piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
user_685064 (2015-05-07 18:59:42+00:00): I understand your point, but the use of the Definitive Map is different. It's correct to just assume the map is OGL based on the documentation and guidance here: http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/prow/council-docs.html, http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/notes/os-open-data.html, https://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/blog/2015/02/were-using-the-open-government-licence-to-encourage-greater-use-of-os-opendata-products/
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 19:31:28+00:00): At that link I read "it is now possible for councils to request exemptions to OS's IP claims on data they have plotted on top of OS's base maps" (but I don't see any evidence that that has happened) and then "Unfortunately, it appears that Ordnance Survey's rights in the data will prevent any use in OSM for the time being".  Can you explain why you think that York's data is not encumbered in any way and can be used in OSM?
user_685064 (2015-05-07 19:42:27+00:00): I don't have any other info to hand unfortunately. The copyright info we have from York LocalView is misleading and shouldn't be a limiting factor here. I can however look at the many other local authorities which have set a precedent in the last few months of releasing Definitive Map data to OGL 3 and the information in the above articles.
SomeoneElse (2015-09-06 20:31:37+00:00): Finally got to check these today - both https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/343442814 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61432263 are signed as public footpaths at the eastern end on the fence at the edge of the bypass.  There's a stile to get you over the fence in each case though what you do after that I'm not sure (the southern one has no adjacent gap in the armco barrier).  I'll get around to updating OSM with it all in a week or two.  There's still the Murton side to check of course.
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 18:04:20+00:00): Similarly to the other changeset, you've changed Bad Bargain Lane (part of which is http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61432262/history ) from a track to a bridleway.  It was definitely a track when I was last there, and is used for farm access.  I can't believe that it is not accessible by four wheeled vehicles.
user_685064 (2015-05-07 18:23:17+00:00): It's passable by a motor vehicle, sure. It's wide enough and paved at many points. But the problem is that the route is not publicly accessible to motor vehicles. There's a large barrier across the whole road at either end marked with Bridleway signs - implying no motor vehicles. I do think there's a section I've incorrectly marked as a bridleway which is actually a track however. Will update this now.

Cheers, NewBrownRice.
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 18:36:06+00:00): "It's passable by a motor vehicle" (if four-wheeled) implies at least highway=track.  "But the problem is that the route is not publicly accessible to motor vehicles" implies access=private, or motor_vehicle=no, or similar.

"highway" describes what the thing is physically like (along with tags such as surface and width etc.); access tags such as access, foot, horse describe who's allowed to use it, and the legal status is covered by e.g. designation=public_bridleway.
user_685064 (2015-05-07 19:01:53+00:00): It's a difficult one - the road width varies greatly throughout the course. I think it would be safest to keep it as a bridleway, just to avoid a car getting stuck halfway down!
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 19:32:48+00:00): I'd hope that any car thinking about using it would look at the access tags and not have a problem!
Mateusz Konieczny (2016-07-15 08:17:59+00:00): Zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/628639?
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 18:01:45+00:00): Are you sure that http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61431770/history is no longer a track?  Last time I walked down it it definitely was.  You've changed it to a "highway=bridleway".  What I suspect that you meant to do was to leave it as a "highway=track" but change it to "designation=public_bridleway" (a tag that wasn't in common use when I mapped it in 2010).
user_685064 (2015-05-07 18:16:45+00:00): Sorry you must have this bridleway confused with another path? From ground inspection only a week ago, the path is barely navigable by foot, nevermind vehicle! Between the A1036 and A1237, the path is in a terrible state. After the A1237, this does improve for about 200m (passable by car, maybe?) but then after this, back to a very poor state. Photographs I took of the Northern side (after A1237) are here: http://imgur.com/uHFsXfE, http://imgur.com/zYWOCvq. Maybe the path should be changed to a track with bridleway tag for those 200m - your decision :)
SomeoneElse (2015-05-07 18:41:14+00:00): Evidently!  The bit north of the ring road http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61431775 is/was used as farm access.  Is it no longer?  The southern bit (that runs into Hopgrove http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/129550281/history ) I do remember as being less wide, but I didn't map that bit.  The bit in the middle must have deteriorated in the last 5 years.
SomeoneElse (2015-05-08 22:55:03+00:00): Odd - I had a quick look as I was driving past tonight and the ends of http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61431770 and http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61431775 at the ring road are clearly tracks rather than bridleways.  Looking at the photos, I suspect that neither are taken on these ways - http://imgur.com/uHFsXfE looks like it is section to the northwest - the eastern end of http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/39325177 and http://imgur.com/zYWOCvq is perhaps further round to the northwest?
user_685064 (2015-05-09 10:35:51+00:00): As I mentioned in my first comment, I do think the first 200m of the way should possibly be changed to a track. But the track very quickly deteriorates to just becoming part of the cultivated field. In the opposite direction (heading South from A1237) the track was in a very overgrown condition - and unsuitable for your average car.
user_685064 (2015-05-09 10:39:10+00:00): Having navigated the entire route (from A1036 in Hopgrove, to North Lane) by bicycle with difficulty I updated the way accordingly, however if you'd rather update a small section based on your visual inspection from A1237, please feel free :)
SomeoneElse (2015-05-09 10:43:29+00:00): Thanks - I've added http://www.openstreetmap.org/note/360564 as a reminder for when I (or anyone else) is next in the area.
Hjart (2015-04-28 16:22:01+00:00): Stier og andre veje (highway=*) må ikke ligge oven i hinanden. Derfor har jeg ryddet op i skoven her. Det vil være fint hvis du fremover er opmærksom på det
Hjart (2015-04-28 15:40:46+00:00): Hvad har du forsøgt at lave her?
Hjart (2015-04-28 15:42:24+00:00): Hvad er det for en slags rute?
Susie Pedersen (2015-04-29 06:40:12+00:00): Dalsagerruten er en løberute som min skole bruger.

