piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jakka (2022-01-16 10:04:58+00:00): New building construction is planned. This is private landuse.
GinaroZ (2022-02-24 17:09:57+00:00): Assume this was meant to be woods instead of a fire station? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1020783124 :)
James Derrick (2022-02-26 17:17:17+00:00): Hi again GinaroZ,
That's a pretty crap bit of copy-pasta from 130m to the SE!
I can remember unpicking a nest of ways joining the footway to the fire_station, so must have got over excited with CTRL-C CTRL-V.

A good spot - thanks!

Fixed:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117885985
JeroenHoek (2022-01-13 09:21:55+00:00): Thanks!
Daniil_E (2022-01-17 07:21:48+00:00): You're welcome. Thank you for provided feedback on the correction.
eggie (2022-01-13 10:08:13+00:00): Dag Daan.. Je vraagt feedback.
Lijkt me oke..  Normaliter tag je bij op de bestaande adresnodes, maar die zijn hier kennelijk niet aanwezig.

https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=AaBe-straat%2027&resultOffset=0&objectId=0855100000279811&geometry.x=135365.64036999&geometry.y=395876.97058905&zoomlevel=6&detailsObjectId=

Wanneer die nummers echt bestaan (officieel uitgegeven)   zou je een terugmelding kunnen doen richting Kadaster, want die nummers ontbreken in de BAG. 

MVG
eggie
user_14288465 (2022-01-13 10:18:48+00:00): Yes super, ik had inderdaad bij de andere winkels, ze wel bij de adresnodes gezet.

Hoe komt het eigenlijk dat ik de winkels nog niet terug zie in de Openstreetmap kaart? Ik zie alleen nog maar de Xenos staan, de rest nog niet?
eggie (2022-01-13 10:35:11+00:00): CTRL-F5 doet wonderen. Een paar keer doen. Je cache leegmaken van je scherm.
Gr eggie
ftcat (2022-01-13 14:54:56+00:00): How can this be a residential road?
PiazzaDellaSignoria (2022-01-14 23:47:39+00:00): Hi ftcat, Since the main purpose of these roads is to access a residential area, I thought these would be most accurately classified as residential. This follows the OSM Wiki’s guidance (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dresidential), to use residential for "roads that are used for accessing residential areas and in residential areas but which are not normally used as through routes”, which also aligns with the East Africa Tagging Guidelines (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines#Road_classification). I hope that reasoning makes sense and please let me know if you think these should still be classified differently. Thank you!
ftcat (2022-01-15 05:55:03+00:00): Hi PiazzaDellaSignoria,

I think these particular ways are more a link to the primary ways from the residential way. It is difficult in this situation as these ways are primarily creating connectivity for routing purposes and don't really reflect the situation as it is on the ground, I have used this junction a few times. In general I think the residential tag is over used by remote mappers in Africa, they tend to use the logic that if there is some form of building in the region of the road it is residential, particularly in rural areas. I would suggest to remote mappers that they ask the question "Would I call this a residential road in my home town?". The other problem is in a rapidly developing city like Lusaka many of the areas are mixed residential and commercial which makes classification difficult and there is not a lot of town planning involved.
PiazzaDellaSignoria (2022-01-19 03:14:21+00:00): Hi ftcat, Thank you for the very well thought out response. I agree that there is a pitfall in potential overuse. To me, the residential portion is simply the terminating section of the larger residential road leading into the intersection. I see nearby examples such as way 685800626 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/685800626/) and way 671587449 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/671587449/) are mapped this way, and it makes logical sense since that road does not switch purpose until the driver actually enters the intersection. How would you feel about modeling it similar to those?
ftcat (2022-01-19 08:07:58+00:00): Hi PiazzaDellaSignoria,

I have reconfigured the layout to more accurately reflect what is on the ground. The other examples you have mentioned are a sightly different as they involve intersecting dual carriageways and a single carriageway road but I will change these to a similar layout to this junction as I think it is more accurate. I found that the junction at (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/685800626/) and way 671587449 was not correct as the link roads were not shown so have reconfigured it.
PiazzaDellaSignoria (2022-01-20 03:51:50+00:00): Hi ftcat, Thank you for the quick response and the careful consideration. I see your thought process on modeling all of those junctions and while I may personally do it differently, they appear to function just fine. As a final note, based on Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=848035575784526) it looks like the intersection at node 6427534813 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9430041261/) does not actually have link roads. The OSM wiki page for links (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) describes them as requiring that the turn be “physically separated” such as by a painted barrier or road island, so in my view they aren’t a great fit for what happens on the ground here and should not be used. I also noticed (from that same Mapillary) that the Southwest road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/685800626) appears to actually be bi-directional, instead of the current oneway. Thank you for taking the time to examine all of this!
ftcat (2022-01-20 06:42:21+00:00): Hi PiazzaDellaSignoria,

