piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
jeslop (2021-06-29 14:36:33+00:00): Cambio denominación municipio. BOE Núm. 150 Jueves 24 de junio de 2021 Sec. III. Pág. 76265. Se me fue la mano en el comentario del conjunto de cambios antes de tiempo.
Gokul Nath (2021-06-29 14:53:28+00:00): created gas station
user_12328418 (2021-10-27 14:48:13+00:00): Bitte beachten: taktile* kein highway=footway sondern Bestandteil des Fußweges oder einzelne Linie:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:tactile_paving
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:OSM_for_the_blind
ovruni (2021-06-29 16:23:18+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se ha puestos el valor "house" como nombre, tal como le he escrito anteriormente esta etiqueta no se encuentra destinada para las descripciones.
Saludos
ovruni (2021-06-29 16:27:00+00:00): lo mismo para el valor de "casa" o "cfasa"
RicoElectrico (2022-07-31 12:23:58+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3284973
syntex (2022-07-31 21:41:59+00:00): Wszystkie inne nie są mieszkalne xD. Zmieniłem
andwil (2021-06-30 06:44:36+00:00): Hi Mikka2021,

klasse, dass du dich einbringst! Du hast Teile der Goethestraße auf highway=cycleway geändert. Mit Blick aufs Wiki [1] wird das Highway-Tag für Fahrradstraßen aber dem Ausbauzustand entsprechend gewählt – in diesem Fall ist highway=residential wohl schon passend gewesen (highway=cycleway wird im Wiki explizit ausgeschlossen).

Die tatsächlichen Nutzungsrechte werden über foot=*, bicycle=*, vehicle=* usw. definiert, dafür ist das highway-Tag erstmal nebensächlich. Ich habe daher "zurückgeändert" auf highway=residential. 

Schöne Grüße aus dem Stinkviertel
André

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:bicycle_road
Omegatherion (2021-07-04 09:48:53+00:00): Ich hab die Werte für motorvehicle mal zurückgesetzt.
user_13545252 (2021-07-05 08:52:08+00:00): Jup, da habe ich wohl einen "Anfängerfehler" gemacht ;-)
Polarbear (2022-08-13 22:07:24+00:00): Hi Schermy,
wie gross ist denn die Schaukel hier, dass du sie als Touristenattraktion gemappt hast?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8875482616

Wenn das eine Kinderschaukel ist, sollten wir vielleicht ein Spielgerät draus machen? (playground=swing)
Schermy (2022-08-14 06:39:56+00:00): Hallo, 
dass ist keine Kinderschaukel und auch kein Spielplatz. Siehe https://mapillary.com/map/im/473867660336281
Die Schaukel wurde vom Tourismusverband als Fotopoint aufgestellt. BG
Polarbear (2022-08-15 20:05:39+00:00): Ich überlege, wie man das Tagging verbessern könnte. 
Einen spezifischen Tag für ein Foto-Setting habe ich nicht gefunden. 
 
attraction=swing gibt es bisher 21x, ist aber nicht dokumentiert. Würde vielleicht passen. 
Den Zweck, "Schaukel als Fotomotiv" könnte man in description packen. 
 
Was denkst du?
Schermy (2022-08-28 16:48:43+00:00): Ich denke das ist ein guter Kompromiss.
Polarbear (2022-09-08 21:46:41+00:00): Tagging entsprechend angepasst.
tarta (2021-06-30 00:14:33+00:00): O que existe nesse lugar?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107157321
jpennycook (2021-06-29 19:51:32+00:00): Hi Robert.

In answer to your fixme on the Wheatsheaf Inn - the last time I went past, it was part of "Good Night Inns".  I don't think it has been a Premier Inn for a while.

Jon
Robert Whittaker (2021-06-29 21:02:34+00:00): Thanks -- now updated.
Herman Lee (2021-07-04 03:26:37+00:00): 您好，站点的role请使用platform，不要使用以前您用的标注，道路请使用空白不要使用“南向北”之类的标注，谢谢。
BCNorwich (2021-06-29 18:23:50+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
It's great to have the benches added to OSM, however there are a few problems with the manner of the mapping. It's not your fault, there's a lot to learn about OSM mapping.

