piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
sannkc (2022-03-23 05:56:10+00:00): The census map definitely identifies it as a "Federal American Indian Reservation" boundary.  Interestingly, it seems to correspond to an older reservation boundary shown in this map from the Kickapoo tribal website... https://www.ktik-nsn.gov/history/treaties/  
That map indicates that the reservation was reduced in size in 1862 to something similar to what's shown in the BIA and Kansas maps.  This makes me wonder if the Census Bureau might be using the pre-1862 boundary for census-taking purposes, perhaps to account for tribal members living outside the smaller reservation area.  But if that's the case, I'm not sure why they would label the boundary as a current Federal American Indian Reservation.  That almost seems to suggest that the pre-1862 boundary has been reinstated and the BIA and Kansas maps just aren't showing it yet.  Not sure.  If I find any new info, I'll add it here.  Thanks for the reply and for sharing the census map!
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:25:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-01 09:46:17+00:00): Maxspeed tags are for ways only
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116846347
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-01 09:49:01+00:00): Unless mapping signs. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:maxspeed
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116846347
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-06-11 11:14:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 122245102 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some dubious-source edits.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6058 .
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:26:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-01 04:24:21+00:00): Good job on your first changeset.
I smoothed out the curves on the road. 
keep up the good work
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116846421
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:26:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
eggie (2022-02-01 07:57:45+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback: Tip.. Best lastig als twee instellingen hetzelfde adres hebben zoals bij de bibliotheek. 
Kunst 2001 must dan weer wel addr:city=.....
De Robert Kochstraat staat op bicycle=use_sidepath... maar er is hier geen apart fietspad? Zou dat op slot zetten een vergissing zijn?


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2022-02-01 08:06:22+00:00): https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=116846682

Door schuiven met de kaart heb je waarschijnlijk Zeemanlaan 45 verplaatst naar een ander deel van Badhoevedorp. Beter niet schuiven.
BAG gegevens R Kochstraat 79  heb ik hersteld. Adresgegevns aangevuld. Zal even kijken waar nr 45 vandaan komt.
Groet,
eggie
eggie (2022-02-01 08:07:35+00:00): Zeemanlaan 45 teruggeplaatst
eggie (2022-02-01 08:15:31+00:00): Ton.... Ik heb het fietsverbod verwijderd van de residential Kochstraat. Ergens zul je toch dit wijkjes straks in moeten komen op de fiets...  maar even in de gaten houden hoe de fietspaden gaan lopen.
Mapse
eggie
mavl (2022-02-03 15:30:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 116969392 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [Reason: poor mapping (nonexistent names are added, valid tags are deleted) - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5646].
EP_Repair (2022-02-26 01:24:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 117858450, 117866896 where the changeset comment is: reverting highway classification edits where Fluffy downgraded trunk/motorway roads without either discussing with local communities or following 2021 Highways Classification wiki. Fluffy is now blocked from classifying highways.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-12 18:44:20+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5133859195/history has rooms = 0 that was added in this edit
What was meant by this? That this object has no rooms? Seems surprising here
attili1 (2022-02-04 06:02:13+00:00): Hi Bùi Khắc Tú ,

Trusting you are doing well!
Thank you for adding the highways using the GPS as a source @https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=19.7380798%2C%20105.8813002#map=17/19.73717/105.88171 

Would you mind also sharing the source for adding the classification to these roads? As these groups of road cannot be tertiary, For the best way of mapping, kindly refer to highway wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway . 
We will go ahead and change them to residential as the area is still under development and please do not hesitate to reach out to us for any questions.

Happy Mapping
Manoj
attili1 (2022-02-09 07:12:26+00:00): Hi Bùi Khắc Tú ,

Trusting you are doing well! 
As informed I have modified the tertiary highways.