Ved ikke helt hvad du mener med "hvad har du forsøgt at lave her"
Hjart (2015-04-29 06:42:47+00:00): Det er ikke heldigt at lægge veje oven i hinanden som du har gjort her, så vi skal have lavet det om. Er ruten skiltet eller er det en uofficiel rute?
Susie Pedersen (2015-04-29 06:43:49+00:00): Det er en uofficiel rute.
Hjart (2015-04-29 06:45:26+00:00): Ok, jeg laver det lige om til en bedre måde at lave det på senere i dag. Tak
Hjart (2015-04-29 06:46:08+00:00): Velkommen til OSM iøvrigt og tak for bidragene til vores projekt
Susie Pedersen (2015-04-29 06:59:31+00:00): Tak for hjælpen. Vi er helt nye i det her og skal bruge kortet til gps løb for vores klasser på skolen.
Hjart (2015-04-29 07:21:55+00:00): Jeg kan se din konto kun er 4 dage gammel og nu hvor OSM bliver mere kendt og brugt dukker der flere og flere begyndere op, som ikke har den store tekniske baggrund, så jeg bruger en del tid på at vejlede og hjælpe dem. Jeg er ikke ude på arbejdsmarkedet iøvrigt, så det er en fornøjelse at kunne gøre noget gavn her.
Hjart (2015-04-29 07:54:12+00:00): Jeg har nu konverteret ruten til en såkaldt "rute-relation" http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:route der bl.a. kan ses på http://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/da/?zoom=16&lat=55.44532&lon=11.72462&hill=0&base=0.485 (vent måske en dags tid til den dukker op)
mxt305 (2015-04-27 12:39:57+00:00): wrong name sorry
ypid (2015-04-30 12:45:56+00:00): Bei [dem Node](https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3455397685/history) gab es immer noch Warnungen (Von dir geändert in: „Mo, Di, Do: 7:15 - 13:00 Uhr, Mo, Di, Do: 14:00 - 18:00 Uhr; Mi, Fr: 7:15 - 12:00 Uhr“) … Hab es korrigiert in: „Mo,Tu,Th 07:15-13:00,14:00-18:00; We,Fr 07:15-12:00“. Das müsste doch eigentlich von JOSM angekreidet werden?
MKnight (2015-04-30 13:59:14+00:00): Klar mein Fehler ... aber ... Gaaanz mysteriöse Geschichte ...

Ich korrigiere Fehler zuerst nur grob, danach validiere ich solang neu, bis ich nur noch Warnungen habe. Diese korrigiere ich dann.

Jetzt kommts: Ich habe Dein Changeset lokal revertet, und nu rate mal was beim Validieren passiert: Genau, nix. 