I'll list the problems, 6 of the benches are placed on the center lines of paths. 1 bench is placed on a hedge. 2 picnic tables are placed on a playground outline as well as 1 bench. 1 waste bucket placed on a path centerline. You've tagged a long section of path as a bench, also bench description details are tagged to the path. You've tagged North Park Meadow as a multipolygon, it's just a regular polygon so no need for a type tag or a relation.

May I please suggest these features be correctly tagged, placing the beaches etc to the correct sides of the paths or feature outlines? If you need help please just say.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2021-07-01 19:00:21+00:00): No response so I've unjoined the objects from highways etc. The bench that was tagged on the path I don't know where it was so that has been removed to repair the path tagging.

Regards Bernard.
iey6Om7C (2021-06-29 16:42:03+00:00): Здравствуйте! Поделитесь, пожалуйста, источником названий "Гром-Каменная улица", "Конная дорога", "деревня Конная" и "Аэродромная дорога", а также расположения улицы 2-я Конная Лахта, которых теперь две (старая отмечена рядом по РГИС). В сети найти ничего похожего не удалось.
SGorskiy (2021-07-01 05:13:10+00:00): Исторические названия нужно отмечать с помощью тега old_name. Пример формата: old_name:ru:1925-1961=Сталинград 

Смена фактического name на что-то другое будет воспринята как вандализм. Правки будут отменены, а пользователь забанен.

Пожалуйста, следуйте принятым правилам.
iey6Om7C (2021-07-02 15:00:38+00:00): Пока нет ответа, откатил пакет: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107316947.

Достоверную информацию из РГИС добавил здесь: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107317232.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-03-01 18:39:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117961003, 117970393, 117965218, 117980733 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint about invalid edits, and a lack of decent reply (see https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=414659 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Max_Kritic/blocks ) reverting changesets where _only_ osmose was used.
PeterPan99 (2022-01-24 15:06:55+00:00): I am sorry, but that is NOT The Plough (Way 359781033).  I have created The Plough in the correct location, after survey (Way: The Plough (1024260513)
SGorskiy (2021-07-01 05:13:14+00:00): Исторические названия нужно отмечать с помощью тега old_name. Пример формата: old_name:ru:1925-1961=Сталинград 

Смена фактического name на что-то другое будет воспринята как вандализм. Правки будут отменены, а пользователь забанен.

Пожалуйста, следуйте принятым правилам.
iey6Om7C (2021-07-02 15:18:26+00:00): Откатил: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107317961
Your Village Maps (2021-07-01 23:13:22+00:00): I just saw that you mapped First Look Trail two days ago. You did not include a source tag. What source did you use? I also saw in the changeset info above the imagery used, but I do not understand what the second imagery is; it doesn't look like something that's actually available to me as a mapper.

I was going to map First Look Trail and another new, short trail, but I didn't because I didn't feel I could map it accurately enough without imagery showing the two new trails.

I have also emailed the state parks department asking about the pre-existing trails/tracks in the park area, as I wondered how we should handle mapping them and even if we should or not.
phidauex (2021-07-02 01:45:31+00:00): Hi, for the First Look trail I used a combination of written descriptions of the trail in some of the CPW and TPL literature, and a blog post with some photos and trail descriptions. For the geometry, Strava heatmaps (which was probably the custom imagery in the source tag). It was enough for me to be >95% confident I was mapping the right trail.

