piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
tux67 (2021-08-25 13:42:06+00:00): Hi RoKo58,
beide Plätze waren bereits mit den korrekten Tags an jeweils einem Node getaggt. Deine Änderung ergibt so keinen Sinn. 
Lies bitte mal die Wiki Seiten zu camping=* (das wäre hier falsch)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:camping?uselang=de
Und tourism=camp_site (das korrekte tag, das auch bei den vorhandenen Nodes angewendet wurde).
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_site
Wenn es dir um access rights und Kosten geht gibt es dazu separate Tags.

Gruß
tux67
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110218914
julcnx (2021-08-26 11:29:20+00:00): Please refer to the official OSM Thailand guidelines for minor road classifications. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand#Rough_guidelines_for_minor_highway_tag_decision-making_.28useful_in_most_cases.29
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110219289
julcnx (2021-08-26 11:31:58+00:00): While the beginning of the road is clearly residential, the remaining part is mostly giving access to agricultural fields (track). The last part of the road might even be a private road (service). If you are not sure, do not add or split the road into multiple segments so it's easier to change later. thanks
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110219289
MihaiBenta94 (2021-08-26 12:03:32+00:00): hello, I've modified the road given your suggestions, thanks a lot for your feedback! - MihaiB.
lyctkel (2022-06-26 18:27:40+00:00): Hi 13hannes11,
did you mean building=terraced (house=terraced) at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/384102552 etc.?
building=terrace is for a row of houses. 
building=terraced is for a single house in such a row of houses.
Regards,
lyctkel
13hannes11 (2022-06-26 20:34:35+00:00): Hi lyctkel,

yes I suppose it should be terraced. I was not aware of this distinction.

Regards
13hannes11
lyctkel (2022-06-27 07:28:16+00:00): Hi 13hannes11,
after reading the wiki again I think building=house is even better. building=terraced is used only 77 time worldwide. If you don't mind I'll change all these houses to building=house.
Regards,
lyctkel
13hannes11 (2022-06-27 08:52:43+00:00): Hi lyctkel,

I don't mind so go ahead.

Best regards
bxl-forever (2021-08-25 10:09:29+00:00): Hello,
Technically correct, indeed.
I added the former name as short_name, to make it available for geocoders.
user_12625593 (2021-08-25 13:16:03+00:00): Hoi, even een tip: maak je changesets wat kleiner, deze beslaat heel midden-europa. Groet, oposm
Pauluzz (2021-08-25 13:45:07+00:00): Excuus, had even niet door dat er nog edits uit een eerdere vakantie in stonden. Zijn wel correct, geloof ik.
scai (2022-03-17 10:23:58+00:00): Hi somebody_else,

you added an elevator. This elevator did already exist: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/251861817

Also, your new elevator is not connected to the road network. Thus it can't be used for routing. That's why I'll delete your elevator.

Next time please check more carefully that you are not adding duplicated information :)

Regards
Alex
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:25:19+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and accurate mapped
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
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/110221387
village (2021-09-17 21:07:53+00:00): siehe https://osm.org/changeset/110221642 - gilt auch hier. Das Abzeichnen von Luftbildern, die im Mai 2018 aufgenommen wurden hat die Arbeit anderer Mapper zerstört, daher revertiere ich diesen Änderungssatz.
village (2021-09-17 21:03:02+00:00): Du hast hier offenbar alte Luftbilder abgezeichnet ohne deren Alter zu berücksichtigen und ohne vor Ort gewesen zu sein. Damit hast du die Aktualisierungen Deines Vorgängers, der sehr wohl die aktuelle Situation kennt zerstört. 

Bitte sei sorgfältiger und beschränke dich auf Änderungen, bei denen du dir sicher bist, dass sie die aktuelle Situation widerspiegeln. Die verfügbaren Luftbilder vom Geoportal Sachsen sind relativ alt: https://geocloud.landesvermessung.sachsen.de/index.php/s/PEH5Gd2r0fPYV4r/download?path=%2F&amp;&files=dop20c_3185690.zip
2018-05-20 steht in den Metadaten.

Ich werde deine beiden Änderungssätze zu diesem Karree revertieren. (Du hast ja um review gebeten, das ist das Ergebnis, da die Änderung wirklich Schaden anrichtet).
village (2021-09-17 21:03:24+00:00): ..angerichtet hat
manoj@123 (2021-08-25 11:48:28+00:00): Added oneway and surface tags With the source of Maxar Premium Imagery (Beta).
aceman444 (2022-02-18 16:52:58+00:00): Zdravim, ta krizovatka bola v podstate dobre (trochu zjednodusena). Ked uz ste potrebovali pridat https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/976263601 odbocovaci pruh, tak to sa nerobi tam kde zacina, ale tam kde sa fyzicky odpaja. Samotna dlzka pruhu sa potom vyznaci na hlavnej ceste https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/263941695 (ocenujem, ze ste znizili pocet pruhov, ked ste jeden oddelili. Ale na 'turn:lanes' ste zabudli). No ale potom ste nezadali, ze z https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/976263601 sa da prejst len na https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/239933967, nie otacat sa na vsetky ostatne cesty naokolo.