Irgendwas bringt die Prüfung aus dem Tritt, ich habe das jetzt mal auf ein Minimum eingedampft:
"Mo: 6:00-7:00, Mo: 8:00-9:00" <-keine Warnung
Kannste damit was anfangen?
MKnight (2015-04-30 14:01:10+00:00): Ich immer mit meinen schlechten Beispielen, ersetze "Mo" durch "Do", selber Effekt.

"Do: 6:00-7:00, Do: 8:00-9:00" <-keine Warnung
ypid (2015-04-30 18:00:55+00:00): Stimmt, da hast du recht. Das liegt immer noch an diesen verflixten additiven Regeln … Problem ist, dass bei dem Wert opening_hours.js crashed. Das passiert bei einer Kombination von additiven Regeln und ":" … Muss ich noch beheben …
MKnight (2015-04-30 18:22:42+00:00): Ok, achte ich beim Bearbeiten zukünftig drauf, Fehler mit Doppelpunkt gleich richtig zu beheben, statt die in die "Warnungen" zu parken.
grin (2015-04-28 08:07:46+00:00): Kedves Judit! Felrajzoltál egy utat de nem adtál neki típust (gyalogút, traktornyom, burkolt közút vagy akár autópálya), így ez nem fog megjelenni a térképen és helyismeret nélkül javítani sem tudjuk. Másrészt biztos, hogy nem csatlakozik a vége a Rákóczi utcához?
Navicia Abbot (2015-04-27 14:59:46+00:00): Changed Wheeler Memorial Presbyterian to Emmaus Bible
scai (2015-04-27 17:52:14+00:00): Bitte "opening_hours" nacharbeiten. Das ist kein Freitextfeld, hier muss man sich an das definierte Format halten (siehe http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:opening_hours).
maraf24 (2015-04-29 20:57:06+00:00): Usunięcie punktu adresowy należy obowiązkowo skomentować wyjaśniając powody.
aceman444 (2015-04-27 18:12:11+00:00): Dobry den, na ten stlpik este chyba barrier=bollard, aby to naozaj bol stlpik. bollard=rising je len jeho upresnenie.
literan (2015-04-27 17:29:41+00:00): а почему access=no на тропинке? Это означает, что даже пешком по ней запрещено перемещаться - в связи с чем?
Kaziu Kisiel (2015-04-29 17:16:39+00:00): Dlaczego zmieniacie kategorie dróg? Wcześniej oznaczenia dobrze odzwierciedlały obecną sieć drogową w Polsce. Teraz ktoś pomyśli - O, jest autostrada. Potem jednak ktoś się rozczaruje.
deleted_account (2015-04-29 17:35:34+00:00): Czy chodzi o Armii Krajowej w Gdańsku? Obecnie ustawiona jest "highway=trunk" - droga szybkiego ruchu. Jaka kategoria powinna być Twoim zdaniem?
Kaziu Kisiel (2015-04-29 17:53:40+00:00): Powinno być highway=secondary, bo to jest droga wojewódzka.
deleted_account (2015-04-29 18:04:12+00:00): Nie ma takiej zasady. Takie ustawienie tej drogi spowodowałoby nieprawidłową pracę nawigacji. Czy jechałeś kiedykolwiek tą drogą? Wygląda tak:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@54.347187,18.534029,3a,75y,291.69h,74.27t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1snAOHlvFW4znDf-3OTa4CIg!2e0?hl=pl
Dopuszczalna na niej prędkość to 80 km/h (bliżej centrum) i dalej od centrum 100 km/h

Dla kontrastu, tak wygląda równoległa do niej droga wojewódzka nr 221:
https://www.google.pl/maps/@54.315702,18.580814,3a,75y,67.52h,90t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1st4JqL_jtjOODuK7J5EeR5Q!2e0?hl=pl

