piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2024-05-22 02:00:03+00:00): Hi chicoaldeota, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/node/11923936773

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-22 11:09:55+00:00): Por favor, não adicione recursos fictícios ao OSM.
Please do not add fictional features to OSM.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:06:01+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669963
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:31:54+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:30:15+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151971298
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:31:47+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!
Intrinsical (2024-05-22 02:39:07+00:00): Decided to also tag the normal ford, as well a specify the log was informal.
Intrinsical (2024-05-22 02:46:30+00:00): ^ *as
Allison P (2024-05-23 01:07:03+00:00): This is how I'd do it—not sure if the building itself needs access and wheelchair tags though
Jarrardi (2024-05-25 06:21:43+00:00): Ooops! Good catch! Thanks tons!
OldManCelli (2024-06-26 13:57:35+00:00): Brian, did you mean to create a building with area. w1285406308 is a building with just two points. I didn't want to delete it because I thought maybe you meant to come back and fill it out?
Brian@Brea (2024-06-26 17:30:40+00:00): Thank you for catching the error. I have since deleted the way in the change set: 153213773. It was a leftover way when I merged multiple ways together from an initial, what looked to be, a map with AI edit.
emersonveenstra (2024-05-22 11:22:59+00:00): Hi there,

In OSM, it's generally incorrect to map a building on top of another building. If the condos are actually separate buildings, could you please delete the building ways that span the entire outside, like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/893851126? Thanks!
gurglypipe (2024-05-22 08:36:44+00:00): Reverted as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151662883. natural=shrubbery doesn’t make sense as these areas are human-made, not natural.

Can you please stop making mechanical tag updates without local knowledge?
Dezza (2024-05-22 11:38:58+00:00): I have just re-checked my photographs of the area from when I surveyed in October.

I personally think it /ought/ to be landuse as it is man-made and not naturally occurring, and that is echoed by some discussions on the wiki and the rejected proposal of natural=shrubbery - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?oldid=2130624

I would say that the wiki description for natural=shrubbery fits what we have here, although it has never been accepted as a proposal.

It was probably a mistake on my part to tag as landuse=shrubbery when natural=shrubbery is better documented, but as there is no consensus on the correct tagging yet I would be inclined to leave it for now.
Piotr Strębski (2024-05-22 12:38:27+00:00): Co jest źródłem informacji dla tych poprawek "ze stanem faktycznym"?
user_20442729 (2024-05-22 12:50:26+00:00): Część, informacje pochodzą z dwóch źródeł:
1. sprawdzenie oznaczenia słupków w terenie
2. weryfikacja danych w serwisie drogi.gddkia.gov.pl
Pozdrawiam.
willkmis (2024-05-22 16:46:14+00:00): Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! Is there really a "pond" here? From Bing aerial imagery it looks like a parking lot, is the pond underneath?

It looks like in other changes you added multiple ponds to this complex. I only see one in the middle, and it looks more like a swimming pool (leisure=swimming_pool). Is that what you might have meant?