Mapovanie krizovatiek a jazdnych pruhov ma svoje pravidla.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lanes#Motorway_with_lanes_and_destinations
Upratal som to.
E de Wit (2021-08-25 15:24:07+00:00): Hoi,

Mooi dat de Tiger stelling wat aandacht krijgt, ziet er goed uit!

Er staat een opmerking open voor dit terrein over de positie / lengte van het aanwezige smalspoornet.
Staat deze er nu ook goed in? Dan kan deze opmerking na bijna 3 jaar ook gesloten worden.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/1527806

-E de Wit
GercoKees (2021-08-26 05:01:34+00:00): Hoi,
volgens mij is ie nu goed, ik was daar op vakantie en ben nu weer op het vaste land. Ik haal de opmerking weg... groetjes,
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:13:02+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping
A question. You adjusted the route of some highways, but I noticed that you are not following the traces on the ground everywhere.
Please focus on mapping buildings and only adjust highways when they interfere with the buildings you want  to map
Best regards
Frans S (2021-08-27 14:34:57+00:00): 
Not all buildings have been correct mapped. Please follow/correct the outlines of the buildings as well. A lot of buildings are just mapped as a rectangular despite they have complex forms
Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2sBest regards and keep mapping
Pink Duck (2022-03-24 16:09:45+00:00): What about name-only houses? How else can that be indicated through tagging if the name tag is stripped to leave only addr:housename, presumably nohousenumber=yes? Otherwise it leaves things ambiguous as to whether the addr:housenumber has yet to be mapped.

Removing name tag is still an issue for some it seems: https://github.com/openstreetmap/openstreetmap-website/issues/3447
confusedbuffalo (2022-03-24 18:41:02+00:00): I'm not sure I understand what sort of situation you are referring to.

In my mind if a house has addr:housename but not addr:housenumber then nohousenumber=yes is implied

I don't think that having a duplicate name changes that at all
Pink Duck (2022-03-24 18:47:52+00:00): For such cases and systems unaware of nohousenumber tag itself, e.g. ABetterRoutePlanner, then the absence of name results in addresses without name or number. Also for cases where both number and addressing name exist, the name tag can help explicitly define the common case instead of leaving it to a renderer to pick one.

The difficulty I have now is the 632 buildings affected here including a number of my own manually surveyed entities, before the nohousenumber wiki entry was created.
confusedbuffalo (2022-03-27 14:02:51+00:00): It sounds like you're saying that ABetterRoutePlanner is unaware of addr:housename, this sounds like a bug there and shouldn't be dealt with by duplicated tagging in OSM data.

I disagree with your point about name there, as it is still duplicating data.

I'm happy to disagree though
Pink Duck (2022-03-27 18:38:57+00:00): addr: prefix is related to the postal address service addressing scheme. The name tag is the commonly known identifier for an object. In the case of a named-only house either addr:housename and name should exist and be the same without nohousenumber=yes to indicate the fact, or if the latter is present then I think it acceptable to just have addr:housename.

However, there are numerous services out there making use of OSM that fail to make use of the addressing scheme and other schemes for suitable name resolution. There's little harm in having two definitions that are the same spelling but for different purposes. It's a sort of optimising for the database approach, instead of just focusing on capturing data key-value pairs.

Sometimes shop names change and the address name lags behind.

The main objection I have to the mass edit you did was that it destroyed the semantic content from some of my previous edits for other cases of name-only houses.

Did you actually take into count the nohousename, noaddress, etc. tags during the dataset build request?

I'm still left manually reviewing and restoring…
Pink Duck (2022-04-17 08:05:30+00:00): Also houses displaying only name or number, but having both in the addressing system, still benefit from having a name key to express their preferred identifier per installed signage.
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:08:25+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Please square the rectangular buildings

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110223085
jqngarcia (2021-08-26 05:44:46+00:00): Pots entrar a la nota i tancarla?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2631434

Salut i Xarxes, JQN
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:02:12+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and accurate mapped
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
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/110223221
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:06:30+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Precise mapping  and follow the rooflines. (Not all buildings are fair rectangular.)
Do not include more buildings in 1 mapping.

Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110223328
Frans S (2021-08-25 14:03:27+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Precise mapping and squaring of buildings
Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110223407
mike140 (2021-09-05 13:19:35+00:00): Не стоит на весь населенный пункт вешать тег жилой зоны - это делается на отдельные кварталы и только на жилые усадьбы. Кстати мультиполигон Брацлава оказался разорванным в этой точке 48.8076363, 28.9498483
mike140 (2021-09-05 13:25:44+00:00): Так же не стоило удалять с мультиполигона города тег place=town
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:58:34+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here
This is a building only project. Please focus on that
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110223568
aceman444 (2024-02-25 16:01:45+00:00): Zdravim, uvadzajte skutocne zdroje informacii. To co ste pridali urcite nie je z Ortofoto. Dakujem
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:57:05+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and accurate mapped
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
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/110223715
SekeRob (2021-08-25 12:39:01+00:00): According Osmose "Definition of sport=skiing is unclear". Since it's decribed as valid sport tag in the ski piste wiki I'm giving it an ignore, also because Taginfo shows it with 5789 uses, strangely though the chronolgy shows the total as dropping. piste:difficulty?
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:56:13+00:00): Helllo. I rviewed your work.
It is just 1 building you mapped. Please be more accurate and square the building before uploading it
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110223934
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:54:34+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and accurate mapped
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
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/110223967
aceman444 (2022-05-21 20:42:01+00:00): Hi, what books and maps did you use for the names? We are not allowed to use any such sources which did not give permission to use the data into OSM.
And you even copy the name wrong with typo.
Michal Filip (2022-05-22 06:59:43+00:00): Hi! Yes, copied so as the source is not changed. In this case Wikipedia. Report went. Thanks.
aceman444 (2022-05-29 10:20:24+00:00): Also Wikipedia must not be used as source for OSM. So if this is your source, all your changes must be removed (reverted).
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:50:16+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
Difficult mapping here. however, please pay more attention on precise mapping. Vaque objects without shadow are mapped as buildings, 
Buildings not correct mapped, buildings crossing highways, Highway should corrected. (does not meet the trace on the ground.
This is task 359 which I invalidate
Best regards and keep mapping
oba510 (2021-08-26 02:46:11+00:00): This is not accurate.  Hilgard Avenue doesn't bend 90 degrees to the south like this; that's just some random private residential driveway serving the last two houses at the end of the street.
yasponam (2021-10-26 10:49:49+00:00): Hi, 
Thank you for reviewing my changeset and providing the feedback.
Apologies for the incorrect road digitization, I have made the necessary corrections in the changeset #112987336.
Going ahead, I'll ensure to not repeat such errors. 
Thank you once again for the information, I'm looking forward to learn more from you. 

Regards,
yasponam
Frans S (2021-08-25 13:42:53+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and accurate mapped
You don't need to ask for a review anymore. Only if you are in doubt about your mappings 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
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/110225768
Jakka (2021-08-29 09:05:19+00:00): Om gebouwen grondcontact in te voeren gebruik je best de laag AIV GRB, luchtbeelden invalshoek verschilt elk jaar bij vernieuwde beelden.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110225888
aachso (2021-08-25 16:36:32+00:00): Hi,

do you happen to know if the traffic signals on way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/976283241 are signals for cyclists, too?

A year ago, they were pedestrian only signals (even though cyclists are allowed to use the sidewalk of Rolandstraße). I know that the city has since improved the curbstones for cyclists in Rolandstraße itself, but I don't know if they changed the signals as well.
L___I (2021-08-27 12:03:52+00:00): Hallo aachso,

danke das Du mal drüber geschaut hast. Ich verstehe nicht ganz worauf Du hinaus willst. Ich habe die Wege recht allgemein (so weit mir bekannt anhand Luftbilder) eingetragen, falls Du es genauer weisst und es konkretisieren kannst/möchtest wäre ich froh.

Viele Grüsse
LI
aachso (2021-08-27 12:12:56+00:00): Hi,

mein Kentnissstand von vor Ort ist leider veraltet und es kann sein, dass sich das inzwischen geändert hat. Ich hatte gehofft dass du ggf neuere Erkenntnisse von vor Ort hast, aber das scheint ja nicht der Fall zu sein. Also alles gut :)

Wenn ich das nächste Mal dort vorbei komme, achte ich darauf, welche Ampel (Fußgängerampel oder Radfahrerampel) dort steht.

Gruß
aachso (2021-08-27 12:25:13+00:00): Noch zur Erklärung: Wenn man mit dem Fahrrad vom Rolandplatz aus kommt, darf man entgegen der Einbahnstraße auf der Rolandstraße den linken Gehweg benutzen. An der Monheimsallee führten dann (Stand 2020) nur Fußgängerampeln über die Roland- und Krefelder Straße sowie über die Monheimsallee. Diese Ampeln gelten aber genau genommen nur für Fußgänger und nicht für den Radverkehr. Als Radfahrer muss man dort laut StVO die Fahrbahnampeln beachten, die von dort aber nicht sichtbar sind (und was auch nicht wirklich sinnvoll ist), das wurde dort wohl einfach nicht beachtet.

