piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 09:48:20+00:00): Olá, Nuno. Thanks for your message. Maybe I can clarify the changes. As I'm from the area I can assure you that the records removed are either not present or are, in my opinion, to be considered over-mapping with commercial interests - created by the owner (OSM user "José Flor - OzFlor") of the alleged "Buddhist temple" at the location. There is no Buddhist temple in that area - at least not publicly accessible or indicated. Same goes for a lot of the buildings which were indicated by the same person with meticulous detail but without presence at the location. Planned future building projects are not to be included into OSM or should, like in the case of public projects like future motorways etc., be correctly tagged. I left in the edition what can be confirmed at the location along EN16 (paths, gates) and the footpaths, or which can be identified on recent Bing Maps and GoogleEarth imagery (2017). Maybe you can rethink your decision to revert all the data? Greetings from Gouveia, Nik
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 10:00:03+00:00): Hi, i assume you read the guidelines, you shouldnt delete elements. About the public access to certain elements, you can add the tag access, not simply remove them from the map like you did.
The data has been restored
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 10:11:46+00:00): You are giving justification for 10 elements, but you deleted over 1000 elements on both changesets. Both of them have been reverted. Do not delete elements
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 10:40:09+00:00): All minor elements - like single trees or barrier:retaining_wall - can be considered unwanted micro-mapping (guidelines). Some elements like natural:water or natural:wetland are certainly not present on location. Road designations "Estrada Fazenda Mondego" or "Buddha Temple Road" are not valid, as well as their tagging highway:residential, which should definitely be removed or corrected (which I did by changing them to :service or :track). Indicated shelter should be publicly accessible or removed by re-tagging to e.g. building:shed.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 12:42:17+00:00): I agree to prefer re-tagging instead of deleting. But with your global restore you have restored a lot of faulty elements, including points, paths, and polygons without properties. There are no wetlands in this area (we are talking about a hillside). Please tell me how to remove non-existent campsites, temples, or inaccessible picnic places, and shelters if you regard deleting inappropriate.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 13:03:10+00:00): @NunoCaldeira: Just saw that OzFlor as owner of this property and generator of the faulty entries is a member of your team at "Map Masters Portugal". I'll thus direct the validity of my changes to another instance of OSM.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 13:26:53+00:00): Hi,

Feel free to escalate to DWG.

I dont see any mentiond of micromapping being unwanted as you state. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Micromapping
Following that logic we should delete all micromapping and indoor mapping because the areas around it arent mapped at that level of detail. That makes no sense.

Regarding my revert, feel free to fix, not just delete the data like you did before. 
From checking your profile, i can see that 20% of your edits are deletions, which im quite sure if i inspect (judging by the two changesets i reverted) that are incorrect deletions.

The question is not my revert, the question is your changeset that deleted, which shouldnt be deleted in the first place. Thats the reason for this mess, not my revert. Feel free to edit and tagging.

Regarding you accusation of OzFlor being a member of my Map Masters Portugal, i do not own any team.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 13:35:06+00:00): Also, can you pinpoint where there's elements without tags?
PLima785 (2019-03-21 13:46:10+00:00): @FulanoHerminio @OzFlor @NunoCaldeira retagging and reaching agreement.
Micromapping is ok the edits have some moderation , also this is a slop so is normal to have barrier also trees is inside the area.
Ozflor will make the changes since he is on the field.
Also the picnic places, and shelters can be mapped if the access is asked (premissive tag).
Talk and dont escalate to a edit war ok?
Thank you
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 16:51:39+00:00): I know that the tagging of single trees and ans similar elements has been discussed ambivalently in the community - I would not object if they were not combined with unclean mapping, partly with non-existent elements (campsite, temple, swamps, ...), and all of them tagged with proper names without foundation. Just cannot get rid of the feeling that the entries are an intended action of "SEO spamming" the map with commercial intention, as the editor obviously runs a tourism business "OzFlor" at the location.

Concerning the UI side, usage of the high tree density could be replaced with landuse=forest or even natural=scrub for a far more readable and unobtrusive rendering (last time I visited the location end of 2018 most of the vegetation above N16 was <6m). This would also solve the contradiction problem of landuse=farmland overlaid with buildings and other elements.

@NunoCaldeira: Please feel free to check any changes. As I use this profile only for this region, deleting the trees of this change set may definitely have resulted in a high percentage. Apart from this location, any deleted elements are usually replaced with more detailed substitutions. On the team issue: https://whats-new-pt.blog/2018/09/24/novos-map-masters-a-bordo/
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 18:44:43+00:00): That argument about single trees being mapped as landuse its ridiculous. If you have detailed data why would you make it generic? It's the other way around, not the way you suggested.

