piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
abakus_uploader (2021-09-29 22:30:59+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
BCNorwich (2021-09-29 07:26:42+00:00): Meant to comment as connected paths to lock-gate
ralley (2021-09-29 20:47:28+00:00): Welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits.  Just a pointer that might make your life easier: in NZ a large proportion of buildings consist of mostly 90 degree corners.  You can easily make all corners 90 degrees in the Id editor by selecting the building, right clicking and choosing “Square”.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111850757
loir (2022-03-10 08:47:29+00:00): Зачем писать в name Долгострой, если уже есть сочетание тегов abandoned=yes + landuse=construction? убираю
mavl (2021-09-30 16:31:22+00:00): Здравствуйте. Спасибо за уточнение карты.  
Как вы, наверное, знаете OpenStreetMap публикует свои данные под свободной лицензией, а данные компании 2ГИС защищены авторским правом. Вы получили от компании 2ГИС разрешение на добавление её данных в OpenStreetMap?
maro21 (2021-09-29 19:28:16+00:00): Jeśli zmienił się właściciel SKP, to adres strony i numer referencyjny chyba też?
maro21 (2021-09-29 19:30:04+00:00): Skąd się wziął ten adres? Taki nie został nadany: https://geoportal.wroclaw.pl/poi/u/4291/ul.Konopackiej
user_1566574 (2021-10-01 11:39:10+00:00): Top ! Je ne connaissais pas merci, pour l'occasion j'ai j'ai été faire des relevés, je complète. ;)
flohoff (2021-10-01 09:58:09+00:00): Moin,
ich habe hier gerade den change gesehen. Du hast da auf den Südlichen driveways so das service=driveway weggenommen oder dazu gepackt. Nach welcher Bildungsregel machst du das? Für mich sind das alles driveways.

Dann der weg über den Parkplatz nördlich. Der geht jetzt mitten über die "Insel" in der Mitte mit den Bäumen. Das kann ja so nicht passen.

Dann hast du die servicezufart hinter der Gaststätte weggelöscht - Warum? Geht der da nicht mehr um die Ecke vor das Lager?

Flo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111853356
DeFra85 (2021-10-01 22:09:23+00:00): Die Zufahrt zur Gaststätte hab ich in eine Zufahrtsstraße geändert weil sie so breit ist.
Das Stück hinterm Haus hab ich weggenommen, weil man denken könnte, das man da auch noch parken könnte. Könnte man ggf. wieder hinzufügen aber den access auf no oder privat ändern.

Bei dem kurzen Stück am nördlichen AmSennberg hab ich gepennt, das sind natürlich alles Zufahrtswege zu den Grundstücken und dem Wald.
flohoff (2021-10-03 19:25:30+00:00): 
WTF?

"... hab ich weggenommen, weil man denken könnte, das man da auch noch parken könnte. "

Wieso löscht du dinge die nachweislich existieren nur weil jemand anders eine andere Nutzung da reininterpretieren wollen würde ? Das ist doch totaler Unsinn. 
Wir mappen das was da ist, und mit der Beschilderung die da ist, und nicht ausgedachtes.

Flo
Meghdoot (2021-09-29 08:33:28+00:00): Kindly Check My Details and confirm to make
mueschel (2021-09-30 15:52:14+00:00): Hi,
please check these nodes - all of them have 'osmand' tags, but no common OSM tag describing what they are.
flohoff (2021-10-01 09:58:57+00:00): Hi,
das ist kein access=private - Das ist wenn überhaupt destination. Siehe auch meinen Note.

