piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
miche101 (2017-05-08 05:33:35+00:00): zu btw: das ist kommisch... sieht mir nach einem Fehler aus. Ich glaube nicht das vor Ort der Fußweg zu beiden Seiten endet... Außer es ist ein Weg der das Ziel die Platform hat. Wenn es nur eine zweit Nutzung ist.. müsste highway=footway bleiben... und die Platform zusätzlich angebracht werden..

zu btw2: ja das muss man dort richten..  die Sketch-line galub ich zeigt immer zwei an wenn stop und platform dabei ist.. soll eine Bug sein den es schon Jahre gibt.

Gruß Miche
literan (2017-04-15 12:20:11+00:00): Здравствуйте! у вас тут получился https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/486817243 луг, растущий на деревьях. Нужно мультиполигон делать, знаете что это такое? И вы уверены, что там именно луг, а не вырубка (landuse=cutting)?
Jothirnadh (2017-04-17 10:53:36+00:00): Hello Fafamalan,

Thanks for showing interest in OpenStreetMap and adding your valuable data. In the parks you added I noticed that you added polygon representing the shape and a node representing the same. As per OSM convention its not necessary to add a node representing the park. For now I am deleting the node.

Happy mapping,
Jothirnadh
user_3216889 (2017-04-15 12:15:06+00:00): Dit is geen square, zie:
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Dsquare

Graag corrigeren.
fatuus (2017-04-14 18:22:23+00:00): Du behövde inte ta bort lekparken, bara göra den lite mindre. Meningen var inte att skrämma dig, bara hjälpa dig på traven i början.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2017-07-05 20:28:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 50067857 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some fantasy mapping in Turkey - attempts by various people to contact the user have failed.
zors1843 (2017-04-14 16:26:53+00:00): The church is already mapped.
Commodoortje (2017-04-14 17:35:05+00:00): Martin,
Je revert is niet goed uitgevoerd.
Advies in dit geval om handmatig de edits van https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Pendatun na te lopen.
JTiptonGIS (2017-06-09 15:31:44+00:00): Please remove https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/486823293#map=16/34.7925/-92.3370 if you are not certain that it exists. I believe this was a temporary road cut in for an event. It is no longer there.

A more appropriate tag would have been "track" instead of footpath as this is about the size of a road.
Dalkvist (2017-04-14 21:07:19+00:00): Hej, kul att du vill hjälpa till att göra kartan bättre. Inte så att du hittade hit från något pokemon relaterat?
Simon Bonér (2017-04-15 09:10:51+00:00): Tjena, hjälper gärna till 
Absolut, kände inte till sidan innan
Dock ser jag det som en win win, jag har inget syfte att utnyttja kartan för min vinning, däremot kan jag både förbättra funktionaliteten och själv möjligtvis dra nytta i det genom pokemon
Dessutom läser jag programmering så allt som gynnar utvecklarvärlden är jag gärna med och stöttar

Känns det som jag inte kan vara opartisk får ni väll ta bort mina förslag på förändringar men meddela mig isåfall så jag inte fortsätter föreslå ändringar

MVH Simon
Dalkvist (2017-04-15 09:27:26+00:00): Det är inget fel på dina ändringar, ursäkta om du kände dig påhoppad. Vi har fått många nya pokemonspelande användare sista dagarna och jag var lite nyfiken var ni alla kommer ifrån. Tänkte det var bästa att fråga någon som gjort bra ändringar :)
Simon Bonér (2017-04-15 12:48:00+00:00): Härligt att höra! Nädå ingen fara, har förstått det som att det är ett mindre problem med dem som utnyttjar OpenStreetMap för att få bättre spawns nära sitt hus, även om det innebär inkorrekta ändringar i systemet