An der Kreuzung Rolandstraße/Pippinstraße wurde 2020 der Bordstein abgesenkt, damit man dort mit dem Fahrrad besser fahren kann, möglicherweise ist dann auch das Problem mit der Ampel aufgefallen und behoben worden, aber das weiß ich eben nicht.

Hoffe, das erklärt es!
L___I (2021-08-31 17:23:42+00:00): Hallo aachso,

danke - jetzt verstanden.

Die Sache mit den "Fahrrad ... entgegen Einbahnstraße ... linker Gehweg" (sidewalk:right:bicycle=yes) ist mir neu - hatte ich noch nie erfasst.

Ja, wie gesagt, derzeit ist es (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/976283241) recht allgemein eingetragen und sollte tatsächlich mal vor Ort angeschaut werden. Hier auf dem mapillary-Bild (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=299740271631034&focus=photo&lat=50.782233123353&lng=6.0888306760479&z=17) sieht der obere Teil des Wegstückes aus, als ob es ein reiner Fussweg ist.

Viele Grüsse
LI
ququruzka (2021-08-26 12:08:59+00:00): name=*
name:uk=*
іза правилами спільноти мають співпадати. 
Випрате , будь ласка.
aachso (2021-08-25 16:13:15+00:00): Hi,

the OSM wiki page states that the German HGV toll system should not be tagged as highway=toll_gantry:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth#German_exception

Perhaps man_made=gantry with an enforcement relation would be the best alternative?
L___I (2021-08-27 11:58:07+00:00): Hi aachso,

thanks for pointing me to the wiki article sub title.

Change it as recommended, see:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/110338448
Please double check it.

Regards
LI
aachso (2021-08-27 14:42:26+00:00): Hallo LI,

ich finde das so in Ordnung.
Vielen Dank
DSem (2021-08-26 12:39:07+00:00): Доброго дня,

В мене одне запитання, та воно стосується не лише цих правок, а і всіх інших, та не перший раз: Ви що, знущаєтесь?
Це не "уточнення даних", а паплюження даних.

Мапити полігони поверх мультиполігонних відношень можливо, хоча і дублюються линії, та це не страшно.

Але не подрібно до полігонів клеїти дороги.
Коли Ви з'єднуєте дорогу та лінії двох landuse, наприклад grassland та weetland то питання ця дорога проходить по полю чи болоту? А якщо приклеєна до landuse=millitary вона в заборонній зоні чи за її межами? А коли приклеєна до waterway це що - водна дорога?
Також, коли дорога "склеєна" з кордоном населеного пункту чи 'place' - то вона в населеному пункті чи за його межами? 
Теж саме стосується меж областей та громад. Будь-які межі, за дуже рідкісними виключеннями, проходять по краю дороги, та можуть по декілька раз перетинати дорогу, але вони не проходять по її осьовій лінії. 
Відносне розташування об'єктів на мапі один відносно іншого - це все важлива топологічна інформація, яку Ви знищуєте.
І це все стосується усіх типів доріг.
І хоча це робити й не заборонено, але я вже Вам надавав посилання на OSM Wiki, де чітко вказано, що цього робити не бажано.
Hanan Tikveša (2021-08-25 12:47:23+00:00): stop editing in 2 different places.
edit for each changeset only.
graduallypebble (2021-08-25 17:48:13+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for pointing that out, I'll make sure I edit correctly from now on. Thank you!
StC (2021-11-01 12:17:17+00:00): Bonjour,
ce changeset a endommagé en profondeur 6 relations du réseau pédestre de Haute-Maurienne Vanoise, sans raison apparente. Si vous avez une proposition pour rétablir ces relations sans en passer par un revert, je suis preneur.
This changeset has deeply damaged 6 relations in the Haute-Maurienne Vanoise node network, with no apparent cause. I am open to suggestions for repairing them without resorting to a changeset revert.
aqdennis (2021-11-01 12:35:47+00:00): I have only added the GR5 variant according to the signposting there and the FFRP guides.... so it's unclear to me what I should have broken/damaged then as I didn't touch any other walking routes. But I see that a user called sergio7826 has also deleted things around the same time in the Modane - Valfrejus area.
StC (2021-11-01 20:48:56+00:00): Actually all the ways you have added to the new relation have been removed in the same changeset from the relations there belonged to previously. I have managed to make a partial revert of the changeset, keeping your new relation and restoring the others.
ToniE (2021-08-26 11:44:28+00:00): Na, da sollte ich bei PTNA wohl access=permit, *=permit mit in die Liste der positiven Zugangsbeschränkugen aufgenommen werden.

Ist das 'permit' recht neu?

Gruß,
Toni