Flo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111853768
DeFra85 (2021-10-01 21:49:59+00:00): Der Sennberg im Süden habe ich glaube nicht im access verändert, nur das kurze Stück vom HallerWeg/B68 zum Privatweg als Nebenstraße geändert, weil es dort noch links zur alten Sandkuhle geht.
DeFra85 (2021-10-01 21:51:25+00:00): Der Sennberg im Norden ist mit Verkehrszeichen DE:250 und DE:1020-30 beschildert, hab ich heute beim vorbei fahren gesehen. Da hab ich jetzt motorvehicle=destination gesetzt.
flohoff (2021-10-03 19:23:46+00:00): Siehe auch den note auf dem Weg - Deshalb hab ich ihn ja explizit dokumentiert. Das ganze ist auch via Mapillary Bilder eindeutig zu finden. Deshalb hab ich mich ja gefragt warum du es auf private setzt trotz expliziter Beschreibung im Note und Bildern die existieren.
eggie (2021-09-29 15:18:35+00:00): Dag HJGroen
ref is bedoeld voor nummers en codes.
Beter note=...  gebruiken
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref

De wegklasse kan hier beter als highway=unclassified getagd worden volgens mij.


MVG
eggie
ToniE (2021-09-29 08:59:40+00:00): Servus,

bitte im Rahmen eures Projektes keine Tags entfernen, die existieren:

- tactile_paving = no

- bench = no

- shelter = no

wurden z.T. hier und an anderen Haltestellen entfernt.

Wenn sie nicht korrekt sind, dann bitte korrigieren, aber bitte nicht entfernen.

Danke
Toni
GinaroZ (2021-09-29 10:44:07+00:00): Thanks for adding this - however I don't think it  needs an access tag as there's nothing restricting them to just customers? :)
kapazao (2021-09-29 12:46:46+00:00): Hola, ¿por qué eliminas este elemento, has leido la wiki por casualidad?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:shop=funeral_directors
De todas formas si es tanatorio podrías haberlo indicado y no eliminar la información que había.
Lo revertiré, un saludo.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111855744
mapko (2021-09-30 06:20:31+00:00): Ahoj. Dakujem za opravu. Videl som, vedel som, zabudol som :(
Ser9ei (2021-09-29 13:36:55+00:00): Поменяв тип, вы разрушили связность дорог по типам. Посмотрите на граф дорог теперь и увидите, что карту вы не улучшили. Прежде чем что-либо менять, советую почитать wiki. А этот пакет, конечно же, следует откатить.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111855937
kapazao (2021-09-29 12:55:09+00:00): Hola, añadiste unos parques infantiles como zonas de recreación y pusiste la plaza como un parque, incluso cambiando su nombre. Por favor usa los nombres que tengan los lugares y ajústa los elementos lo más posible a la realidad, no los inventes.
Lo he corregido, un saludo
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111856013
Jakka (2021-09-30 20:14:17+00:00): le nom piste cyclable pas correcte.
Il y a panneau type D7 ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/158320365#map=15/49.5856/5.8237&layers=N
Jakka (2021-09-30 20:18:13+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=cycleway
pas de panneau type D7 ect.
highway path
Jakka (2021-09-30 20:11:43+00:00): "name=chemin privé" pas correcte. access=private
highway=cycleway pense pas non définition "cycleway" est spéciale conçu pour vélo panneau D7 ? Et c'est privé ????
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111856170
SHARCRASH (2021-10-11 22:26:08+00:00): Hi Jakka! I corrected :) 

PS: do not expect any answer from him, he never replied mine and doesn't really respect OSM tag consensus.
Jakka (2021-10-12 06:46:12+00:00): Thx for the extra information.
A67-A67 (2022-03-08 16:09:40+00:00): Dat hier geen auto's mogen komen, wordt al aangegeven met de tag highway=cycleway (fietspad). Graag geen access=no gebruiken op wegen die niet daadwerkelijk verboden zijn voor weggebruikers als fietsers en voetgangers.
Jakka (2021-09-30 20:07:06+00:00): ces deux track ont le nom officiel de "Chemin du Meunier" ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111856311
eggie (2021-09-29 15:27:08+00:00): Dag ov

