piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
highflyer74 (2019-02-01 14:28:15+00:00): Moin! Schau Dir bitte einmal diese Tankstelle an https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/217503788. Da wurde das building=* entfernt und durch amenity=* ersetzt. Ist es kein Gebäude mehr? Weitere Infos findest Du unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Fuel_station. Ist es vielleicht ein building=roof? Dann bitte auch nochmal Hausnummer 46a ansehen. Da wurde eine neue Gebäudeform gezeichnet, aber das fixme=*, welches vermutlich hinfällig ist, nicht entfernt. Viele Grüße!
Ted Pottage (2021-05-27 15:30:09+00:00): Just turned up another deleted building/business on this:
"Stitch-up" still visible here https://wheelmap.org/nodes/-374832868 
Will restore or replace it as son as I have re-surveyed this bit.
Piskvor (2019-01-31 08:08:34+00:00): Dobrý den, ta smíšená pěší a cyklostezka je oddělená, nebo sdílená? (viz https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Key:segregated )
Martin2035 (2019-01-31 10:49:06+00:00): Dobrý den, stezka je sdílená. Není ani z asfaltu, pouze z mlátového povrchu.
muralito (2019-01-31 00:21:43+00:00): Hola. Tene en cuenta que los espacios para estacionar en la calle no se etiquetan como amenity=parking. Para eso tiene
muralito (2019-01-31 00:22:24+00:00): (sigo) que ser un predio dedicado al estacionamiento, no importa si publico o privado, pero dedicado a eso.
b-jazz (2019-02-01 22:05:07+00:00): Why were those footpaths deleted? Was there a problem with them?
bhav_ana (2019-07-10 04:30:07+00:00): Hi Pittrichimica

Trust you are well. While reviewing the road network in Yogyakarta, I have come across the way 132895263 , way 132895265 , way 702339478 and way 702339479 classified as 'unclassified' . However, going by the aerial imagery and other ways around, this seems to be 'tertiary'

As of now correcting the data. Please suggest if it is otherwise

Thanks in advance.
pittrichimica (2019-07-13 12:26:20+00:00): Hello,
Thanks for commenting.
I have similar remarks as with the other changeset you commented:
- ways 132895263 and 132895265 were created by Serpico as unclassified, only extended by me;
- way 702339478 and 702339479 seem to have been  created by you, I do not see my name in the edit history. Maybe because of way splitting?
As I normally do not change way classification unless I see residentials running cross-country, it might make sense to check with the users who created them first, to discuss attributes.
Best
François2 (2019-01-31 09:43:42+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci d'avoir demandé une revue sur tes modifications.
L'utilisation du tag construction=subway n'a pas l'air correcte puisque ce n'est pas le tracé du métro en lui même qui est en construction. 
Pourra tu le corriger ?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66783041
EneaSuper (2019-01-31 10:21:59+00:00): Ciao ernestoadinolfi, in attesa della riforma mappale delle strutture ospedaliere mi stavo giusto domandando se questo doveva essere mantenuto come tale oppure no. Non presenta né reparti specialistici né alcuna tipologia di pronto soccorso...
ernestoandolfi (2019-01-31 10:41:02+00:00): Me lo sono domandato anche io ma sapendo che sono monitorati da te ho lasciato stare. Se pensi di togliere il tag hospital per me ok. Per il nome? Lì  è  comunque conosciuto come ospedale Pastorino, credo.  Lasciamo il name:ex Ospedale Pastorino insieme al tag building? Ciao. Matteo
eggie (2019-01-30 22:33:21+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
eggie (2019-01-30 22:44:17+00:00): Dag Gogo.. Je hebt het gebouw en de toegangsweg verwijderd van de kaart en een nieuw gebouw (?) ingetekend. Dit staat echter niet in het Kadaster. Verder geef je aan  dat de serviceweg prive is. Dit wordt echter in OSM getagd met access=private. het is niet de bedoeling om zomaar data van de kaart te halen.
Graag uitleg.
MVG,
Eggie
eggie (2019-01-30 22:54:00+00:00): reverted door Wijzigingenset #66785942 

Je bijdrage wordt beschouwd als vandalisme en is teruggedraaid. Wat is je bedoeling.
Bijna alle gebouwen in Nederland zijn privé. dat is geen reden om die van de kaart te halen. 
De parkeerplaats zal ik op access=private zetten. 
MVG,
Eggie
Gogolathome (2019-01-31 09:19:55+00:00): Hallo Eggie, bedankt voor de uitleg.
Ik wilde aangeven dat de toegangsweg naar de parkeergarage onder het gebouw behoort tot het privé terrein van de Vereniging van Eigenaren en geen straatnaam heeft. Het hele gebied is dus privé eigendom. Verder heeft de node 1-PG iets met de parkeergarage te maken?
eggie (2019-01-31 09:37:34+00:00): Dag Gogolathome,

