piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Robhubi (inaktiv) (2021-09-30 21:07:43+00:00): Hi,
Tip on "ruins": Only a few maps show them. One of them is https://openstreetbrowser.org/#map=17/39.53996/19.90138&categories=historic in the category "History". Or also with more flexibility (click "Execute"): https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1bEk 
Are you convinced of the tag historic ? Does it fit into the meaning frame of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Historic ?
In cases of doubt, I always ask myself "Is it verifiable?": Has a historian published about it? Is it included in an official list of historic sites?
Just from the aerial photo I would have tagged building=yes + ruins=yes. But on site, of course, it may look different.
Best regards to Corfu, Robert
ibanez (2021-09-02 19:15:09+00:00): Änderungssatzkommentar ist falsch. Es war nicht mein Hinweis sondern der eines anderen anonymen Erstellers.
Leo Slager (2021-09-03 08:49:48+00:00): Door het ondoordacht opknippen van wegen zijn 29 routerelaties beschadigd.
Als er routerelaties over een weg lopen dan richt je grote schade aan als je de weg doorknipt.
Als je serieus wilt mappen gebruik dan niet de editor iD waar je nu mee werkt. Overweeg dan over te stappen naar de editor JOSM. Dan worden die fouten niet gemaakt !
OST360VR_Joscelin (2021-09-03 14:19:06+00:00): @Leo Slager Prettig dat je dat even meldt. Denk evenwel niet dat je kunt zeggen dat ik ondoordacht en niet serieus handel, dat ik niet alles heb kunnen overzien kun je mij niet kwalijk nemen als de door de community ter beschikking gestelde editor daar niet in voorziet.
Overigens vraag ik me wel af of het handig is om een open omgeving als OSM voor bedrijfskritische complexe toepassingen te gebruiken als busroutes. Mij lijkt dat men niet verder zou moeten gaan dan bushaltes met welke lijnen die aandoen. Als er geen simpele aanpassingen aan OSM meer kunnen worden gedaan omdat er busroutes over wegen lopen, dan vind ik dat een slechte zaak.
Leo Slager (2021-09-03 15:22:43+00:00): Ik ben het volkomen met je eens.
De beslissing om routerelaties in OSM mogelijk te maken kan worden beschouwd als een historische vergissing. Nu OSM vol staat met wandelroutes, fietsroutes en OV-routes zullen we er, spijtig genoeg, mee moeten leven. 
Van een meer ervaren mapper mag worden verwacht dat hij JOSM gebruikt. JOSM kan goed omgaan met routerelaties en dan worden beschadigingen vermeden.
Maar ja, dat is ook niet meer als mijn mening.
OST360VR_Joscelin (2021-09-06 18:22:58+00:00): @Leo. Sympathieke reactie. Tof dat we het eens zijn. Goed dat je de rest ook ff noemt, dan heb ik dat ook op mijn netvlies. Mijn prioriteitsbijdrage is 360 street-level imagery voor Mapillary and Google Street View. Kom natuurlijk dingen tegen op de kaarten die niet (meer) kloppen en probeer daar dan wat aan te doen. In dit geval was het ook een spin-off. Door jouw reactie wel wat geleerd. Een jaar geleden JOSM hier voor Curaçao gebruikt om 'zonering' en 'wijken' op orde te brengen, want die waren aangegeven als politieke boundaries terwijl ze dat niet zijn. Ik heb al die relationships op orde gebracht. Zag vorige week dat ze nu 'incomplete' zijn gelabelled. Heeft mij weken gekost en is dus ook door iemand