piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
k_zoar (2016-11-16 23:53:21+00:00): こんにちは、ぞあといいます。

私もブラウザ版のエディタには詳しくないのですが、重複していて不要な道路は次のような操作で削除できると思います。

Shift キーを押しながら不要なラインをクリックするとメニューが開かれるのでゴミ箱アイコンをクリック。

ただし、Shift キーを押しながらラインを選択したときに消してはいけない部分の道路まで選択(赤いオーラが表示)されてしまう場合は、全ての選択を解除してから、必要な部分と不要な部分を繋いでいる折れ点を Shift キーを押しながらクリックしてハサミアイコンをクリックするとラインを分割できます。  
選択を解除してから先ほどの操作をすれば不要な部分だけ削除できます。


操作に自信がなかったら本番データに影響を与えないサンドボックスがあります。本番とは別にアカウント登録が必要です。
http://api06.dev.openstreetmap.org/

ブラウザ版エディタの編集では LearnOSM (http://learnosm.org/ja/beginner/id-editor/) や Wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:ID/Shortcuts) で操作方法が記載されています。


また、メーリングリスト(https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ja)やフォーラム(https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewforum.php?id=85)もあり、こちらでより詳しい方に操作方法を質問することもできます。

Happy Mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2016-12-14 21:39:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 44403770, 44396421 where the changeset comment is: Initial revert of some google.cn sourced data in China
user_5359 (2016-11-16 18:16:44+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2016-12-04 12:06:37+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
SomeoneElse (2016-12-06 19:28:38+00:00): Hello, 
I'm confused - the changeset comment says "Setting Peak Rail tags to preserved" yet this changeset changes Peak Rail from railway=preserved to railway=rail?  Presumably you've tried to follow what the wiki says at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=rail , but that's not always a good description of how people tag things.  In this case http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=railway%3Dpreserved is used 5 times more often than http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/railway%3Apreserved#values .
Cheers,
Andy
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:33:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:34:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
SomeoneElse (2016-12-04 11:44:01+00:00): Hi,
Just for info, you don't need to add a layer=-1 to http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/453747356 as it goes under a bridge.  The bridge already has layer=1 on it (and here the bridge is raised up over the railway, it isn't the railway that dips down under the road).
Hope you don't mind me mentioning this, just trying to help.  Any other questions please don't hesitate to ask.
Best Regards,
Andy
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:34:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:33:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
DiLeGreen (2016-12-03 19:37:44+00:00): Die Straße ist (noch) nicht vorhanden, daher proposed:highway. Habe es rückgängig gemacht.

http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Dinge_so_kartieren.2C_wie_sie_in_der_Realit.C3.A4t_sind
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
trigpoint (2016-11-17 17:20:19+00:00): I cannot see a chimney on bing, and you have placed it in the road?
What are you trying to achieve?
trigpoint (2016-11-29 17:45:51+00:00): No response so I have reverted, there is already a garage mapped where the tyre shop was added
alphensebezorger (2016-11-16 23:55:02+00:00): Hallo Robbie,

De knooppuntroutes zijn na deze changeset niet meer heel. Dick heeft er al een voor je gerepareerd. Kun je zelf voor deze zorgen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6624063?
Daarbij de andere natuurlijk wel heel laten, tenzij je ruzie met Dick wil ;).
Groet, Alphensebezorger.
P.S. Wegen waarover een route loopt kun je in JOSM herkennen aan een blauwe markering, wees daarmee altijd extra voorzichtig.
Aggregaat02 (2016-11-17 07:42:54+00:00): Nee, ik hoef geen ruzie :). Ik ga hem straks aanpassen.
Commodoortje (2016-11-17 10:50:12+00:00): Interessant, welke layer heb je dan aanstaan in JOSM om deze blauwe markering te kunnen zien?
Commodoortje (2016-11-17 10:52:05+00:00): Ik bedoelde eigenlijk, welke Map Paint Style.
alphensebezorger (2016-11-17 18:03:39+00:00): Ik heb even wat geëxperimenteerd met de Map Paint Styles. Ik heb geen bijzondere styles aanstaan. Mijn JOSM (11223, onder linux) geeft de fietsroutes een lichtblauwe 'gloed' zodra ik Style Potlatch2 aanzet. Busroutes lijken met een griizige markeerstift behandeld te worden. Zodra ik een fietspad uit de route-relatie verwijder, verdwijnt de gloed. Krijg ik zo cadeau van JOSM, bij jou niet?
Commodoortje (2016-11-17 19:13:15+00:00): Dat doet de map paint style.
alphensebezorger (2016-11-17 19:50:32+00:00): Ja, de standaard meegeleverde map paint style "Potlatch 2" dus blijkbaar. Zo te zien regel 378-383 in https://josm.openstreetmap.de/browser/trunk/styles/standard/potlatch2.mapcss. Kleur hangt zo te zien af van het soort route: ncn, rcn, lcn, etc.
Aggregaat02 (2016-11-17 19:55:02+00:00): Klopt, ik krijg in JOSM ook een blauwe gloed om een weg die deel uit maakt van een route-relatie.
dvdhoven (2016-11-18 10:21:40+00:00): Er zijn voor knooppuntroutes 2 Map paint styles beschikbaar:
- Numbered Cycle node networks
- Numbered Walking node networks
Deze "verdragen" elkaar niet, je moet één van de 2 aan zetten.
Ik heb standaard die van de Cycle node networks aan staan, dan wordt niet alleen de route gemarkeerd met de blauwe lijn, ook de route identificatie wordt zichtbaar gemaakt met rode cijfers/letters.
En dan hoef je dus geen Potlach style aan te zetten

