piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
A67-A67 (2022-06-27 13:25:30+00:00): Hi,

Please only add link-roads, when there is actual physical separation. This is not the case in the right-turn from northwest to southwest. 

If you add link-roads, the :lanes-suffixed tags, traffic lights and route relations should also be adjusted and the correct tags should be added to the newly added link roads. 

I'll remove the non-existing right turn-link NW-SW and the badly mapped right turn-link SW-SE.
A67-A67 (2022-06-27 13:29:03+00:00): I now also see the physical separation you've made between the Kruisweg NW-SE and the left turn SE-SW also doesn't exist and had been mapped correctly before. So I'll revert that.
sbelemey (2022-06-27 19:29:50+00:00): Hello!
thanks for your comment. I have taken note of your remarks and will keep that in mind.

Best regards,
Sergey
Martin Borsje (2022-06-27 19:27:44+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
pitscheplatsch (2022-06-29 06:05:26+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/122980163
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:55:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
wkdgs (2022-07-05 08:19:13+00:00): Hi,

ich gehe mal davon aus, dass der Weg zum Feuerwehrhaus noch existiert. Dann sollte er auch nicht gelöscht werden. Ich habe ihn daher wieder als private Grundstückszufahrt hinzugefügt.

Ich habe außerdem das Stück Zaun hinzugefügt, dass ich auf den Luftbildern erkennen konnte, und die Enden der beiden Wege als Sackgasse markiert. Weißt du, ob es hinter dem Zaun noch eine Barriere gibt, die verhindert, dass man vom Parkplatz zum Feuerwehrgelände kommt? Wenn ja könntest du die noch einzeichnen.

Gruß
winkeldings
NKA (2022-06-28 19:17:29+00:00): Please revert this and similar Tomtom changesets. There should be one amenity=school, not three.

Why are you doing such modifications?
Gazer75 (2022-06-28 20:45:34+00:00): Yeah this is pointless. The school is already mapped as an amenity here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/943956343 This is just amenity inside amenity which is wrong.
Crick_RN (2022-06-30 05:07:15+00:00): Hi NKA &  Gazer75,

Thank you for your input. I restored the data to the previous version.

Regards.
pitscheplatsch (2022-06-29 06:07:27+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Just a test or what's the source of your mapping activity?

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-17 00:10:16+00:00): Me parece que este usuario está añadiendo puntos personales al mapa.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-17 00:11:56+00:00): todos pontos criados por este usuário foram revertidos, pontos pessoais sem relevancia publica.
RicoElectrico (2022-06-27 14:11:48+00:00): Cześć, poproszę o ponowną edycję z dodaniem jakichkolwiek szczegółów, bo teraz nie ma nawet nazwy. Dzięki!
baprischka (2022-06-27 14:12:08+00:00): *apertura
123cargo_user (2022-06-28 14:31:20+00:00): Nu știu ce s-a întâmplat aici, cu traseul Autostrăzii Unirea, dar a „agățat” mai toate drumurile de rang superior de pe traseu și le-a mutat cu un nod mai încolo
RobertH-PUM (2022-07-03 14:34:47+00:00): Am calibrat traseul A8 dupa SF si probabil cine a pus inainte traseul a creat noduri si cu nistre drumuri desi nu e prea e voie la proiecte propuse. 
Imi poti indica zona , ca sa repar?
user_8101879 (2022-07-03 12:48:27+00:00): Hi,

the relations 14300399 and 14300400 are empty (no member) so useless : do you know how to fix this ?

The last version of JOSM will help you to prevent a new one, maybe you could update your software ?

Best regards
danieldegroot2 (2022-10-29 15:58:19+00:00): Hey Victor,

"Trail marker 2" and "Trail marker 3" look like descriptive names. The reference number may be tagged with "ref" instead if it is explicitly signed.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions

Regards,

Daniel
VictorIE (2022-10-29 16:28:00+00:00): Hi,

I've never been to Freshford, so I don't know how I came to making these edits! I can only imagine they came about in relation to the nodes that were deleted in this changeset. Maybe there were duplicate markers.