Oke.. alleen dat aangeven was niet helemaal gelukt vandaar dat ik je bijdrage heb teruggedraaid. :)
Het gebouw en de toevoerweg waren immers van de kaart verdwenen. 
De toevoerweg naar de parkeergarage staat op access=private evenals de ondergrondse parkeerruimte.
1-PG is het kadasteradres van de parkeergarage. 
Het staat bij de ingang.
De dubbele adresnode 1-PG elders heb ik verwijderd.
Gebouwen en Adresnodes zijn import van het Kadaster.
De straatnamen zijn nodig om de adressen te vinden in routeplanners en GPS apparatuur. Die straatnamen kunnen ook op de toevoerwegen worden gezet. 
Periodiek worden gebouwen en adressen ge_updated. Aan gebouwen sleutelen heeft dus geen zin. 
De rendering van de standaardkaart ligt momenteel praktisch stil.. dus niemand zal je acties hebben gezien. :)
Wanneer je nog vragen hebt stel ze gerust. 

MVG,
Eggie
François2 (2019-01-31 09:37:29+00:00): Bonjour!

Merci de prendre en compte les remarques !

Un commentaire car tu a demandé une revue de tes modifications.

D'après le wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:construction), la route en travaux devrait être taggé en higway=construction et construction=secondary
Je ne mettrais pas non plus de nom (Réaménagement de la RD 127 A et B à Gentilly jusqu'à Fin 2019) mais plutôt en description.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66783311
highflyer74 (2019-02-10 10:01:17+00:00): Moin!

In dieser Gegend wurden von Dir einige Wege hinzugefügt. Danke dafür!

Versuche bitte beim Hinzufügen von Wegen zu vermeiden, dass diese sich selbst überschneiden. Dadurch kommt es zu Routingfehlern und es führt zu Mehrarbeit bei Deinen Mit-Mappern. In Deinem Fall ist meist die Verbindung mit der Straße das Problem.

Hier http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=7.79327&lat=52.78733&zoom=13 kannst Du Dir die Stellen ansehen. Wenn Du Hilfe beim Korrigieren benötigst, melde Dich gern!

Wenn Du weiterhin Lust hast, zu OSM beizutragen, kann ich Dir sehr den Editor JOSM (https://josm.openstreetmap.de/) ans Herz legen. Dieser macht die Bearbeitung sehr viel komfortabler und sicherer, da er vor potentiellen Fehlern warnt.

Ein tolles Tutorial im PDF Format, welches von einem engagierten Mit-Mapper erstellt wurde, findest Du hier:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

Weiteren Lesestoff gibt es hier:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice

Viele Grüße aus HB!
François2 (2019-01-31 09:45:23+00:00): Bonjour,
Si tu est certain de l'emplacement des arrêts, ca m'a l'air bien !
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66783683
clay_c (2019-12-04 19:28:38+00:00): Hey there stevea,

This is mostly just a technicality, but what was your reasoning behind changing this back to railway=light_rail? The remainder of the route and infrastructure for the SPRINTER is still mapped with train=yes rather than light_rail=yes, so if you meant to change this to a light rail line, your work is incomplete. From my point of view, changing the underlying railway for a DMU line to railway=light_rail makes it a bit harder to maintain and it doesn't match up with how similar DMU routes are mapped elsewhere.

In good faith, I'm going to go ahead and change this back to railway=rail. If this is something you're confident about, feel free change it to a light rail line—just make sure your changes are reflected in the public_transport elements and route relations as well.

-Clay
stevea (2019-12-04 19:44:11+00:00): I agree with your analysis and changes here.  This has always been mildly confusing in my mind as to how DMU lines are best mapped, especially when the tracks are used for both a light_rail service (whether DMU or electric) AND there is also some freight on the line (as on San Diego Trolley's Orange line out to Santee and El Cajon, where there are "industrial rail customers" that use the same line the passenger trollies are on, but between 2:00 AM and 3:30 AM for their freight runs).

So, as I don't know if the SPRINTER tracks even ARE used for freight, (I don't think so, my nephew rides this line as a CSUSM student) that was my motivation:  "light_rail only" made me change it.  But you continue to do excellent work on rail, and if you have noticed that what I did is "incomplete" and that your newer tagging is how similar routes are mapped, then I defer to your more consistent tagging.

