piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
felipeeugenio (2024-05-21 21:33:39+00:00): Diego, por favor no usar S/N. no se usa en addt:street=

se usa nohousenumber=yes
miluethi (2024-05-21 21:02:32+00:00): Hi PingleSneha19,

Please square out your buildings in OSM. Select a building shape and press "Q". That's easy.

I corrected all your buildings in Nicaragua.

Thank you,
jtracey (2024-07-05 16:09:50+00:00): What did you mean by the fixmes added here?
Unbeatable101 (2024-07-07 14:24:34+00:00): Looking at the street from aerial imagery, I think I meant to say "Cycleway should be mapped on the right side of the road", it currently isn't, and the road is explicitly tagged as not having one on the right.
mapertzw (2024-07-11 06:23:33+00:00): Bardziej to pod deptak pasuje.
Tomek | Yanosik (2024-09-12 08:21:34+00:00): zmieniłem na highway=pederstrian
eggie (2024-05-21 13:40:33+00:00): Beste 3Develop..
Je fietspad zal niet routeren want hij zit aan de westzijde niet aan de rijbaan vast.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151627930
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-21 13:43:14+00:00): Het pad heb ik doorverbonden en losgemaakt van de landuse=grass
Groet
eggie
3Develop (2024-05-21 14:16:01+00:00): Inderdaad, foutje; ik had het gras aangezien voor de weg.
eggie (2024-05-21 14:40:33+00:00): No problem.. De juiste accesstags heb ik nog toegevoegd aan het fietspad. Het trottoir idem.
Gr eggie
d_berger (2024-05-22 17:20:27+00:00): Entfernt bitte in Zukunft keine 'layer'-Angaben, diese sind für die OSM-Ebenenlogik und das Rendering zwingend und haben absolut nichts mit den 'level'-Angaben zu tun. Danke.
rokas_osm (2024-05-23 06:54:42+00:00): Herr Berger,

ich glaube, Sie liegen falsch. Ein Layer-Tag für Objekte im Gebäude (Indoor) ist nicht notwendig, insbesondere wenn diese mit dem Indoor-Tag markiert sind.

OSM-Wiki:
"Wege in Gebäuden (oder ähnlichen Strukturen ... Bahnhöfen, ...) sollten hauptsächlich mit level=* anstatt von layer beschrieben werden."

"https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer?uselang=de"
d_berger (2024-05-23 15:00:04+00:00): Im wiki steht vieles, das bedeutet nicht, dass alles richtig ist. Denn konsequenterweise wird vorausgesetzt, dass _in_ Gebäuden dann auch ausschliesslich indoor-Elemente[1] verwendet werden. Diese werden von osm-carto nicht gerendert und benötigen die layer-Angabe nicht zwingend.

Solange wir allerdings den organisch gewachsenen Mischmasch aus "outdoor"-Elementen wie 'hw=footway' oder 'hw=pedestrian' statt 'indoor=corridor' verwenden, ist die layer-Angabe weiterhin zwingend.

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:indoor
mavl (2024-06-22 11:38:14+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].
ika-chan! (2024-05-24 07:02:31+00:00): Please stop splitting highways only separated by hatched lines: please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dual_carriageway
nikospag (2024-05-24 08:11:19+00:00): Changeset reverted
watmildon (2024-05-21 22:02:19+00:00): Hello! Another user (ferog_v) is doing boundary updates and hit conflicts with their edit. I have tried to sort it out but it's possible that I may have mismerged something you were updating here and I would love if you could take a quick look.

Here's the changeset in question: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151649332
KangtoMountain (2024-05-23 14:22:51+00:00): Hello watmildon, thank you for contacting me. I have reviewed the area you are referring to and have noted features that could be evaluated. There are several validation warnings for overlapping features, for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285363227 or https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285363264. What do you think about removing the overlapping features that you added so that we preserve the highways that have been in the data for longer and have more history?

When working on a changeset I like to refer to the editing good practices page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice) and the JOSM/validator page (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator) to ensure that I have made consistent and thorough edits. I have linked them if you would like to take a look, they can be helpful when attempting to fix validation warnings that were left behind. Have a nice day.

Traducción automática:

Hola watmildon, gracias por contactarme. Revisé el área a la que se refiere y noté características que podrían evaluarse. Hay varias advertencias de validación para funciones superpuestas, por ejemplo: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285363227 o https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285363264. ¿Qué opinas sobre eliminar las características superpuestas que agregaste para preservar las carreteras que han estado en los datos por más tiempo y tienen más historial?

Cuando trabajo en un conjunto de cambios, me gusta consultar la página de buenas prácticas de edición (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice) y la página JOSM/validator (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM). /Validator) para asegurar que he realizado ediciones consistentes y exhaustivas. Los he vinculado si desea echarles un vistazo; pueden ser útiles al intentar corregir las advertencias de validación que quedaron atrás. Que tenga un lindo día.
Strubbl (2024-05-21 17:59:54+00:00): Vielen Dank für das Aktualisieren und Schließen des Hinweises
mavOsaure (2024-05-21 16:23:12+00:00): Il serait plus cohérent d'appliquer le même type de highway (unclassified/path/track) au pont et au chemin, sauf raison particulière.

Bien à toi,
mav
mavOsaure (2024-05-21 16:14:41+00:00): Bonjour Tom18000,

Tu as l'air d'avoir vu le chemin en question récemment. Est ce qu'un véhicule à 4 roues (tracteur par exemple) peut circuler dessus? Le pont me fait supposer que oui.
Si c'est bien le cas, il faut mieux utiliser highway=track. Sinon, tu as tout bon!