Feel free to adjust.
danieldegroot2 (2022-10-30 11:32:51+00:00): Thanks for the pointer. I've replied to Anne's original changeset. It does look like they were duplicates.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=122912086
Dimitar155 (2022-06-27 14:41:45+00:00): Hello Kate,

Why did you change the name of these TBI Bank offices? The bank is indeed called "TBI Bank" and it's written that way on their offices and on their website (https://tbibank.bg/). They also spell it that way in the commercial register (https://portal.registryagency.bg/CR/en/Reports/ActiveConditionTabResult?uic=131134023).

Best regards,
Dimitar
Svetlana_rocketdata (2022-06-28 12:18:48+00:00): Hello Dimitar, 

Yes, you are right, we will correct the name to TBI Bank. 
Thank you for writing!

Best regards,
Kate
Dimitar155 (2022-06-28 17:22:56+00:00): Thank you!
fs_LT (2026-01-20 09:54:54+00:00): What kind of relation is that supposed to be? The Nordic ski trails and the small ski lift together as the “Rinn ski resort”?https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14300498
grawal (2022-10-01 15:01:16+00:00): Ciao, la banca che hai mappato si trova nello stesso edificio del place_of_worship?
Frans S (2022-07-09 13:29:25+00:00):  Reverted mappings due to poor mapping quality
user_8101879 (2022-07-03 12:46:57+00:00): Hi,

the relation 12653819 is empty (no member) so useless : do you know how to fix this ?

The last version of JOSM will help you to prevent a new one, maybe you could update your software ?

Best regards
Leo Slager (2022-06-27 15:33:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Florek89 (2024-02-05 21:11:33+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4055540

Tych budynków nie widzę na geoportalu w ewidencji, wydaje mi się, że tę inwestycje porzucono, bo jak zerkałem uzbrojenie to jest tylko w drodze.

Oczywiście mogę się mylić.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2022-06-28 11:43:50+00:00): Please keep sidewalk:left and sidewalk:right=separate tags and values. We use these attributes a lot to know which side has a separate sidewalk mapped. Keeping only sidewalk=separate is not precise enough, because it does not specify if there is a sidewalk mapped on both side, on the left only or on the right only. Thanks!
mcliquid (2022-06-28 14:04:28+00:00): Hi ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy,
according to the wiki entry, the general "sidewalk=both" is quite sufficient if there is a sidewalk on both sides mapped separately. Only if it is different on both sides should this be more specifically specified.
If you would like it mapped here contrary to the wiki, can the general "sidewalk=seperate" value be removed? Or for what reason do you need all three values at the same time?
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2022-06-28 14:19:37+00:00): In the wiki, it says that sidewalk=separate must be use when drawn separately: 

both:	Both sides of the street have sidewalks.
separate:	This road has sidewalks but these are mapped using separate ways. If there is a separately mapped sidewalk on only one side of the road, consider the more specific tags below.

When both right and left are specified, we don't really care if the general sidewalk=separate is present or not, but in Quebec, the three are there together 95% of the time. This may be good for legacy tools that do not fully read the right and left suffixes yet.
pesec (2022-06-28 04:13:35+00:00): Добрый день.
Можно уточнить, в чем была ошибка топологии?
mavl (2022-06-28 04:20:15+00:00): Добрый день. Две линии, которые затрагивает этот пакет правок, раньше были одной линией. То есть подразумевалось, что это одна дорога и по ней можно проехать. В действительности так не ездят. Возможно, там ещё нужно поставить ограничения движения. Это первая причина. Вторая причина - острый угол этой дороги.  
  
Этот пакет правок просто поделил одну дорогу на две.
pesec (2022-06-28 04:23:49+00:00): Т.е. я правильно понимаю, что въезд и съезд с трассы нужно делить на отдельные линии?
mavl (2022-06-28 04:27:55+00:00): Да. Желательно. Например, JOSM предупреждает о таких ситуациях.
pesec (2022-06-28 04:29:57+00:00): Принято, спасибо.
Frans S (2022-08-27 11:05:06+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but  your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:
B: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
Do not tag clusters of buildings as a residential area
each building needs to be mapped individually