Tror de flesta kommer från trainer tips, i en av hans senaste videos berättar han hur man potentiellt kan skapa ett nest i pokemon go via OpenStreetMap
ACS1986 (2017-04-14 20:34:42+00:00): Hi Mike,
Adding foot=yes would allow pedestrians whilst maintaining the traffic restrictions.
Removing the access=no tag to allow pedestrians has the unintended effect of allowing some types of traffic which aren't permitted by the road signs egs. horses and non-motorised vehicles.
Regards,
Adam
Mike Baggaley (2017-04-14 23:48:13+00:00): Hi, Adam,
I must admit I haven't checked to see whether there is a no horses sign, but these are extremely rare in the UK, so I'd be very surprised if there is one there - they are normally only found at tunnels and other places that could be dangerous. Regarding vehicular traffic, I had thought that the only non-motorised vehicle supported by OSM was bicycle and the way already had bicycle=yes on it, hence my change of access=no to motor_vehicle=no. However, on checking I see horse and carriage is also supported (caravan and trailer don't apply as these will already be prohibited by the towing vehicle, unless someone is trying to push one along and I don't think anyone will seriously expect to accurately map where a caravan can legally be pushed). I have never see a carriage tag on any way and see that there are only a small number worldwide, suggesting that it is a facility that is not being used. I don't believe anyone will use the tags in OSM to determine where they can take a horse and carriage.

Regards,
Mike
ACS1986 (2017-04-15 12:27:45+00:00): Hi,
The signs are the blue circular signs meaning a road for buses, cycles and taxis only. Obviously pedestrians are also allowed unless explicitly prohibited.
access=no, foot=yes, bus=yes, taxi=yes bicycle=yes seems a more accurate representation of these restrictions than motor_vehicle=no, bus=yes, taxi=yes, bicycle=yes but as you say the practical difference to end users is minimal. 
Kind regards,
Adam
Mike Baggaley (2017-04-15 13:47:39+00:00): Hi, there are several reasons I normally choose setting motor_vehicle=no over access=no and overriding specific types of access. One is that setting access=no generally sets an incorrect value for horses - neither the blue signs nor the no entry signs prohibit horses, but I don't want to explicitly set horse values. I am generally suspicious of ways tagged with access=no, as many mappers automatically put it where there is a no entry sign, without thinking of the non vehicular users. Also, using access=no gives the impression of a stronger prohibition and this seems to be echoed by the standard OSM renderer which appears to render differently if access=no is specified, regardless of the individual access settings.
Best wishes,
Mike
nammala (2017-04-19 06:56:16+00:00): May I know the reason behind deleting the park
Seandebasti (2019-11-24 17:44:53+00:00): Hi. is https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4793787839 really wind?
Seandebasti (2019-11-24 17:52:52+00:00): because it doesnt look like wind (I checked eo-browser for recent S2) looks more like petroluem well
ff5722 (2019-11-24 19:15:29+00:00): Yes you are right, I think they were under construction at the time so I guessed it was wind based on the high locations, I will correct it.
Seandebasti (2019-11-24 19:24:04+00:00): a lot to do ;) is there a way to do it automatically? around your wind I put already petroleum.
ff5722 (2019-11-24 19:25:33+00:00): http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Op6

And load in JOSM, select all and change tags

It should be fixed in this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77490578
Dalkvist (2017-04-14 21:22:35+00:00): Välkommen tillbaka, det har hänt lite på 6 år tro jag.
Om du har några funderingar så får du gärna skicka ett meddelande till mig.
chillly (2017-04-14 17:33:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM

Is the park really called Green Place? There is a temptation to describe things using the name tag, but we only ever use the real name for things. I know that Pokemon players think that parks need a name to help with the game, but we only want real names. :-)
chillly (2017-04-14 17:30:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM

Thanks for the detail. 
I would suggest that Victory Fields is a recreation ground, not a park. It looks to be predominantly for sports.
AbrasivePigeon (2017-04-14 19:00:02+00:00): Yep you're absolutely right, my bad. Changed and also added more detail (skate park and playground).
trigpoint (2017-04-14 17:57:35+00:00): The correct way to describe this is amenity=playground.
nammala (2017-04-19 09:01:03+00:00): Hi parlindungan simanjuntak,

Please don't add fantasy data in the null island, I went ahead and reverted the changeset.