Best,
Will
Szymson (2024-05-22 14:53:30+00:00): Pikietaż był już usunięty. Po co usuwać samesłupki? Można to później wykorzystać do dodania pikietażu DW468
user_20442729 (2024-05-23 08:17:36+00:00): Poprawione.
felipeeugenio (2024-05-22 12:58:09+00:00): Hola Sergio. Borró completamente el pasaje Manuel Novoa. 
Ya no existe?
Bobropiton (2024-10-11 23:58:18+00:00): Дратути. В реестре маршрутов https://www.gov.spb.ru/static/writable/ckeditor/uploads/2024/09/20/58/%D0%A0%D0%B5%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80_%D0%BC%D1%83%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%86%D0%B8%D0%BF%D0%B0%D0%BB%D1%8C%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85_%D0%BC%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D1%80%D1%83%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B2_%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B3%D1%83%D0%BB%D1%8F%D1%80%D0%BD%D1%8B%D1%85_%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BE%D0%BA.pdf остановки называются с маленькой буквы, кавычки так же наличествуют. Поэтому откат
dpolovinkin (2024-10-12 17:04:28+00:00): ааа, вот как, спасибо что сказали и поправили как надо, буду знать!) думал как на Я.Картах (вроде не то что прямо жестко данные оттуда взял, просто имена) правильно)
Bobropiton (2024-10-12 00:03:42+00:00): Уважаемый, вы палитесь. Данные из яндекса нам запрещено копировать.
Да и ситуация та же , что и с приморской-откат.
dpolovinkin (2024-10-12 17:04:48+00:00): сорямба!)
mini-me (2024-05-22 08:14:41+00:00): 1. Вы добавили латинские буквы вместо русских.
2. Если уж менять стиль, то везде и сразу, а не выборочно.
3. Лично я против удаления кавычек. По правилам русского языка они нужны. Да, на старых картах их нет, но это не повод теперь всегда делать так. Мы не ограничены размерами таблички или бумажного листа, наши "печатные машинки" могут набрать любые символы. Нет смысла что-либо упрощать.
dpolovinkin (2024-05-22 11:18:25+00:00): 1 - о, про латинские буквы это конечно прикол, как так вышло, поправлю
2 - что имеете ввиду? я на всех точках тут поменял название и на паре остановок на кораблях тоже с большой буквы сделал (надо проверить латиницу там кст хех, мало ли), во всем городе сразу не очень получится)
3 - Ну тут вопрос как на самом деле правильно называется автобусная и другие станции, мне кажется если у нее официальное название везде без кавычек, так оно таким и должно быть на OSM. Это же больше даже как имя собственное
mini-me (2024-05-22 12:00:00+00:00): 2. Можно и во всём городе если использовать JOSM. iD вообще неподходящий инструмент для работы с маршрутами.
3. На официальном сайте Организатора Перевозок названия с сокращениями и заглавными буквами (вероятно, импортированы из какой-то древней системы). Они только недавно додумались как правильно остановки на пересечениях улиц называть, чтобы никого не путать. А с кавычками ещё лет ндцать разбираться будут...
dpolovinkin (2024-05-23 12:14:58+00:00): я еще не так силен с JOSM, надо будет обучиться, уже пора))

про названия на гос сайтах да, представляю...
Bobropiton (2024-10-12 00:04:57+00:00): Откат.
FajrAl (2024-05-26 05:21:33+00:00): 1285446362 is not road, it's trail
ThompsonPlateau (2024-05-29 09:09:17+00:00): Hey there FajarAlim, 
Thank you for sharing your knowledge of this area. I can reclassify this way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285446362 from highway=living_street to highway=path. I hope you have a good day!
dpolovinkin (2024-05-22 06:37:07+00:00): related somewhat to https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/the-osm-standard-tile-layer-looks-wrong-white-lines-abusive-comments-etc/111583
Byenin (2024-07-18 08:17:32+00:00): Hello DipaleeShirsath@123
Thank you for mapping!
I fixed the data by clearing the validation error. We aligned the geometry but missed clearing the validation error.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
NeisBot (2024-05-22 05:35:03+00:00): Hi burboon89, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1285453905

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-23 19:21:48+00:00): Please do not use Google Maps as a source for your mapping activities.

Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151739938
d_berger (2024-05-22 17:25:58+00:00): Ist ja ganz toll, dass der Tagi da ein weltbewegendes Thema zur Bewirtschaftung gefunden hat, aber wie genau funktioniert die Logistik der Coop-Filiale gänzlich ohne Zufahrt?
captain_slow (2024-05-22 17:33:34+00:00): Das weiss ich ehrlich gesagt nicht. Es hat im Moment Absperrgitter entlang des kleinen Vordaches zwischen dem neuen Park und dem Gebäude und dahinter standen einige dieser typischen fahrbaren Giterpalletten mit denen Supermärkte beliefert werden.
captain_slow (2024-05-24 05:34:04+00:00): Gestern habe ich gesehen wie sie das machen: der LKW fährt rückwärts über das Trottoire zum Vordach zwischen neuem Park und Gebäude und bleibt quer auf dem (dort sehr breiten) Trottoire stehen. Rätsel gelöst ;-)
Shamazu (2024-05-23 06:06:17+00:00): Kolejna zmiana nie mająca nic wspólnego ze stanem rzeczywistym. Źródło które podałeś to potwierdza (już pomijając fakt, że zdjęcia nie są aktualne). Prośba o zaprzestanie psucia mapy
melody_Tej (2024-07-18 08:23:57+00:00): Hello vaishnavi2003
Thank you for mapping!
I have Aligned the polygon to the building as per aerial imagery
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
mavl (2024-06-22 11:38:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 153025651, 153025658, 153025634, 153025596, 153025615, 153025678 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible sources].
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-24 01:07:07+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151657692
rskedgell (2024-05-22 13:38:50+00:00): This may not do quite what you expect. Using an access value of permissive means that anyone is permitted to use that road, but that the permission may be revoked at any time.

