piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
redd (2021-09-30 18:15:05+00:00): habe die Website zunächst mal wiederhergestellt und wieder eine Notiz angebracht
Carnildo (2021-09-24 17:38:14+00:00): I've reverted this changeset.  Just like last time, the things you deleted were correctly labeled as private driveways.
mueschel (2021-09-25 09:43:28+00:00): Hi,
something went wrong here, you uploaded a large set of squares like this one:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/986718590
ezekielf (2021-09-24 23:57:31+00:00): Hi, this changeset deleted the piste:type and piste:difficulty tag from several ski trails at Mad River Glen.  Did you do this for any particular reason, or just a mistake?  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31477640/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/31433493/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/44626947

Please put them back so the trails won't be removed from:
https://openskimap.org/#16.78/44.190506/-72.929419
and
http://www.opensnowmap.org/?zoom=17&lat=44.19076&lon=-72.92858
scotteaton92 (2021-09-27 15:54:59+00:00): I can add the ski trails back, but having them tagged on actual track roads breaks things, because the piste should be one way, but the road should not be.
ezekielf (2021-09-27 16:17:36+00:00): Can you give examples of breakage?  I'm not aware of any problems with a way tagged as highway=* as well as piste:type=*.  It accurately represents that the road is closed in the winter and becomes a snow covered ski trail.
scotteaton92 (2021-09-27 16:39:33+00:00): Because it marks a two way track road as a one way piste. Maybe there is a more nuanced way to tag the way to show downhill ski and two way track road, but I don't know how.

If you look at "Broadway" on the edit page you'll see that it still shows an error, because it is unreachable as a road.
ezekielf (2021-09-27 16:56:54+00:00): I see what you mean, although flagging this as a warning appears to be a bug in the iD editor.  The "Broadway" way isn't even tagged oneway=yes, just piste:type=downhill.  The JOSM validator doesn't flag this an an issue.  Nothing wrong with separate ways I guess, but it seems fairly redundant.
ezekielf (2021-09-27 16:59:02+00:00): Also, a warning in iD is not "breaking things".  QA tools like this often have false positives that can just be ignored.  If there is some data consumer out there that this is actually causing a problem for, that is a different story.
ezekielf (2021-09-27 19:30:11+00:00): I've opened and iD issue for this false positive: https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD/issues/8724
BikePC (2021-09-26 20:13:01+00:00): Is de aansluiting op de Prins Bernhardlaan al klaar (check-date was 4 sept 2021)?
A67-A67 (2021-09-26 21:21:49+00:00): Bij de Prins Bernhardlaan zijn ze volgens mij nog de brug aan het bouwen.

Deze wijziging is bedoeld om het nieuwe fietspad naar de Landscheiding Noord uit te lijnen. Deze was al ingetekend, maar veel te dicht bij de weg: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/986589765/history JOSM lijkt hier een compleet nieuwe way aan te hebben gemaakt, i.p.v. gewoon een nieuwe versie toe te voegen.
BikePC (2021-09-27 06:25:20+00:00): Dat stukje bij de rotonde Oostersingel is inderdaad nieuw (dacht ik). Wel vreemd dat er op het stuk fietspad langs de Berkelseweg geen restricties staan als de aansluiting naar de Prins Bernhardlaan nog niet klaar is.
A67-A67 (2021-09-27 12:18:18+00:00): Je mag op het fietspad Berkelseweg fietsen, maar je komt uit bij een brug die nog niet af is. Access-restricties lijken me dus niet correct. Het staat nu als doodlopend fietspad in OSM, zoals het ook tijdens de check_date van 4 september 2021 was.
BikePC (2021-09-27 13:06:33+00:00): Als die restricties er ook niet staan, ok. Maar wel vreemd toch?!
DressyPear4 (2021-09-24 21:24:23+00:00): Olá, linhas não devem ser enviadas sem atribuir tags a elas, resolva os avisos do josm antes de fazer upload dos dados.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111659823
L'imaginaire (2021-09-25 06:13:25+00:00): Hallo S_Torre, bij highway=construction gebruiken we construction=... om aan te geven wat de weg na de werken zal worden (zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dconstruction). Ik ben er van uitgegaan dat dit "footway" zal blijven en heb het in die zin aangepast.
Frans S (2021-09-25 08:28:23+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
Please pay attention on these points. 
Be more accurate. Your mappings are very rude and don't reflect the actual buildings