om zeep geholpen. Mogelijk door degenen die hier met busroutes bezig zijn. Een andere zaak die ik vorig jaar tegenkwam is dat de grens van ons koninkrijk een verkeerde korte naam heeft. Een edit lokte natuurlijk een discussie uit, maar is blijven steken in academisch geharrewar. Indien jij goed ingvoerd bent in de community dan kun je misschien wat gewicht in de schaal leggen dat daar voortgang in komt in het belang van de eilanden. Misschien ook een signaal richting het iD team dat ze een blokkering aanbrengen in dit soort gevallen. 
Bedankt voor het herstellen van de schade, want ik heb de kennis niet paraat.
AsgerFrank (2021-09-02 22:37:54+00:00): Man kan med fordel tilføje et tag "source" (kilde) til ændringssættet; det er muligt i iD lige før man uploader det, men desværre ikke obligatorisk som i andre editorer.
Har man f.eks. faktisk været på stedet og observeret, vil et "survey" som kilde være værdifuldt, foruden hvad man evt. har tegnet efter (SDFE aerial imagery eller måske egen gps, etc.).
AsgerFrank (2021-09-02 23:02:10+00:00): Det er også muligt til en vis grad at inkludere noget om kilden i selve kommentaren til ændringssættet, selvom det ikke er hovedprincippet.
AsgerFrank (2021-09-02 22:19:17+00:00): Hej, rettelsen er ikke nødvendig, ja den er faktisk forkert, fordi navne på objekter skal være et "rigtigt navn", ikke en beskrivelse af HVAD det er. Man skriver heller ikke eksempelvis "En lille dam", hus, sti osv.
Derimod ville det være rigtigt med navn, hvis stien f.eks. var skiltet "Søkrogstien".
Er der alligevel en særlig grund til at fortælle noget ekstra, kan man evt. gøre det i et tag "beskrivelse" (description).
Du kan nemt gå ind med editoren og blot fjerne hele tagget. 
Det kan også være en anden mapper, der bemærker fejlen, gør det inden; eller jeg selv senere.
aweech (2021-09-03 18:32:36+00:00): Hi,
The tolls have been removed from Exit 11. Whatever data source you are using is incorrect.
aayudhi-choudhary (2021-09-06 17:30:49+00:00): Hi, thank you so much for pointing it out, I had no idea about it. Can you help me verify that has the toll been removed from the entry ramp too. Thanks again.
aweech (2021-09-06 17:37:53+00:00): Here is a press release from the turnpike authority. Yes, the tolls are no longer collected at the entry ramp too. https://www.nh.gov/dot/media/nr2019/20191230-merrimack-toll.htm
jaap de vries (2021-09-03 12:14:26+00:00): Het betreft een eenrichtingsweg. Waarom pas je deze weg weer aan? 
Je geeft zelf aan dat je via satelliet werk en niet ter plekke komt. Ik ken het en je vernield zomaar zonder contact mijn werk. Ik zou je kunnen aangeven bij de dwg, maar omdat nu dit de eerste keer is doe ik het niet, maar bij meerdere keren zal ik het waarschijnlijk wel doen.
armiductor (2021-09-03 13:58:26+00:00): Ik weet dat het een eenrichtingsweg is. Dit heb ik ook niet aangepast. Wat ik wel heb gedaan is service=parking_aisles toegevoegd aangezien dat het ook is. Graag dit wijzigen want ik zie nu op de kaart dat het weer verkeerd staat. Dank dat je er net als mij en alle andere vrijwilligers ook tijd en moeite in steekt. Samen maken we er wat moois van :)
jaap de vries (2021-09-03 14:23:33+00:00): Jawel dat heb je wel gedaan, misschien onbewust. Ik had het in versie 9 het toegevoegd

