piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eerib (2026-06-05 05:41:11+00:00): You told me via private message:

"The trail is now deactivated and unsafe to ride with a sign at the top attributing the change to your refusal to remove it for safety reasons."

And

"My trail was designed to be physically challenging, but as safe as I could make it. The pro level stuff is just batshit crazy insane, and even the pros should not be riding some of those features. By sharing them to a wider group than the local riding community you are going to get some young kid paralized or worse. Local SAR / Medical already knows where these are and have their own maps. You are not helping."

As a result of your messages, I was ok with leaving the trail as highway=construction as I understand the trials of building a new trail and I could not immediately verify the statements you provided. However I could still see users using the trail and as a result I did an updated trail survey.

When I did an updated trail survey, I found:

1. The signage saying the trail was usable was still up and there was no new signage put up saying the trail was unsafe to ride. 
2. The signage saying the trail was double black difficulty was still up. No new features were found on the trail. No pro-line features were found on the trail. No built features were found on the trail except for a simple ramp over a recently fallen tree.
3. No new construction works were noted except for a small portion extending the trail upwards towards the Rainbow-Sproatt Flank Trail. The average user would not consider the trail under construction.

For the rationale I previously provided, for the reasons above, and because by your own admission that the trail has been found and is seeing use by mountain bike riders, trials riders, and hikers is why the trail shows on the OpenStreetMap platform.

Since you've marked the trail as sensitive on the TrailForks platform it no longer shows up on that platform. This achieves your main objective of keeping trail use down as that is the main platform for mountain bike users. As I previously described, other platforms like Gaia only update their OpenStreetMap data bi-yearly to yearly and the next update isn't likely until the end of summer so deleting the trail from OpenStreetMap will have no effect. The bulk of mountain bike users do not use OpenStreetMap or Gaia except for more advanced riders and they would have already found your trail anyways. However having the trails on OpenStreetMap provides it to all relevant first responders, which other platforms do not.

I understand you are likely to disagree with OpenStreetMap policy. You are welcome to submit a complaint to the moderation group of OpenStreetMap by sending an email to data@openstreetmap.org. To assist your complaint it helps to include links to the relevant features, links to the changesets with discussion, and a receipt of private messages.

Cheers, eerib
woodpeck (2026-06-05 15:55:20+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20769 - use highway=construction if it is clear from local inspection that construction is taking place; do not use highway=construction if construction is not obvious (i.e. if the trail builder in their head thinks they still want to do some improvements at a later time this doesn't mean "under construction"!). Do not delete if clearly visible.
eerib (2026-06-06 18:09:57+00:00): The newest changeset #183746208 deleting all of the features in this area has been reverted by changeset #183746762.

Please do not continue to delete the features. I understand you are likely to disagree with OpenStreetMap policy. 

You are welcome to submit a complaint to the moderation group of OpenStreetMap by sending an email to data@openstreetmap.org. To assist your complaint it helps to include links to the relevant features, links to the changesets with discussion like this one, and a receipt of private messages.
eerib (2026-06-06 18:33:47+00:00): The newest changesets #183750621, #183750587, and #183750500 deleting all features in this area have been reverted by changeset #183751081.

Please do not continue to delete the features. I understand you are likely to disagree with OpenStreetMap policy.

You are welcome to submit a complaint to the moderation group of OpenStreetMap by sending an email to data@openstreetmap.org. To assist your complaint it helps to include links to the relevant features, links to the changesets with discussion like this one, and a receipt of private messages.
Taya_S (2026-06-06 18:51:05+00:00): Please see: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20771
Taya_S (2026-06-06 19:08:31+00:00): For transparency's sake, I have received the following message from RNWhis:

"I have been communicating with Frederik aka woodpecker repair about and issue I am having with eerib.

I am the actual trail builder of the area that keeps getting published against my wishes. I have explained in detail to anyone who will listen that the trail is in an unfinished state, is dangerous to be made public before it is ready, and puts myself the trail builder in danger as well.

I have engaged in good faith respectfully with the OSM community at all times. I have invited eerib to meet personally, walk the full projected trail length and contribute for a few mins helping build the trail to get an appreciation for the work involved.

I am not vandalizing anything with my removal request. I have respectfully communicated to both frederik and eerib that I require a few more months to complete the trail then it will be published for everyone to use. It is never intended to be secret or hidden.