Czy chcesz aby nawigacja prowadziła nas po pierwszej czy drugiej? Sam chyba widzisz, że podział dróg według zarządcy (wojewódzka, krajowa czy jeszcze inna) nie działa. Mógłbym tak naprawdę odesłać Cię do definicji na Wiki OSM (ale tych po angielsku bo polskie tłumaczenia często są błędne).
lilienthaler (2016-04-26 16:00:02+00:00): Hallo, du musst die gates auch mit dem Weg verbinden. Josm zeigt es dir als Fehler an. Einige habe ich schon korrigiert.
aceman444 (2015-05-17 19:11:01+00:00): Hi. What did you mean with oneway=bicycle on way 6841971 ? The tag is unique in the whole world.
Karnajh (2015-04-27 18:30:44+00:00): Corrected a typo on a street in St-Eustache, Quebec, Canada
zimba (2015-04-29 23:16:48+00:00): Hallo,

auch wenn viele Geschaefte ihnen eigenen Namen komplett GROSS SCHREIBEN, die Namen in OSM bitte trotzdem korrekt gross/klein eintragen.

lg
andrePechio (2015-04-27 19:02:46+00:00): #USP
domdomegg (2015-04-27 19:34:59+00:00): Please can someone revert this, thanks, and sorry for my mistake
ToeBee (2015-04-27 20:43:52+00:00): I have reverted this edit in changeset 30559410.
glglgl (2015-05-01 11:13:28+00:00): Why was relation 2202162 renamed here? It represents entire France, not only French Polynesia. That was not correct. I changed it back.
SomeoneElse (2015-05-05 11:26:44+00:00): Hi - I think that something went a bit wrong here.  You've deleted lots of objects around here.  Perhaps you were trying to create a map for your own use?  If so, you might find something like "umap" useful - http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/ .  When you delete things from OpenStreetMap they are deleted for everyone, so you should only do this if they really don't exist any more on the ground.  According to this forum thread http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30941 people have tried to get in touch with you but haven't heard back.  I've therefore reverted this changeset so that the deleted roads are restored - see http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/30806377 .  If you've got any further questions please don't hesitate to get in touch - you can contact the data working group by email on data@osmfoundation.org and you're also encouraged to get in touch with the local community - the forum at http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=46 seems like a good place to do that.
StefanB (2015-05-01 19:48:37+00:00): Pozdravljen/a!

Risanje takšnih dolgih poti po že obstoječih poteh ni produktivno, kvečjemu moteče. OSM ni skladišče vseh prehojenih poti posameznikov, ampak urejena zbirka poti, cest, stezic, gozdov....

Ta tvoj prispevek sem odstranil:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/30701724

Če si prehodil kakšno pot, ki še ni vrisana v celoti, pa le dodaj tisti manjkajoči odsek.

Če imaš kakšno vprašanje pa kar na plan z njim, bodisi tu, ali na forumu (http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=58 ) ali na mailing listi (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-si/ )

lp,
Štefan
jeffmeyer (2015-04-27 20:47:11+00:00): This needs to be deleted!
jeffmeyer (2015-04-27 20:47:41+00:00): or... rolled back...
daganzdaanda (2015-04-27 23:36:49+00:00): Hi Jeff, 
I think something went wrong with this changeset. The two nodes
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2082813401#map=19/47.60509/-122.33631&layers=D
and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2082813475#map=19/47.60509/-122.33569&layers=D
are connected to things in Finland!
Is that why you wrote the first two comments? I think it would not be hard to undo the changes to these two nodes.
SimonPoole (2015-04-28 06:23:36+00:00): @jeffmeyer &  @daganzdaanda PLEASE the next time you have such a small accident or notice one, either report it per mail to an appropriate mailing list or join IRC and point it out there. You could have saved a number of people a lot of work.
malenki (2015-04-28 06:34:17+00:00): For completeness a link to the German forum regarding this issue:
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=30938
daganzdaanda (2015-04-28 07:42:11+00:00): @SimonPoole: Sorry, I really did not think it had anything to do with the strangeness in Europe. I must have been very tired.
jeffmeyer (2015-04-28 15:16:43+00:00): Hi @SimonPoole - I know - my apologies! I reported it immediately on IRC, but didn't see any replies. Should have sent email, too. My bad. Is there a link to better instructions on how to do this on my own? The JOSM reverted tool appears to have issues. Also - how can I confirm that the changeset has been undone?
SimonPoole (2015-04-28 15:23:26+00:00): Hi @jeffmayer normally -somebody- is present on irc, probably just bad luck. For such small changesets the reverter plugin should work without issues. 

