piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
jengelh (2023-08-29 10:16:03+00:00): Stand 2020-01-01 gab es in einer bbox von ca. 30×20 km um Göttingen 43000 Uses von survey:date und 0 check_date. Die "34/66%" (egal worauf es sich letztendlich bezieht) sind ausschließlich durch die umtaggenden SC-Horden entstanden, die bis 2023-08 lokal etwa 2500 check_dates (also eher 5%) umgesetzt haben.
Aufregerthreads über SC gibt es zuhauf, es wäre nicht das erste Mal.
YoungHiro45 (2023-08-30 15:24:00+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery
Frans S (2023-08-28 14:38:31+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please square each rectangular building with the Q key.
Best regards
Fizzie-DWG (2024-01-08 05:01:18+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146014614
spughetti (2023-08-28 15:26:42+00:00): Hi kolivere, the amount of nodes on this object were not excessive. Removing detail poses little to no benefit in this situation. Please make sure to only simplify objects that have an excessive amount of nodes node.

A good example of an feature with too many nodes is this small building in California, which contained 339 nodes.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1019821408/history

I've reverted your changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140500839

Feel free to reach out to me if you have any questions :)
NorthCrab_upload (2023-08-28 14:50:16+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nieprawidłowa wartość addr:postcode. Kod pocztowy powinien być formatu XX-XXX, gdzie X oznacza cyfrę.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202839173
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202839174
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202839175
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202839176
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202839177

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202334885

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
tolioalessandro (2023-09-04 17:15:01+00:00): Ciao fayor,
la definizione di trunk è in fase di definizione qui:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/utilizzo-del-tag-highway-trunk-in-italia/101471

Evita di effettuare mass editing declassando trunk in primary fino a che la discussione non sarà conclusa. Almeno per rispetto della comunità di utenti che sta decidendo.

Stai declassando strade secondo una definizione che hai scelto tu di ripristinare, imponendo la tua scelta alla comunità.

La definizione che hai ripristinato è in contrasto con tutte le altre pagine wiki. Quindi come tu ti basi su quella, gli altri utenti si stanno basando sulle altre pagine wiki che riportano la definizione italiana precedente e altrettanto legittima quanto la tua.
cserpell (2023-08-29 02:18:11+00:00): Crees que el bloqueo será tan largo como para modificar el mapa?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140498896
julcnx (2023-09-01 12:45:21+00:00): Hi pLoskutov, in our Thailand wiki, unclassified roads are typically designated for important through-traffic routes, especially those leading to official settlements. However, this road appears to be primarily serving a farm estate, so it might be more appropriate to classify it as 'service' or 'track.' For additional information, please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand#Urban_and_Local_Road_wide_enough_for_motor_cars
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140498897
pLoskutov (2023-09-01 15:54:06+00:00): But why?
1) this transit road differs from other unclassified ones in that it connects different cities. 
2) this road has a number, which is rare for unclassifiable roads.
julcnx (2023-09-02 02:41:05+00:00): Hi pLoskutov, I'm specifically referring to this segment: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/555852322

While we're generally discouraged from using Google for mapping, the street view link below shows two signs related to a Department of Agriculture Cooperative estate and a Watershed Management unit, rather than a residential settlement. Hence 'highway=service' would be the most suitable classification in this case:

https://www.google.com/maps/@19.0595073,98.3151573,3a,29.4y,170.43h,75.68t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s90USCcsb8AZGvZSYnSRSCw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu

I understand this might be a bit perplexing, but the designation "highway=unclassified" doesn't imply that the road is impossible to classify. Instead, it signifies that it's a road within the network hierarchy that holds lower significance compared to tertiary roads. In essence, it would have been more fittingly labeled as "quaternary."

You can find detailed information about this in our Thailand wiki, so please feel free to reach out if you have any additional queries.
pLoskutov (2023-09-02 17:15:05+00:00): Good. I'm not sorry. Let it be any :)
I rely on the established practice of this region. Usually all such roads have a track or unclass label
Nerungri 86 (2023-09-01 19:44:20+00:00): Их ещё Утиными порой называют
creabaluti (2023-08-31 15:58:43+00:00): Auf der Karte steht diese Bank jetzt im Wasser, entweder stimmtdie Wasserlinie oder die Position dere Bank nicht, scheint mir.
spughetti (2023-08-28 15:16:27+00:00): Hi dpolovinkin, you shouldn't remove detail from the map for the sake of simplicity. Detail is part of what makes OSM so great!