If you do not remove the block on my account, and remove the trail or set its settings to be hidden from the public trail apps like trailforks and gaia then I am just going to physically remove the trail. This will ruin it for everyone, no one will get to use it. The choices you and your team make effect real life people in the real world. How your team does not recognize this is beyond me.

If I do not hear from you or see the ban lifted in 24 hours the trail will be permenantly removed and it will 100% be your choice and fault."

At this time the account will remain blocked.
Seyruun (2026-05-14 22:03:17+00:00): Hej, thank you for adding features to the map! 

Names in full upper case (LIKE THIS) will trigger error messages in the osmose and someone will probably come by later and fix it - but you could do it right there. :) (Same for the Rasta roads if you did that)

Happy mapping!
Supaplex (2026-05-14 07:01:23+00:00): 你真得確定這邊是24小時開放然後是觀光景點？
OpenStreetMap是收錄真實存在然後是正確資訊的國際地圖共編專案，如果編輯不實資訊將會遭到移除
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13826276601
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182626781
nevw (2026-05-27 07:44:11+00:00): Hi, outer rings of are multipolygon cannot share segments.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.31917&lat=-28.11052&zoom=19
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20681929#map=19/-28.109795/153.319993
nevw (2026-05-27 22:03:44+00:00): This is fixed now
khag7 (2026-05-14 02:57:07+00:00): The source I provided is mistaken. Satellite imagery was used to map these elements.
i2004 (2026-05-14 11:53:52+00:00): falto la 271 que extendio a la noria
eerib (2026-05-14 04:25:11+00:00): Hello a4a91120,

I have re-added the highway=track tag to this roadway and added the description "Private road.". 

One of OpenStreetMap’s central tenants is that the data within the OpenStreetMap dataset must follow “Ground Truth”, which means that every feature must follow as it exists in real life. Since the road exists it should have the highway=track tag.

OpenStreetMap has developed an explainer page for land owners on trails but is applicable to roadways too. One thing that most land owners in BC don’t realize is that OpenStreetMap data is used by a number of emergency organizations, including volunteer search & rescue organizations, RCMP, BC Ambulance, BC Wildfire, and local governments. This is one reason why it’s critical that features such as roads are mapped as they exist. By attempting to hide this road you risk creating delays for emergency responders.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

Thank you, eerib
a4a91120 (2026-05-14 06:41:56+00:00): Hello eerib,
Thank you for the comment. As the son of the property owner (a4a91120), I have closed this changeset and reported it.
This is private property. Utilities and governments already have standing agreements with the owners for any necessary access. Decisions about access, emergency routing, or how our private roads are represented are matters for the property owners and the proper authorities — not volunteer mappers or trespassers.
OpenStreetMap is a mapping tool and database, not a platform for enforcing public access preferences over the federal and provincial laws of privacy and private property rights. Mapping this road as a general highway=track without proper private restrictions misrepresents the legal situation and risks encouraging trespassing.
We have no objection to the road being mapped accurately as private: for example highway=track + access=private, plus a clear note. That reflects true ground truth — both the physical feature and the private ownership with restricted access under Canadian law.
Please stop all further edits or re-additions on this property. Continued changes will be treated as unwelcome interference.
Regards,
a4a91120 (property owner's family)
eerib (2026-05-14 06:57:22+00:00): Hello a4a91120,

I'm a bit confused by your response as it misrepresents the situation and seems to have a significant misunderstanding of OpenStreetMap policies.

The road in question has always been marked with access=private from version 1 that was added in July 2023.

My recent edits to the roadway were only to correct errors in some of your recent changesets, namely incorrectly adding gate tags to the road and removing the highway tag from the roadway.

Thank you, eerib
eggie (2026-05-14 05:27:24+00:00): Tip.
In dat geval ook de uitzonderingen op oneway yes verwijderen.
Mvg
eggie
eggie (2026-05-14 05:47:32+00:00): Uitzonderingen verwijderd
eggie (2026-05-14 05:29:19+00:00): Hoi. Dat paaltje en pad looot nu door een huis?
Mvg..
eggie
eggie (2026-05-14 05:45:09+00:00): pad teruggezet... adres teruggezet.
Let op .. beter niet schuiven met de kaart in editmodus.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=182628501

MVG
eggie
JeroenHoek (2026-05-14 06:59:10+00:00): Waarom laat je cycleway:right=separate vervallen?
emvee (2026-05-16 07:55:14+00:00): Wat voegt *=separate toe aan een object? 