On the swamps, what i see is wetland, which can be seasonal as you can read on the wiki. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dwetland

About the "fictional" elements, you should have wrote that in the changeset where you deleted thousands of elements at once. SEO spamming, as i mentioned, if you do not agree with certain elements, you edit them and mentioned that in the changeset comment, not just blatantly delete >500 elements.

About the UI, im sure you are aware you can make or use other map layouts. Which you can cartographically represent only certain elements. Following your mindset we should delete indoor mapping, because its not rendered.

About your multiple account, which i can't verify since i cannot guess who you are as you don't mention other usernames. i have a transparent policy. i don't hide under different alias. 

Regarding the Map Masters as you can see its not my team, but HERE. And to be honest i don't see the relevant fact of that being mentioned in this discussion as you clearly deleted thousands of elements, when in your point of view you dont agree with some. That's not how we behave on OSM.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 19:21:39+00:00): As I said, it is not about the single trees or stone walls (although it may be discussed as vegetation above N16 is in most cases, <6m). This case is about tagging and placing: (1) false elements like temples or campsites which do not exist on the ground, including swamps which per nature do not live in hillsides, not even temporarily, (2) repeatedly placing advertising titles for the before mentioned elements or the editor guesthouse just to gain visibility in the map renderings available to the general public in both OSM and 3rd party products, and (3) pairing this with unclean mapping like highway=residential where there is none, applying "Casa em ruínas" as title instead of using correct designations with abandoned=yes, or leaving elements without further description.

It would have been nice if you had contacted me and heard my point before reverting the alterations. I may have hastily deleted hundreds (not thousands as you mention) tree points and stone walls at this location, yes. As said I'd perfectly live with them if their change sets would not be combined with the points mentioned as 1-3 above. Now you have also reverted the work I put into re-tagging and correcting the existing elements.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 20:14:45+00:00): Proposal: Let's calm this down and give OzFlor the chance to make the needed alterations and corrections himself, as the both of us have already wasted too much time on this issue. I'll add FIXME and notes asap. Whenever it is possible I'll re-survey the area and not delete or escalate to DWG if the mentioned elements (temple, campsite, swamps, ...) are either present in sitiu or were removed from OSM by the owner himself.
PLima785 (2019-03-21 23:23:44+00:00): sure, 15 days to 30 days, take it easy.
naoliv (2019-03-22 20:02:35+00:00): Olá,
We have received a report against this situation and I'm here only to say that communication between the mappers is a key part of OpenStreetMap.
Regardless of whether the person is correct or not, we can always leave a comment on the changeset and look for a solution in a friendly way.
The comment can be used to clarify doubts, show how to better/properly map a feature or even thank for the work that the other mapper did.
If you need anything, you can contact us.
Best regards,
Nelson (from the Data Working Group)
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-25 14:28:51+00:00): @all: Just created a public thread for further discussion of this area, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=65772
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-25 19:11:05+00:00): dont see the point of having that there, especially when you dont reply on Telegram group. But you are free to do as you wish.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-25 19:26:05+00:00): You probably know Telegram is closed source and private discussion not fruitful in the sense of open software and transparent consensus in OSM. As you may have noticed, I have asked about an open discussion channel used by the PT contributors. Just let me know if there is any and I'll switch over. And no, WhatsApp does not count. ;)
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-25 19:47:29+00:00): Good, that makes perfect sense, like this changeset is private. Also regarding Telegram, might be worth getting out of the group then, if you don't reply there.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-25 20:08:11+00:00): Private? You mean, like in "everyone who knows the link may access it" private? I consider that open. :) I'm really interested to solve the issue of a user (consciously or not) damaging the map. So what do you propose? As I have seen, you have been in touch with OzFlor for some time without being able to solve the issue. Contrary, you yourself keep cleaning up after his steady faulty edits, like in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/68502012. If you look at the edit around the CS there remains a mess of wrong name tagging created by him.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-25 20:26:27+00:00): It's written on the wiki, so it's not like a secret like you make it look like. I see you don't reply on Telegram, but you are reading, funny. Again as I said, give him time to fix. The first thing is the mass deletion you done. That's not how to proceed.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-25 20:48:24+00:00): @Nuno: I simply think discussions on closed source software channels are not fruitful for consensus in the _O_SM sense. As I was told your Telegram group was recently created by yourself, let me just ask what did you use before? I mean not for coffee table discussions but for things related to OSM policies, disputes, etc. in the national area.