Happy Mapping
Manoj
zluuzki (2022-02-01 17:54:13+00:00): Looks good, thanks!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:01:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:58:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
jcr83 (2022-02-01 07:16:33+00:00): Pourquoi ton bot a-t-il enlevé le s dans "Allée des Albizzias" ? Il aurait mieux fait d'enlever le z en trop :)
Marcussacapuces91 (2022-02-09 17:00:22+00:00): S'il s'agit de "Allée des Albizzia" way/8038885, il a pris la valeur dans le "planet" de la veille (sinon l'erreur apparait sur le cadastre). Ce bot ne corrige que des typos évidentes (n'enlève pas de lettres). Sur ce nom il y a trop d'ambiguïté sur l'orthographe pour décider, sachant que je vérifie manuellement chaque proposition de correction en visu cadastre, là la minuscule sur "des"
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:01:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:06:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:05:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:05:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:05:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 21:59:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
ChrissW-R1 (2025-01-02 04:58:36+00:00): Please check changeset #97231709: https://osm.org/changeset/97231709
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:01:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:05:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:07:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:01:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
vsahith (2022-02-01 06:28:26+00:00): Added restrictions based on Driver feedback
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:06:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:02:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-04-23 22:03:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 120102796 where the changeset comment is: Following complaints to the DWG and discussion with Mapbox, reverting some changes by a Mapbox editor. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5868 and previous blocks.
Dimacn (2022-02-01 07:36:03+00:00): Простая улица - это residential Проезд без названия - service  Пожалуйста исправьте.
user_2066394 (2022-03-06 13:38:38+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/187659087
Hier ist das Gebäude "geschrumpft", gab es da Bautätigkeit oder ist das die Detailerfassung eines einzelnen Reihenhauses?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/254642783
Hier hast du office=company gelöscht, das gehört technisch als Hauptmerkmal zu name=*
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:office%3Dcompany

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/7679812811
Hier hat es eine Hausnummer verschoben?
Ropino (2022-03-24 10:44:44+00:00): Hi, please check: maxspeed=750 ?
( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1026604214 )
Thx
kartonage (2022-02-01 09:05:34+00:00): Reverted in cs 116857559 due to it being spam.
sharjahescorts (2022-02-01 07:20:13+00:00): Call :- ((SHJ ZIP ∛⊚:S:5:7:6:S:7:6:6⊚ ))  ((CallO5576==5766O)) I'm hi fi sharjah independent escort girls offering Hot Independent Russian escort service in Sharjah 24/7 in 5 Star Hotels outcall. Get a pleasurable moment withindependent escort girls sharjah at very affordable rates near hotels. We provide amazing independent call girls sharjah, Call us to hire Russian girls at affordable rates. Independent Escorts sharjah are available 24/7.

https://www.baidra.com/Indian-escorts-sharjah.html

Call :- ((SHJ ZIP ∛⊚:S:5:7:6:S:7:6:6⊚ ))  ((CallO5576==5766O)) sharjah Escorts|sharjah call girls|escort girl sharjah | Pakistani call girls in Sharjah| call girls service in Sharjah| Russian call girls in Sharjah| independent call girls in Sharjah| sharjah escort girls| vip call girls in Sharjah| call girls available in Sharjah|independent call girls sharjah .In my hobby, i like to be your girlfriend, sweet deep kiss, soft touching each other, make love slowly and enjoy sec together. I want your time with me will be a best quality filled enjoyment time.Contact me anytime for any kind of your mood.i will be same as your desire and fantasy.

Rates:-
1 Hour Charge: AED 1000
2 Hours Charge: AED 1200
3 Hours Charge: AED 1500
Overnight Charge: AED 2000
Call / WhatsApp > +971557657660
kartonage (2022-02-01 09:05:42+00:00): Reverted in cs 116857559 due to it being spam.
pitfire (2022-04-11 04:12:23+00:00): Hallo knutk,
URL ungültig.
website=* gilt nicht für jede URL. 
beachte Key:website 
contact:facebook=*,
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website)
sharjahescorts (2022-02-01 07:27:56+00:00): Call :- ((SHJ ZIP ∛⊚:S:5:7:6:S:7:6:6⊚ ))  ((CallO5576==5766O)) I'm hi fi sharjah independent escort girls offering Hot Independent Russian escort service in Sharjah 24/7 in 5 Star Hotels outcall. Get a pleasurable moment withindependent escort girls sharjah at very affordable rates near hotels. We provide amazing independent call girls sharjah, Call us to hire Russian girls at affordable rates. Independent Escorts sharjah are available 24/7.