Regards,
nammala
Nakaner (2017-04-17 08:47:29+00:00): Hi DCJoeS-dcmnbuildings,

some users have pointed out at the Imports mailing list that the license of the data you use for this import is unclear and maybe not compatible with OSM. I hereby ask you not to import more data as part of this import until this issue is resolved. https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/imports/2017-April/004920.html

In addition, I would like to ask you to add a description to the user page of your account which describes what this account is used for and who is responsible for this account.

Best regards

Michael
Владимир К (2017-04-17 08:32:35+00:00): не нужно писать слово заправка в название заправки
deavmi (2017-04-14 18:00:39+00:00): Very dank.
FraMauro (2017-04-18 13:19:24+00:00): il gruppo di modifiche è errato: è stato cancellato il tag building e aggiunto il POI sull'intera area.
Non mi pare di vedere il civico del POI (ho cercato sul loro sito); qualcuno che conosce la zona potrebbe rivedere il tutto?
richlv (2017-04-14 23:14:23+00:00): Hi there, new mappers.
We welcome all new users and are glad to receive corrections to the map. At the same time, we expect the changes to improve the map, not serve some other goal - be it playing some online game or anything else.

While it is nice that the area here has benches, it is not officially designated as a park - please see http://www.rigasmezi.lv/lv/Rigas_darzi_un_parki/par_parkiem/Darzi_un_parki_Pardaugavas_iecirknis/ . Please do not engage in edit wars, it is not an appreciated way of solving issues.
Additionally, note that Google maps is not an authority - even more, it is legally not permitted to reuse Google maps data.

Thank you for your interest in OpenStreetMap, and if you'd like to see this place designated as a park, please do contact the local city council :)
chillly (2017-04-14 19:04:10+00:00): The wood looks good, but it has a hole in it. We create that by creating a relation known as a multipolygon relation. If you create an outline for the hole then select the wood and the hole and merge them (from the menu when they are both selected) that will create the MP relation. You can then tag the hole area as, say landuse=grass or whatever you think is appropriate.

HTH
AbrasivePigeon (2017-04-14 19:18:03+00:00): Done, thanks for the tips!
richlv (2017-04-14 23:20:47+00:00): Have all of these been surveyed to be designated footways?

If you have a chance, could you please add Mapillary images of these footways ?
See https://www.mapillary.com/ for the detail.
richlv (2017-04-14 23:34:54+00:00): This one indeed designated as a park - thank you for spotting :)
http://www.rigasmezi.lv/lv/Rigas_darzi_un_parki/par_parkiem/Darzi_un_parki_Pardaugavas_iecirknis/

I changed it to use the official name, and added the previous name in the loc_name tag.
richlv (2017-04-14 23:28:34+00:00): I cleaned up the duplicate here, but getting back to the topic of the object itself - the name seems to be describing a memorial. What indicates that it is not one ?
eggie (2017-04-14 19:09:27+00:00):  "Welkom op OSM”

Lees hier hoe je OSM het beste kunt gebruiken en hoe je kunt bijdragen aan een betere kaart: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/help 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM

Mocht je vragen hebben, kun je altijd contact met me opnemen, ik (en medemappers zijn/) ben bereid om je te helpen.
Klik op de link om te antwoorden.
eggie (2017-04-14 19:14:28+00:00): info samengevoegd met bag adresnode
Colin Smale (2017-04-14 21:47:15+00:00): Hi Kieran,

Welcome to OSM! I hope you don't mind if I give you a couple of hints on this edit.

The two roads you added here are not going to show up unless you add some kind of highway tag to them. I suggest highway=service might be about right Also, did you know there is a tag "amenity=police" to mark a police station explicitly? Then it gets a nice icon and everyone can see what it is - including people who work with the raw data.
Lastly it looks nicer if you can get the capitalisation right - "Port of Tilbury Police".