De weg heeft al bicycle:backward=use_sidepath en cycleway:left=lane, en dat beschrijft alles wat een fietser moet weten en nog beter ook.

Of gaan op het fietspad highway: 	tertiary=separate toevoegen?
JeroenHoek (2026-05-16 09:17:58+00:00): Het maakt de lane-tagging compleet, en geeft aan dat de andere kant (die los ligt) niet ontbreekt. Dat voorkomt dat StreetComplete-achtige apps er vragen over stellen en mappers onnodig tijd er aan besteden.

Hij is niet nodig als het fietspad aan beide kanten losligt, maar bij een half-lane-half-separate wel.

bicycle:backward is een access-tag en heeft niets met lane-tagging te maken.

Probeer tags die valide zijn te laten staan. Het is sowieso raar om een van een left/right-paar te verwijderen en de andere te laten staan.
emvee (2026-05-16 10:07:05+00:00): Sinds wanneer gaat één object beschrijven waar een ander object ligt?

Apps vindt ik geen goed argument, die moeten worden gefixt.

Ja, in dit geval is het "mooi" om  cycleway:right en cycleway:left te hebben.
JeroenHoek (2026-05-16 10:38:22+00:00): In dit geval is het om de lane-tagging compleet te maken. Bij een stuk weg waar het aan beide kanten hetzelfde is is dat niet nodig, dan is het of een weg waar je niet mag fietsen, of een weg met of zonder fietsstroken. Bij dit soort halve wegen zit je met een asymmetrie van tags. Ze beide taggen maakt het plaatje dan compleet.

Het is geen defect van een QA-app als die vraagt hoe het dan met cycleway:right zit als cycleway:left alleen is getagt.
Константин Гам (2026-05-28 11:00:15+00:00): Здравствуйте!
Уточните пожалуйста, что вы сделали в данном пакете правок на пол-мира и почему в Петербурге появились не существующие велодорожки в результате этой правки?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 12:11:22+00:00): Reverted SEO spam and malformed tags added to building way for POI in changeset 184350773

https://osm.org/changeset/184350773
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 12:11:11+00:00): Reverted SEO spam and malformed tags added to building way for POI in changeset 184350773

https://osm.org/changeset/184350773
BCNorwich (2026-05-15 06:10:09+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Unfortunatly your new highways duplicated existing highways. This duplication could cause disruption to routing. Thus I've removed all the duplicated highways.

Regards Bernard.
Ponderosopine (2026-05-18 02:39:22+00:00): natural = spring is what you're looking for
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 12:12:59+00:00): Reverted SEO spam and malformed tags added to building way for POI in changeset 184350850

https://osm.org/changeset/184350850
FroschForscher (2026-05-14 10:51:54+00:00): Hallo no_sch,
cycleway:right=track ist zwar von der Bauform korrekt, da dieser aber separat eingezeichnet ist wäre cycleway:right=seperate (der orange Pfeil in SC) hier richtig.