While realizing that the following questions mildly stray in the direction of tagging for the renderer, doesn't it seem that your style of tagging railway=rail instead of railway=light_rail would make an ORM rendering "disappear" that the tracks (as black, not green) are not readily apparent as passenger (light_rail) service?  That's another motivation for me having changed it, not so much tagging for the renderer, but merely as an accurate way of seeing (say, California-wide) rail as a network and identifying where the light_rail passenger service is?

I'm still not sure which is "more correct," as I see both of our perspectives here, though I will defer to you setting it to railway=rail as we discuss this.  Let's say there is no freight service here (maybe true, maybe not).  Wouldn't the ORM tagging convention of "the highest or heaviest service on the line" (i.e. passenger service being "more important" than freight) suggest that light_rail "win out" over rail?  We really could go either way here.

Thanks for noticing and your very polite note here!  I encourage further discussion, or you might simply leave your changes as is without further discussion, though I would appreciate an answer as to the above questions.
stevea (2019-12-05 07:50:29+00:00): relation/6161003 (Escondido Subdivision) seems fine — it is even additionally stitched into local transit as a bus_route.

relation/1371791 (SPRINTER) was updated with the text of the change in the wiki.  In short, this route=light_rail is now a route=train and is documented in the wiki as so.  Keeping eyes open here, as this is a curious edge of California/Rail:  the distinction between a light_rail and a train route.
stevea (2019-12-06 19:52:50+00:00): I have changed relation/1371791 back to route=light_rail (from route=train).  Everything I know and can find about this calls it a "light rail" and calling it a train (as in heavy rail) seems incorrect to me.

Wiki changes made yesterday were backed out (to re-reflect it is light_rail, not train).  The "service=commuter" tag on the relation was deleted, as this key:value pair isn't wiki-documented and doesn't make sense in the better-established context of the "passenger=urban" tag (which does make sense and is wiki documented).

While the route is still PTv1, some platform elements (as in the richly-tagged Escondido Transit Center) do begin an ability for upgrading to a fully PTv2 route, but other intermediate platforms will need to be added to the map and this relation.
stevea (2019-12-06 20:36:34+00:00): Now, finally, the question confronts us:  do we change the elements of the Escondido Subdivision from railway=rail to railway=light_rail where applicable?  Following the example of the San Diego Trolley's three infrastructure lines (Blue, Orange, Green, though there is also a Silver passenger route on these), I would say "yes, we should" make these changes.

It would be good to definitively know if/when there actually is any freight service on the Escondido Subdivision, the "Freight Bypass Tracks" and minor amount of freight-appearing rail just past the Escondido Transit Center notwithstanding.
stevea (2019-12-06 22:06:11+00:00): The rail elements in the route=light_rail are changed from railway=rail to railway=light_rail.

Despite the service being DMU instead of electric, everything about this says "light" rail instead of "heavy," (which would lead to a route=train for the passenger service, but it isn't, it is route=light_rail).  The concomitant train=yes tags (on stations, transit centers, platforms) are now light_rail=yes
EneaSuper (2019-01-31 10:19:28+00:00): Ciao ernestoadinolfi, dato che l'accesso a queste attività è diretto, come da regolamento internazionale dovevano essere mantenute così com'erano.
Se non riesci ad eseguire un ripristino lo farò io 👍🏻
ernestoandolfi (2019-01-31 10:39:28+00:00): Ciao. Non avevo mai visto i tag delle attività commerciali ancorate ai nodi del perimetro dei palazzi. Di norma sono all'interno. Forse mi perdo qualcosa. Ti contatto in privato. Per il ripristino non c'è problema.
nlehuby (2019-01-31 07:23:58+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour ces mises à jour.

J'ai corrigé une petite erreur : 
railway=station correspond à une gare, et non à un arrêt de tram (source : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:railway=station)
François2 (2019-01-31 09:51:09+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour ces changements. 
J'ai remarqué que tu avais changé le nom du tramway de T2 à Tram T2. Le reste du tramway étant indiqué à T2, je ne pense pas que ce soit une bonne idée de le changer.
Concernant le changement de l'arrêt "Pont du Garigliano", le tag alt_name était correctement rempli. Je ne sais pas si c'est pertinent de le changer du coup.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66784009
abrensch (2019-02-03 12:35:24+00:00): Hallo TBKMrt,

schau Dir mal diesen Knoten an (und seine Dubletten...): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6248002765

Das ist jetzt ganz schön zerrupft.

