piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Tomas_J (2025-08-12 08:24:58+00:00): Zdar , obecne popisy (clothing optional) nepatří do tagu name. Popisy v a angličtíne mají mít správný prefix :en. opravil jsem
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:51:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
eerib (2022-09-02 20:57:26+00:00): Hello Mike,

It seems that you're a new user and may not be aware of OpenStreetMap policies on private property features such as roads and trails. Deleting these features at the request of a property owner is not the right course of action but rather adding the access tag with the value 'private' or 'no' is. It appears that you did add the access tag with the value no, which is correct. However, you deleted a portion of the road which is not correct. Deleting this road could impair emergency services like the local fire department and/or BC Wildfire service, among other potential issues.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

Thank you!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-10-29 15:50:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 128216214 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'mechanical' maproulette changes, following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6386 and discussion with Expedia.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-05 16:26:31+00:00): A to nie jest czasem "Flow park"?

Choć mi wygląda że ten Flow park to po prostu nazwa producenta tych urządzeń
michalgy (2024-05-06 16:03:31+00:00): Tak, Flowparks to producent. Z drugiej strony, mam wrażenie że chyba nie ma alternatywnej nazwy dla tego typu urządzeń do ćwiczeń/parkuru?

Jedyne co znalazłem to stronę producenta w PL i EN:
https://flowparks.com/pl/realizacje/street-workout-krakow-zalew

https://flowparks.com/en/
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-06 18:42:12+00:00): jak to nazwa typu obiektu to nie daje się nazwy - np. nie dajemy name=Drzewo czy name=Dąb na każdym dębie
rene78 (2022-09-03 19:50:59+00:00): Hi crac, wenn Du die Bildmaterial-Quelle "Kanton Zurich, Terrainschummerung 2017" aktivierst scheinen die von Dir gelöschten Pfade doch vorhanden zu sein. Vielleicht kannst Du Dir das nochmal anschauen. Danke und Gruss, Rene
crac (2022-09-10 12:41:00+00:00): Hoi Rene, ich war vorort und konnte die wege nicht mehr finden. einer war total verwachsen und ist bestimmt schon lange nicht mehr gebraucht worden (über 2m hohe büsche). sollen solche krass verwachsenen wege noch stehen gelassen werden? Gruss Luca
rene78 (2022-09-11 08:00:54+00:00): Sali Luca, dann passt das schon so. Würde ich auch eher rauslöschen. Danke für die Rückmeldung. Rene
Frans S (2022-09-03 11:53:07+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/125714310
user_2066394 (2022-09-03 06:32:49+00:00): surface=grass_paver siehst man nicht mehr im Luftbild?
Elefant aus Wuppertal (2026-04-12 19:57:53+00:00): Hallo pyram,

ich habe eine kurze Frage, weißt du eventuell noch, weswegen du die Wege zu den Häusern in den Hindenburgstraße wie https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/518804254/history mit access=private markiert hattest?
Die Grundstücke sind zwar grundsätzlich eingefriedet und führen zu Privathäusern, ja, aber es gibt kein Tor (nur Durchgänge in den Mauern) und kein Schild, das den Zugang beschränken würde...

Danke dir

LG
Lukas
pyram (2026-04-15 21:22:12+00:00): Naja, wenn ein Grundstück eingefriedet (Stichwort "befriedetes Besitztum"- https://www.juraforum.de/lexikon/befriedetes-besitztum (ggf. auf "Leseansicht" umschalten oder anderweitig suchen)) ist, dann benötigt das nach deutschem Recht kein Schild "privat". Es ist dann einfach privat (bzw. in dem Fall "nur für Feriengäste"!?). Jedenfalls - soweit ich mich erinnern kann - sah das schon so aus, als ob Nicht-Gäste dort einfach nicht sein sollten.
Luzandro (2023-07-11 04:51:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3774053
Shaun das Schaf (2023-02-25 20:35:48+00:00): Ich dachte, das wär bestimmt ein Fehler, dass diese Weiche https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/679453378 einen video-Tag hat oder dass es ein Video zur Funktionsweise von Weichen ist.