If this is the service road for the waste water treatment works, then destination may be appropriate, or private if explicit permission is required in advance (or if there's a locked gate).

There's a full explanation of access tagging on the Wiki here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
aTarom (2024-05-22 11:02:04+00:00): Este memorial
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9969892171/history
un compañero se puso en contacto directo con el artista y se estableció como quería que se nombrase, puedes rectificarlo al estado anterior del elemento? por favor; y las eliminaciones de name:ca? ...

Ruego respuesta
Fraxi (2025-11-03 12:11:32+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285462455 май е готов вече?
foreigner037 (2025-11-03 12:13:25+00:00): Възможно е, не съм следял.
Fraxi (2025-11-03 12:20:17+00:00): Не, питам, защото ти си го добавил, а на снимките от МЗХ изглежда готов. Аз лесно мога да обновя таговете.
foreigner037 (2025-11-03 12:35:56+00:00): Едни и същи снимки ли гледаме, при мен даже не е започнат?
Fraxi (2025-11-03 12:42:05+00:00): Ми на MAF снимките гледам(това, което е по подразбиране в редактора). И те май са най-новите за Враца. Vintage за този район май им е 2023 г. Аз така и не знам какво има да се прави. Но от fb страница на общината виж какво пише:
https://www.facebook.com/obshtinavratsa/posts/%D0%B7%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%8A%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B8-%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B6%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0-%D0%B2-%D0%B6%D0%BA-%D1%81%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D1%89%D0%B5-%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%BD%D0%BE-%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B4%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%BE-%D0%B8-%D0%B7%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BE-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE/1139860294957422/
foreigner037 (2025-11-03 12:45:14+00:00): Значи можем да го маркираме като готов
Szymson (2024-05-22 15:21:52+00:00): Jaki jest cel dublowania słupków pikietażowych?
0.0 stoi już od 9 lat:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3157623561
A Ty kawałek dalej dodajesz swój i to na dodatek niesymetrycznie względem osi drogi:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11924750639
Szymson (2024-05-22 15:32:45+00:00): Wgl ten pikietaż się nie zgadza z rzeczywistością:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11924750646
Przecież to jest 300 metrów a nie 3 km.
MxxCon (2024-05-26 03:28:31+00:00): Hello.
Why did you delete valid data here?
This is considered vandalism!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151658687
Jrachi (2024-06-15 07:53:56+00:00): ref:REI=EVCA7680A
È un errore?

Ma hai fatto tutte quelle modifiche (inappropriate) in modo completamente manuale?
Senza un controllo di quello che hai fatto?

Ivo
eggie (2024-10-28 16:51:21+00:00): Dag Martin,

Wanneer je use_sidepath tagt en er is geen sidepath zal het niet routeren. Ik pas even wat aan (Almkerkseweg).
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/51.808534/4.996454

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-28 17:10:15+00:00): aangepast met bicycle:forward=use_sidepath
idem mofa

Groet
eggie
emvee (2024-10-29 06:54:04+00:00): Bedankt Eggie, inderdaad het fietspad is eenrichtingsverkeer. Goed dat er iemand mee kijkt, ik maak ook fouten.

Groeten,

Martin.
eggie (2024-10-29 07:02:26+00:00): Hoi.. osm zit vol met foutjes. Daar kom je vaak weer bij toeval achter. 
Soms na vele maanden.. 😀
emvee (2024-10-29 20:07:18+00:00): Of zelfs pas naar jaren. Tijdens maxspeed Utrecht een stuk tertiary tegen gekomen met access=no uit 2018 en geen uitzondering voor autoverkeer...
BCNorwich (2024-05-23 07:01:49+00:00): Hi, I've removed several sections of duplicated highways. Please be careful not to make these duplications as they disrupt routing.