I've reverted your changeset
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140500388
dpolovinkin (2023-08-28 15:38:38+00:00): hi, is it your opinion? There is no need to map individual trees in a obvious tree row when there is... well... a separate tree row line type, it's just cluttering a map and database then it's basically the same thing
spughetti (2023-08-28 15:47:46+00:00): I think it's fine to map a tree row as a way if there aren't already trees mapped, but by removing already mapped trees and replacing them with a tree row you're removing detail from the map.
dpolovinkin (2023-08-28 16:01:45+00:00): hm, aight, just for to make a point clear - if there is a forest and someone mapped 10k individual trees there instead of just making it a forest area, would you also consider someone removing all those trees and just putting a forest there "removing detail from the map" and revert it back? even if it makes no sense to map those trees individually and it just clutters the server and possibly a render?
spughetti (2023-08-28 16:08:43+00:00): Mapping individual trees in a forest is far more redundant than mapping them in a city. If such a situation happened I would be hesitant to remove them myself but if someone else decided to do so I wouldn't contest it. Personally I think the best option would be to keep the mapped trees and also draw a forest area around them.
dpolovinkin (2023-08-29 12:14:45+00:00): the point I'm making is that "removing detail from the map" can be fine and you also understand that from your last message, and it's kinda hard to really see the benefit to map obvious tree row as individual trees instead of "tree row" way
spughetti (2023-08-29 12:50:21+00:00): I just don't see a benefit to removing detail unless it's so excessive that it becomes entirely useless (buildings with huge node counts as a result of bad imports for example). If someone feels that a certain amount of detail is unnecessary they can choose to compress the data they use, or remove certain parts of it outright. OSM is supposed to contain detailed and accurate data, not simplified data.

Also trees render in [StreetsGL](https://streets.gl/#37.80270,-122.41233,39.00,0.00,362.23) which I think is really cool.

I do want to reiterate that if you see an unmapped tree row I think it's fine to map it as a way, but I think the added detail of individual trees is a better alternative.
ivanbranco (2024-04-28 21:27:11+00:00): Hi, I saw DWG restored some of the deleted trees. I noticed tho that there are still many (around 15.000) there were deleted in 17 August 2023 that were never restored. I wonder why? Can they be restored now?
Mazda05 (2023-08-29 19:57:44+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
Mazda05 (2023-08-29 19:57:55+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
dcapillae (2023-08-28 15:58:23+00:00): Buenas tardes.

Este objeto no es un tanque de almacenamiento, es una balsa contraincendios: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/430160307.

Por favor, revierta sus cambios y ajuste el etiquetado como crea conveniente.

Gracias por su colaboración.

Atentamente,

Daniel Capilla
kapazao (2023-08-29 13:35:20+00:00): Lo he corregido. Parecía más bien un depósito en imágenes por satélite y el etiquetado que tenía no estaba claro.
Un saludo
dcapillae (2023-08-29 13:41:29+00:00): Gracias.

No se preocupe, sé que suele ser cuidadoso con sus ediciones y reconozco que hace un gran trabajo.

Un saludo.
Mazda05 (2023-08-29 19:57:56+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
Mazda05 (2023-08-29 19:57:58+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Russian%E2%80%93Ukrainian_war
AkuAnakTimur (2023-08-28 15:04:07+00:00): but wait, there's more!