Nog even over het Ammonslaantje.
In Streetview van 2010 zie ik een C06 bord staan met onderbord OB55 aan de kant van de Maaldrift
Het kan met gemak zijn, dat dit bord vervangen is door een C02, maar als het nog steeds C06+OB55 is, dan is oneway=yes in feite onjuist
Ik heb daarom ook oneway:bicycle=no toegevoegd omdat C06 fietsers niet uitsluit.
Is het echter een C02 zonder onderbord, dan is er een echt probleem omdat het knooppuntnetwerk dan in de problemen komt.
Het overzicht van VMarc checkt ook op eenrichting in de routes.
Een C06 moet je in feite aangeven met motorcar:backward = no en niet oneway=yes.
Als je wel oneway=yes kiest, dan komen er een aantal uitzonderingen bij voor fietsers, bromfietsers, motoren.

Ik heb al eens eerder met een mapper in de clinch gelegen, die een C12 ook naar oneway=yes vertaalde en uiteindelijk het moede hoofd maar in de schoot gelegd.
De mapper accepteerde de oneway:bicycle=no en daarmee was het netwerk gered en de tagging nog steeds onjuist, maar soms kun je dingen niet winnen.
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
Supaplex (2016-11-16 15:58:28+00:00): 這也可以畫出範圍
ds_twn (2016-11-16 16:15:10+00:00): 謝謝您的鼓勵支持 :)
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
LucFreitas (2016-11-16 14:44:22+00:00): *Atualizaçao dos limites dos bairros.
BCNorwich (2016-11-29 18:16:43+00:00): Hello There,
I just wanted to point out a few problems I can see in this changeset. 
The highway=track that you've drawn continuously up and down the field are not highways. They are the trails the tractor made while ploughing and planting the crop.
The south field is not landuse=grass it should be landuse=farmland, from Bing looks like a crop of winter wheat but this would likely change from year to year. 
The north field section is actually sown to grass but this is not natural grassland so could well change in the short term.
Regards
Bernard
BCNorwich (2016-12-18 11:50:24+00:00): Not response so fiction is now deleted.
user_599436 (2016-11-17 21:26:31+00:00): Mass edits are problematic, see example below.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43495527
DenisCarriere (2016-11-17 22:12:41+00:00): I've reviewed the edits, which Wikidata code is wrong? There isn't any Tiger references within this changeset.

@zeromap: Please review the Changesets before accusing OSM members of submitting problematic edits. You are creating a hostile environment for OSM contributors.
user_599436 (2016-11-17 22:25:31+00:00): In the above post I provided a direct example. If you review the edit history, you will
see how another user edited the node to add the wikidata tag, then removed it, only to have you add it back a few days later.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/157642644/history

It's not my intent to be hostile, it serves no purpose to OpenStreetMap nor Wikidata to have incorrect data.
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-17 22:28:54+00:00): If you believe it is a wrong wiki article, then please remove it. If it is the correct wikidata, why remove it?
user_599436 (2016-11-17 22:34:15+00:00): @logicalviolinist
The impetus should be on every user to produce good data and use feedback and criticism to improve the map. 

There is a place for mechanical edits and imports, but if those users don't take responsibility for their edits, there's less incentive for others to contribute.
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-17 22:45:03+00:00): If it is truely related to the relation(county) we should fix the wikidata item to not reflect it as a town then as it will reoccur over and over. Wiki data says it's a town with the coordinates less than 15km difference: https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3501230?uselang=en-US
If this is not an actual town(osm) why is it still on the map?
DenisCarriere (2016-11-17 22:48:03+00:00): So which Wikidata code was incorrect?
Sullivan is correct...
https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q3501230

Please show an actual example of a wrong Wikidata code from this edit.