Best regards,
Colin
JamesKingdom (2017-04-14 18:30:24+00:00): Is there really a park there? It looks just like houses to me.
chillly (2017-04-14 18:30:55+00:00): Welcome to OSM
The park looks to be imaginary. There are houses there. I will revert (undo) this edit.
André Alvarenga (2017-04-14 21:53:24+00:00): Eu inclui dois pontos para incluir duas atividades que acho não dá para serem incluídas no mesmo ponto. São duas atividades bem distintas, uma é venda de produtos para pesca e caça. A outra é estande de tiro. Separando as duas será possível pesquisar pelas duas possibilidades. Não seria a melhor forma? Lembro de ter lido em algum lugar isso.
adrianojbr (2017-04-14 21:55:22+00:00): faz sentido. eu até mapearia todas as etiquetas no mesmo ponto, mas o motivo de eu ter apagado é que eu não sabia que havia estande de tiro ali. vou restaurar o ponto apagado. abs.
André Alvarenga (2017-04-14 22:09:09+00:00): Também pensei em incluir todas as informações, mas não sei como os aplicativos vão gerenciar isso. Não é uma questão de mapear para o renderizador (aplicativo), mas de ser necessário separar atividades distintas, mesmo sendo da mesma empresa. Por exemplo, em um posto de gasolina podemos mapear o posto, uma bomba de ar, uma lavação, etc...
De qualquer forma, é fácil unificar as informações se não forem incompatíveis. Minha dúvida é justamente essa. Compatibilidade entre as tags.
André Alvarenga (2017-04-14 22:16:12+00:00): Pensando no caso do posto. Será que não seria melhor criar uma pequena área (e não um ponto) dentro do prédio, incluir as informações da empresa e agrupar os dois pontos dentro desta área?
André Alvarenga (2017-04-14 22:18:18+00:00): O JOSM não apresentou nenhum problema na validação.
adrianojbr (2017-04-14 22:28:40+00:00): no caso de postos, tenho mapeado na área, geralmente, as etiquetas do posto junto as de loja de conveniência (claro, quando há) -- shop + amenity, e não encontrei problema em nenhuma aplicação.

quanto ao validator, depende do alarme gerado. quando é erro, deve ser corrigido. quando é alerta, deve-se avaliar se precisa de correção. sei que alguns tipos de etiquetas geram alerta, por exemplo, landuse + amenity, mas não necessariamente estão erradas.

de todo modo, na falta de especificação na wiki, procuro optar pela forma correta mais simples. ou seja, basicamente não representar em vários elementos no mapa, o que pode ser representado por somente um. nesse caso da loja de pesca e caça, eu colocaria tudo no mesmo ponto, apesar de achar que do jeito que você fez não está errado, só é um pouco mais complexo e, talvez, de forma desnecessária.

não entendi muito bem sua ideia sobre mapeamento de posto.
André Alvarenga (2017-04-14 22:38:16+00:00): http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/368300022

Veja este posto. Tem área, lavação, bomba de ar...
Fiz assim no JOSM.
Dentro do prédio criei uma área com as tags name, shop, contact:*.
Dentro da área coloquei um ponto com leisure=pitch, sport=shooting, shotting=pistol

Assim o endereço da loja é obtido com as informações do prédio e no caso da atividade de tiro as informações da empresa são obtidas pela área.

O que você acha?
adrianojbr (2017-04-15 01:16:34+00:00): quanto ao posto bailer, estou plenamente de acordo. tb já mapeei alguns de forma bem parecida.

quanto a loja e estande de tiro, acho que os dois obtém o endereço do prédio (depende da aplicação, claro. o osmand não faz isso, mas o maps.me e nominatim sim).

de todo modo, a loja e o estande têm o mesmo endereço, mesmas informações para contato e mesmo nome, por isso acho que poderiam estar mapeados no mesmo ponto. eu faria assim, porque é mais simples. mas, repito, não vejo como errado do jeito que você fez.