Aber du hast doch tatsächlich den genauen Zeitpunkt des Videos verlinkt in dem man tatsächlich genau diese Weiche sieht. Respekt! :-)
bigbug21 (2023-02-27 23:01:30+00:00): Danke. Derartige Videos  sind eine wichtige Quelle für alle möglichen Details, beispielsweise auch die Bezeichnung von Weichen.
Allison P (2022-09-02 23:24:45+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/125718876
philippec (2022-09-03 08:03:27+00:00): Herent OCMW AED.
Bijna altijd zet ik de gevel waarbij een AED komt conform het GRB.
Alhoewel de meesten het zo doen is het geen goed idee een AED op een lijn te zetten.
Ronald Erwt (2022-09-03 08:26:44+00:00): Ik volgde het voorbeeld zoals het voorheen was, waar het ook op de lijn zat. Vind jij het meer gepast om het een beetje naar buiten toe te zetten zodat mensen weten dat de AED buiten is?
philippec (2022-09-03 08:29:09+00:00): Vreemd, dan heb ik mij vergist bij het mappen.
Ronald Erwt (2022-09-03 08:33:19+00:00): Maakt niet zoveel uit wat het voorheen was op zich. De elegantie van OSM is dat je het altijd kunt rechtzetten achteraf. :)
philippec (2022-09-03 08:38:03+00:00): Ik heb ergens een volledige argumentatie opgesteld, maar ik vind het niet terug.
1 van de argumenten is :
Met 1600 AEDs met mapillary, als ik telkens een melding krijg als er iets aan het huis verandert, dan is dat niet meer plezant.
SHARCRASH (2022-09-07 11:36:18+00:00): Hi!

In the future, please, lifecycle prefix the features if they are still available on commonly used sources. For tracks, paths, etc in nature they are almost all lifecycled. I've already restored the element and lifecycled it.

More infos here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
There are problems though for this prefix tagging scheme on certain features at certain lifecycle stages , I discuss in the Wiki here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Lifecycle_prefix#Flawed_with_prefixes_construction,_disused,_abandoned
kepivar (2022-09-03 17:47:06+00:00): Was the native mappers work like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/863240303/history bad?
Qitay (2022-09-03 18:32:32+00:00): Probably not bad, I was just adding missing roads nearby and improving geometry of the existing ones, so for some of the roads it was faster to remove them and draw from scratch.
NSiecw (2022-09-06 14:26:42+00:00): The surface type of this way may have been incorrect but this way definitely exists, why did you remove it?
polymitis (2022-09-06 14:40:35+00:00): It is an access driveway, not a road. The grey area should have extended up to the end of the road, but I don’t know to edit the grey square
polymitis (2022-09-06 14:55:22+00:00): I believe with this follow up change: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/961585370 will resolve any confusion.
frozenrabi (2022-09-05 14:52:08+00:00): No track is seen on bing imagery but you have contributed adding tracks. Please review the imagery and map as it on the ground. Thank you!
watmildon (2023-02-03 05:54:26+00:00): What does the data on this node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9995967338 in the gnis:feature_id mean? It's not a valid ID but I presume it's something else..?
tastrax (2022-12-10 03:45:46+00:00): I have just cleaned up this golf course as you looked to have made many common golf tagging errors. I suspect that you are using old tagging or tagging for some renderer or some golf course software (TGC Designer??). Please refrain from naming golf holes and features like greens and fairways. Please use the accepted tagging for all golf course edits https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course
eggie (2022-09-03 09:35:50+00:00): Ahhh..  Ik zag nu dat jij hier gisteren aan bezig was. 

Ik had wat landuse en water opnieuw ingevuld bij 
Lageveld / Lancasterweg.

Goet
eggie
eggie (2022-09-03 09:47:18+00:00): Het Wagejot ook ingevuld met de juiste landuse en water. Volgens mij was je daar nog niet mee bezig.

Groet
eggie
eggie (2022-09-03 16:02:23+00:00): Je bedoeling was vast wel goed om er wat moois van te maken, maar je hebt het werk van o.a. Voorwaarts helemaal verwijderd.  Dat had je net zo goed kunnen ombouwen. Dan krijg je ook geen 'kaalslag'.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2022-09-04 17:34:47+00:00): PB contact..
kepivar (2022-09-04 10:38:49+00:00): Hello Maps Man,