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/122915617
MxxCon (2022-06-28 04:00:03+00:00): Hello.
As documented in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes parking lanes are not supposed to be counted for the lanes= tag.
As such, according to the satellite imagery 3rd Ave has 6 lanes, not 7 and E36 St has 3 lanes, not 4.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122915804
ssundell (2022-06-30 13:32:41+00:00): Moi! Onkohan tuolle joku peruste, miksi juuri track on oikea näille? Nähdäkseni kun kyse on lähinnä jalan ja pyörällä liikkujien ulkoilureiteistä, tuo cycleway (ja siihen asianmukainen access jalankulkijoille ja pyöräilijöille) olisi oikeampi kuin track, joka kuitenkin lähtökohtaisesti nähdäkseni on nelipyöräisille tarkoitettu väylä.

Latupohjan kyseessä ollen kaikkien taiteen sääntöjen mukaan tietysti pitäisi noille varmaan laittaa conditional-ehto, jonka mukaan pyöräily ja jalankulku talvella on kielletty.
tila89 (2022-07-01 05:12:47+00:00): Suunnon kellon kartat renderöi cyclewayn samanlailla kun pathin ja track erottuu. Lisäksi on yhtenäinen linja koko Kaupista lähtevän latuverkoston osalta.
ssundell (2022-07-02 20:13:15+00:00): Aivan, ihan ymmärrettävää. Tästä on kuitenkin itse asiassa jopa erillinen Wiki-sivu: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer - se, että Suunto näyttää polut ja pyörätiet samalla tavalla, pitäisi korjata Suunnon päässä, ei muokkaamalla dataa. Joku toinen ohjelmisto renderöi väylät toisin, ja nyt esim. jotkut pyöräreittiopastukset saattavat jättää koko Kaupin huomiotta, koska ne suosivat nimenomaan pyöräilyyn tarkoitettuja reittejä.

Yhtenäisyys on hyvä, mutta pääperiaatteen pitäisi kuitenkin olla, että merkitään sitä, miltä tilanne paikan päällä näyttää. 

En ihan tarkkaan muista, miten nuo Kaupin kaikki polut menevät, mutta eilen satuin ajelemaan tuota pääreittiä Kaupista Niihaman ajalle ja sieltä edelleen Tasanteelle, ja tuo reitti on itse asiassa merkitty liikennemerkeillä yhdistetyksi jalankulku- ja pyöräilyväyläksi. Se on kyllä totta, että Kaupissakin on useita reittejä, jotka on vanhastaan merkitty trackiksi (osittain mahdollisesti siksi, että aiemmin noita eri tievaihtoehtoja oli vähemmän), muistaakseni tuolta lähempää rantaa menee yksi reitti, joka on liikennemerkillä merkitty jopa pelkästään kävelijöille.

Latupohja voi kuitenkin siis olla periaatteessa mitä tahansa; mitä olen itse tuolla metsissä ajellut, esimerkiksi Nokialla ja Ylöjärvellä osa latupohjista on talvikäytön ulkopuolella pyöräteitä, osa metsäteitä (siis oikeasti track-merkittäviä).
GinaroZ (2022-07-05 16:22:21+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edits. I've removed the duplicate nodes that were added for the Scholar and Scott, as the buildings were already tagged with the hotel info.
gscholz (2022-06-28 04:34:00+00:00): Hi cammorinigo29,
your recent changesets have added several errors to the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-57.64224&lat=-27.33683&zoom=15

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=122916296

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Руслан Т (2022-06-27 15:48:40+00:00): Описка в названии. Имелось ввиду: Правка границ города Красноярск (часть 1) #vk_maps
scarapella (2023-01-31 19:19:25+00:00): Bonjour La Voire de la Raison. Merci pour votre contribution à OpenStreetMap. Désolé pour le comment en Anglais. Je n’ai pas le vocabulaire nécessaire en Français. 

I was noticing the way 1073918521 (highway=track) and similar nearby ways. I was wondering if they were not highway=track but instead some sort of avalanche or snow control structure like a ditch or a dike. 

-scarapella
AurélienQ (2023-02-01 06:38:34+00:00): Hello, I'm not very good in english so please forgive my mistakes. 
That’s a good question. I tagged it as a runway because that’s what I saw in the aerial photo. But maybe another label could be better along those lines. I don’t know.