Regards Bernard.
literan (2024-05-22 20:24:58+00:00): вы упорно записываете адреса в неверном формате, без пробела. Я уже предупреждал вас об этом https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150083520

мне просить DWG о профилактической блокировке?
dingoy29 (2024-05-23 17:10:59+00:00): Спасибо, что исправила. Буду стараться более не нарушать
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:09:04+00:00): Do not mess around with local name conventions, unless you talk to the local mapping community. Thank you.
VLD528 (2024-06-24 09:03:40+00:00): Thanks!
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:08:59+00:00): Do not mess around with local name conventions, unless you talk to the local mapping community. Thank you.
VLD528 (2024-06-24 09:04:04+00:00): Thanks!
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:08:50+00:00): Do not mess around with local name conventions, unless you talk to the local mapping community. Thank you.
VLD528 (2024-06-25 16:01:30+00:00): Ok. Well noted.
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:09:15+00:00): Do not mess around with local name conventions, unless you talk to the local mapping community. Thank you.
VLD528 (2024-06-24 08:59:51+00:00): OK, thank you!
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:09:55+00:00): Do not delete PTv2-platforms. This is not France.
VLD528 (2024-06-24 09:02:36+00:00): Thank you for your comment.
NeisBot (2024-05-22 07:30:04+00:00): Hi Kamrul Islam  003, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1285484600

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:09:31+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151687202
emersonveenstra (2024-05-22 11:11:59+00:00): Removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151670356, I have a good feeling this isn't located inside the state capitol
d_berger (2024-05-23 01:10:06+00:00): Do not mess around with local name conventions, unless you talk to the local mapping community. Thank you.
VLD528 (2024-06-24 09:03:18+00:00): Thank you!
mcliquid (2024-05-22 16:17:03+00:00): Hi Matijn, I've just been there and had a look at the situation. From the south there is a sign in accordance with STVO § 52.1 "Fahrverbot" with the text "Privatstraße" in the centre. As I understand the law, this clearly states "vehicle=no" with no exception for bicycles. Why do you think bicycles are allowed here?
Matijn (2024-05-23 06:38:38+00:00): Hi mcliquid,
When the STVO 52.1 sign is there, you´re right. I was just planning a tour in Komoot and was surprised to see that cycling was not allowed on that road as I have cycled there many many times. I though that the 52/6 c sign was on the road there. I will change it back to cycling not allowed in accordance with the sign.
mcliquid (2024-05-23 07:13:45+00:00): Thank you! Since I can't understand the signage either, I asked the municipality - Answer pending. On the other hand, the road in the northern part is also really steep and dangerous with a bad bike or with children.
literan (2024-05-22 20:20:49+00:00): не надо дублировать адреску на части здания. Она уже стоит на всем здании.
kanari_himawari (2024-05-22 21:38:57+00:00): Привет! Хорошо, мне надо делать новую правку с удалением адреса на части здания?
literan (2024-05-23 06:21:36+00:00): нет, я уже все исправил. Привет)

можете посмотреть здесь, как правильно делать такие здания из двух частей. Но я сделал через мультиполигоны.
literan (2024-05-23 06:22:20+00:00): а, пардон, здесь через мультиполигоны не делал
GinaroZ (2024-05-22 14:15:41+00:00): Hi, thanks but I've had to remove this node you added as it is a duplicate of the whole school area mapped here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23136698
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-06 04:05:39+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam tags for Two Men and a Truck POI in changeset 183721520

https://osm.org/changeset/183721520
archie (2024-05-22 08:43:48+00:00): Hej, vilka är customers i det här fallet (ingen verksamhet i närheten)? Det är väl en vanlig betalparkering, förutom under gudstjänsttiden i kyrkan då det är gratis att parkera där. Men att parkeringen är förbehållen "customers" - vem det nu skulle vara i det här fallet - framgår så vitt jag kan se inte av någon som helst skyltning på platsen. Eller har jag missat något?
Sakari_N (2024-09-05 08:12:58+00:00): Changeset reverted in part due to object moved to wrong location in a different country. I didn't review the rest of the changeset thoroughly, but some other corrections has been already made too.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156218319
Warin61 (2024-05-22 22:58:50+00:00): Bradfield is;

Viewable on the DCS Base Map.