I have corrected the erroneous one way. As regards links, I have previously had a discussion with remote mappers regarding these in Zambia and feel they do not apply to many of what we call 'slip roads' here in Zambia but if I changed them somebody would come along and re tag them as links so for peace and quite I have left them as links. You may notice from the Mapillary images there are not many road markings at all on the roads, they do not get repainted often, makes driving at night a really tricky business. These 'links' will have been marked separating the traffic with a painted line at some point but the markings will have worn off. If you are observant you will also notice the traffic lights/signals are not operational at this junction, also a common problem in Zambia The vehicle in front has put their hazard lights on and will edge their way into the traffic hoping the vehicles in the main road will allow them in, if you are too timid you will not get across. Some drivers will treat a junction like this, where the lights are not working, as a 4 way stop but you can not be sure this will always be the case. At the next junction with Burma road the driver has actually ignored the traffic lights and turned left when they should wait for a green arrow. The driver has done this because the lights are not correctly synchronized and traffic from the right, in Burma Road, should be stopped by the red light you can see once the driver has completed the left turn and only traffic making a right turn off Burma Road  into Nationalist Road should be able to go as indicated by the green arrow, if you think of it this should allow traffic turning left from Nationalist Road into Burma Road to go as well but the lights are not synchronized to allow this so the Mapillary driver has just ignored the lights. It pays to keep your eyes on the minibuses with the orange stripe, they are a law unto themselves. Lessons in road safety in Zambia
PiazzaDellaSignoria (2022-01-22 00:59:18+00:00): ftcat, Thank you for taking care of that oneway and for the thoughtful discussion!
user_5359 (2022-01-14 15:36:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM! What is the meaning of tag addr:locale = ru?
Patr1k_P (2022-01-16 14:31:34+00:00): ahoj, to podium som ti zmazal, uz tam bolo predtym pridane....a name sa dava, len ak je tam aj v skutocnosti tabula napr. Obecny urad, nazov podniku atd
Cleveland steamer (2022-01-13 18:27:33+00:00): You've made https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13621455/history wrong
hebolz (2022-01-14 15:08:03+00:00): @NoKnow   You changed scrub to building, which makes no sense here. Please be careful when changing relations. They can be tricky and you might destroy a lot of work easyly. 
I will repair the tag.
NoKnow (2022-01-14 16:11:08+00:00): @hebolz
accidental, thanks for the fix.
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-01-14 12:26:08+00:00): Hi Erin76,

Something went wrong here - an empty changeset was created.

Would you mind explaining if you were making a change and if so, what the change was? Then I can attempt to debug what is going wrong.

Kind regard,
Pietervdvn - MapComplete creator
Erin76 (2022-01-14 12:27:43+00:00): Sorry, browser crashed during the edit
Pieter Vander Vennet (2022-01-14 12:30:55+00:00): Oh! Well, that could explain it! Thx for getting back!
woodpeck (2022-01-13 10:28:55+00:00): Hallo hofoen, in diesem Changeset hast Du eine alte Bahnstrecke von route=tracks auf route=railway geändert: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10283483/history
Diese Änderung ist falsch, route=railway wird für Kursbuchstrecken (dreistellige Nummern) verwendet. route=tracks war hier korrekt (vierstellige VzG-Nummer). 

Noch eine grundsätzliche Anmerkungen zu Deinen Edits: Bitte gib immer aussagekräftige Kommentare an - z.B. "Wikipedia-Tags entfernt" bzw. "Wikipedia-Tags hinzugefügt", "route-Tag korrigiert" und so weiter. "railway details" ist keine ausreichend präzise Beschreibung. Gib ausserdem auch Deine Datenquellen korrekt an - bei Dir steht "source=Bing", was definitiv bei 99% Deiner Änderungen nicht passt, weil sie nichts mit irgendetwas zu tun haben, was man auf dem Luftbild sehen könnte. 