Note: a revert doesn't "undo" a changeset, it simply creates new versions of the objects as they where before. In other words: you can check the objects history to see if things have worked and, 2nd, there is no real difference to simply making a corresponding edit (aka in this case you could have simply moved the nodes back to where they belonged).
jeffmeyer (2015-04-28 16:28:44+00:00): Ok... turns out it was user error, not a lull on IRC - I was disconnected, but not paying attention to that! Doh! So... I've used reverter to attempt to revert the changeset. Hopefully, that has worked.
malenki (2015-04-28 16:33:55+00:00): The issue invented with this changeset had been fixed ten hours ago:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2082813401/history
jeffmeyer (2015-04-28 16:37:47+00:00): @malenki - thanks so much for helping with that. I have no idea what "brown flooding in Europe" is or means, but it sounds horrible. Again - my apologies! : /
malenki (2015-04-28 16:57:08+00:00): @jeffmeyer: just look at the  screenshot on the first page of the thread linked above. Plainly explained: all Europe became brown – like there was a brown flood.
malenki (2015-04-28 17:00:45+00:00): BTW: do I see correctly that you mapped buildings from 1787 in this changeset?
jeffmeyer (2015-04-28 17:32:02+00:00): Ich sehe! 

Yes - that's correct (well, actually 1878, not 1787, but yes) - I forgot to repoint JOSM to openhistoricalmap & not openstreetmap after I grabbed some data from OSM. Definitely need to be more careful!
malenki (2015-04-28 17:55:39+00:00): JOSM lacks definitely an account management.

Besides I started with the wrong finger on the numpad for the year and am fine with the fact I don't have to discuss historical data vs OSM with you. :)

(Once I had to move quite a chunk of data from OSM to opengeofiction due to a sloppy user.)
opendcc (2016-01-24 16:25:36+00:00): Hallo,

bing ist manchmal etwas veraltet. Da hast Du ein Gebäude in Grüngiebling hinzugefügt, das schon weg ist. In JOSM kann man auch Bayern als Hintergrund wählen, ist aktueller.

Servus Wolfgang

Servus Wolfgang
klaule (2016-01-25 16:57:55+00:00): Hallo Wolfgang, 
stimmt, bin inzwischen auch umgestiegen. 
Lösch die Hütte einfach, wenn du das nächste mal in der Nähe mappst. 
Grüße
maro21 (2018-03-31 13:20:01+00:00): Co to znaczy "description=obligatoryjna" przy niektórych stacjach?
maraf24 (2018-03-31 19:09:15+00:00): To chyba rowers2 dodawał. "obligatoryjna"-jej istnienie wynika z umowy z UM. Pozostałe to sponsorskie.
Wg mnie można to wyrzucić.
highflyer74 (2022-09-11 19:00:23+00:00): Moin!

Ist schon etwas her, aber ich bin hier auf diese Note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3350575 gestoßen, welche deine Änderung am Namen als falsch darstellt. Auch ist die Frage, ob die Straße nicht auf voller Länge den gleichen Namen hat (der wäre dann nach Osten auch nicht vollständig).

Vielleicht kannst du dich ja noch erinnern.

Gruss aus HB!
user_53559 (2022-09-12 10:50:32+00:00): Moin, ich habe die Bemerkung nach bestem Wissen kommentiert. Gruß aus Brandenburg!
Miflo (2015-05-06 16:37:29+00:00): Hallo,
das Fahrverbot gilt in der Dr. Karl Renner Straße aber auch für Radfahrer, hier müsste der Tag also auch auf "destination" lauten.
W0lle (2015-04-28 22:38:59+00:00): Kein Problem, da die Position der Notruftafeln sehr oft teilweise sehr weit abweicht dachte ich dass die am Petergraben aufgefundene Position die korrekte ist.
Xmypblu (2015-04-28 12:37:08+00:00): возможно заинтересует - ж/д теги в проекте:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:railway
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Как_обозначить
gileri (2015-04-28 05:50:22+00:00): Bonjour,

Les objets "simples" tels que des fontaines n'ont pas besoin de nom sur OSM en général, à moins que le nom soit particulier (ex: Fontaine du Général de Gaulle...)