https://www.baidra.com/Indian-escorts-sharjah.html

Call :- ((SHJ ZIP ∛⊚:S:5:7:6:S:7:6:6⊚ ))  ((CallO5576==5766O)) sharjah Escorts|sharjah call girls|escort girl sharjah | Pakistani call girls in Sharjah| call girls service in Sharjah| Russian call girls in Sharjah| independent call girls in Sharjah| sharjah escort girls| vip call girls in Sharjah| call girls available in Sharjah|independent call girls sharjah .In my hobby, i like to be your girlfriend, sweet deep kiss, soft touching each other, make love slowly and enjoy sec together. I want your time with me will be a best quality filled enjoyment time.Contact me anytime for any kind of your mood.i will be same as your desire and fantasy.

Rates:-
1 Hour Charge: AED 1000
2 Hours Charge: AED 1200
3 Hours Charge: AED 1500
Overnight Charge: AED 2000
Call / WhatsApp > +971557657660
kartonage (2022-02-01 09:05:49+00:00): Reverted in cs 116857559 due to it being spam.
Dimacn (2022-02-01 07:32:36+00:00): Тип простой улицы residential , а не то что вы указали. У вас же есть инструкция? Вот и пользуйтесь ею.
pitfire (2022-04-11 03:59:07+00:00): Hallo knutk,
Korrektur Tel. Nr. nach DE:Key:phone erforderlich. entsprechend ITU-T E.123 und DIN 5008
zyphlar (2022-02-06 07:48:45+00:00): Hi Goatku, thanks for your great contributions and for joining Sonoma County Openstreetmap!

Thank you for tagging these generic buildings as carports, and even going so far as to note their capacity. The only issue with this changeset is that the addresses put on the carports were duplicates of each other. It wasn't clear if any building on this property would actually get the address 771 without a unit number, so I just removed the address tags. (Sorry I didn't realize you'd added them, you caught this just in between us importing the buildings and me reviewing them so I didn't realize it wasn't our import mistake!)