please give more so generic changeset comments: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments ~
All changes are "Map Updates"!
Muhmaker (2022-09-03 18:12:35+00:00): Hallo, mir sind bei diesem Edit der Öffnungszeiten der Fleischerei/Bäckerei einige Ungereimtheiten aufgefallen. Soweit ich erkennen kann gibt es dort keine Bäckerei Lamm. Ist auch nicht als Filiale auf deren Homepage verzeichnet. Die Fleischerei ist angeblich umgezogen aber eindeutig dort noch zu erkennen. Die geänderten Öffnungzeiten beziehen sich auf die Fleischerei laut Aushang. SC hat sie aber an die Bäckerei gehängt. Vielleicht kannst du dir das nochmal anschauen
Firefishy (2022-09-02 22:59:10+00:00): What is the name of the restaurant?
Firefishy (2022-09-02 22:59:45+00:00): Try the https://every-door.app/ it is great for adding more detail.
user_5359 (2022-09-03 12:09:10+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1085438054 (one of one tausend eighteen objects). What is the meaning of the tag 40=40?
tonyf1 (2023-05-28 03:43:47+00:00): Hi, what were your reasons for changing from residential roads to shared driveways? In particular Munro St? It is wide, has a footpath and nature strip, road signs and road markings, 66kV power lines, all the characteristics of a main road?
tonyf1 (2023-06-01 09:53:12+00:00): Hi Sebastian, I really want to change Munro street, the others, I am not so sure. I havent been there and the photography is hard to read. Can you help please?
HighRouleur (2023-06-01 22:40:20+00:00): Agree with you on Munro St, slight oversight on my part.
Changes updated - 136848737
tonyf1 (2023-06-02 08:37:17+00:00): Hi i have removed the driveway=pipestem from Munro, but what about the other streets? I think they are streets not shared driveways. I have not been out there and i presume you have. I am reluctant to change them without your input. The sort of thinks to look for: named streets, house numbers, rubbish collection,  road markings, sign posts, footpaths, nature strips etc. That is why i ask for your reasoning
tonyf1 (2023-06-02 11:13:29+00:00): Hi, a longer list of features that might help decide street vs shared driveway: named streets, house numbers, rubbish collection location, road markings, sign posts, footpaths, nature strips streetlights letter box locations Breaks the kerb with a ramp or level Has a kerb Private or public land Maintained by government or owners Part of the public road network Access control, gates and signage
SekeRob (2022-09-03 15:01:01+00:00): Via Moldava does not exist in the CAP register listings.
n34s (2022-09-03 16:54:16+00:00): I believe it is due to its privatization. However, there are several WebGIS - Geoplan, TuttoCittà, TomTom, Apple Maps - that keep calling way 109138283 "Via Moldava".
SekeRob (2022-09-03 17:10:26+00:00): The litmus test is the house address numbering.
n34s (2022-09-03 17:28:29+00:00): I agree. The absence of street numbers along way 109138283 would just confirm the removal of its name due, probably, to its privatization.
SekeRob (2022-09-03 17:53:46+00:00): Actually my thinking is then they'd get numbers in the Via Vistola series. The corner house is nr 7 on the wall and the next (new) house on the uneven side is 13 leaves 9-11 unaccounted for.
SekeRob (2022-09-06 18:07:35+00:00): After an 'in situ',  talking to the resident at Nr3, metal nr on gate ), Via Moldava, made the necessary adjustments and additions. The thru road is real, as proposed but never materialised. That was to become the official road. There's also a nr 1+3 at the start of Vistola, so the story does add up.
Mordechai23 (2022-09-03 12:33:48+00:00): ta Racławicka jest do przerysowania bo to robiłem z pamięci na oko po przejechaniu tędy i się parę rzeczy trochę nie zgadza ;) 

na pewno tego wjazdu przed rondem nie ma i chodniki są na kawałku ulicy oddzielone od ddr trawnikiem
Hans Bieshaar (2022-09-18 11:11:47+00:00): Bij https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2853427017 is de postcode verwijderd, bij https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/43395885 niet
Benoît C MdP (2022-09-05 09:13:10+00:00): Bonjour  Vvv222,

Il y a bien une bande cyclable en contresens. Pourquoi l'avoir supprimée d'OSM  ?

Benoît
Vvv222 (2022-09-05 14:31:59+00:00): Bonjour,
Effectivement cette bande cyclable existe bien. Cela est une erreur de ma part.
ovruni (2022-09-03 00:28:51+00:00): Hola, en varios de sus conjuntos de nombres se han agregado nombres como "Carpintero-S/N" o "Tienda Abarrotes", sin embargo el nombre debe de agregarse unicamente cuando un objeto tiene un nombre en particular, no para agregar descripciones. [0]
Saludos
[0] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Los_nombres_no_son_para_descripciones
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-09-05 00:13:58+00:00): voce deixou vias desconectadas aqui https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/855732892#map=19/-22.24045/-50.89225
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-09-05 00:14:23+00:00): várias vias ficaram desconectadas nesta edição
gottimapper (2022-09-05 02:02:21+00:00): Olá,

O espaço está correto, de acordo com os proprietários dos locais.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2022-11-06 13:30:33+00:00): não. vias não devem ficar desconectadas assim
sputinyk (2023-01-16 00:43:21+00:00): vias refeitas!
abakus_uploader (2022-09-03 22:46:25+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!
abakus_uploader (2022-09-03 22:46:47+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!
Luzandro (2023-07-11 18:14:46+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137316849
gscholz (2022-10-01 08:44:03+00:00): Hi adrianojbr,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-52.40976&lat=-26.88806&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125719237

Can you  please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
adrianojbr (2022-10-01 13:06:53+00:00): Hi gscholz!

The errors were created in the https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125663927.

I tried to fix some.