I don't see any.
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-17 22:50:41+00:00): I don't want to see mean or pushy, but is this an actual place? Or is it a county?
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-17 22:53:52+00:00): If it's not a town and a county ill delete it in osm and correct wikidata
user_599436 (2016-11-17 22:54:05+00:00): I've already had this conversation with another mapper. Read it and the linked changesets/comments.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43495527
user_599436 (2016-11-17 22:56:09+00:00): @logicalviolinist
I'm not saying this is or isn't the case, but it's best not to edit tags if they require local knowledge you don't have.
user_599436 (2016-11-17 22:58:18+00:00): At minimum check to see if the wikidata tag already exists in the OSM database and the edit history of what you intend to change.
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-17 23:32:11+00:00): http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/k8Q
From what I see is that the town boundary and the town point are the same. Adding the wikidata to the point and the way is accurate as they are the same thing. Unless we create a relation that has all this information, this is not incorrect. I can do that if you want me to. The way is the town boundary.
user_599436 (2016-11-17 23:37:24+00:00): Please make no further edits. This issue is complicated and has not yet been resolved. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/43187605
LogicalViolinist (2016-11-18 00:03:43+00:00): So what you are saying is that it may or may not be erroneous, you want me to fix it, but don't want me to touch anything?  Gotcha loud and clear
user_599436 (2016-11-18 00:32:32+00:00): I'm advising you to be cautious in your edits because there are data problems that may lead edits to appear to be correct for those without local knowledge.

The TIGER data for town nodes is the issue, which Wikipedia uses as well. In NY state (and likely other US states) Towns (NY) are like countries, states, and and counties. They correspond with boundary areas not a node or a set of coordinates. The wikidata tag should only appear once in OSM, on that area. If there is a town tagged as a point, it is often an error. In many cases, the data hasn't been corrected yet because consensus is not yet reached on how to deal with the problem.

Not all towns have their boundaries yet. For those which don't I think it's fine to tag the node as you've done. But if there is an area that should be the only OSM object with the wikidata tag.
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:33:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
highflyer74 (2016-11-17 15:16:32+00:00): Hallo kibek!

Sind die von Dir hier hinzugefügten Tags irgendwo im Wiki dokumentiert...?

Ich kann da nicht viel finden, wenn ich unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:place nachsehe.

Viele Grüße aus HB!
Supaplex (2016-11-27 18:46:26+00:00): 恭喜您完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Robot8A (2016-11-25 16:18:43+00:00): OSM es imparcial, por lo tanto no es de recibo poner las opiniones personales de cada uno.
Quito el nombre a la vía.
glibbertorsten (2017-01-01 11:18:36+00:00): Test erfolgreich! Habe den leeren Node entdeckt und gelöscht. Richtig so?
tomao44 (2016-12-03 19:50:49+00:00): Il faut connecter le chemin piéton à la route et donc au trottoir.
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:33:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
Willem1 (2016-11-25 14:57:29+00:00): Bedankt voor het mappen van de nieuwe situatie hier! Ik wilde er al een note bijzetten dat het veranderd was, maar het was al bijgewerkt :)
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
Аркадий Кохан (2016-11-16 15:46:05+00:00): Надеюсь, в этот раз всё записал верно.
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:32:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
Wh0resden (2021-12-16 10:52:43+00:00): Olá minha querida, acho que esta não é a camada 1 e modifiquei a tag de uso .. obrigado
user_5359 (2016-11-16 18:22:27+00:00): Hi, your map edit is similar to ones from a coordinated group of editors that we have found to be using a copyrighted source. But, I wanted to check with you to see whether that was the case or not--that way we don't potentially lose valuable data from a real user. So do you mind confirming whether this data was collected by you or if it was from another database/copyrighted geocoder? Thanks! user_5359
user_5359 (2016-12-04 12:07:24+00:00): I'm deleting this node that was created using presumed unacceptable data sources.
SomeoneElse (2016-11-18 02:23:32+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
I think that a couple of things have gone wrong though - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/453771893/history certainly wasn't all building, when I last drove past.
Also, are you sure that you can get into the Horse and Groom car park from the south?
Cheers,
Andy
PT-53 (2016-11-16 17:43:12+00:00): Hallo felkel,
Du hast gerade die von mir ein gezeichnete Ortsumfahrung von Kleinwinnaden von construction auf secondary geändert und verschiedene Feldwege gelöscht. Hast Du das vor Ort erkundet (mit GPX-Aufrzeichnung) oder woher hast Du diese Information?
Es gehört zum "guten Ton" in OSM zu jedem Änderungssatz einen Kommentar und die Quelle der Daten anzugeben!
Grüße PT-53
PT-53 (2016-11-17 13:27:33+00:00): Hallo felkel,
mich würde immer noch interessieren, woher Du die Information hast, daß die Ortsumfahrung Kleinwinnaden freigegeben ist!
Ich wollte gerade die neue Straße befahren und per GPS und Videocam zur Überprüfung des Straßenverlaufs aufzeichnen, aber siehe da, die Straße ist immer noch gesperrt !!!
Deine Änderung der "alten L 284" komplett von secondery auf residential ist auf jeden Fall auch falsch.
Ich werde daher deine Änderungen komplett reverten.
Ich werde Deine Änderungen daher komplett reverten
PT-53 (2016-11-20 13:50:10+00:00): Die Ortsumfahrung ist zwischenzeitlich freigegeben. Ich habe die neue Straße heute befahren und entspr. überarbeitet / ergänzt.
Deine wiederholte Änderung der Ortsdurchfahrt auf residential habe ich wieder korrigiert. Eine gut ausgebaute Ortsdurchfahrt ist keine residential sondern eine tertiary !
Müszi (2016-11-27 10:40:59+00:00): Salut!