Abschliessend möchte ich Dich bitten, in bezug auf historische Eisenbahninfrastruktur besondere Vorsicht walten zu lassen. Nur, weil zu einer Bahnstrecke, die es irgendwann einmal gegeben hat, ein Wikipedia-Artikel existiert, heisst das noch lange nicht, dass wir in OSM dafür auch eine Relation anlegen. Von wenigen Ausnahmen abgesehen, ist OSM eine Datenbank dessen, was heute existiert, und keine Datenbank dessen, was früher einmal existiert hat.
hofoen (2022-01-17 11:11:13+00:00): Hallo woodpeck, da hier eine Relation für zwei VzGs gleichzeitig angelegt wurde, passt "tracks" auch nicht genau. Wo die genaue Grenze zwischen den beiden VzGs liegt weiß ich leider nicht. "railway" ist ja der allgemeinere Typ für eine Railway-Infratruktur-Relation - nur in DEU ist das ja im engeren Sinne eine KBS. Wo man die Grenzen setzt, ob man eine alte Bahnstrecke erfasst, wurde ja schon diskutiert. Meistens erfasse ich nur eine Relation für bestehen ways (auch wenn es nur noch tracks oder cycleways sind) und schließe kleine Lücken. Wenn noch Dämme und Brücken existieren, passt das ja ganz gut. Unterwegs weißt ich immer ganz gern, woher Überbleibsel stammen, die noch existieren. Hilft auch beim Wandern. Neben Grenzlinien jeglicher Art ist ja ehemalige Eisenbahninfrakstruktur die zweit größte Ausnahmen. Aber ich will es natürlich auch nicht übertreiben. Wo wollen wir die Grenze setzen? railway=razed zu verbieten würde ja auch zu weit gehen. Haben wir Guidelines? Bezüglich Source-Kommentar gelobe ich Besserung.
hofoen (2022-01-17 11:39:37+00:00): Ergänzung: Warum sollte man nicht die Route-Tracks-Relation erfassen, wenn die Ways sowieso schon erfasst sind (disused, abandoned, razed)? Ist doch eine historische Information dazu.
hofoen (2022-01-17 12:09:00+00:00): s. auch folgenden Kommentar: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116068907
user_2066394 (2022-01-14 16:05:31+00:00): Was ist mit der Haltestelle Kirchenstraße passiert?
Cristoffs (2022-01-16 16:50:30+00:00): Proszę opisuj swoje zmiany w czytelny sposób.
PT-53 (2022-02-13 13:45:36+00:00): Hallo mak68,
besteht dies Sperrung der Königsberger Allee
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/162617334/history
 noch?
Fragende Grüße
mak68 (2022-02-13 20:36:02+00:00): Hallo PT-53, am 10.2. bestand sie noch. Ich fahre fast täglich dran vorbei. Sobald siw Baustelle weg ist entferne ich die Sperrung.
Gruß 
Mak68
PT-53 (2022-02-14 07:07:39+00:00): Danke für die Rückmeldung und Überwachung.
Grüße
Jordi MF (2022-01-14 21:43:40+00:00): Puedes añadir el área que ocupan las colmenas usando la etiqueta man_made=beehive.
szydzio (2022-01-14 12:20:54+00:00): Hej! Myślisz, że jest już sens wrzucać adresy z tego osiedla? Na razie to szczere pole... => https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9415090714
Cristoffs (2022-01-14 16:49:51+00:00): Nie zauważyłem tego. W Piotrkowie tak jest na maksa. Jarocin mocno się rozbudowuje to bym zostawił.
AndreyGeograf (2022-01-13 10:11:44+00:00): ID editor automatically removed tags:
tiger:separated=no
tiger:source=tiger_import_dch_v0.6_20070812
tiger:tlid=145961089
Ted Pottage (2022-02-10 11:02:38+00:00): Thanks for preserving the Vacant shops that are tagged on wheelmap - one has accessibility photos https://wheelmap.org/nodes/-534297902
Russ McD (2022-02-19 03:08:21+00:00): cmoffroad - I don't know what you are playing at with this road.  Its tertiary all the way from the 1001, but for some reason you changed the west section to unclassified, and split the road arbitrarily where a track meets it. The tagging is identical both sides so why split ?
The east section, u chose to leave as is, yet looking at the point it changes I see no difference in the road.
The Thai wiki states it all should be tagged as tertiary.  
If you really disagree, please have the courtesy to discuss your changes with the original contributor first.
I have changed it back.
Russ.
julcnx (2022-02-19 03:15:54+00:00): Hi Russ. which exact road segment you are talking about?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116100656
Russ McD (2022-02-19 04:08:23+00:00): Its Way: ชม.4049 (284221982), but I deleted your unclassified bits and extended original so you probably can see your edits any more.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116100656#map=15/19.2053/99.1911
julcnx (2022-02-19 04:24:49+00:00): Ok. It was definitely a mistake from my part. I should have contacted the original mapper first. If I recall, I didn't see any local signs showing there is a 4049 tertiary road here. Do you have any good online source to confirm these refs?
Russ McD (2022-02-19 06:03:04+00:00): Julian, the point is I have been mapping here 12 years and get worn out with people just deciding they think a road should have its status changed.  My notes on my GPS 7 years ago show it was tertiary then, and when I whizzed past yesterday, I think I saw a blue sign, glanced at my GPS, and saw the road was no longer tertiary.  
We are not supposed to look at Google streetview, but if you did, you will see the white milestones (typical of CLASSIFIED roads) marking the hwy - that should have made you think twice.
Sorry if I sound hard, hopefully this is one "mistake" and not the tip of an iceberg, which has happened many times before.
Russ.
julcnx (2022-02-19 08:25:56+00:00): I have only downgraded tertiary a few times when they don't have a ref and looks out of place. Like you have done here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117586823 
Also I have corrected a few major segments where the residential bypass was tagged as the main road.
I have and will continue upgrade many tracks and residential to unclassified, and tertiary when I find a ref. 
If you find any conflicting changes, let me know. Cheers, Julien
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116100656
Russ McD (2022-02-19 10:06:56+00:00): No problem with any of the above (and after surveying said road on Thursday, it truly didn't deserve tert status). But it also had no signs or mileposts, which I guess is the point I'm trying to make.  
Thailand's roads are continually improving so I never have a problem when an upgrade is justified, and I certainly applaud changing the mass of Facebook residential roads that traverse the rice paddies, into tracks.
Russ.
highflyer74 (2022-01-18 06:22:55+00:00): Hallo mal wieder!