https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=5.805705~102.54383&lvl=17&dir=41.517&style=x&v=2&sV=1

also a sign near the Kuala Besut roundabout
parukhin (2023-09-09 11:56:52+00:00): Виктор, зравствуйте.
Не добавляйте, пожалуйста, в name у зданий номера домов, достаточно addr:housenumber
lefuturiste (2023-08-28 19:12:26+00:00): Pour ton information, les lignes qui passent au dessus c'est du transport très haute tension par RTE (donc c'est pas Enedis (Anciennement ERDF))
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:59:30+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937519
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:58:37+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937509
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:57:42+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937500
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:56:45+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937486
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:55:49+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937471
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:54:46+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937451
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:53:11+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937430
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2023-09-04 14:05:12+00:00): Hallo Dirk_Stahl, mit diesem Änderungssatz hast du die Landstraße L198 zwischen Lech und Zürs /Lechtalstraße zu einem  Wanderweg umfirmiert. Ich werde die Änderungen rückgängig machen, da dies falsch ist und nun kein Routenplaner, Navigationssystem für  motorisierte Fahrzeuge eine Route darüber berechnen kann.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:51:35+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937406
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:49:45+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937377
amadvance (2023-08-28 15:46:55+00:00): Ciao Paolo,

Volevo segnalarti che ho ripristinato la difficoltà mtb:scale=1 su questo sentiero. Una difficoltà 3 è esagerata, e dato che la maggioranza del sentiero è proprio facile, la difficoltà 1 è appropriata.
Tiene presente che per la MTB non si mette la difficoltà massima, ma quella prevalente.

Ho anche un video del sentiero: https://youtu.be/UANSkhMcPSM?t=1795

Ciao,
Andrea
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:47:54+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937346
Dodko (2023-09-03 11:32:36+00:00): Ak adresa má ulicu vtedy sa nepoužíva addr:place
filip769 (2023-09-04 12:16:42+00:00): opravené (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140801949), tie addr:place tam boli predtým než som pridal addr:street a zabudol som ich vymazať
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:45:19+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937312
hyun_jun (2023-08-31 23:08:49+00:00): Hello. I am a local here.
The road tag in this area is a more appropriate highway=service than a highway=residential
VLD277 (2023-09-05 17:27:28+00:00): Hello  hyun_jun,

Thank you for reaching out. We are basing our classifications on the editing guide found on The OSM Wiki ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ko:Map_Features) I had updated the classifications of these roads to better fit the existing road hierarchy in this area.
rapidassist (2023-09-11 20:45:57+00:00): Hello Deweyjungles, This is just an FYI that I had to revert the change you made to this road. The Map roulette challenge suggestion was inaccurate because the name of the road is Avenue E - not Avenue East. Please try to verify that  suggested changes  are correct before accepting them. Anyway - just wanted to let you know - happy mapping
Fizzie-DWG (2023-09-30 05:43:56+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141937293
Fizzie-DWG (2024-01-08 05:01:19+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146014614
oh8mxl (2023-08-31 14:31:43+00:00): Tervetuloa muokkaamaan maailmanlaajuista karttaa! Perustelisitko hieman tarkemmin, miksi poistit pisteitä, joiden myötä olemassaolevia väyliä poistuu kartalta?
oh8mxl (2023-09-01 20:12:08+00:00): This change has removed at least all the footways in the block where the building Kasarmintie 12 B is situated. / Tämä muutos on poistanut paljon jalkakäytäviä ainakin Kasarmintie 12 B ympäristöstä.
oh8mxl (2023-08-31 14:38:56+00:00): Hi Hermell, nice to see you joined OSM mappers. Please describe the changes you made and where did you get the information for such changes? / Tervetuloa tekemään karttaa. Voisitko kuvailla tekemäsi muutokset ja mistä sait tiedot muutosten tekemiseen?
oh8mxl (2023-09-01 20:02:15+00:00): The cycleways/paths which were removed/shortened by this changeset still exist as was determined in a bike ride today: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/oh8mxl/traces/9866282
Nämä tällä muutoksella poistetut/lyhennetyt pyörätiet ja polut ovat olemassa.
Marek-M (2023-08-28 20:30:59+00:00): Cześć, te dojścia do PKM to bardziej nadają się do OSM jako highway=path - nie są to drogi przystosowane do ruchu pieszego, tylko przedepty, których autorami są pasażerowie kolejki :) Przy highway=path tagi foot i bicycle są zbędne.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202862104
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202862105
Bigismall (2023-08-29 05:43:18+00:00): Dziękuję bardzo Marek za informację. 
Jestem początkujący. Zmieniłem już kategorię.
Marek-M (2023-08-29 06:55:15+00:00): Super, dzięki. Już kilka razy planowałem te ścieżki dorysować ale ciągle wypadało mi to z głowy :) Dlatego fajnie, że Ty o tym pomyślałeś i zrobiłeś :D
Duja (2023-10-05 09:38:55+00:00): There aren't any orchards here -- what you see is freshly planted poplar forest.
dpolovinkin (2023-10-05 09:53:23+00:00): what does poplar forest mean? if it is a forest, I can just change it to managed forest then :)
Duja (2023-10-05 10:11:09+00:00): Poplar - Тополь, cut and re-planted along the whole Danube flow. 
It's pointless to have managed forest within managed forest, so they're best deleted.
dpolovinkin (2023-10-05 10:21:38+00:00): aight! :)
dpolovinkin (2023-10-05 17:03:47+00:00): done btw :) thanks for noticing!
philippec (2023-08-28 19:55:31+00:00): Puurs CC AED
wat is de straat en het huisnummer ?
Kunt u mapillariseren, om een juiste positie te krijgen ?
sjokomoeske (2023-08-29 10:30:42+00:00): Aed (tijdelijk) verplaatst omwille van werkzaamheden in uitvoering. Geen beeld in mapillary beschikbaar.
philippec (2023-09-30 13:42:26+00:00): Puurs Forum, de tijdelijke AED juist gezet met mapillary en GRB.
silversurfer83 (2023-08-29 08:26:28+00:00): Gude :)