Văd ca ai modificat numele vârfului Cârligatele - vezi că numele obiectului trebuie să conțină *numai* numele, nu și alți parametri (ca de exemplu înălțimea - pentru aceasa există parametrul "ele").

Am corectat.

-- 
Zsolt
Müszi (2016-11-27 11:06:32+00:00): O altă problemă: dacă desenezi pe baza imaginilor de satelit, este absolut necesar ca prima dată să calibrezi imaginea, pentru că pot fi erori de zeci de metri. Aici poți citi mai mult despre procedura de calibrare:

http://learnosm.org/en/josm/correcting-imagery-offset/

Trebuie să fii foarte atent dacă obiectul pe care vrei să-l modifici este verificat cu GPS pe teren (source=survey): aceasa înseamnă că cineva a făcut măsuratori pe teren, și poziția obiectului este exactă. Este indicat să modifici un astfel de obiect doar dacă cunoști foarte bine zona, ai făcut măsuratori precise pe teren (nu doar ai trecut pe acolo) și ai experiență în editarea hărții :-)

-- 
Zsolt
Müszi (2016-11-27 10:36:57+00:00): Salut!

Văd că ai marcat punctul de belvedere ca vârf - vezi că vârful Cornu Munților este cu câțiva metri mai încolo.

Am corectat problema.

-- 
Zsolt
pitscheplatsch (2016-11-19 21:42:31+00:00): #pleasereview
- fictive data
kartler175 (2016-12-11 11:08:59+00:00): Ein Fußweg, für Fußgänger verboten, aber als Radweg beschildert, wie passt das zusammen?
Supaplex (2016-11-27 18:47:12+00:00): 恭喜您透過 Maps.Me 完成第一次的地圖編輯！ 歡迎加入開放街圖，群眾共同參與，繪製生活週遭大家關心事物的共編地圖。Maps.Me App 採用開放街圖的地理資料，由社群而非商業公司建置的地理資料庫。以下是相關的參考資料，歡迎隨時指教與提問。

編輯須知
台灣的標示依循準則可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Taiwan
常見的圖徵標示方式可參考 http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hant:Map_Features

由於Maps.Me隨著軟體更新更新最新地圖，App裡的地圖資料版本可能略舊，透過Maps.Me增添商家等資料時有可能開放街圖上已經有了，請到http://www.osm.org 網站看是否要加的商家有沒有人加上去了。

台灣社群網站
台灣 OpenStreetMap 網站 http://www.openstreetmap.tw
臉書粉絲頁OpenStreetMap台灣 https://www.facebook.com/opestreetmaptaiwan/
台灣社群Facebook社團 https://www.facebook.com/groups/OpenStreetMap.TW/
郵件論壇 https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-tw
Slack https://osm-tw.signup.team/

Happy Mapping!
Tyanna Eaton (2016-11-28 17:21:36+00:00): Edits in Kuwait. KG Ground Survey 2016.
literan (2016-11-17 11:10:10+00:00): магазинов shop=organic у нас в России всего может 2 или 3, не надо этот тег применять. Здесь обычный овощной, я исправил.
woodpeck_repair (2016-11-19 06:33:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 43780386 where the changeset comment is: Revert mass addition of wikidata tags because of lack of prior discussion and unclear legal situation, see https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=618618
Tyanna Eaton (2016-11-28 17:21:19+00:00): Edits in Kuwait. KG Ground Survey 2016.
user_5359 (2016-11-16 18:25:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don't mark the whole property as building. Only mark the building as building.
j-wills (2016-11-17 13:21:36+00:00): Извините, она так и называется, "моя стоянка"?
trigpoint (2017-08-29 13:17:32+00:00): Hi Christian
I was suspicious of this edit when I first saw this edit, I finally got around to checking it at the weekend and could not find any evidence of a school in this area. It is entirely made up of residential properties.
I suggest that in this case the database is in error and that this school is removed.
Cheers Phil