Reinier Haga Orthopedisch Centrum staat al op de adresnode nr 2.
Je bedoeling is uiteraard goed, maar gebouwen worden (periodiek) geïmporteerd vanuit de BAG (Kadaster). We tekenen niet zelf in.
Ik pas even wat aan mbv de BAG data.
Luchtfoto's vertekenen.... schuin genomen foto's.
MVG
eggie
ov_079 (2021-09-29 16:50:11+00:00): Oke dankjewel voor de info. Geldt dat ook voor kleine gebouwtjes zoals schuurtjes op het platteland en zo, of pakt het systeem die niet op?
eggie (2021-09-29 17:26:58+00:00): Kleine schuurtjes teken ik vaak gewoon in. Die staan ook soms niet in de BAG.
Dus geen probleem. Nieuwbouw beter laten importeren via het forum van OSM
Mapse
Eggie
eggie (2021-09-29 17:28:58+00:00): Import verzoek..Dat kan in dit draadje https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=842366#p842366
Inlog identiek aan osm account
Gr eggie
literan (2021-10-08 15:38:20+00:00): здесь вы зачем-то приклеили линию газона к середине линии дороги. Так делать нельзя (ведь дорога не состоит наполовину из газона). Исправлю
literan (2021-10-08 15:35:27+00:00): leisure=park это тег для отметки парковых учреждений, предназначенных для рекреационных целей. Газон с деревьями и дорожками этим тегом отмечать не принято.

К тому же вы зачем-то удалили контуры древесной растительности. Правку придется отменить
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:18:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:50:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:57:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
abrensch (2021-10-21 11:26:02+00:00): Hallo changchun_1,

für dieses motor_vehicle=agricultural finde ich keinen Hinweis in dem sehr reichlichen Bildmaterial von 2018:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/987937122

Hast Du das mit Absicht gesetzt?

Danke und Gruss, Arndt
changchun_1 (2021-10-21 12:06:54+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, ist fälschlicherweise reingekommen. Habe es korrigiert.
Gruß Matthias
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:52:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:53:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:48:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:16:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
Ebong C137 (2021-10-26 06:17:35+00:00): Hello Sat_spike. Please do not add information on the mapped road(highway), leave that for the field team.
Thank you for mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111858069
Sat_spike (2021-10-26 12:59:39+00:00): Hi Ebong C137, I have provided the missing connectivity and corrected the highway classification. It looks like the extra information was added by other mappers. Kindly refer to this changeset for your reference https://osmcha.org/changesets/111699652/.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:02:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:56:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
rab (2021-09-29 17:04:13+00:00): Regarding Tomtom mapping:
Sharp angles, unnecessary streets, street layout does not look logical, looks ugly, residential streets could also be paths or tracks (bing) Please check considerations at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Zambia
Please only tag a street as a "residential" if the land use is also clearly residential. Unclassified streets and residential streets should look official somehow. A street that is only visible in one image layer may disappear again.
St_Drive (2021-09-30 13:20:22+00:00): Hi rab, the changeset you commented on is not in Zambia, but in Zimbabwe. I followed the African tagging guidelines (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa) for editing and creating highways, and assigned classification according to the latest imagery (Maxar Premium) in this region. Your suggestions and tips are helpful, thank you.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
surveyor54 (2021-09-29 10:25:48+00:00): Sollte im Kommentar "der schon bei der Übernahme von node 8745778654 bestand" heißen.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Larmax (2021-09-29 12:47:53+00:00): Tuo ei taida olla tien virallinen nimi?
j numminen (2021-10-14 08:35:35+00:00): Valitettavasti tämä käyttäjä on jatkanut häiriköintiä samalla kaavalla ja Larmaxin revertin jälkeen toistanut tiennimimuutoksen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/112492593
edvac (2022-04-12 09:58:20+00:00): This user has been blocked for a year:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5901

Rafael Avila Coya, on behalf of the OSMF's DWG
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:17:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:59:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
martianfreeloader (2021-10-24 11:05:55+00:00): Hello!
You've deleted a whole lot of objects here: a parking lot, an access aisle, a vegetated area + a number of trees.