Versie #9
dit betreft een eenrichtingsstraat !

1 dag geleden bewerkt door jaap de vries · Wijzigingenset #110618167
Labels
highway	unclassified
name	Weg door Jonkerbos
oneway	yes

In versie 10 heb jij het aangepast 
Versie #10
(geen opmerking)

ongeveer 19 uur geleden bewerkt door armiductor · Wijzigingenset #110637370
Labels
highway	unclassified
name	Weg door Jonkerbos

In versie 11 verander ik het weer.
jaap de vries (2021-09-03 14:26:04+00:00): Dus aub ter plekke gaan kijken en niet zoals je eerder schrijft " Ik kan op de satelliet niet zien of het klopt vanwege aanwezige bomen. Zelf kan ik het ook niet ter plekke controleren. "
jaap de vries (2021-09-03 14:29:37+00:00): Verversen van de kaart duurt even, maar ik kan je garanderen dat het juist op deze kaart staat.

Jaap
jaap de vries (2021-09-03 14:48:27+00:00): In versie 6 had ik het al aangepast naar eenrichting zie ik zojuist, dus nu 3 keer aangepast naar eenrichting...
armiductor (2021-09-03 15:54:38+00:00): Er is wat verwarring geweest dan. Maar begrijp dat het nu goed staat en daar gaat het uiteindelijk om. Dank voor het meedenken en verder detaileren van de parkeerplaats. Dit stukje kaart is er sinds vorige week dik op vooruitgegaan. :)
WoodWoseWulf (2021-09-02 20:35:56+00:00): Hi gzephirin,

This feature was already on the map, here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/51253492

I have removed the newer duplicate.

Cheers,

-Wood
Arisuaq (2021-09-02 19:45:53+00:00): Take a look at Albania for example - a town Roskovec with approximately 15,000 inhabitants, and many other small towns are marked as city. Or in Bosnia, there is town Gradiška with only 14 368 inhabitants marked as city. Šibenik is bigger than both of those "cities" combined.
eric db (2026-05-09 11:28:44+00:00): Hi Chris, just fixed this riverside path in Glen Nevis (from survey), it's indeed a bit closer to the river in many places, but anyway it wasn't confusing.
hayashi (2021-09-03 08:02:33+00:00): 「自動車専用道路」でない道路に[highway=motorway]をつけないでください。
千葉外房有料道路は「自動車専用道路」ではありません。原付き＆自転車の通行も制限されていない一般道です。OSMを利用するナビゲーションアプリが正しく動作しなくなるので、現地の規制標識等に従って正確なマッピングを心がけてください。
dqn (2021-09-03 09:09:38+00:00): コメントありがとうございます。
自動車向けナビゲーションアプリを考慮していましたが、自転車向けナビゲーションアプリは確かに正常動作しなくなりますね。
「toll=yes」と歩行者・自転車タグで修正してみました。
これでうまく動作するかと思います。
板倉インター接続部については少々不明瞭な場所（廃道？）があり、該当タグつけておりません。
最後の一文は余計です。
Lennardderudder (2026-05-08 14:40:53+00:00): Hi, in this changeset you added the tags highway=path and paved=driveway to this way -> https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978839267 . What did you mean by the tag paved=driveway? Did you mean to add the tag highway=driveway instead?
bielebog (2026-05-09 09:32:45+00:00): Looks like I made typing or copy/paste mishap in JOSM. Thanks for spotting. On local aerial imagery, this looks like is a path.
Changed accordingly in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182415719#map=16/51.55356/8.54743&layers=N
Lennardderudder (2026-05-09 13:04:05+00:00): No problem, thanks for the quick response and fix! It doesn't happen that often to me that someone replies to a question on a 4 year old changeset.
ke9tv (2022-02-21 22:43:06+00:00): I'm updating minor civil divisions in New York, incliuding making sure that administrative centers are present, and I see that Village of Deposit gives 61 Front Street as the address of the village hall. Is the web site correct? (I mapped a village hall at the address given, and then discovered the conflict.)

I checked, and this is not a confusion with the Town of Deposit offices, which are at 3 Elm Street.

Did you perhaps merge a misplaced address point from the GNIS import?
ke9tv (2022-02-21 22:48:38+00:00): Ah... I see what happened here. 146 Front Street is the historic village hall, which has been sold and repurposed - but still has the name in the masonry on the building.
TomPar (2021-10-01 20:09:15+00:00): Do you have a second reference to support adding this trail to OSM besides Strava?  Or have you seen this first hand?  This "trail" is not on any trail map I've seen.
TomPar (2021-09-23 14:35:30+00:00): This trail has been closed years ago.  There is no longer a bridge over the river here.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2021-09-03 00:14:50+00:00): Il y aura bel et bien un accès par le sud. Le site du REM n'est pas à jour. Le tunnel piéton est presque complété
BCNorwich (2021-09-03 07:34:51+00:00): Embankment removed.
BCNorwich (2021-09-03 07:28:10+00:00): wall removed
ElPerenza (2021-09-02 20:49:20+00:00): oops, wrong source link, here's the correct one: https://normativaesercizio.rfi.it/NormativaEsercizio/detail.xhtml?doctype=FCL&compartimento=TS
Shaun das Schaf (2021-09-06 17:20:00+00:00): Hallo gummibaerli,

bicycle=yes, foot=yes und horse=yes brauchen gar nicht explizit gesetzt zu werden, wenn sie gesetzlich eh schon erlaubt sind und sich nicht von der folgenden Liste unterscheiden:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Germany
Das gilt nicht nur für Straßen, sondern z.B. auch für Feldwege (highway=track).