Da Du auf meinen letzten Kommentar (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/116066156) noch nicht wieder eingegangen bist, aber zum Beispiel auch hier Telekom-Infrastruktur mappst, in dem Du existierende Objekte löschst, um dann neue zu erstellen:

Hör' bitte damit auf und erkläre:

- woher Du Deine Daten beziehst

- warum Du löschst

- warum Du Dinge auf Gebäude taggst, in denen auch andere Dinge vorhanden sind und somit POIs als Node gemappt werden müssen

- warum Du Dinge, die korrekt als Node gemappt sind, auf Gebäude umtaggst

- warum Du Namen verwendest, die nicht die Namen der Gebäude sind (Deutsche Telekom, Hauptgebäude, Nebengebäude etc.)

Ich will Dich mit Sicherheit nicht nerven, auch wenn Dir das so erscheinen mag, aber wir müssen hier eine Lösung finden, da es so nicht funktioniert.

Schönen Tag!
mavl (2022-01-14 13:19:13+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок повысил статусы дорог до tertiary. Наличие асфальта не является причиной для повышения статуса дороги, так как статус определяет важность дороги в дорожной сети.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:highway

Этот пакет правок отменён.
emvee (2024-05-08 07:55:36+00:00): Ja, die maxspeed ten zuid-oosten van Berta is een zooitje, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6364253

Heel de gemeente Oldambts is trouwens grote bagger wat betreft verkeersborden.
Shaun das Schaf (2022-01-13 14:53:36+00:00): Hallo Nicl-hh,

ich habe den vorherigen Namen der Straße noch als "old_name"-Tag wieder hinzugefügt. So geht der geschichtliche Hintergrund nicht verloren.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
Warin61 (2022-01-13 22:09:04+00:00): Hi,
Please tag roundabouts as roundabouts... see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout
They also carry the name of the connecting major road
Stephen Males (2022-01-14 03:51:57+00:00): Thanks, thats good to know.
Rookie Pro Nigga (2022-01-15 00:09:56+00:00): Don't make mass movements
Aarogya Pandey (2024-01-27 16:00:34+00:00): noted with thanks
jotoeri (2022-01-13 11:03:06+00:00): It is for sure glass-containers. Review only requested as it is my first contribution and i'm not sure, if i changed too much. ;)
Shaun das Schaf (2022-01-13 14:58:54+00:00): Hallo jotoeri,

sieht soweit gut aus.

Als recyceltes Material hast du sowohl Glas als auch Glasflaschen angegeben. Ist das wirklich für beides vorgesehen?
Zumindest bei mir in der Gegend sind die üblichen Container wirklich nur für Glasflaschen, nicht z.B. für Fensterglas o.ä.