Now, for the other trails and existing roads, I chose not to try mapping any for now… I know they are under active trail work, some are closed, some will probably be revegetated, etc… It might be worth the effort to trace some of the linework as private track roads, but it isn’t clear what will go away and what will become real trails yet. If CPW shared a map that would be helpful.
Mahdi Nameghi (2021-08-29 04:55:31+00:00): سلام
ویرایش شما در محل گره 6722554097 باعث قطع شدن بزرگراه شده. خواهشمندم همچنان که به ادیت نقشه توجه دارین با دقت بیشتری ادیت کنید.
ovruni (2021-06-29 17:03:43+00:00): Hola, en este conjunto de cambios se han agregado como edificios algunos lotes que contienen áreas que no son edificios. Solamente etiqueta como edificio la parte que es edificio.
Saludos
ovruni (2021-06-29 17:05:06+00:00): Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe
GinaroZ (2021-08-12 22:55:42+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding the buildings here (and elsewhere in Ayrshire, great work!) :-)
However I couldn't help but notice you had drawn them from the Bing imagery. Unfortunately that makes them out of alignment with most of the OSM data and GPS traces.

If your turn on the "OSMUK Cadastral Parcels" overlay you can then use the imagery offset tool in the background settings to move it to match the blue lines. The "old" Bing imagery is now shown at Esri (clarity) and you can see how that more or less matches the cadastral parcels and OSM data.
scintlark (2021-08-12 23:04:37+00:00): Hey there, thank you for your comment! I try to use my GPS traces and street-level images whenever I could, and as far as I noticed Bing imagery is usually closer to reality. Still, I’m new to this thing and my GPS devices might be imprecise :/

I’m also trying to use the cadastral data when it’s available, but unfortunately that’s not always the case (and sometimes it’s also imprecise when I compare it to the street-level imagery). I’m thinking about sourcing the positioning data from multiple sources (like Esri + cadastral data). What would you recommend?
rah_em (2021-06-30 03:27:07+00:00): Hi MrTheGeographe, 
As per OSM Wiki I have removed tunnel=building_passage tag and added covered=yes tag .Kindly refer this way 959620101, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107177102 
Thank you.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107160681
BCNorwich (2021-06-29 18:37:54+00:00): Hi, 1 bench is placed on a wood area outline. 1 bench is placed on the basketball pitch outline. Highway tagged as a bench as stated per the last changeset. 1 benched placed on path centerline around yacht pond.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2021-07-01 19:01:06+00:00): I think I've fixed the problems.

Regards Bernard.
FOEP HM (2021-07-02 14:07:07+00:00): Hi Bernard,
Thanks for your replies. i have been busy with other things in the park and not able to respond immediately. 

Zooming in I can see you have tidied things up considerably. Thank you! I may be able to work on this again next week but if I don't get time it will be later in July before I do anything else. 

I like your map and would like to add more information to it so that it can be more useful and up to date. It may take me a bit of time though! Apologies for mistakes and for not doing things particuarly quickly. I do know the park very well though so can help make the map even more useful than it already is.

Have a great weekend.

Helen  

ps. I couldn't work out how to reply before but spotted this comment box so communication will be easier in the future.
BCNorwich (2021-07-06 07:46:07+00:00): Hello Helen,
Better late than never, Thanks for your positive response to the problems. Yes, you can comment and re comment here on these changesets. You can also click on a mapper's name where among other things there's a send message option for maybe topics not specifically related to the changeset. (Click on your own name to see your history of editing.) There's also lots of help and forums found easily through Google. Please feel free to ask for help if it's needed.