motor_vehicle=private ist richtigerweise gesetzt, da es sich ja vom gesetzlichen Standard unterscheidet.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
skyper (2021-09-25 12:21:33+00:00): Hi wermak
iD hat leider die Reihenfolge der Rufbuslinie 5 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11193902) komplett durcheinander gewirbelt.
Habe es in CS 111685304 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111685304) versucht wieder geradezurücken aber Du kannst ja nochmal drüberschauen.

Danke und Grüße,
skyper
gurglypipe (2021-09-02 21:27:14+00:00): Hi, I’m wondering why this was necessary. The layer key only defines an order for overlapping ways which are not joined with a node, and I don’t think that’s the case for any of the ways you’ve added the key to (where it was unset before) here.
Falsernet (2021-09-02 21:37:58+00:00): It was set before actually, just such that when zooming out the bridges overlapped the roundabout. It tidies up the appearance of the junction. Think of it this way - the whole roundabout itself doesn't have motorway rules or restrictions, and the edge of the roundabout is the distinct line from which motorway rules apply (e.g. you're not allowed to go beyond that on foot).
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-09-02 22:29:04+00:00): edição revertida
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-09-02 22:29:06+00:00): edição revertida
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-09-02 22:29:08+00:00): edição revertida
gurglypipe (2021-09-02 21:31:31+00:00): Heya, thanks for this. Just a quick note that when mapping terraced/semidetached houses, the nodes for the joined walls should be joined together. The editor will have given you a warning like ‘house crosses house’ about this. I’ll fix these houses, but please make sure to join the nodes in future, thanks :)
VictorIE (2021-09-03 09:07:44+00:00): Hi, there are some buildings here that have been mapped twice https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978862987
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-09-02 22:29:10+00:00): edição revertida
4004 (2021-09-05 23:33:14+00:00): seriously, continent spanning changesets from gomap? please avoid
BodhidharmaI (2021-09-06 15:10:59+00:00): Why?
erickdeoliveiraleal (2021-09-02 22:32:14+00:00): edição revertida
julcnx (2021-09-03 02:03:37+00:00): In the future, please make smaller geographical changesets, thank you.
For more info: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110642141
Bexhill-OSM (2021-09-02 22:46:00+00:00): Please be careful with the geometry, bing isn't well aligned, better to use osmuk cadastral parcels
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-03 10:04:52+00:00): This was a geometry fix, not alignment to the Bing satellite map
Bexhill-OSM (2021-09-03 19:33:17+00:00): Okay, wrong changeset, but it applies in general
skquinn (2021-09-02 22:37:52+00:00): Also resolves note 2828704
skquinn (2021-09-02 22:38:24+00:00): Disregard, this applies to the next changeset I submitted not this one
skquinn (2021-09-02 22:38:05+00:00): Also resolves note 2828704
pesec (2021-09-03 07:11:44+00:00): Старайтесь, чтобы названия правок отражали суть вносимых изменений.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
literan (2021-09-03 11:21:01+00:00): присоединяюсь. Корректно комментировать правки - знак доброго отношения к коллегам по проекту
DENelson83 (2021-09-08 09:15:39+00:00): Names of bodies of water should not overlap.  "Burrard Inlet" should not overlap with English Bay, Vancouver Harbour, Indian Arm or Port Moody.
Olyon (2021-09-08 12:39:50+00:00): Why?
English Bay, Vancouver Harbor, Indian Arm and Port Moody are all in the Burrard Inlet, so they are in OSM too.
DENelson83 (2021-09-08 15:17:16+00:00): Because that is how the whole BC coast is structured in OSM.
Olyon (2021-09-08 15:37:18+00:00): That's how you've structured the BC coast, but I don't see the reason for it.
eggie (2021-09-06 21:34:01+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
ExecutableFiles (2021-09-02 23:55:51+00:00): Complete list of stops are incomplete and more will be added later.
SekeRob (2021-09-03 07:00:43+00:00): Hi

With 53K change sets you surely would know that doing edits in one save of spots far apart creates very big bound boxes too which causes everyone in-between to get this update shown in their local history view. Please make saves per small area. I'm told it's very easy with the JOSM map editor. Not interested to know what's updated in Denmark or Greece and causing every in between to wonder with just the 'tolo' comment: What did the mapper do?