cito, como exemplo, alguns pesque e pague (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/460517631) onde também há um restaurante. vi alguns (e passei a fazer igual) sendo mapeados num elemento só (no caso, uma área).
André Alvarenga (2017-04-15 01:37:35+00:00): Certo. Num primeiro momento pensei em mapear tudo junto, depois achei melhor fazer separado. Desde que começamos a conversa pensei melhor e acho que a forma mais simples é realmente em um ponto (ou área) só. Vou unificar.
Valeu pela troca de informações.
Abraço.
chillly (2017-04-14 18:34:10+00:00): You have added a point but it needs tags to describe what it is, a name is not enough. If it is a wall you need barrier=wall. Names usually have initial letters in capitals, especially old names.
chillly (2017-04-15 09:44:03+00:00): This does not look like a park, it is just farmland. Please stop adding imaginary stuff to OSM
eggie (2017-04-14 19:22:52+00:00): Hier lagen de voetpaden helemaal los. Ze moeten vastzitten aan de andere wegen om te kunnen routeren. 'k heb ze even vastgemaakt.
eggie (2017-04-14 19:25:18+00:00): Graag steeds aangeven wat je doet, want dit is nog steeds het commentaar bij de brandweerkazerne.
Parallel stoepen worden niet getagd,. Alleen als ze strikt gescheiden zijn van de hoofdrijbaan.
In het begin volgen we de edits van startende mappers. Ook om te helpen.
Chris Lawrence (2017-05-01 15:49:03+00:00): These roads off Newell Road South do not appear to exist in reality. If they are platted, they should be highway=proposed.
chillly (2017-04-14 18:49:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM

You have added a playground and named it as 'Childrens Playground - Recently built' This is a common beginner's mistake, using the name tag to describe the site. If the place doesn't have a name, or you don't know it, please leave it blank.
xhxllyx (2017-04-14 19:08:43+00:00): Ok thanks
richlv (2017-04-14 23:50:23+00:00): Thank you for the map improvements. What was added here as a park did not seem to be a park actually - no official note I could find at http://www.rigasmezi.lv/lv/Rigas_darzi_un_parki/par_parkiem/Darzi_un_parki_Pardaugavas_iecirknis/ .
I have removed the park designation in OpenStreetMap, too.
AkageMuk (2017-04-18 10:58:42+00:00): A strange wave last weeks of stubborn adding fake parks, duplicate parks, change forests into parks and changing paths into footways from various new users. Could be some pokemon game related vandalism.
richlv (2017-04-18 11:03:12+00:00): Yes, this does seem to be PokemonGO inspired. Some of it is not vandalism, looks like genuine improvements - although maybe slightly misguided.
If the editors stay around and "upgrade" to quality map editing, we all stand to benefit.
To the new editors: don't be discouraged to make good edits, just keep on mapping what really exists, and don't stretch the map to reach goals on some game - we appreciate your input a lot :)
Hjart (2017-04-14 19:44:25+00:00): Nice job. I've corrected the bridges as well as polished some of the footways a bit
Chris Lawrence (2017-05-01 15:42:45+00:00): Hi. This road does not exist yet and is unlikely to ever exist for environmental reasons (the Ocmulgee National Monument is being expanded into the area of the proposed route), so it should not be mapped in OSM, except possibly as highway=proposed. A route that has not been built should not be tagged with anything *except* highway=proposed (or if under construction, highway=construction).

I will retag appropriately.
moosfrosch (2023-04-13 08:55:53+00:00): aber Fußgänger=agricultural ist ja wohl sinnfrei. Und verhintert Routing. Habs geändert.
richlv (2017-04-14 23:53:04+00:00): Most of these looked like paths, I have modified them accordingly.