One of the results is that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/927801230 is now disconnected from other roads, but more importantly, I'm wondering why you deleted all these objects. Was this by accident?

https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=111859762#19/46.04758/14.49576
Mark Martinec (2021-10-25 14:17:54+00:00): That whole area of the MDB square has been recently fully reconstructed/rebuilt. There is no road there any more, it is essentially a pedestrian zone entirely. This includes removed vegetation and parking area. Some details will need to be filled-in when the reconstruction is finished. Have you seen the square recently in person? I'll need to check how the service road you mention is now accessible by vehicles. Regards, Mark.
martianfreeloader (2021-10-25 14:34:34+00:00): Oh great! Thanks a lot for your edit!

No, I have no recent on-ground information, so I wanted to make sure it wasn't an accident.

Just a minor issue: The driveway https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/927801230 is now disconnected from other roads. Do you know whether the path https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/983014205 can be used by cars? Should we convert this to a driveway?
Mark Martinec (2021-10-25 18:02:59+00:00): I doubt that the path can be used for motor vehicles, as the "Ljubljana Ortophoto 2020" shows there is a bollard there. Need to check, will go there in one of the following days to see accessibility of the now-disconnected service road.
martianfreeloader (2021-10-25 18:52:39+00:00): Very nice! Happy mapping!
Mark Martinec (2021-10-28 00:28:48+00:00): Been there, done some mapping the old-fashioned way with a GPS, OSMtracker, and with josm back home. Filled-in lots of details according to the current situation on the ground. Regarding that service road: I talked to someone living there, who happened to be standing there. He explained that the bollard on the back-side has been temporarily removed so this is now their only access to a back-yard by car. The service road terminates on a pedestrian zone with a lift-gate, there is currently no way to enter there by car due to bollards between the pedestrian zone and Prešernova street. They have been promised a rising bollard and access across the pedestrian zone, but it is not yet happening. I have updated the map according to the current situation to the best of my resources - until we get a newer aerial photography of Ljubljana.
martianfreeloader (2021-10-28 14:27:27+00:00): Absolutely fantastic!
That's what I call committed mapping! :-)
Ser9ei (2021-09-29 13:32:36+00:00): "23 к1" по принятому формату требует пробела. Для точки, находящейся в контуре здания, адрес вообще можно не указывать. Для адреса не требуется указание города и страны, так как он автоматически находится внутри соответствующих полигонов.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111860185
danieldegroot2 (2021-09-29 11:04:01+00:00): Seems I didn't switch back from Maxar to Bing, oops. I'm going to leave it as is for now as the difference is very small and all the roads in this area need to be aligned anyways.
eggie (2021-09-29 11:14:35+00:00): Dag Nölke,
Tip... name=...   hoeft niet operator is voldoende.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Datm

MVG
eggie
Nölke75 (2021-09-29 18:02:44+00:00): Hallo Eggie,

name= is vergrendeld bij voorgestelde objecttype keuze omdat er een Wikidata tag bestaat
eggie (2021-09-29 18:57:43+00:00): Oke..
Voor mij even nieuw..
Bedankt voor je reactie
Eggie
Frans S (2021-09-29 12:39:43+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped.
in on occasion you included the yard into your building.
 Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111860752
Frans S (2021-09-29 12:41:30+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and  mapped.
Please follow the rooflines more accurate. a few buldings are oversized mapped.
 Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111860942
Ser9ei (2021-09-29 13:30:09+00:00): Сначала читаем, потом удаляем guest_house из многоэтажки: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111861524
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:17:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work
woodpeck_repair (2023-01-03 12:15:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 130822479, 130823603, 130822659, 130821821, 130822156, 130821684, 130823808, 130823423, 130823995, 130823041, 130821981, 130818753, 130822310, 130822822, 130823241 where the changeset comment is: revert all edits by Designer1 because they often damaged existing non-golf infrastructure and individually reverting only the problematic edits would have been too much work