Let OzFlow have as many trees and flowers in his backyard as he likes but please stop him from further damaging the map in the area by adding false entries or "Abandad house" etc. while not replying to CS comments. Otherwise I will through revert filters or DWG. As you may have noticed I have added 'fixme' and a note to all his edits in the area to allow for following-up after a survey. (either me or whoever volunteers)
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-25 21:14:14+00:00): You are free to search for what I done over the years, I don't hide behind alias like you do. About the edits, I already told you several times to edit. Not delete. You keep ignoring that and pushing irrational arguments. Your ovrrmspping argument is pointless. Now have fun o your irrational talk because I'm not here to someone hiding being a nickname, questioning my integrity and my efforts over the years for OSM.
have fun and feel free to reply on Telegram instead of ignoring.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-25 21:24:56+00:00): Please read again. I did never question your credibility but the one of using closed source channels for dispute mediation. See the difference? E.g. how do you have a pro/con vote or similar on a Telegram group?
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-25 23:10:51+00:00): Its the second time you indirectly question my impartiality. Its not my Telegram group, its OSM Portugal and allow me to disagree with you as it was probably the best thing that happened in the last year regarding our portuguese community, to share, organize and discuss OSM related matters. It is not a closed source channel as anyone can join. And again, you keep pointing to different directions than the source of all this discussion, the two changesets that deleted 1100 elements in the map. And this will be the last time you will hear from me, as i'm not wasting any more of my time with this irrational, non-objective and lack of respect for OSM guidelines.
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-26 00:29:02+00:00): Anyone being able to join Facebook does not make it Open Source. Get the point? OSM needs transparency in every way and there are substancial constraints in trying to organize those matters in a single-threaded discussion feed.

I never objected to revert the delete actions. Although a partial revert would have been more beneficial to maintain my corrections contained in the CS.

As said, I'll wait for OzFlor to comment on his faulty CS's and for someone to confirm the validity of his entries at the location.
Filohipo (2019-03-26 00:55:44+00:00): Depois de ter visitado o local, confirmo as observações e notas de FulanoHerminio.
Local visitado em 24 de Março de 2019.

Ater a local survey, FulanoHerminio is totally right about this changeset. Visit made last Sunday 24Mar2019- Photos and GPX tracks upon request
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2019-03-21 09:28:04+00:00): hello, why did you delete all this data? you shouldnt delete data, unless it cease existence.
Im waiting for a reply, before reverting your edit
FulanoHerminio (2019-03-21 09:48:43+00:00): Olá, Nuno. Thanks for your message. Maybe I can clarify the changes. As I'm from the area I can assure you that the records removed are either not present or are, in my opinion, to be considered over-mapping with commercial interests - created by the owner (OSM user "José Flor - OzFlor") of the alleged "Buddhist temple" at the location. There is no Buddhist temple in that area - at least not publicly accessible or indicated. Same goes for a lot of the buildings which were indicated by the same person with meticulous detail but without presence at the location. Planned future building projects are not to be included into OSM or should, like in the case of public projects like future motorways etc., be correctly tagged. I left in the edition what can be confirmed at the location along EN16 (paths, gates) and the footpaths, or which can be identified on recent Bing Maps and GoogleEarth imagery (2017). Maybe you can rethink your decision to revert all the data? Greetings from Gouveia, Nik
eggie (2019-01-29 18:35:57+00:00): Alle dubbele adressen en namen heb ik verwijderd. Allen taggen op dat schoolterrein is voldoende en verder niet. 
Niet 2x aangeven dat het een school is. 
Scholen taggen zijn wel lastig.
Eggie
eggie (2019-01-29 18:31:46+00:00): Oke.Jasper. top!