Regards Bernard.
FOEP HM (2021-07-06 10:44:40+00:00): I will definitely pick up on this but am having a holiday and have lots on generally so it won't necessarilyy happen quickly : )
Thank you for your help and guidance.
Helen
ravali_78 (2021-07-01 06:12:11+00:00): Hi Laveure,
I have removed invalid turn restriction.Kindly check with r9017808,https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107240816.
Thank you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107161141
ovruni (2021-06-29 17:37:34+00:00): Hola Mabel, gracias por contribuir a OSM. El uso de la etiqueta "Descripción" no es una que utilicemos en OSM. En cambio la etiqueta "description" se encuentra destinada a dar información adicional sobre un elemento para cuando no exista etiquetas para ello.
En caso desee dar detalles sobre el tipo de edificio consulte la sección de la clave building en la wiki de OSM. [1]
Si tiene alguna duda sobre como mapear, puede hacerla por el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe o la lista de correos de la comunidad de OSM en Perú https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-pe 
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:description
[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:building
SGorskiy (2021-06-30 04:54:24+00:00): addr:city зданиям прописывать не надо. Это лишняя информация. 
Названия города берутся автоматически из place города.
iWowik (2021-07-02 10:27:29+00:00): Но ведь можно и прописывать, 
потому что вовсе и не "берутся", а всего лишь "могут браться".
ZhenyaBarashko (2021-06-29 17:51:09+00:00): Thanks for your attentiveness and work. We apologise that some of your edits have been removed bacause of outdated satellite images. We appreciate the work made by local people. If you have any questions feel free to write me.
4004 (2022-09-28 13:39:49+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3368951 ?
TomCerts (2021-06-29 17:46:24+00:00): Edit to changeset description: Ways aligned north of Νεοχώρι
AndersAndersson (2021-06-30 14:29:02+00:00): Hej!
Enligt LM Topo herer tjärnen "Stora Blästtjärnen".
Kommer namnet du lade dit från en skylt på plats?
landscapemapper (2021-06-30 17:27:12+00:00): Oj. Jag läste fel. Fixar det direkt. mvh
landscapemapper (2021-06-30 17:37:24+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107221272
AndersAndersson (2021-06-30 21:21:39+00:00): Toppen!
user_3022894 (2021-07-03 11:42:24+00:00): Hi,

auch wenn es in OSM eigentlich eine Sache wie jede andere ist: Wollte dir nur kurz ein kleines Lob aussprechen, super, dass du hier und da die öffentlichen Telefone prüfst. Es freut mich immer, wenn sich noch jemand diesem Thema annimmt.

Viele Grüße
Lukas
Pitoresker Pi (2021-07-04 08:40:49+00:00): Danke für die netten Worte, ich mache gerne weiter so.
Deine ganzen Telefonzellen-Karten finde ich übrigens auch super. Ist auch mal interessant, wo früher sonst noch so Telefonzellen gestanden haben.
user_3022894 (2021-07-04 11:06:16+00:00): :-)
iWowik (2021-07-08 06:49:19+00:00): Не копируйте слепо адреса.
В OSM принять единый порядок наименования улиц
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%B1_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3
SGorskiy (2021-07-10 08:08:31+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107737733

Проверяй
joost schouppe (2021-07-01 14:42:36+00:00): Jakka,
Ik ben niet mee: je hebt eerst state=proposed hier afgehaalt en er vervolgens proposed:route=* van gemaakt. state=proposed is goed gedocumenteerd (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:state) en gekend bij verschillende grote datagebruikers, ik zie niet direct een reden om daar hier van af te wijken.
Jakka (2021-07-01 16:38:24+00:00): Hier ben ik volledig in de mist gegaan ....
Jakka (2021-07-01 16:42:52+00:00): Hersteld oorspronkelijk toestand met ook terug zichtbaar in planners ????
BCNorwich (2021-06-29 18:45:07+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You inadvertently dragged a couple of fences out of line. No problem though I've corrected the problem. Please be careful not to accidentally upload changes as this is a live worldwide database. If you need help with anything please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
RunTrails (2021-07-06 23:51:47+00:00): Hey.... I think you made an oopsie with the road XD
Mapvic (2021-07-07 00:01:59+00:00): I removed a line that some other editor created and left alone? 

What was the mistake? 
I can correct it. 

Thanks
RunTrails (2021-07-07 00:30:59+00:00): There is no road that touches the river's edge. And it does not do that in the marina grounds. And somehow this road is the border for the Daingerfield Island park area but the park area is now an unclosed area that needs to be fixed. I really don't know what you did.
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-08-29 13:39:12+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2826472 - zerkniesz na to? Nie wiem co tu się stało.