FroschForscher
dp7 (2026-05-18 08:46:48+00:00): Ciao Camoscio Sibillini
Hai una traccia GPS per questo sentiero ? Scusami per questo commento, ma il sentiero 22 era già mappato con passaggio più in quota e non trovo traccia di quest'altro nelle tracce GPS di openstreetmap, ne' sulle heatmaps. Per essere mappato come sentiero è importante che sia riscontrabile sul terreno, soprattutto in luoghi impervi come questo...
Camoscio Sibillini (2026-05-18 08:51:35+00:00): Ciao il percorso io l'ho fatto ma in alcuni tratti non c'è una traccia chiara, si passa sui prati ed è un percorso da identificare con il senso dell'orientamento (su una mappa CAI sarebbe o con i trattini o con i puntini)  ciao
dp7 (2026-05-18 08:58:20+00:00): Hai una traccia GPS da poter caricare su OSM, in modo che sia visibile a tutti ? Poi per descrivere visibilità e difficoltà ci sono tag appositi come SAC_SCALE e TRAIL_VISIBILITY. In assenza di traccia GPS e se non c'è un minimo di visibilità sul terreno, eviterei di mapparlo.
Camoscio Sibillini (2026-05-18 08:59:34+00:00): no , non ho una traccia GPS anche se ci sono stato. vedi tu
Camoscio Sibillini (2026-05-18 09:00:51+00:00): però è segnalato anche sull atlante dei Sentieri del CAI come n22 prima con una linea rossa unita poi per le ultime centinaia di metri con puntini rossi
Camoscio Sibillini (2026-05-18 09:02:03+00:00): poi già che ci sei in zona sono stati erroneamente messi punti con il nome "Colle" come Colle delle Murelle e Colle della Priora, non in realtà sulla mappa ufficiale cai si parla di C.le per Casale delle Murelle e Casale della Priora e non si intende Colle ciao
dp7 (2026-05-19 10:52:09+00:00): Grazie per le precisazioni. Per i toponimi hai fatto bene a correggere, probabilmente l'errore era dovuto alle abbreviazioni IGM ma in effetti in zona sono conosciuti come casali. Per il sentiero invece non capisco a quale atlante CAI fai riferimento, comunque ho verificato su alcune carte tra cui una vecchia carta IGM.  Il tracciato c'è ma è in parte diverso da quello che hai mappato e non completamente sovrapponibile; soprattutto è una fonte molto vecchia, mentre su OSM dobbiamo mappare la situazione attuale sul terreno. 
In una zona impervia come questa, un sentiero disegnato sulla carta ma non riscontrabile a terra può trarre in inganno e creare qualche problema, soprattutto agli utenti meno esperti: devi considerare che le mappe OSM sono oggi utilizzate da una miriade di app per l'escursionismo. 
Visto che lo hai percorso, io non lo rimuovo, ma se decidi di lasciarlo avrebbe senso aggiungere dei tag che aiutano a capire la situazione, come "trail_visibility=horrible", "sac_scale=demanding_mountain_hiking" e, volendo, un "fixme=verificare sul terreno con traccia GPS". In particolare i primi due vengono considerati da molte app per rappresentare graficamente il sentiero come "meno visibile" e "impegnativo" (es. puntini rossi).
In generale, per i prossimi inserimenti, una traccia registrata anche da smartphone è utile per dare oggettività al percorso. Scusa per il sermone e grazie per la pazienza e per i tuoi contributi: apprezzo la disponibilità. Ciao!
osmviborg (2026-05-14 06:47:33+00:00): Farmyard polygonen og hovedhuset er tagget "Gammel Brønden", som er stednavnet, set skærmkortet. Der skal ikke både være en polygon og en node der definerer gården, og så bør stedet kun have ét navn.
osmviborg (2026-05-14 08:20:45+00:00): alt_name=Bertrams Landbrug
andershl (2026-05-14 08:25:05+00:00): Fint. Det er bare virksomhedsnavnet, som omtalt i Nordjyske i dag.
osmviborg (2026-05-14 08:28:14+00:00): Øf grise, Øko 😉
BerryTrails (2026-05-14 10:52:04+00:00): Hi, KainjiLake On what basis did you open the highway while construction is still ongoing? Do you even live here or understand the daily situation? The main highway itself is still under incomplete and minor works, yet you opened it . This kind of careless edits  creating inconvenience and safety issues for public.
KainjiLake (2026-05-15 15:14:16+00:00): Hi BerryTrails,
Parts of this highway is open in Vantor Hub imagery from April 2026 which shows vehicle vehicles driving along the northern highway (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/889783579) that leads into the roundabout and the southern highways (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1501979501) and (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1501979507) that connect to the roundabout.

I noticed you added construction along the southern bypass (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/264401055) which vehicles are currently taking in Vantor Hub imagery to bypass the roundabout as the way (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1501979503) that leads into the roundabout is not yet open. If you driven here recently and believe these should be closed, I can defer to your edits. 

Apple has an agreement with Vantor Hub (previously Maxar) to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. We generally use the imagery that is already available in JOSM but where we do use that more recent imagery, we always cite it and the date the imagery is from in the changeset source.
BerryTrails (2026-05-19 10:25:04+00:00): The imagery you cited is from the 4th month, but even at that time the road was still under construction and minor construction work is still ongoing. Please ensure proper verification before making such edits without sufficient evidence. Once the remaining minor works are completed, these highways will be opened.