If that does not seem to be correct, you could you please provide Mapillary images of the area ? See www.mapillary.com for more detail.
dieterdreist (2017-04-15 13:46:17+00:00): mi sembra un po' un caso di tagging for the renderer: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
perché un prato non esiste lì?
Wolfgang B (2017-04-15 07:20:34+00:00): Na, das sind ja aussagekräftige Changeset-Beschreibungen, die du da verwendest! :(
Glassman (2017-04-14 20:40:06+00:00): Looks like line was used instead of area when creating the house. If you didn't go through the walk through, I would suggest doing so. It only takes 10 minutes or so.

I went ahead and fixed it using a different editor, JOSM, that can easily add any kind of tag to a feature.
zors1843 (2017-04-15 08:21:40+00:00): Bestaat die weg niet meer tussen Ginderbroek en Beekstraat ?
zors1843 (2017-04-15 08:25:03+00:00): Is die parking een gebouw ?
Glassman (2017-04-14 20:33:43+00:00): Thanks for adding the parking lot. As a suggestion for the some more edits, the building needs and address and name if it has one.
trowhite (2017-04-14 20:36:32+00:00): Thank you for commenting on this edit! I will add an address. But it is a commercial building with several companies, so I'm not sure what name would be associated with the building (maybe I'll skip that attribute).
Glassman (2017-04-14 20:45:40+00:00): Skipping the name is appropriate in this case with many offices in the building. Enjoy mapping!
Fauzan IRM-ED (2022-12-01 02:10:29+00:00): Hi IndianaJones737 I hope you have a great day . I deleted this building because I think there's no building that matches the imagery. Thank you and Happy mapping
trigpoint (2017-04-15 12:42:34+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM. Thank you for you contribution however there are a few issues.
Is there any evidence the names Berwick Grange and Sundorne Grove actually exist beyond marketing and estate agent speak. I have never seen, or heard, those names. Also please try to work with existing objects rather than simply delete (them and the history) and starting again. In redraing your new residential areas have now absorbed the footpaths that are in reality through a grass area, and connected the residential area to the path. Please be careful to keep highways and landuse separate, you have also deleted the grass area which surrounds this residential area.
The name of schools belongs on the area covering the grounds, rather than on the buildings.
Hope this helps and if you need any help or advice just ask.
Cheers Phil
sleepingwolf (2017-04-17 12:33:14+00:00): Hi Phil
Thanks for your comments, my apologies I hadn't realised I had deleted grassed areas, I'll replace them and bare in mind for the future about editing existing objects instead of replacing. I'll amend the school names too.
In terms of the estate names they are very much used locally in those areas and surrounding areas to identify them.
Many Thanks
sleepingwolf
Hjart (2017-04-14 19:54:33+00:00): Velkommen til vores projekt og tak for dine bidrag. 
Jeg har ændret Niels Brock så den igen vises som bygning (du kom til at slette den del) + lavet lidt andre ændringer
Chieftl (2017-04-19 11:56:27+00:00): Подяка за велику кількість доповнень на Каскаді :)
Єдине зауваження - для магазину запчастин немає необхідності вказувати назву "запчастини", достатньо задати тип.
При можливості, продовжуйте додавання відстутніх об'єктів. Удачі!
mueschel (2017-04-17 11:14:07+00:00): Hi,
could you check this building, it has many strange tags:
http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/486855572

Cheers, Jan
EnigmaQuip (2017-04-17 21:19:55+00:00): Fixed, sorry about that
eggie (2017-04-15 06:33:25+00:00):  "Welkom op OSM”

Lees hier hoe je OSM het beste kunt gebruiken en hoe je kunt bijdragen aan een betere kaart: 
http://www.openstreetmap.org/help 
http://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=12 
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Welkom_op_OSM

Mocht je vragen hebben, kun je altijd contact met me opnemen, ik (en medemappers zijn/) ben bereid om je te helpen.
Klik op de link om te antwoorden.
Luzandro (2017-04-15 04:50:38+00:00): Ein wenig aussagekräftigere Kommentare, die nicht den Eindruck erwecken, als wären die ganzen Changesets alle nur als Scherz gedacht, wären hilfreich
Hjart (2017-04-14 20:12:13+00:00): Denne her ser noget misvisende ud?