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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/111660398
em1nk (2021-09-24 17:58:48+00:00): https://sehirplanlama.ibb.istanbul/arnavutkoy-ilcesi

https://sehirplanlama.ibb.istanbul/basaksehir-ilcesi
DressyPear4 (2021-09-24 21:21:55+00:00): Olá, escadaria não está correto. nesse caso use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:irrigation%3Dpivot
Fiz as correçoes no local.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111661288
thopf (2021-09-25 13:47:58+00:00): In der OSM werden üblicherweise keine realen Wege gelöscht, nur weil sie im Privateigentum stehen! Wenn dort "Betreten verboten" ist, wird der Weg mit den Zugangsbeschränkungen , entweder access=private oder access=no versehen. LG.
SaschaAustria (2021-09-26 13:20:49+00:00): Der Weg existiert tatsächlich nicht mehr. Nach dem Verkauf der einen Liegenschaft wurde ein striktes Betretungsverbot erlassen; die nicht gemähte Wiese zwischen den Privathäusern lässt keine Markierung als "Weg" mehr zu
thopf (2021-09-26 14:30:54+00:00): OK! Danke für die Information.
eggie (2021-09-24 21:13:05+00:00): Dag NHVELDH

Het lijkt me allemaal correct zo.
Je edits
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111661471

MVG
eggie
Frans S (2021-09-25 09:21:07+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 buildings you map and do not connect nodes of buildings to other features like roads

FYI Please view this video about common New mappers Mistakes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0

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/111661514
eggie (2021-09-24 19:30:44+00:00): Hi Jorisbo...
Are you familiar in this area?
You are changing edits of other mappers. 
Did you consult the former mapper?
Greetz,
eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-23 14:28:32+00:00): Skąd to node=0 ?

Czemu to dodałeś lub zostawiłeś w imporcie?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/986756243/history
Valutcizen (2023-03-23 17:48:59+00:00): Nie mam nic na swoje usprawiedliwienie. Nie robię automatycznych importów.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-23 18:29:59+00:00): A ma to tam być czy została niechcący przy imporcie z użyciem budynki.osm.org.pl?

Jak celowo - to co to znaczy?
Valutcizen (2023-03-23 19:21:16+00:00): Niechcący przy kopiowaniu danych z warstwy na warstwę
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-24 06:50:41+00:00): poprawiłem w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/134050856
gogorm (2021-11-18 23:06:14+00:00): Hi, I'm not sure if you know but there's a 30 km/h speed limit on Charlestown Road in the eastbound direction, according to a sign placed just as you come onto it from North Road. I had tagged the limit as 30 from there to the end of Charlestown Place, as there was no later sign to indicate otherwise between there and the junction with St Margaret's Road. Let me know anyway if you believe there was reason for me not to tag it so. Thanks.
user_1566574 (2021-10-15 21:32:20+00:00): Attention à ne pas supprimer les noms de rue des adresses, c'est difficilement utilisable autrement.
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/175886376
dentonny (2022-01-02 10:36:19+00:00): Dag Thierry,

Volgens mij heb je u vergist van straat. Ik betwijfel ten zeerste dat dit plaatselijk verkeer is. Steenrijt wel daarentegen
Thierry1030 (2022-01-02 17:18:29+00:00): Klopt, in Kremer is er geen plaatselijk verkeer. Ondertussen aangepast
muralito (2021-09-25 03:00:24+00:00): Hola. Tiene acceso directo desde predios linderos, asi que no cumple lo minimo para ser motorway.
4004 (2021-09-26 23:26:11+00:00): https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=291733619098629&focus=photo https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5009601757/history эту штуку (вентшахта?) убрали?
Pavelfantik (2021-09-27 16:03:49+00:00): не было доп тегов тегов. думал временный ориентир какой-то
4004 (2021-09-27 21:58:42+00:00): доп теги думал навесить после того, как узнаю что это, но не сложилось
AgusQui (2021-09-26 03:39:55+00:00): se rompio el multipoligono de bosque
JuanjoCorrea (2021-09-26 11:28:15+00:00): Si... Fue un error... Si puedes revertir ese cambio por favor o indicarme como hacerlo.. Te agradecería....
AgusQui (2021-09-26 15:51:47+00:00): No sé cómo explicar por acá cómo corregir eso, así que te paso la más fácil:
Se puede revertir desde esta página http://revert.osmz.ru/ pones el número de cambio y listo, si te da error avisame.
gscholz (2021-09-30 04:58:50+00:00): Hi all,
does anybody care about this error? Here is a view showing the deleted lines:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111663193