Alleen regel Leisure_1  moet nog even weg.
Eggie
eggie (2019-01-29 18:26:41+00:00): Je verwijderd met deze actie het hele gebouw? In Culemborg stond dat winkelcentrum op een node. het gaat alleen maar over de functie en naam. De Aldi is een gebouw, maar niet het winkelcentrum.
Dat het gebouw niet direct van de kaart verdwijnt komt omdat de "rendering" erg traag gaat.
Het lijkt een beetje zolas van de week. Toen verdwenen ook de gebouwen.
Eggie
eggie (2019-01-29 18:27:33+00:00): In deze layer zie je dat de gebouwen al weg zijn
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/66746734#map=19/51.89028/5.07995&layers=H
eggie (2019-01-29 18:41:01+00:00): De gebouwen heb ik weer hersteld. De naam van het winkelcentrum staat op een knoop (node)  in het midden.
eggie (2019-01-29 18:58:16+00:00): Hier heb ik het gebouw weer hersteld.
De naam van het winkelcentrum eraf gehaald. Dat staat op een losse node op het gebouw nu.
jaap de vries (2019-01-29 20:12:07+00:00): Jasper, ik wil je best helpen. Heb je kennis dat het rechter gebouw enkel uit 1 Plus supermarkt bestaat en voor de rest uit appartementen? 
Bij het andere linker gebouw er 1 Aldi supermarkt is met tussen de gebouwen 1 passage.Bij de parkeervakken ook wat winkels, niet overal, en daarboven appartementen. 
Ben jij hier ter plaatse wezen kijken of woon je in de buurt? 
Ik kom zelf bijna iedere week wel bij de Tiendweg en Broekgraaf.
eggie (2019-01-29 18:45:50+00:00): Jasper.. dit is echt onzin. 
Winkels staan op de adresnodes. Een winkel is geen name=winkelcentrum Leerdam West. Je hebt hier het gebouw verwijderd en de omtrek een tag gegeven van winkelgebied. Weer iets anders dan een winkelcentrum.
Dat je dat weer doet geeft niet veel vertrouwen ondanks alle aanwijzingen.
Eggie
eggie (2019-01-29 18:47:59+00:00): reverted door Wijzigingenset #66747681
eggie (2019-01-29 19:16:24+00:00): Jasper.. Wat was hier precies je bedoeling? Wat wilde bereiken?  Dan kan ik wellicht helpen. 
Gr Eggie
Galbinus (2019-04-30 14:26:52+00:00): Hallo Waheiss, die Lagesche Straße, die Paulinenstraße und die Lemgoer Straße sind zwischen Nordring und Kaiser-Wilhelm-Platz uneinheitlich klassifiziert, mal secondary, mal als tertiary und mal als residential. Dies sollte dringend mal vereinheitlicht werden. Aus Deinem Änderungskommentar "ohne Referenznummer" entnehme ich, dass Du zu residential tendierst. Diese halte ich angesichts der im OSM-Wiki zu findenden Kriterien, die auch die Verkehrsbedeutung berücksichtigen, für nicht passend, es müsste meines Erachtens eine Entscheidung zwischen tertiary und secondary getroffen werden vgl. z.B. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Attributierung_von_Stra%C3%9Fen_in_Deutschland u
Galbinus (2019-04-30 14:36:15+00:00): Wichtig erscheint mir vor allem die Vereinheitligung, in die dann aber noch weitere Straßen einbezogen werden sollte: Beringstraße, Siegfriedstraße, Richthofenstraße, Leopoldstraße, Georgstraße, Sylbeckestraße, Westerfeldstraße, Niemeierstraße... das sind alles Straßen, die nicht ohne Grund keine Zone-30-Straßen sind, da sie zumindestens die Funktion der Verbindung verschiedener Stadtviertel miteinander haben.
Galbinus (2019-04-30 14:38:39+00:00): Ach ja: Die Blomberger Straße wäre da auch zu nennen.
waheiss (2019-05-01 06:08:36+00:00): Hallo Galbinus,
ich habe seinerzeit auf Grund einer Meldung im JOSM "Referenznummer fehlt" die entsprechenden Abschnitte von secondary heruntergestuft.
Laut WIKI sind secondary Straßen die von überregionaler Bedeutung sind und kleinere Zentren miteinander verbinden.
Du kannst ja mal alles Überarbeiten. Aber verwende bitte nicht secondary Straßen.
Gruß waheiss
Galbinus (2019-05-01 09:46:07+00:00): Ich habe nun die meisten Durchgangsstraßen als tertiary klassifiziert. Wo ich noch unsicher bin:
1. Lemgoer Straße - diese ist im Gegensatz zu der Detmolder Straße z.B. nach wie vor breit ausgebaut und man könnte sie auch von der Verkehrsbedeutung nach wie vor als wichtig für den Durchgangsverkehr einordnen. Ich habe sie erst einmal auf den einheitlichen Stand secondary gebracht, so wie sie bisher ja auch teilweise klassifiziert war. Aber wie gesagt, da bin ich mir unsicher.
2. Plantagenweg / Oerlinghauser Straße: Diese Strecke ist im ersten Stück Landesstraße, dann Kreisstraße, dann städtische Straße und dann wieder Landesstraße (Hellweg) - von der Verkehrsbedeutung ändert sich zwischendurch nichts. Bislang ist sie durchgängig als secondary eingeordnet, erscheint mir auch irgendwie logisch.
Was meinst Du?
Chris Fleming (2019-02-05 21:36:43+00:00): Hi - I just wanted to drop a quick note to say Welcome to OSM!

It's great to add and improve these paths.

I see that you requested a review on some of your edits. I've had a loom through and they all look great.

Also let me know if you have any questions.

Cheers
Chris
viloan (2019-01-29 18:55:13+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
viloan (2019-01-29 19:03:07+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Geim (2019-02-24 21:07:10+00:00): Hoi Geritsel,
Met het mappen van de beken heb je aardig wat intersections zonder junction gemaakt. Zie: https://www.keepright.at/report_map.php?zoom=14&lat=48.20808&lon=16.37221
Het is voor anderen zonder lokale kennis ondoenlijk om al deze fouten te corrigeren.
Zou je deze junctions nog kunne toevoegen?

Gr. Geim
viloan (2019-01-29 19:15:30+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!