Anyway, as long as address tags aren't duplicated it looks like you're doing a great job. Thanks again.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853742
zyphlar (2022-02-06 07:52:12+00:00): Oops I also forgot, you added a park and set its street name as "santero way" but we don't have a nearby street named that and we capitalize street names. Could you edit the park street tag and check where Santero Way actually is and update the map? I assume it's the newly constructed street that goes through this development? Thanks again!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853742
zyphlar (2022-02-06 07:55:25+00:00): Thanks for contributing this road and requesting review! FYI residential roads are roads that have names and are generally flush with the rest of the road grid. I updated this road to be a service road because it seems to just be the path cars take through the parking lot and the houses behind it all take the address of the main road. Check the Wiki for road tagging especially in parking lots, it can be confusing at first.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116853950
zyphlar (2022-02-06 07:58:50+00:00): Thanks for requesting review of this parking lot contribution! It looks perfect to me, the only way you could improve it is by adding the type, usually a "surface" lot as opposed to a garage, and surface, usually asphalt. If you're feeling really generous you can add how many spaces there are, whether it's open to the public, and whether it costs money or not. But there's nothing wrong with how it is!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116854039
zyphlar (2022-02-06 08:02:39+00:00): Thanks for adding this road! I already changed it from a residential to a service road since it seemed these roads wouldn't have names and the buildings would all take the address of the main road up front, but if that's wrong please do correct me.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116854250
Patr1k_P (2022-02-03 14:56:15+00:00): zdravim, cez tu lavku sa da uz prejst? Boli ste tam? este par mesiacov dozadu bol most uzavrety
user_5359 (2022-02-03 14:04:18+00:00): Hallo! Bitte sieh Dir mal den Weg https://www.osm.org/way/247362587 an. Der hat keine Tag's. Vermutlich fehlt ein highway=foot.
Pajopath (2022-02-03 14:08:13+00:00): Ne das ist kein Fußweg sonder der kruselige outliner von der Krankenhaus Relation in lauter einzelnen Linien Stücken. Über den bin ich auch schon gestolpert hatte aber noch keine Zeit die Relation mal
Sauber neu einzuzeichnen. :-)
user_5359 (2022-02-03 15:28:14+00:00): Ich habe mich mal dran gesetzt und die Relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13756264 gebaut.
Pajopath (2022-02-03 15:36:33+00:00): Oh cool danke :-)
goodidea (2022-02-11 22:56:48+00:00): Huch? Was ist denn da passiert? 10000 Knoten (+ noch ein paar im Changeset danach)? Da wären ein paar Infos mehr im Changeset-Comment ja nicht schlecht ... Die Changesets davor mit über 9000 geänderten Knoten hab ich auch schon mit Erstaunen gesehen ... War da was verrutscht und dann nochmal rückgängig gemacht?
Teddy73 (2022-02-12 12:47:00+00:00): Hi goodidea, ja sowas war es. ich hab etliche Dinge geändert, und dabei ist plötzlich eine gesamte Selektion verrutscht. Das habe ich erst gemerkt als der Changeset beim Upload war... huch? 20000+Punkte? Dann war es am einfachsten dieselbe Selektion nochmal zu machen und es wieder zurecht zu rücken -> wieder 20000+ Punkte im CS. Abgesehen von viel zu viel Änderungshistorie sollte also nichts passiert sein.
goodidea (2022-02-25 14:17:01+00:00): Ja, sowas passiert, ist mir nicht unbekannt ... und hab ich mir fast gedacht (vielleicht ein bissl mehr Text im comment in so einem Fall investieren ... es erschreckt ja schon, wenn man es im ersten Moment sieht, auch weil es für Außenstehende nicht klar zu erkennen ist, ob sich da wirklich nix geändert hat am Ende ... oder ob doch großflächige Geometrie-Änderungen beabsichtigt waren, z.B. Anpassungen Satellitenbilder o.Ä.). Viele Grüße!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-02-04 05:20:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 116986772, 116973878, 116976578, 116979036, 116983082, 116959113, 116985873, 116987926, 116984402, 116970935, 116981234, 116967980 where the changeset comment is: Following a complaint to the DWG, reverting some fantasy mapping.  Attempts to contact the mapper failed.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=14729412 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5642 .
MikeN (2022-02-01 23:53:33+00:00): Hi, this edit reactivated a node deleted from 15 years ago.   https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1344172/history
LockOnGuy (2022-04-17 15:06:08+00:00): Hello hasaan22, Can you please specify the source of this import?        
You added lots of imports in Iran with non-used OSM tags like: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/964088/history    
Please take a look at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
Dodko (2022-02-05 18:29:21+00:00): Adresa bola správne na budove, samotný stožiar mimo budovy nemá adresu.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2595555255
*Martin* (2022-03-14 16:12:04+00:00): Ahoj. Odkial mas nazov Polnerova luka? Zvroj si nevuviedol.
Patr1k_P (2022-03-14 22:32:49+00:00): Ja som mu ohľadom toho názvu že odkiaľ to vie písal 3.2 a neodpovedal
Patr1k_P (2022-03-14 22:34:20+00:00): SS som myslel
opendcc (2022-02-01 09:15:34+00:00): Hallo,

der Name-Tag ist nur für den Eigennamen (also z.B. Königslinde), nicht für die Gattung. Siehe hierzu https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:genus
Dimacn (2022-02-01 11:27:02+00:00): В названии улицы должно быть: Лесная улица. И больше ничего. Вы как будто раньше карт не видели?
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2022-02-01 08:53:10+00:00): Please do not use the description to advertise. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:description
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/116856854
pitfire (2022-02-01 11:07:32+00:00): Hier hilft:

https://www.tim-online.nrw.de/tim-online2/
osmviborg (2022-02-01 09:13:44+00:00): landuse og bygninger går ikke sammen. Hvad prøver du på?
Peter B Sørensen (2022-02-01 11:24:03+00:00): Prøver at fremhæve at der er tale om kommende bygninger og "Building Under Construction" giver ikke en anden farve eller bliver på anden måde adskildt fra eksisterende bygninger på kortet.
osmviborg (2022-02-01 12:13:06+00:00): Der er ikke forskel på renderingen. Det er ligegyldigt hvad du tagger. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building
Peter B Sørensen (2022-02-01 12:47:42+00:00): Okay - Så sletter jeg dem sku bare :-)