Guido
JuanjoCorrea (2021-09-30 23:51:23+00:00): Hola a todos..gracias por comentar
e revertido el cambio....
http://revert.osmz.ru/5285
JuanjoCorrea (2021-09-30 23:52:28+00:00): Reverting changesets: 111663193
Comment:
User: JuanjoCorrea
Added: 29.09.2021

Status: too big
Error: Would not revert 314 changes
JuanjoCorrea (2021-09-30 23:53:19+00:00): otra solución?
gscholz (2021-10-01 04:24:13+00:00): Hi all,
I have reverted this changeset with using the JOSM reverter plugin.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111943068

Kind Regards
Guido
highflyer74 (2021-10-10 20:09:28+00:00): Hallo László Telavarro! Leider gibt es immer wieder Probleme mit Deinen Edits, da diese sehr viele Geometriefehler verursachen. Mittlerweile ist der Raum Solingen "führend", was defekte Geometrien in OSM in Deutschland anbelangt (http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=7.06439&lat=51.17354&zoom=13).

Da unklar ist, wie diese Fehler entstehen, möchte ich Dich bitten, Dich einmal direkt hier im Changeset zu melden, damit man dies gemeinsam herausfinden kann. Sei so nett, Deine Mappingtätigkeit bis dahin zu pausieren. Danke!
literan (2021-09-25 12:07:46+00:00): добрый день

временные объекты мы не мапим. Тем более, что вы выбрали тег для отдельной велодорожки (велополоса наносится через тег https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane на основной линии дороги)
Rps333 (2021-10-04 19:02:01+00:00): can you reply to this note?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/2880557#map=14/43.4110/-80.3748&layers=N

Cheers
borishag (2021-09-25 10:58:13+00:00): Henk, het zou fijn zijn als je vermeld wat je gedaan hebt!
Ser9ei (2021-09-25 21:44:59+00:00): В name пишутся только имена собственные. У большинства частных домов name нет. А отдельно стоящий дом обозначется building=detached или (если большой) building=house. В housenumber пишутся номера, а не наименования НП. Наименование НП вообще не требуется, если здание расположено внутри полигона населённого пункта.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111665021
Ser9ei (2021-09-25 21:41:54+00:00): Прежде чем менять тип дорог, почитайте, пожалуйста, wiki. В СНТ никак не может быть трассы федерального значения (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk)
Любые типы должны иметь связность. У вас получилась толстая красная колбаса (на стандартном рендере) посреди ничего.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111665566
eggie (2021-09-24 20:51:18+00:00): Dag bijenboel, maar wat is nu je edit?
Dit pad zal gewoon routeren als wandelpad.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111665744

MVG
eggie
bijenboel (2021-09-24 22:14:39+00:00): wandelpad is verdwenen
eggie (2021-09-24 22:17:47+00:00): Oke..duidelijk..... maar dan kun je het gehele pad gewoon verwijderen.
Mapse
Eggie
eggie (2021-09-25 05:28:34+00:00): Wanneer het pad er nog wel is, mar ontoegankelijk is gemaakt kun je het ook taggen als disused:highway=path

Het rendert dan ook niet meer op de kaart en het voorkomt dat een andere mapper het weer gaat intekenen. 

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

Wanneer het helemaal is overgroeid kun je het definitief verwijderen.
Gr eggie
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-10 17:25:56+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4938800

Are they really selling stuff like raw vegetables/tampons/cleaning supplies etc (or other corner store stuff, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=convenience )?

Or more narrow range of things like specialty foods only?
AndersAndersson (2025-10-10 22:16:32+00:00): As I already answered in the note, they do.
Their full name is Vika Nära Krog & Handel.
Which translates to something similiar to "Vika (the village name) nearby/close pub & commerse".

Since it was some years I was there I don't remember exactly what they had in ther store. But milk and strawberries are example of what they sell.

It's not a common combination, but that does'nt mean this one doesn't exist.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-11 03:20:23+00:00): thanks for answering!

I asked for clarification as some other restaurants where I asked such question turned out to not stock wider supply of products, only some specialty food (so restaurant selling also say wine/jam of own production/etc).