Może łączyłeś punkty adresowe z budynkami?

Trafłem na to przy szykowaniu https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/retag_addr:postcode_to_postal_code_where_needed_(in_Poland)
rskedgell (2021-06-30 11:00:35+00:00): You're doing some fantastic mapping in previously neglected parts of Newham, for which I am very grateful.

However in this case, you haven't "corrected" the circular section of Queensberry Place, you have added what is essentially fiction. When I tagged it with "not:junction=roundabout", I did so for a reason.

If you read the wiki page for the junction=roundabout tag, you may note that the following is in bold: "The tag junction=roundabout is used only on road intersections where traffic on the roundabout has right of way."
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout

There are no TSRGD Diagram 1003.3 give way markings here, therefore it is not a roundabout for traffic law purposes and traffic on the circular section of road does not have priority.

The oneway=yes tag would be redundant on a real roundabout and requires explicit signage to have effect elsewhere, e.g. TSRGD Diagram 606, the blue circular one way arrow. I am not aware that any such sign exists at this location.

Chapter 6 of the Traffic Signs Manual may be of some assistance in understanding what is, and is not, a roundabout.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/773421/traffic-signs-manual-chapter-05.pdf

I also note that you realigned the roundabout from cadastral to Bing's default offset.

Updated in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107201333
CjMalone (2021-06-30 19:01:15+00:00): @rskedgell Did you mean to add `oneway=no`?

`oneway=yes` may be redundant on `junction=roundabout`, but this is now just a circular `highway=residential` so it would need to be explicitly set.
rskedgell (2021-06-30 23:15:14+00:00): @cjmalone In this case, yes, along with "not:junction=roundabout" to make it absolutely clear that it's just a circular section of a residential street with no special status whatsoever. Neither tag should be necessary, but in a previous edit the road geometry was deleted and replaced by a junction=mini_roundabout node (and a fixme stating that it wasn't a mini-roundabout).
CjMalone (2021-07-01 10:24:53+00:00): While the wiki may describe junction=roundabout as being about the legal right of way, oneway is more of an on the ground truth. (Think access vs wheelchair)

I've changed it to oneway=yes in #107253468.
iWowik (2021-07-06 06:25:39+00:00): День добрый!
Выполняйте, пожалуйста, принятое соглашение о наименовании дорог
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%81%D0%B8%D1%8F/%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BB%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%BE%D0%B1_%D0%B8%D0%BC%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B8_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B3

Не вынуждайте других участников ваши правки за вами исправлять или откатывать

Пример вашей ошибки
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/680090301/history
iWowik (2021-07-10 07:36:04+00:00): Так вы Калмыкию так и бросите разломанную?
Её можно вернуть назад?
iWowik (2021-07-10 07:47:29+00:00): Пардон, опечатался, Калмаш.
Не надо слепо копировать из других источников. В OSM есть определенный порядок с названиями улиц
SGorskiy (2021-07-10 07:57:33+00:00): Все поправлю, не переживай.
SGorskiy (2021-07-10 08:06:07+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107737733

Проверяй
habi (2021-07-13 19:10:02+00:00): Ciao HaPe-CZ

Auf der `talk-ch` Mailingliste haben wir über die Sinnhaftigkeit von nicht-(mehr)-existierenden Bahngeleisen diskutiert [1,2].
Der Konsens unter N=3 Mitdiskutierenden und dem OSM Wiki [3] ist, dass dies als "mapping of non-existent railways" als falsch angesehen wird.

Die Geleise tauchen auf dem Katasterplan Bern sowie den aktuell verfügbaren Orthofotos nicht auf.

Ich möchte diese Geleise entfernen, was sind deine Argumente, dass diese verbleiben müssen?