Ici, il faudrait donc enlever le nom, qui est redondant avec amenity=drinking_water.
Kris Anselmo (2015-04-28 07:30:33+00:00): Oui effectivement, je me suis posé la question car le nom n'apporte pas plus d'info que le tag. J'ai en fait regardé comment cela était fait aux alentours et j'ai vu qu'un nom y était associé généralement. Exemple ici : http://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2466428388
Peilscheibe (2015-05-20 10:29:48+00:00): In diesem Changeset wurde die Sammelrelation "Radwegenetz Stuttgart" gelöscht. Zur Begründung der Löschung siehe Diskussion hier: https://lists.openstreetmap.de/pipermail/stuttgart/2015-April/000593.html
Riyadi IRM-RV (2022-11-28 06:57:28+00:00): Hi. @musche. I've changed highway classification to residential  id ways 340615268. thank you
scai (2015-04-28 18:19:13+00:00): Wo hast du denn diese Syntax zu den Öffnungszeiten gefunden? Das ist nach wie vor inkorrekt und wird so von keinem Programm ausgewertet werden können. Bitte nochmal auf http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:opening_hours nachlesen und http://ypid.de/~osm/evaluation_tool/?setLng=de zum Validieren benutzen.
tacado (2015-04-28 23:01:15+00:00): Die Syntax hab ich genau dort gefunden, wo du auch jetzt wieder hinlinkst. Den Validator nicht, aber ich hab ihn benutzt und der hatte einen Fehler entdeckt. Hab jetzt das mit den Open-End-Zeiten rausgenommen.
scai (2015-04-29 07:54:00+00:00): Alles klar. Die Syntax für jeden x-ten Tag kannte ich noch gar nicht, gut zu wissen.

Open-End sollte aber prinzipiell funktionieren, beispielsweise so:
Oct-Jan,Apr-Jul: Mo,Th 21:00+;We[1],We[3],We[5] 18:00+
Jean-Marc Liotier (2015-05-01 13:58:10+00:00): Le way:341058012 (http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/341058012) me semble être erroné : je doute fortement qu'il y ait un higwhay=primary qui passe au milieu du lycée...
aharvey (2018-04-29 09:58:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3482883979 same question about isced level 0
aharvey (2018-04-29 09:59:18+00:00): ditto https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3482883980
mrpulley (2018-04-30 11:48:04+00:00): ISCED 1 is correct (i.e. no preschool) - I've fixed this at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/58552383
rlhuffine (2015-04-27 23:17:50+00:00): add location for hotel; personal visit, April 2014
avatorl (2015-04-27 23:23:57+00:00): fake road removed
Talitha IRM-ED (2022-12-09 04:40:39+00:00): Hi, Russ McD. Thank you for your mapping contribution. 
I see there's a warning about layer tag without bridge or tunnel on this highway (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/341136356). Would you mind to check and fix it?
Thank you and happy mapping!
Russ McD (2022-12-09 12:18:14+00:00): Ok I'll take a look hen back on computer.  X
imagico (2015-04-30 08:46:15+00:00): Hello Stephen,
the most accepted taging for moraines is geological=moraine, see http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:geological

natural=landform is primarily used by a Canadian import, is not well defined and should not be used.

You might also otherwise want to re-evaluate the linz2osm tagging for antarctic features - see your other changeset using man_made=windmill instead of power=generator
bstempi (2015-04-28 02:40:50+00:00): The commit message was a mistake...I split Seville St and indicated that the east half was one-way.
jc86035 (2015-04-29 10:01:05+00:00): Your changes to this map can be seen by everyone. Don't add things that definitely don't exist.
sgraves10 (2015-04-28 03:55:46+00:00): Poor imagery from Bing.  Largely mountainous.  Difficult to estimate likelihood of populated villages.
Lyubchenko Denis (2015-04-29 16:41:05+00:00): Прошу проверить, так как отмеченные объекты плохо согласуются со спутниковыми снимками.
aceman444 (2022-05-22 15:13:26+00:00): Hi, what is this good for? A Lithuanian name on city_limit signs of a random town in Slovakia?
Reclus (2015-04-28 10:06:11+00:00): Bitte keine Hausnummern/Adressen löschen nur weil sie nicht in der ALK stehen! In der ALK stehen nicht alle Hausnummern. Die meisten Hausnummern in Witten wurden vor der Freigabe der ALK vor Ort gesammelt. Bitte Edit daher rückgängig machen!