-La Voie de la Raison
Martin Borsje (2022-06-27 19:06:56+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.
Joseph E (2022-08-07 00:19:01+00:00): It is inappropriate to map this entire area (most of the Marble Mountain Wilderness) as woodland, while much of it is wooded, there are large ares of bare rock, scrub, grass and many lakes. Please remove this, and map smaller areas which actually correspond to the areas of trees only.
Adamant1 (2022-08-07 07:02:09+00:00): "It is inappropriate to map this entire area (most of the Marble Mountain Wilderness) as woodland, while much of it is wooded." 

Unfortunately it's impossible to map each individual wooded spots as separate areas. Whereas, mapping the rocky areas inside the wood does work perfectly fine. I know that's idea because of the way the style renders natural=wood over other things, but then that's not my issue. This is a compromise between Carto's way of rendering things or not ever mapping the area. Personally, I'm fine with it this way as someone who visits there sometimes and rather see a wood covering the 90% of the area that has woods on the ground then nothing just because Carto screws up the other 10% or whatever. 

As a side to that it's almost impossible to tell the difference between what areas are trees or scrub from the satellite images. I'm sick of caring about the distinction. No one IRL really cares about it either. I rather not leave a large area of the map blank just because I can't figure out on the satellite images what the exact ratio of manzanita bushes to oak trees is down to the 1mm distance or whatever. Get real.
Adamant1 (2022-08-07 07:04:06+00:00): Especially consider how much of this area has been burned through the last couple of years. At this point it would probably be just as accurate to map it all as grassland.
Frans S (2022-06-29 14:45:39+00:00): Hello. I commented on a direct message.
Here is no room enough to explain my comments
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122919256
4004 (2022-07-10 23:40:32+00:00): видимо, дубль с аптекой в ваших данных? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9851085670/history
Frans S (2022-07-01 10:51:11+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say that your mappings rather sloppy and inaccurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:

A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention to following the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.
C: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.
E: Rectangular buildings, not squared. They are mostly strict rectangular.
See this link for detailed picture
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1N6fU9SXWLqKrkPEAIGGaJodVlGC41ubq/view?usp=sharing


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/122919515
abakus_uploader (2022-06-27 22:31:21+00:00): (Wiadomość automatyczna)
Cześć!
Otrzymujesz ten komentarz, ponieważ dodałeś lub zmodyfikowałeś adres, który jest niepełny lub błędny.
Adres powinien zawierać minimum trzy znaczniki: addr:city=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:street=[nazwa_ulicy] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Wyjątkiem są miejscowości bez nazwanych ulic - wtedy stosujemy znaczniki: addr:place=[nazwa_miejscowosci] + addr:housenumber=[numer_porządkowy].
Bez poprawnego oznaczenia adresów, nie będą one brane pod uwagę przez wyszukiwarki, dlatego warto je dostosować do ww. schematu (w zależności od sytuacji).
Więcej informacji na forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=5632 - a pytania najlepiej zadawać tu: https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=681873
Pozdrawiamy!
bkil (2022-08-06 20:06:22+00:00): Some of the tags on the object seem to be in error. What is service:bicycle:Bicycle_Sales_and_Service? Could you please have a look into the syntax of opening hours? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours#Implementation
Paavobave (2022-06-27 17:43:57+00:00): Kiitos! Aion käydä paikalla ja varmistaa / tarkentaa sijainnin heinäkuun aikana :)
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-07-16 22:29:40+00:00): duplicate
Frans S (2022-08-29 14:22:36+00:00): Hello.
This task has been reviewed by a validator
Your mappings include multiple buildings. Each building should be mapped individually. Your mappings will be reverted.
If you have mapped on a similar way on other tasks, they will be reverted as well.
Glassman (2022-06-28 23:13:48+00:00): Does the building still exist? I would recommend adding it back. The address is 738 Peace Portal Drive, Blaine - not sure about zip code.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122920270
Frans S (2022-07-08 15:30:47+00:00): Reverted mappings due to poor mapping quality
ToniE (2022-06-28 08:12:50+00:00): Servus, wie in Note #3230660 schon angedeutet. Für mich rechtfertigt das Vorhandensein der Grasbausteine (Befestigung) mindestens ein highway=service  und hier mit service=emergency_access und, da die Wiese befestigt ist: surface=grass_paver (nicht =grass)
ToniE (2022-06-28 08:28:18+00:00): Ein highway= sollte es auch deshalb schon haben, da wir informelle/illegale Trampelpfade in der Pampa ja auch mit highway=path mappen. Hier ist der Weg sogar befestigt und trägt Lasten von mehreren Tonnen.