But of such places actually exist I will need to figure out how to handle them...
ArtDanTroll (2021-09-24 20:44:24+00:00): Наконец-то 
это свершилось!
nemethtamas (2021-10-01 10:29:06+00:00): Felhasználói visszajelzések alapján lett egy kis gubanc ebben a módosítócsomagban:

Gyakorlatilag lett egy új 47-es főútvonal.

Elég nagy a módosításcsomag, én nem tudom, a többi része mennyire valid, így nem revertelném, de helyismeret nélkül a javításának sem állnék neki.


Tamás
matt_ellery (2021-09-25 12:57:21+00:00): Hi mygrove, thanks for your edits. Adding access=no to a way is only used if the general public are explicitly prohibited, so it's definitely not appropriate for this public bridleway. What were you trying to clarify re: the access?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111666933
mygrove (2021-09-25 13:49:50+00:00): There appeared to be a problem with routing along the DownsLink north of Christ's Hospital station. I was accessing via ridewithgps.com and it takes a long detour off the track by road. It behaves like there is a break in the track.
SK53 (2021-09-26 09:37:38+00:00): Hi mygrove,

Please dont fiddle with access tags to fix a routing problem with an app. Often apps will be using older data, or may just have bugs in the consumption of OSM tags (highway=bridleway is a common one, particularly if the app is written by developers elsewhere). 

A quick check on the RideWith GPS website suggests that ways tagged with highway=bridleway with no specific bicycle access set are ignored. Graphhopper also seem to have this myopic view of bridleways. A UK-based cycle router such as cycle.travel does not.

The correct action would be to ask RideWithGPS to fix this bug in their access rules. I've sent such a comment through to them via their website.

When you change the access you can affect 10s of apps many of which may have been working perfectly. The app you are using may not update for another month or so, so you wont even see if you have fixed an issue or not. In particular it is now impossible to do any diagnosis of your original problem, because you have potentially affected routing for everyone (as well as caused the way to be virtually invisible on the main map). I have therefore reverted your changes so that we can really work out what the problem might be (which is probably adding bicycle=designated to the ways).

Sorry to be a bit shirty, but I seem to have spent an hour on this & I'm a bit disgruntled!

Yours,

Jerry aka SK53
mygrove (2021-09-26 09:57:14+00:00): Thanks, that's perfectly OK. Perhaps there is a better way to flag this point as a problem for some experienced person to investigate.
mygrove (2021-09-26 10:08:36+00:00): If you follow route 223 (DownsLink) around the station some of the segments are not designated "bicycle" at all or as "bicycles" in the "allowed access" table. Is that the problem?
SK53 (2021-09-26 10:44:59+00:00): NCN 223 implicitly means bicycle=yes or bicycle=permissive, but some routers may not use this information and may need it on the ways. Leave it for a bit, I'm asking other experienced mappers about this. The issue is that fixing it here doesn't fix it for any other bridleway.

The access is a bit complex here, S of the railway it appears to be legally a public footpath, and the bit through the old station isn't even on the West Sussex Rights of Way map (see Map the Paths which helps find rights of way missing from OSM https://www.mapthepaths.org.uk/?lat=51.05093034480947&lon=-0.36507251053827583&zoom=4&mode=0).
matt_ellery (2021-09-26 10:54:37+00:00): The way from Railway Cottages under the Arun Valley line was recently converted from a footpath to a bridleway as part of the work to extend the offroad section of the Downs Link (see v5 of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/412925868/history - a bridleway fingerpost has been installed since then).
matt_ellery (2021-09-26 10:56:24+00:00): Thanks for the research & revert work Jerry.
mygrove (2021-09-26 11:23:14+00:00): Thanks for that clarification @matt_twam_asi. Guys, is that enough to update the classification of these ways?
SK53 (2021-09-26 12:40:25+00:00): @matt_twam_asi: do you have a link to the PRoW modification order? West Sussex website is not particularly forthcoming. I also found this regarding the section across the old station http://www2.westsussex.gov.uk/ds/cttee/row/row230209i7.pdf
matt_ellery (2021-09-27 12:38:08+00:00): @SK53 no, I tried an failed to find anything when the footpath signs were removed. I have re-surveyed today (see also https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Downs_Link_fingerpost.jpg) and updated the bridleway tags in changeset 111767131.
SK53 (2021-09-27 13:31:12+00:00): That looks good enough!
A Hall (2022-07-08 14:25:37+00:00): Are you able to draw a new line for Relation: 1169726 so the forest doesn't use the international border in its relationship? There's a couple reasons for this:
1) attaching landuses/land cover to borders frequently leads to accidental edits of the borders
2) Since there is a cut line between the US and Canada, extending the forest to the border is technically incorrect.
A Hall (2022-07-08 14:58:23+00:00): Nevermind. I see you simply edited this relation, and it was created some time ago. I'll throw a fixme on it.
martinst (2021-09-24 21:52:56+00:00): Die erstellten Wege haben noch keine Tags, magst Du die noch ergänzen?
Frans S (2021-09-28 11:40:32+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here
Please don't map from the Bing imagery. This is outdated. Use Mapbox. 
Best regards
user_11418917 (2021-09-24 23:18:43+00:00): Why did you delete this?
syntex (2021-09-30 22:00:04+00:00): Gdy zmieniasz nazwę ulicy, musisz zmienić też ulicę w adresach
YacoobPL (2021-10-01 14:01:46+00:00): Tak też robię, musiałem przeoczyć, dzięki za zwrócenie uwagi.
IlBano (2021-10-09 15:38:05+00:00): Ciao,