ThankYou....
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 06:40:58+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie powinna zawierać przedrostka. Nazwa ulicy nie powinna zaczynać się od 'ul.', 'ulica' itp. Należy usunąć przedrostek i pozostawić samą nazwę ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11238725942

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

Zasady nazewnictwa ulic w polsce:
https://wiki.osm.org/Pl:Znakowanie_dróg_w_Polsce#Nazewnictwo_ulic

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 06:51:11+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13826679510

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
rarad74 (2026-05-14 09:35:16+00:00): Salut. Te rog nu mai sterge date valide. Folosesti imagini Bing care sunt mai vechi de 8 ani de zile. Vezi pe ESRI Standard, ca sunt din vara lui 2025. Si mapbox sunt aproximativ de 2 ani  pe unele zone din Bucuresti.
matolin1 (2026-05-16 13:59:57+00:00): Zdravim, chapem, ze v terene sa zrejme situacia zmenila, ale vymazanim linie 537492336 bola narusena aj cast modrej turistickej znacky - ako teraz tato trasa vedie?
woodpeck (2026-05-14 09:11:09+00:00): The majority of this changeset is better described as "deleting buildings" than "mapping buildings"; next time if you find yourself deleting a lot of data, please amend your changeset comment to explain the rationale (e.g. "deleted buildings that were not visible on aerial imagery" or so). It can also make sense to research who added the buildings you are about to delete, and when - just to make sure they did not perhaps have more up-to-date information than you. Also, drop the hashtags from the comment field - they can happilly live in the "hashtags" field and do not need to be duplicated.
Greg91 (2026-06-19 11:13:19+00:00): Hello, Heboyan djan! Unfortunately, your 2 sets of edits of the building at Paronyan street are not correct - you converted a building into amenity.
If you want to add a barbershop, one of the possible methods is to create a point as POI (point of interest), put it within the boundaries of the building (in approximate center of the salon) - and it will be rendered!
Kind regards, Gregory M.
Please, welcome to join OSM Armenia in TG chat.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184310795
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-14 07:30:51+00:00): #Spam
baddal (2026-05-14 07:34:24+00:00): Harika Bir İşletme Bugün Hizmet aldım.
Yeni bir işletme ama çok güzel dizayn edilmiş, kahveler de çok lezzetliydi.
Muğlaya giderken arabaya servis aldım.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-05-14 07:43:23+00:00): w sensie sprawdziłem czy operator:wikidata pasuje do operator które już jest
SomeoneElse (2026-05-16 12:29:35+00:00): Oops - looks like your addition of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1513376565/history broke NCN56: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/156406#map=20/53.4025835/-2.9856755 .
Can You fill in the gap?
SomeoneElse (2026-05-16 12:43:40+00:00): And the Trans-Pennine Trail in the same place: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4139229#map=20/53.4026703/-2.9857982
North14 (2026-05-18 08:17:45+00:00): Hi , thanks for keeping an eye out, and sorry for breaking a navigation path again. Unfortunately, I have no idea how to fix this gap. I tried, but without success. I guess I'm having trouble figuring out the right settings. Could you lend a hand again? Thanks in advance for your help.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 08:12:21+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1197703451
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1513381640

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/304579788

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Lokai (2026-05-16 14:11:35+00:00): Hallo,

beim Zufahrtsweg wurde access=no gesetzt, welche Verkehrszeichen sind dort aufgestellt bitte.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/980133202#map=19/49.556281/7.668688&layers=D

Gruß
literan (2026-05-14 19:42:35+00:00): это не акведук, там вода не течет
eggie (2026-05-14 08:08:38+00:00): Commentaar moet zijn .. aanlegsteiger toegevoegd tijdelijke fiets voetgangerspont
pelekPL (2026-05-19 09:33:49+00:00): Raz że głupio to wygląda - parkingi w lesie, dwa to nie są parkingi tylko miejsca do składowania drewna. Kiedyś było dodane area=yes ale ktoś usunął, ktoś inny zmienił...
WMietek (2026-05-20 08:35:53+00:00): Trzeba powrócić do area=yes
rskedgell (2026-05-14 14:05:08+00:00): Hi and welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You can use the name:left=* and name:right=* tags to describe situations like this, in addition to the human-readable description you've already added.
rskedgell (2026-05-29 07:29:33+00:00): Updated in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183339120