ist das wirklich ein Automat oder eher eine Stelle, wo man Kürbisse mitnehmen kann und Geld in eine Dose wirft?

payment:cash würde ich auf "only" setzen, wenn es keine andere Möglichkeit der Bezahlung gibt und ich vermute, dass man hier nicht das ganze Jahr Kürbisse bekommt, daher noch "seasonal=yes". Und der Wert für das verkaufte Produkt sollte in Englisch geschrieben werden, also "vending=pumpkin"

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140504481
Jan Mathys (2023-08-29 09:07:17+00:00): Ja, ist tatsächlich eine Stelle, an der man gegen Bargeld Kürbisse mitnehmen kann. Weiß nicht, wie das zu taggen ist.
silversurfer83 (2023-08-29 13:34:10+00:00): Glaube, dass https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:shop%3Dfarm besser ist.
Wenn die Bezahlung auf Vertrauensbasis läuft kann da self_service=yes mit dran.
Wird da nur während der Kürbissaisson verkauft oder gibt's da vorher / nachher andere Produkte?
Gibt's da jedes Jahr Kürbisse oder wechselt der Standort?
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-28 21:43:27+00:00): Features should not be named.  I have removed the names.
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-28 21:44:59+00:00): Also, these features are not golf courses...  You need to use appropriate tags such as fairway, putting green, sandtrap, etc.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140504595
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-28 21:45:00+00:00): Also, these features are not golf courses...  You need to use appropriate tags such as fairway, putting green, sandtrap, etc.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140504595
OptikalCrow (2023-08-29 00:41:26+00:00): Hey Nathan! It looks like you're mapping road areas- I believe it will render on the basic osm-carto if you use the combination of

highway=primary
area=yes

rather than the tag highway:area=yes? I've seen it work around in other areas.
OptikalCrow (2023-08-29 00:43:43+00:00): Nevermind, I think that standard is more for areas that are routable anywhere in the area. I think this may be correct then?
partytax (2023-08-29 15:10:25+00:00): Thanks for taking a look! The area:highway=primary is showing up in OsmAnd now. Weirdly, area:highway=yes doesn't.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-30 18:14:08+00:00): Hello!

You used
tunnel=culivert
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202879087/history

Have you maybe meant
tunnel=culvert
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-09-01 07:57:03+00:00): What you meant by 

cycleway:surface 	paving_stones
surface 	asphalt

at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202879114 ?