volevo segnalarti che hai duplicato una parte della SS113 (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/986794000). Immagino che sia un errore... oppure c'è qualche spiegazione ?

Grazie

IlBano
user_11418917 (2021-09-24 23:15:40+00:00): As discussed with the Iraqi community this is the work of the group. It was discussed well and well received in the iraqi osm community. Why are you reverting it!?
jeslop (2021-09-25 07:32:28+00:00): This is an illegal import of data that has not followed the usual import procedures. 

We have been in contact with members of the Iraqi community and they believe that the import was not correct. Most of the buildings are a copy-paste that do not reflect the reality of the area.

The user deleted his account as soon as the import was completed after being contacted by the Data Working Group. That's enough for me. Thank you for your interest.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
user_11418917 (2021-09-25 11:43:04+00:00): Dear Jeslop, can you name the members and tell me how did you contact them? I saw in some iranian osm telegram channels that they are so jealous and they want to vandalize, just like what they did in Saudi Arabia and the rest of the Gulf, I’m the admin and owner of the iraqi osm community on telegram and I was in contact with the buildings team first hand as the other iraqi members. This is not an import, this is thier work as they draw in a big file and one of the team called Sargon was the one who’s on converting it to osm friendly to upload. Thier work are not even close to done, the plan is to do all of iraq not just Baghdad and some of the team have other cities already finished, you can see the work progress they are doing if you want. Deleting it this way is truly disrespectful to the iraqi community! The head of the team deleted his account and left the team after your very disrespectful block, you could’ve messaged him instead and asked him about the buildings but you blocked him and told him to stop the “illegal undiscuss import” which is FALSE ACCUSATION! Instead of thanking them and appreciate thier work. I don’t know why you are so angry of them so that you didn’t only remove the buildings they drawn but you removed other buildings created by other they just fixed! Also they added few roads and they added tags to already existing buildings like building color, level, etc. why you remove this too! Is this also an “import”? So disrespectful and so unbelievable. I barely convinced some of the buildings team to stay and continue without quitting and I finally managed to let them listen and leave the “quitting osm” movement that are starting in the iraqi osm community. The community was happy with the rapid progress by the team, all of the members were satisfied, we even have an admin in hotosm who asked the team ti start with Erbil after Baghdad. Continuing your behavior will lead the whole iraqi osm community to leave osm including me. 
Leave the team alone and don’t harass them please, they have other projects after mapping buildings like adding streets name tags and adding shops restaurants etc. to the map too.    
Regards.
jeslop (2021-09-25 22:21:22+00:00): Dear lockdownguy. As you can understand I am not going to disclose the people who have contacted the data working group. We have contacted them through email and direct messages. 

If you don't call uploading ten thousand changes in one set of changes an import, I can't understand what the concept of import is. If your plan is to do all of Iraq you should definitely contact the import group first(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines).  

As for who you call "team leader", his account was blocked (zero hours block) to get an answer. He was only asked about complaints from other users about massive importing and numerous errors, and his response was to delete the account from which the imports had been made. He did not provide any details about the source of the work or further explanation.
Regards

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group