Gegebenenfalls den recycling:glass-Tag wieder entfernen.

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
jotoeri (2022-01-14 11:47:39+00:00): Hallo Shaun,

Interessante Unterscheidung... Es ist tatsächlich eher ein Flaschencontainer. Habs korrigiert.
Danke für das Feeback!

Liebe Grüße,
Jonas
user_2066394 (2022-01-13 11:04:51+00:00): disused:shop=*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3006161
pyram (2022-06-26 14:16:18+00:00): Die Meldung bezog sich auf den Vorgänger "Back.bude" => Revert.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122869142
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 03:28:21+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Darkhorse (2022-01-14 13:58:50+00:00): This is an interesting one, as the changes were made with StreetComplete https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/StreetComplete — it looks like it failed to upload open changesets from the UK made weeks before the changes made in Santiago, and merged them together. This might be considered a bug in it; I'll try to file a issue once I've resolved my own jetlag. In the mean time, my apologies.
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 20:38:32+00:00): Future reference: see http://www.osm.org/changeset/116101839 & http://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3640
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 03:28:06+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Darkhorse (2022-01-14 13:58:45+00:00): This is an interesting one, as the changes were made with StreetComplete https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/StreetComplete — it looks like it failed to upload open changesets from the UK made weeks before the changes made in Santiago, and merged them together. This might be considered a bug in it; I'll try to file a issue once I've resolved my own jetlag. In the mean time, my apologies.
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 20:39:10+00:00): Future reference: see http://www.osm.org/changeset/116101839 & http://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3640
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 03:27:48+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Darkhorse (2022-01-14 13:58:19+00:00): This is an interesting one, as the changes were made with StreetComplete. It looks like it failed to upload open changesets from the UK made weeks before the changes made in Santiago, and merged them together. This might be considered a bug in it; I'll try to file a issue once I've resolved my own jetlag. In the mean time, my apologies.
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 20:39:37+00:00): Future reference: see http://www.osm.org/changeset/116101839 & http://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3640
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 03:24:13+00:00): Much smaller changeset areas, please: http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Darkhorse (2022-01-14 13:58:07+00:00): This is an interesting one, as the changes were made with StreetComplete. It looks like it failed to upload open changesets from the UK made weeks before the changes made in Santiago, and merged them together. This might be considered a bug in it; I'll try to file a issue once I've resolved my own jetlag. In the mean time, my apologies.
Lee Carré (2022-01-14 19:59:01+00:00): I did suspect something like that. Thanks for confirming.

If / when you do open an issue (I quite sympathise about jetlag), please cite it, since I'd like to follow it. The failure-mode interests me, if SC was indeed told to upload the changes.
Darkhorse (2022-01-15 14:14:58+00:00): Thanks very much for your understanding. After a lot of sleep, I'm now in a much better position to create the issue. I'll add a link to it when that's done.
Darkhorse (2022-01-15 14:28:19+00:00): Opened issue 3640: https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3640
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-01-15 15:11:33+00:00): Note that root cause (no uploads) could be caused by an irritating bug that was fixed recently (at least partially), see https://github.com/streetcomplete/StreetComplete/issues/3494#issuecomment-1001609589
Mateusz Konieczny (2022-01-15 15:16:58+00:00): And thanks for reporting the issue!

It is very useful to be aware of problems caused by SC, reports are really welcome. This way problems can be actually fixed.
Darkhorse (2022-01-15 15:48:15+00:00): No problem at all, I'm a huge advocate of open source development, and even though I'm more hardware rather than software focus, I do try to help where I can. Sometimes it's only by reporting issues, but I know I appreciate it when people raise issues with my work when they can't help to fix it.

I think you're right that this is likely to be the root cause of the problem in this case, thank you!
Lee Carré (2022-01-16 03:01:16+00:00): That turned out to be a whole lot more interesting than I was imagining.

Given the nature of the suspected cause, it might explain other instances of SC uploading changesets with large bboxes. Not only in the past, but recently.

I'm delighted that SC devs have such a positive attitude toward refinement. Particularly since I recommend SC to newbies.

Glad that my nudge of Darkhorse led to a resolution (hopefully) of a tricky bug. Thanks, Darkhorse, for enabling that 🙂. Not everyone does bother to report such problems (and I'm reluctant to do it for them, since I have no more details for devs, can't answer questions, and can't test if a commit fixes the problem).

Awesomeness 😏👍.