Gruss, Arndt
TBKMrt (2019-02-03 17:03:16+00:00): Danke für deinen Hinweis!
Ich kümmere mich gleich darum. Keine Ahnung was dieses dumme Merkaartor da wieder angestellt hat. iD sagt mir auch, dass es die Punkte nicht mehr verbinden kann. Also muss ich kurz JOSM starten.
TBKMrt (2019-02-03 17:37:36+00:00): Habe die drei Punkte iweder zu einem vereint.
Ich nehme an Merkaartor hat beim trennen der Linien schlicht nicht nur die Linien getrennt sondern gleich alle Wege auf einzelne Punkte gesetzt. Das Verhalten kenne ich eigentlich vorrangig von iD, unterstreicht aber nochmals die Nutzlosigkeit von Merkaartor.

Routing mit GraphHopper funktioniert, er nimmt aber das Wendeverbot noch nicht.

In jedem Fall danke für deinen Hinweis!
4004 (2019-02-03 19:48:22+00:00): а это не та, что там висит уже несколько лет без названия? на снимках вроде одна только аптека в здании, 1 этаж со стороны банка
eggie (2019-01-30 23:09:44+00:00): Kleine aanpassing verricht: 
► Uw node samengevoegd met bestaande adresnode

MVG,
Eggie
trigpoint (2019-01-31 12:54:58+00:00): Hi again, please could you explain the source of these edits? It is concerning when a new mapper only changes other mappers work over a wide area that they are unlikely to have visited.
Before you continue editing please answer this and other comments that have been made on your edits.
Cheers Phil
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 18:25:26+00:00): Añadí el nombre de la calle ROBERTO ESPINOZA y ya no está!
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 18:34:00+00:00): http://i63.tinypic.com/11kgqya.jpg
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 18:34:28+00:00): Tambien eliminaron calles que añadi y no estaban en el mapa!
chachafish (2019-02-01 13:11:14+00:00): Good morning, Ferchino83. Thank you for your response. On numerous occasions chachafish and Polarbear-repair have tried to contact you because you are deleting a large number of traffic lights, adding “junction=yes” incorrectly and not responding to changeset comments. The DWG issued you a block. A DWG member asked me to revert your edits in order to repair the damage and so, your changesets have been reverted. Nobody wanted to revert your edits, but no communication was received from you. Kindly do not delete traffic lights which exist. You can learn the proper of use junction=yes in the links below. Sincerely, chachafish
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Dyes
And here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Named_spots_instead_of_street_names
eggie (2019-01-31 06:40:16+00:00): Dag Wrombers. Je vraagt om een review. 
Elk begin is moeilijk. Ziet er netjes uit. 
Begin nooit met access=no. Dat is een totaal verbod. art. 461  Ik heb er even vehicle=no van gemaakt. Het pad zat geplakt aan de landuse =grass. Wanneer je de linker alt-toets gebruikt plakt iD niet. Ik heb het pad en trap losgemaakt. 
MVG,
Eggie
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 18:36:12+00:00): http://i63.tinypic.com/2w1t8o2.png
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 18:37:06+00:00): Eliminaron informacion que añadi como: nombre de la calle Rio Tigre y la calle Geodésico que no estaba en el mapa!
chachafish (2019-02-01 13:11:59+00:00): Good morning, Ferchino83. Thank you for your response. On numerous occasions chachafish and Polarbear-repair have tried to contact you because you are deleting a large number of traffic lights, adding “junction=yes” incorrectly and not responding to changeset comments. The DWG issued you a block. A DWG member asked me to revert your edits in order to repair the damage and so, your changesets have been reverted. Nobody wanted to revert your edits, but no communication was received from you. Kindly do not delete traffic lights which exist. You can learn the proper of use junction=yes in the links below. Sincerely, chachafish
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Dyes
And here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Named_spots_instead_of_street_names
viloan (2019-01-30 21:48:48+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Glassman (2019-01-31 03:40:06+00:00): If you need help adding new features, let me know.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/66784759
viloan (2019-01-30 21:51:02+00:00): Bem-vindo(a) ao OpenStreetMap e parabéns pela sua primeira edição! :-)

Temos um portal brasileiro sobre o OpenStreetMap, com várias informações úteis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brasil

Enquanto você está se acostumando com o OpenStreetMap, é recomendado que sempre pergunte aos usuários mais experientes antes de remover ou modificar objetos do mapa, especialmente aqueles que são aparentemente "estranhos" ou "fora do lugar".