Gruss aus Bern,
Habi

[1]: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2021-June/011026.html und folgende Emails im Thread.
[2]: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2021-July/011031.html
[3]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway
habi (2021-07-13 19:14:17+00:00): Sorry for assuming you're speaking German, I just looked at your latest changesets, all in Switzerland and only then saw "locale=cs" in your changeset tags and then the -CZ suffix of your name clicked :)

Here's the English translation:

On the `talk-ch` mailing list we have been discussing the usefulness of non-existing railroads (or 'razed' ones) [1,2]. 
The consensus among N=3 co-discussants and the OSM Wiki [3] is that this is considered wrong as "mapping of non-existent railways".
The tracks do not appear on the 'Bern cadastral map' neither on the currently available orthophotos from SwissTopo.
I would like to remove these tracks, what are your arguments that they must remain?

Greetings from Bern, 
Habi
[1]: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2021-June/011026.html and following emails in the thread. 
[2]: http://lists.openstreetmap.ch/pipermail/talk-ch/2021-July/011031.html 
[3]: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Demolished_Railway


Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
HaPe-CZ (2021-07-14 08:06:14+00:00): Ich spreche nicht Deutsch :)
Ja, ausgebaute Bahnen sind für OSM ein Problem. Es gibt jedoch ein anderes OSM-Laufwerk: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap. Diese Projekte sind miteinander verbunden. Wenn wir etwas auf dem Standard-OSM löschen, wird es auch auf OpenRailwayMap gelöscht. 
und insbesondere: https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?style=standard&lang=de&lat=51.58248&lon=15.6501&zoom=3.
Deshalb werden sie hier inzugefügt.
Die alte Lautenrunen - Wengen Bahn ist zum Beispiel seit mehreren Jahren auf OSM ... https://www.openrailwaymap.org/?style=standard&lang=de&lat=51.58248&lon=15.6501&zoom=3.
Gelöschte Bahnen werden nicht auf Karten angezeigt, das ist in Ordnung. Es ist interessant für die Geschichte, diese Spuren zu dokumentieren.
HaPe-CZ (2021-07-14 08:11:24+00:00): zur Übersicht sind die Linien tatsächlich eingezeichnet ... https://www.google.com/search?q=meiringen+bahnhof&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwik8tv2jeLxAhWOlqQKHUyTAdYQ_AUoAnoECAEQBA&biw=1266&dih=1.21
habi (2021-07-14 14:47:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/959537549 ist auch auf dem Standard-Layer angezeigt.
In der Realität ist da aber ein Parkplatz und keine Geleise mehr zu sehen.
HaPe-CZ (2021-07-15 05:24:26+00:00): Ja, das ist wahr.
orycteropus1 (2021-07-16 06:57:35+00:00): Die alte Lauterbrunnen-Bahn ist 
- nicht razed, sondern abandoned 
- im Gelände ist dir Linie noch sehr gut sichtbar
Dies trifft auf die Gleise in Meiringen nicht zu, da ist ein Parkplatz. Zudem: Geschichtsschreibung ist ohne 
- Quelle
- Jahreszahlen
- genauere Informationen zum Bau usw.
wertlos. In Meiringen zudem unvollständig, die (ehemalige) Trambahn zur Aareschlucht wäre hier z.B. mindestens ebenso interessant (da ist zumindest noch ein Restchen einer Brücke sichtbar).
HaPe-CZ (2021-07-16 08:04:39+00:00): Ahoj kamaráde.
1) Chápu tvoje obavy, ale nemáš správné zdroje a informace. Podívej se na toto: https://www.gleisplaene-schweiz.ch/gleispl%C3%A4ne-sbb/kreis-ii-1966/br%C3%BCnig-brunnenfluh-meiringen/ .
Zde je situace velmi pěkně zakreslena z roku 1966 (otočeno o 180°). Můžeš se podívat i na množství historických fotografií nádraží  Meiringen dostupných na internetu.
2) Parkoviště tam můžeš zakreslit i most  Aareschlucht u tramvaje MIB.
3) Lauterbrunnen-Bahn je odstraněna v dolní části (louka) u Lauterbrunnen
Pěkný den.