TIA and Happy mapping.
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2021-09-03 11:23:38+00:00): Sorry, I thought had submitted the DK edits when I made the Tolo edits.
DressyPear4 (2021-09-03 11:33:39+00:00): Praça não corresponde com a realidade, edição removida
kimo (2021-09-28 13:06:02+00:00): Why did you remove the roundabout at Knees Road and Arundel Road?
Ray Mandes (2021-09-03 01:20:58+00:00): Large changeset size due to accidentally touching a boundary way. However, it appears the boundary way is identical to before.
◪ Jarv (2021-09-03 21:51:27+00:00): Not sure why this change was needed. I've been past this dozens of times and It was perfectly mapped. revert?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110644410
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-04 01:55:29+00:00): I have been past here many a time too. It's correctly mapped (monument + traffic island). What's the issue?
◪ Jarv (2021-09-04 17:17:14+00:00): Its not a traffic island. It is a cross in the centre of the road, physically dividing traffic with keep left signs. Having the carriageway split in two and the cross on its own node in the centre is a perfectly acceptable way to map it with more detail (aka micro mapping). All you have done is removed detail and incorrectly saying it is traffic calming when its purpose is not traffic calming.
Nathan_A_RF (2021-09-05 17:13:42+00:00): Fine, revert if you want. It's the same either way, I just thought it doesn't look aesthetically pleasing as two segments.
Supaplex (2021-09-03 02:44:24+00:00): 舟山路應該是不是單車專用吧，車子還是能通行的
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110644885
Supaplex (2021-09-03 02:52:04+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28357584
蒲葵道有人行走，還有單車，另外廠商送貨的車能開進來，改成 cycleway  並不太適合
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110644885
user_10360149 (2021-10-28 06:16:15+00:00): 尊敬的Yao Hui
您好！注意到您在大连旅顺到中山、普兰店附近添加了大量的毫无意义没有任何标签且不存在的点。
若您想要标注一条或多条基于GPS等定位系统生成的路径，请您通过上传GPX的方式解决。
若您的数据来源于某个数据集，还望您添加有解释说明意义的标签。
还望您做出必要的解释和说明，期待您的答复。

---------
快乐的老鼠宝宝
代表 OSMChina数据团队 敬上
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-28 06:32:10+00:00): 上面这条是我说的，不知道为什么会蹦到Thregren的名下

---------
快乐的老鼠宝宝
补充
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-28 07:40:38+00:00): 已回退
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113068901
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-28 06:16:10+00:00): 尊敬的Yao Hui
您好！注意到您在大连旅顺到中山、普兰店附近添加了大量的毫无意义没有任何标签且不存在的点。
若您想要标注一条或多条基于GPS等定位系统生成的路径，请您通过上传GPX的方式解决。
若您的数据来源于某个数据集，还望您添加有解释说明意义的标签。
还望您做出必要的解释和说明，期待您的答复。

---------
快乐的老鼠宝宝
代表 OSMChina数据团队 敬上
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-28 07:41:06+00:00): 已回退
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113068975
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2021-10-28 07:02:09+00:00): Yao Hui
您好
用OSMCha看到您这一批修改一共分为四个修改集
110645162, 110644935, 110644928, 110644924
您将大量的道路拆分出双向线路，这并不一定符合OSM的逻辑，我们选择双线或者单线，是出于on the ground的原则，反应真实的道路等级和路况。
此外，OSM拒绝无来源的数据，您的数据若为互联网地图得到，它很可能是属于地图服务商所拥有的版权，是不可以导入进OSM的。

综上，我们将安排OSMChina的维护者对您的这系列编辑进行回退。

    ---------
    快乐的老鼠宝宝
    代表 OSMChina数据团队 敬上
jleedev (2022-01-04 12:28:17+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
ohmanger (2025-06-24 09:47:54+00:00): Hi again, hope you had a good solstice.