Além disso, pedimos que não copie dados de mapas proprietários (como nomes de ruas do Google Maps, por exemplo) e que mapeie apenas o que existe na realidade.

Se você está mapeando por causa do Pokémon, dê uma olhada em https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2017/12/01/dicas-para-novos-mapeadores-pokemon-go/?lang=pt-pt

Se tiver qualquer tipo de dúvida você pode entrar em contato com a comunidade brasileira através de algum dos canais disponíveis em https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Contact
O canal "Comunidade" do Telegram costuma ser o mais movimentado.

Abraço e boa diversão com suas edições!
Revolta Gardy (2019-01-31 17:37:59+00:00): você colocou PE-119 como nome em vez do código da rodovia (ref)
Lee Carré (2021-12-11 23:10:52+00:00): “updating map of Jersey”

How?
What makes for http://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

This comment is meaningless to local mappers.
sergeybe (2019-01-31 11:33:49+00:00): Ну вот опять не проверяете данные и тащите на карту ошибку. Ниже этой высоты уже проходит жирная изолиния 1000 метров. Никак она не может быть 980 метров.На современных картах она 1016 метров.
Севернее есть высота 978 не нанесенная на OSM.
dask63ru (2019-01-31 15:55:51+00:00): Откуда такие подробности? С каких карт срисовано?
sergeybe (2019-02-01 07:58:28+00:00): Вы думали что смените аккаунт и будите продолжать гадить на карте и мешать людям? Вам неоднократно объясняли, что ваши правки в OSM не нужны: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/2478
https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/dask63ru/blocks
Что вы здесь забыли? Займитесь чем-нибудь другим и не позорьтесь раз за разом.
Ferchino83 (2019-01-31 17:55:05+00:00): El nombre de la calle no es AVENIDA OCCIDENTAL, sino AVENIDA MARISCAL SUCRE, estandaricé los nombres, por favor guardar esos cambios

The name of the street is not WESTERN AVENUE, but AVENIDA MARISCAL SUCRE, standardized the names, please save those changes
chachafish (2019-02-01 13:10:04+00:00): Good morning, Ferchino83. Thank you for your response. On numerous occasions chachafish and Polarbear-repair have tried to contact you because you are deleting a large number of traffic lights, adding “junction=yes” incorrectly and not responding to changeset comments. The DWG issued you a block. A DWG member asked me to revert your edits in order to repair the damage and so, your changesets have been reverted. Nobody wanted to revert your edits, but no communication was received from you. Kindly do not delete traffic lights which exist. You can learn the proper of use junction=yes in the links below. Sincerely, chachafish
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Dyes
And here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Named_spots_instead_of_street_names
Cedrcha (2019-01-30 22:17:55+00:00): Partie Bus normal (pas bus à la demande)
caffo666 (2019-01-30 22:22:57+00:00): Dit word op correcte manier teruggeplaatst.
eggie (2019-01-30 23:16:27+00:00): Dag caffoo.. Gooi nooit oude schoenen weg voordat..... Wanneer ga je dat dan doen, want nu zit Lochem zonder residential?
Gr Eggie
caffo666 (2019-01-31 09:24:12+00:00): Hoi eggie, dit gaat vandaag gebeuren. Na inschatting is dit best lang werk dus ik moest het in mijn dagplanning plannen. Mvg kevin
eggie (2019-01-31 09:42:47+00:00): Oke Kevin.. succes,
Groet,
Eggie
gendy54 (2019-02-23 21:49:58+00:00): Bonsoir,

Merci des nombreuses modifs.
Je viens de faire des changements sur plusieurs gendarmeries que vous avez modifié.
Attention à ne pas modifier inutilement. Sur celle de Briare, le fait d'enlever le tag police du bâtiment, on ne fait plus la correspondance avec le reste des informations qui sont utilisées par la gendarmerie. Voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Project_of_the_month/Gendarmerie_nationale#Gendarmerie_nationale
Egalement attention à ne pas mettre building=yes sur ces zones. C'est réservé aux bâtiments stricto sensu.
N'hésitez pas à de demander conseil ;)
Il y a une rencontre OSM à Tours le 25/03, 19h30 chez Artefacts, Pépinière du Sanitas.

Donat, alias gendy54
gendy54 (2019-02-23 21:50:56+00:00): Voilà l'annonce pour le rdv. http://forum.openstreetmap.fr/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=7063
WoodWoseWulf (2019-01-30 22:55:18+00:00): Please don't just delete things that you didn't create without first discussing them.