Downloadable from the PSMA data which is where most admin boundaries in OSM come from... and are much easier to enter into OSM from that source. See the OSM wiki for the Australian Data Catalog
Warin61 (2024-05-22 23:04:37+00:00): Arr .. I see the PSMA data is not up to date. But the DCS Base Map is correct and shows more detail than you have entered...
d_berger (2024-05-22 17:38:43+00:00): Ist das wirklich 'culvert'? Dort kann man Durchspazieren, auch wenn ich aktuell davon abraten würde.
glaesel (2024-05-27 13:56:42+00:00): @d_berger: Danke, stimmt. Ich bleibe beim Value des Linienmodels.
FajrAl (2024-05-22 23:45:32+00:00): Itu bukan Jalan Tinggal.

That is not Living Street.
AzatRiver (2024-05-24 04:18:47+00:00): Hello FajarAlim, I did not modify the classification to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1120098253. It looks like that was from GrabID_Utami Gendis in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148576232. 
However, I did add the motorcycle=yes tags to be consistent with the living_street classification of surrounding ways. If you are local to the area and know this road to be only for pedestrians, then I will change to your original version as a footway with addition of a motor_vehicle=no tag to prevent cars and motorcycles from using it. Thank you for helping to confirm these. Please let me know if you have any other suggestions for edits in the area. Appreciate it. 

Terjemahan Otomatis:

Halo FajarAlim, saya tidak mengubah klasifikasi menjadi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1120098253. Sepertinya itu dari GrabID_Utami Gendis di https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148576232.
Namun, saya menambahkan tag sepeda motorcycle=yes agar konsisten dengan klasifikasi jalan_hidup di sekitarnya. Jika Anda penduduk lokal di daerah tersebut dan mengetahui bahwa jalan ini hanya diperuntukkan bagi pejalan kaki, maka saya akan mengubah ke versi asli Anda sebagai jalan setapak dengan penambahan tag motor_vehicle=no untuk mencegah mobil dan sepeda motor menggunakannya. Terima kasih telah membantu mengonfirmasi hal ini. Harap beri tahu saya jika Anda memiliki saran lain untuk pengeditan di area tersebut. Menghargai itu.
FajrAl (2024-05-25 11:30:34+00:00): That's alright. It's a 1,5 meter wide footway only accessible by pedestrian and bicycle or any 2 roadies.
Jrachi (2024-06-14 18:59:24+00:00): Tre domande:
1) perché hai eliminato dei codici esistenti?
Nella provincia piemontese di Vercelli ci sono percorsi che vanno ricodificati in quanto la x finale non indica una variante ma sentieri principali con lo stesso numero di altro percorso e le varianti di questi devono essere ricodificati di conseguenza, altrimenti non possono avere un codice REI a 8 caratteri
2) quale criteri hai usato per modificare il ref:REI su oltre duemila percorsi e non sugli altri?
3) perché hai cambiato il ref:REI senza conservare il ref_reg?
4) a seguito di queste modifiche andrebbe aggiornato anche OSM2CAI.
Lo hai fatto?

Ivo
Frans S (2024-05-22 09:07:55+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and  accurate mapped. However, in some cases you included a yard adjacent to a mapping.
Be sure not to connect nodes of buildings to other features like residential areas.

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
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand 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/151662626
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-22 08:40:27+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

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/node/3444429869

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
TrickyFoxy (2024-05-27 19:00:19+00:00): reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151914719
itineris (2025-07-09 17:37:24+00:00): Szia!

A Lőcsei úti parkolóhoz felvettél egy üveggyűjtőt, amit itt elem gyűjtőnek hívsz. A helyszínen egyiket sem látok.
Mire gondolt a költő?

Üdv:
Ákos
SonOfZenMaster (2025-07-10 20:17:31+00:00): Szia, 

Az elem gyűjtő a bejáraton belül van. oda is van jelölve külön . 

Az üveg gyűjtőt azóta az építkezés miatt  elvitték átmenetileg, ezen FB post szerint : https://www.facebook.com/groups/bosnyakter/posts/2073852766421753/
itineris (2025-07-11 06:31:02+00:00): Én erről beszélek:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11847181848

Van egy bent is, a jó helyen
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11925065332