Gruß
Toni
map per (2022-06-28 16:36:52+00:00): Der Weg ist inzwischen aber wirklich mit hohem Gras zugewachsen
ToniE (2022-06-28 16:57:18+00:00): Trotzdem vermutlich darunter grass_paver? trail_visibility=bad/very_bad?
Gibt es für den  Gebäudekomplex eine Feuerwehranfahrtsinformation/-tafel auf der der Weg angegeben ist?
Dann ist es für mich highway=service und service=emergency_access.
emersonveenstra (2022-06-27 18:19:43+00:00): Hi,

Parking lots should be `highway=service`, not `highway=unclassified`. there's also `service=parking_aisle` for service roads that are rows of the parking lot. Would you mind updating those please?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122921177
Frans S (2022-07-09 13:34:40+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say that your mappings are not accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to these points:

A: buildings not always accurately drawn. Please pay more attention on following the outlines of a building (with extensions).
B: Overlapping buildings drawn.

C: Multiple buildings drawn as 1 building.

D: Nodes of buildings linked to other buildings or roads.

E: Rectangular buildings not squared. They are mostly strict rectangular.




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/122921360
Niiepce (2022-07-01 15:09:26+00:00): Der Eigenname dieser Spielplatzanlagen ist nicht "Karusell Areal" oder "Schaukel Areal" etc. Achte bitte auf die korrekte Verwendung des name-Tags. Ich habe es korrigiert. :)
Frans S (2022-07-10 09:50:15+00:00): Hello. I reverted most of the buildings due to poor mapping quality
Best regards
Glassman (2022-06-28 23:17:14+00:00): Thanks for adding all the names. Are you local? I'd like to discussing adding in names in the local language. 

I'll send you more info on OSM in a message. Let me know if you are interested in add the local language.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122922083
Enock4seth (2022-06-27 18:11:54+00:00): Hi Harriet,

Can please pause mapping for many issues from your recent changes to be addressed.
b-unicycling (2023-07-15 13:22:07+00:00): did you mean a benchmark, i.e. man_made=survey_point where you put man_made=masons_mark?
aTarom (2022-06-28 05:12:15+00:00): Hi, can you look at these ways?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1073978357/history
accés via ferrada=Piscina

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1070753392/history
accés Forat Negre 	cave_entrance

Cheers
Enock4seth (2023-01-27 06:13:42+00:00): Hi DraperC_18,

Can you clarify using 233 as house numbers, which I find unusual for many dispersed buildings.

Best,
Enock
DraperC_18 (2023-01-27 10:26:31+00:00): Oops, I added these buildings as bookmarks in Maps.Me for some navigation purposes, but didn't know they got uploaded on OSM. I will edit now.
opendcc (2022-06-27 20:12:08+00:00): Hallo und willkommen auf OpenStreetMap!

Bei Deinem Edit ist leider was schief gegangen (massive Verschiebung einer Straße; habs korrigiert), zudem bitte ich Dich, im Changesetkommentar anzugeben, was geändert wurde. Danke.
pyrog (2023-05-03 14:32:52+00:00): Quel est ta source ?
Ou plutôt le type de récepteur GNSS que tu utilises ?
As-tu effectué une moyenne ?

Yves
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122925525
Frans S (2022-09-19 12:39:01+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. 
I am a Sr Validator and review mapped tasks at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
* Buildings not always accurately drawn and squared. Please pay more attention to follow the outlines of a building (with extensions).
Most buildings are strict rectangular. Can be mapped with 4 nodes.
Please square each building with the Q key when it is selected.

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 !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122925526