Especially as it seems to represent cycleway-only way?
elumbella (2023-09-01 08:49:49+00:00): Good observation, thanks. I believe I split this off of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/226212158
and forgot to adjust the tags in detail. Fixed now with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140668487
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-28 21:43:42+00:00): Features should not be named. I have removed the names.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140505149
VictorIE (2024-01-29 19:23:03+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11151112637

Is this one of these: https://homesavers.ie/ ?
danieldegroot2 (2025-06-20 16:13:43+00:00): Now visible on Mapilio 2024-05-19.
Added details in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/167877756
Harald Hartmann (2023-10-26 13:51:38+00:00): Ich habe mal einen Hinweis (https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3958827) eröffnet, weil ich nicht nachvollziehen kann, ob die Änderungen mit nur `bicycle=designated` (ohne `foot` irgendwas) so richtig sind und dann auch noch ein  kleines Teilstück "vergessen" wurde. Wenn du aus der Gegend bist, wäre es schön, wenn du dir das bitte nochmal genauer anschauen könntest.
silversurfer83 (2023-08-29 08:20:02+00:00): Hi :)
sieht gut aus
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140506384
Holferum (2023-08-29 14:58:57+00:00): Hi, danke fürs Anschauen
Carto'Cité (2023-12-28 16:50:02+00:00): Bonjour Kam,
Merci pour ta contribution. Je n'ai pas de données concernant cette nouvelle piste et je te fais confiance. Il y a une correction à apporter je pense par contre concernant la jonction à ce niveau :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1804754083
Car la nouvelle piste serait raccordée à 2 footway (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/695975513 ; https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/169307752) ce qui pose un problème de routage et probablement de logique sur le terrain même ça peut arriver dans certains cas et alors il faut quand-même ajouter un bicycle=yes sur une petite portion de footway pour un minimum de jonction.
N’hésite pas si tu as des questions ou des remarque. Et si tu as des photos de l'aménagement, n’hésite pas à les déposer sur Panoramax le nouveau Mapillary libre 😀
À bientôt.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIDF
Kam (2023-12-29 17:28:50+00:00): Bonjour,
J'ai cartographié exactement ce qui est présent sur le terrain.
La nouvelle section de piste cyclable s’arrête (avec un panneau C114) au niveau des deux footway, sans continuité cyclable.
Pour poser le contexte, ils ont élargis l'ancien footway et ajoutés des panneaux C113/C114.
Carto'Cité (2023-12-30 07:51:56+00:00): Merci pour ton retour. Après avoir observé tes autres contributions dans le secteur et les situations j'avais conclu à ce phénomène. Je suis assez ok avec mais ça a tendance à casser les calculateurs. Une pratique que j'ai et qui est partagée par d'autres dont les contributeurs de Geovelo est de laisser les footway et de mettre bicycle=yes. bicycle=yes sur un footway est censé traduire une anomalie, c'est à dire qu'il ne s'agit pas d'un bicycle=designated et cela implique qu'il n'y a aucun élément de type signalétique qui permet de dire que les cyclistes sont autorisés mais par la force des choses les cyclistes doivent l'utiliser. N’hésite pas à me dire si tu es d'accord avec cette pratique.
Charles
lenny32 (2023-08-30 08:37:25+00:00): les attributs `cycleway:surface` et `footway:surface` ont du sens s'ils sont différents : là, ils sont identiques `surface=asphalt` est donc suffisant, ils peuvent donc être supprimés
DUGA (2024-10-20 18:47:56+00:00): Gantry removed since they serve no purpose outside of the road, tag them on the road from now on.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1202905737#map=19/42.395045/-73.500807
CurlingMan13 (2024-10-21 00:52:00+00:00): I appreciate the input.  I assumed it was a gantry for signage, not tolls and wasn't aware that OSM differentiated between the two.  I will be sure to check the type and map differently, as appropriate.

I typically map man_made=gantry where they hold signs, not toll gantries.  Looks like I added it as the wrong type.  Ones for signs are mapped as ways across the road and not connected according to the wiki (different from toll gantries): 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dgantry

It states the following:
"Draw a line representing the gantry, using the base of the gantry as nodes. Just like you would with a bridge, do not connect the gantry to the way it is crossing"
mapperue (2023-09-13 14:07:20+00:00): Ahoj, všimol som si, že sochy historických osôb označuješ ako artwork_type=statue, pričom sa používa značka memorial=statue. Viac tu:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:artwork_type%3Dstatue

Tiež nerozlišuješ značku wikidata a subject:wikidata. Viac tu:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikidata?uselang=sk