Regards!
gscholz (2022-10-02 09:01:32+00:00): Thanks for your quick response.
Guido
willkmis (2022-09-03 16:17:52+00:00): Hi, I'm not sure this reference code is a a good fit for the name=* tag, as I don't think anyone really calls the road that or is using the code for navigation. I think it would be better if this way were left unnamed, perhaps with the city reference code you've added kept as an official_name=* or even ref=*.
stst415 (2022-09-03 16:24:04+00:00): This was the city calls it, and it has name:signed=no to clarify. 👍
willkmis (2022-09-03 21:09:57+00:00): Yes, but if the name is unsigned and unwieldy like this, normal people probably don't use it. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name, where it says not to use name=* if the value is an obscure reference code. As a concrete example, I don't think someone navigating using OSM would want an instruction to "turn left at Frontage Road #139-5A221-258", even if that is the city's internal reference code of this road. For all practical purposes, I think this link is nameless. Also, what is your source for this data?
stst415 (2022-09-04 00:27:30+00:00): I read that wiki (thank you), but I still feel as if this is "official usage" which is allowed.  And with the name:signed=no, wouldn't GPS systems this *not* reference this name anyway?  It's certainly not unnamed=yes or noname=yes when it does have a name. 🤷  As a general rule, I look TO maps to LEARN these kind of details about what’s around me, so I appreciate seeing such trivial descriptors. 👍

As for the source, it's all over the various L.A. databases, including Zone Information & Map Access System.  I work for Netflix and we're currently in the process of temporarily shutting down this 1-block stretch for a shoot, so this Frontage Road number was vital for our permitting process.  Other people who aren’t familiar with the deep dive databases might appreciate the information being made easier to find next time.
stst415 (2022-09-04 00:30:48+00:00): I suppose the name could be moved to official_name=*, but let me ask you this.  If it’s there instead (and name=* is blank), how would anybody who’s not an OSM editor ever see or find the information?
willkmis (2022-09-06 17:52:09+00:00): I took a look at the ZIMAS system. The code you added here appears to not be the reference code of the actual road per se, but of the parcel of land it sits on. Compare the code number's similarity to adjacent parcel ID numbers. The description of the PIN also explicitly states it's for internal city use only. So I still don't really think it's a good fit for the toplevel name=* tag, though I appreciate that you have a unique use case. As for official_name=*, a value there will still come up if someone searches the number in the search bar.
willkmis (2022-09-06 17:54:48+00:00): Another suggestion from a user of the OSMUS Slack channel is using unsigned_name=*, which is undocumented but has a few hundred uses: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/unsigned_name, or unsigned_ref=*, which is well used but mostly for highway routes that are on the books but not signposted: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aunsigned_ref
stst415 (2022-09-06 19:57:38+00:00): willkmis, I appreciate you taking the extra time to educate me.  I'm removing the name=* right now.  And when I get a chance a little later today or tomorrow, I'll read further and utilize one or two of the alternate choices that you suggested.  Cheers!
user_2066394 (2022-09-03 08:17:56+00:00): Neue Praxis?
Andreas Altmann (2024-08-22 12:09:29+00:00): Ja
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-20 14:20:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 150265070, 150261530, 150261385, 150261427, 150261374, 150261398, 150261463, 150262164, 150264883, 150261443, 150265293, 150265518, 150263711, 150261692, 150263544, 150263148, 150264695, 150263349, 150262918, 150264472, 150264284, 150261551, 150264090, 150262527, 150262687, 150263890, 150261413, 150261488, 150261509 where the changeset comment is: No reply to https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15936 , so we've taken a guess at what was likely derived from Google Earth (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149290548 admits to that use)
abakus_uploader (2022-09-03 22:46:26+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!
abakus_uploader (2022-09-03 22:46:46+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!
kartler175 (2022-09-04 08:15:37+00:00): Das ist irgendeine Ralation, aber bestimmt kein multipolygon:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14534423
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=12.78331&lat=50.85215&zoom=18&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.95&overlays=intersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
Zandu (2023-11-29 02:05:11+00:00): Good day, I just discovered you reverted changes I made to cleaning up tag errors around fort Leavenworth a year ago. Why did you revert these changes? Your comment does not indicate anything wrong with my edits.
Local-Mapper (2023-11-29 02:35:34+00:00): Hello, it looks like we were going back and forth between power=tower and power=pole. I have typically used power=pole for single wood poles per the third sentence on this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:power=tower
That said, some of these are steel poles while others that are more closely spaced together in Leavenworth are wood poles. I don't personally have an issue with wood poles being towers and I generally haven't been changing towers to poles or vice versa in my more recent edits.
Zandu (2023-11-29 02:38:56+00:00): Thanks for the explanation. I’ll look into it and take your general practice into account. I appreciate the feedback.