I appreciate this was a while ago but do you have a source for the tag "ref=SW (2)" used for the Shropshire Way?
This change set appears to be the source of it.
AlwynWellington (2025-06-25 01:00:44+00:00): Thank you.  We call it Matariki (the time at which the constellation the Greeks called Pleiades and the Japanese, Subaru) is first seen and marks the new year for our first nations.

Not guilty.
My focus for Severn Way was to fix the many little things that led to elevation profiles shown in WayMarkedTrails as being incomplete or "deranged".
At that time I was also conscious that order in which relations with the same name in a super relation were randomly sequenced.  
OSM seems to have changed to the sequence of route relations as entered in the super relation as being the order to be rendered.

I can say that using a notation such as "SW (1)" is not a style that I would default to.

But you will see the reference above to "over 900 elements is difficult to maintain in sequence" 

That was also a concern with Shropshire Way north and ... south and was the primary factor for revising Shropshire Way into the stages that the SW Association adopted about a decade ago.

Kia kaha (take care, be strong)
orthocircular (2021-09-03 19:24:23+00:00): Just to confirm, when you deleted these driveways was it because you were physically there and know there is no passable road here? Usually #amap is pretty okay about noting roads where they exist. If you just think people shouldn't walk or drive down the path, but a path does exist, then there's other ways of tagging that.

Thanks again for your contributions!
Balih00! (2021-09-03 19:56:42+00:00): I know for a fact these are private driveways. I didn’t want people to think they link up to the MiLK run trails.
orthocircular (2021-09-03 23:08:06+00:00): Ok thanks! Amazon (#amap) added them likely because they were necessary to deliver a package, so I'll re-add them but mark them as private so that any decent GPS app will not suggest using it. (We shouldn't delete things that exist, because they'll just be treated as missing and re-added later, rather we can just tag them appropriately to match reality.)

Is there any way of accessing the MiLK trail from the west side? Maybe Kestrel Hill Ln or Windsor Place or Grandview Dr? Or is it just a single entrance loop off Fair Oaks Dr?
Balih00! (2021-09-07 17:36:54+00:00): Good to know the background. thanks. There's no access to the trail that doesn't go through private land.
orthocircular (2021-09-07 19:33:52+00:00): Gotcha. The legal access is via Northwest Fair Oaks Drive, right? There were some trails up there that were overlapping but not actually connected so I connected them.
Balih00! (2021-09-07 20:29:06+00:00): Looks good. Fair Oaks is the only public access point.
orthocircular (2021-09-03 06:04:16+00:00): Hey there, it looks like you edited the city border for Corvallis. Was this intentional?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110646759
Balih00! (2021-09-03 15:50:57+00:00): Certainly not. Thanks for catching did you change it back? I don't see where it happened.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110646759
orthocircular (2021-09-03 18:15:18+00:00): I didn't change it back, maybe you can give an attempt. I like to use osmcha for viewing changesets (linked above) but you can also use this: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=110646759#19/44.58794/-123.31089 the deleted node was 454170749
orthocircular (2021-09-03 18:22:50+00:00): I'm having trouble rewinding time to see exactly how the Corvallis border looked before, but some cached map tiles give us a hint: https://imgur.com/a/SYL32XA
Balih00! (2021-09-03 18:35:51+00:00): I think the best thing would be to rollback my entire change set. I'm not entirely sure how to do that though. If you have the ability, please do. If not, I'll try to figure it out.
orthocircular (2021-09-03 18:39:32+00:00): It looks like you did a bunch of good work mapping a new trail! I think I see the problem and I'll take care of it. Here's the correct border in red according to the newest TIGER census data, which means the city border hasn't been correct in a while ;) no worries!

In the future to prevent this just double check the list of changed things before you hit upload, and double-check what all is attached to stuff like landuses and roads at the edge of town cuz sometimes people (misguidedly?) merge them with administrative boundaries. Happy mapping!
orthocircular (2021-09-03 18:39:47+00:00): (link) https://imgur.com/a/Jt8oIbU
AngocA (2021-09-10 01:15:07+00:00): Te recomiendo poner tildes. La palabra es "Río". Hemos hecho una campaña para mantener la ortografía en los objetos.
AkuAnakTimur (2021-09-03 03:53:32+00:00): The "Lebuhraya Pantai Timur link to Gebeng" part is misleading, always check your comment before uploading