05:14:10+00:00): 1. `name=` is the common name used now. Please don't use it to show what you think should be correct. 
2. Fort Street Area is seen on signs, and in some limited use. 
3. Please don't use changeset comments for discussions. No one is meant to read them to understand your opinion. They are for database change management. At the same time, there's a limit on length that you got cut off.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 05:15:07+00:00): 4. People have discussed many times with you before. Please discuss first before making these changes.
user4816003805 (2022-01-12 07:47:18+00:00): Haha. So it *is* that cafe from The Matrix Resurrections. Do they have any references to it inside? On the outside it's just a Joe and the Juice.
cmdoptesc (2022-03-22 03:44:06+00:00): Unfortunately no references to the movie--a missed opportunity!
kartler175 (2022-01-03 13:38:31+00:00): Hiding accessibility in name tags is not adequate. It is not analyzable by routing engines and other tools.

Please use proper access tags. The name tag is for names only:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions

Use routes for mapping trails:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:route
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:snowmobile

And what's obout the dismembered relations for boundaries and water bodies?
LabradorWildMan (2022-01-03 19:29:36+00:00): I'm trying my best even seen the snowmobile icon thought i could but that on too more markers to help too
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:48:21+00:00): Reminder: `name=` is the common name used, not what you think should be correct.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:49:05+00:00): Put this in OHM, not OSM.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:46:12+00:00): This is clearly irrelevant. The official name has no "Resite Village", unlike some other here.
user_5359 (2022-01-02 08:50:12+00:00): Hello! Please have look on http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eGU.
What is the meaning of the keys
BldgID=1422_498273707888
GNIS=882193
GenDesc=200 - Residential
LatLong=40.77680935 -74.47781065
MuniID=Morris Township
NJSP=498271 707889
PAMS_PIN=1422_6904_8
UseMajor=Residential
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:24:09+00:00): Against you claim, one can easily raise the otherwise. `name=` is the common name used, not what you think should be correct.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-02-04 05:20:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 116986772, 116973878, 116976578, 116979036, 116983082, 116959113, 116985873, 116987926, 116984402, 116970935, 116981234, 116967980 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some fantasy mapping.  Attempts to contact the mapper failed.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=14729412 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5642 .
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:18:23+00:00): This has been discussed with you many times by others. `place=` and `name=` are the common settlements and names recognized, not what you think should be correct. 
There's nothing wrong with concluding with the center of the Causeway Bay district is at the East Point area now.
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:20:57+00:00): "Extra" is a wrong concept as well. One Feature, One Object is adhered to, to represent different features by different data items, which could be in different aspects.
user_5359 (2022-01-02 16:31:34+00:00): Hello again! is the key ratno the same key like RATNO?
VISHNU K C (2022-01-03 11:13:46+00:00): I guess the contributor added the key ratno=49 depicting the ARD number of that particular ration shop (Fair Price Shop). I would suggest to remove this key and add branch=Place name, ARD no to indicate which ration shop it is!
Kovoschiz (2022-01-01 17:08:40+00:00): 1. Please don't use `natural=cape` for reclaimed capes. 
2. `name=` is a common name. Not what you think should be correct.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-01-01 10:57:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115631701 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for using unwelcome and inappropriate language.
0235 (2022-01-01 11:07:03+00:00): Happy New Year!
Юхнов (2022-01-01 11:30:03+00:00): Happy New Year! :)
janolezab (2022-01-01 13:13:25+00:00): You too!
Monchinho (2022-01-01 13:54:58+00:00): Bo aninovo! / Happy New Year!
user_14050790 (2022-01-01 15:39:50+00:00): Happy New Year! Bonne Anne!
OSMWeekly (2022-01-01 18:04:46+00:00): Happy New Year from NY, USA!
maaxy_ (2022-01-01 21:38:30+00:00): Happy new year!
Lee Carré (2022-01-04 13:21:11+00:00): What makes for http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 🥳
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-01-01 10:57:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115631701 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for using unwelcome and inappropriate language.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-01-01 10:57:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115631701 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for using unwelcome and inappropriate language.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-01-01 10:57:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115631701 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for using unwelcome and inappropriate language.
marczoutendijk_repair (2022-01-01 10:57:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 115631701 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert for using unwelcome and inappropriate language.
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2022-01-14 08:02:05+00:00): نرجوا منك عدم إدخال أمكانك الشخصية للخريطة العامة