Bien à toi, 
mav.
StefanHRT (2024-05-21 14:18:42+00:00): Danke für die Korrektur
aceman444 (2025-02-23 13:17:12+00:00): Zdravim, preco https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285196502 ked uz je skola na bode? Alebo teda lepsie by bolo zrusit ten bod, ak vieme cely areal a presunut znacky na areal.

Tie znacky 'level' na castiach budovy nemaju velmi zmysel (hlavne ked cast ma 3 poschodia). Mozno ste mysleli layer.

Trochu to skusim vylepsim.
Illio (2025-02-23 17:56:47+00:00): Ďakujem.
Danil (2025-01-17 06:36:12+00:00): terlalu semangat mergenya, jembatan di jalan nasional dekat perbatasan jadi ikut kena libas tuh
syntex (2024-05-21 18:25:44+00:00): Warto tuż po niedawnej zmianie nazwy obiektów, zachować starą nazwę ze znacznikiem old_name.
eggie (2024-05-21 14:15:51+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback De landuse heb ik losgemaakt van het pad.
Probeer plakken te voorkomen.
Wellicht access=permissive hier toevoegen conform de andere paden?

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
BCNorwich (2024-05-23 06:28:09+00:00): Hi, 
Really strange shaped gardens here. The gardens are the whole plot excluding the house, so there should not be gaps between adjoining gardens. The fence/hedge/plot line would be the garden edge.

Please consider the tag garden:type=residential to shoe these gardens are not public, or access=private.

Regards Bernard.
Dan10ch (2024-05-29 09:43:38+00:00): Hi Bernard.

Thanks, was originally planning on adding in the fencing like on Albemarle/Park Road properties so had given myself some space to do so, but having second thoughts due to the time commitment so will square off the gardens at the boundary lines. Will also add the tags :) 

thank you for your help. 

Dan
eggie (2024-05-21 14:07:14+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback   Wat bedoel je met meubilair?  Ik zie alleen een berg schade aan de kaart momenteel.
Dit is wat je hebt gedaan...

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151630494
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-05-21 14:10:37+00:00): reverted by changeset #151630858

De schade heb ik hersteld. Wat is precies je bedoeling?

MVG
eggie
EneaSuper (2024-05-22 09:18:10+00:00): Ciao, per quale motivo hai staccato la way dal nodo della strada?
BLUES01 (2024-05-22 18:51:44+00:00): Ciao, dava errore di strada chiusa, ho forse sbagliato io qualcosa?
EneaSuper (2024-05-23 08:10:54+00:00): Strano, probabilmente l'errore riguardava la barriera (che si trova a metà del ponte), comunque ho provato a ricaricare con JOSM ma non mi segnala alcun errore lungo la way 😗
Martinligabue (2024-06-02 16:50:35+00:00): Ehilà, questa modifica non ha apportato alcuna modifica alla mappa, hai bisogno di aiuto?
Johnny Carlsen (2024-05-22 02:09:33+00:00): Hi,

A quick explanation. I'm adding house numbers to OSM every day for about an hour or two. Recently I was told I have 10 days to move out from my current rental place and find a new place.

While I am adding house numbers, it was easy for me to quickly call the numbers and find the prices in the area. I know this data doesn't belong in OSM but switching between apps to register the house number and then somewhere to try and register the rental price was tedious.

So I decided to go the easy route and add what I learned to OSM, and in a few days when I have found a place remove it all again. It'll probably be less than 30 places in total.

So, that is my poor excuse for adding rental notes to houses.

What is your excuse for removing the house number that I've collected? I can understand remove the contact and note. But the house number is now gone forever as well.
Johnny Carlsen (2024-05-22 02:33:30+00:00): I have re-added the address, did you remove any other addresses?
mueschel (2024-05-22 08:11:20+00:00): Hi,
I'm pretty sure I checked and saw that the address itself was already mapped. But maybe I misread one of the other ones. It was not my intention to delete valid house numbers.
Johnny Carlsen (2024-05-22 09:02:21+00:00): No problem, mistakes happen.
willkmis (2024-05-21 14:52:23+00:00): Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! It looks like Madame Tussaud's is already mapped a couple of blocks over: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/424105889, next to the Chinese Theatre. Is that what you meant to map? I think the existing location is the correct one, unless it's moved since I've last been in the area?

Best,
Will
Konrad-Merlin (2024-05-21 14:54:57+00:00): thanks buddy 

new to this
willkmis (2024-05-22 05:09:15+00:00): No problem! I moved the info you added over to the existing building in this change: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151655920#map=18/34.10194/-118.33940. Thanks for contributing!
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-05-27 03:15:57+00:00): Why are you removing names, adding tiger tags and tagging publicly accessible roads as private?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631101
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-05-27 03:10:43+00:00): Reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631352
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-05-27 03:10:03+00:00): Reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631400
A63T4MJ9QO (2024-05-21 23:32:42+00:00): varejo loja 2
Frans S (2024-05-22 09:41:29+00:00): Hi, I reviewed all your changesets of this project.
See my comments on specific changesets 
In general, don't forgot to  square the rectangular buildings.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631486
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:56:36+00:00): Hello. 
See my comments on other changesets>
Here you clustered buildings ! 
Each building need to be mapped as a single building.
Buildings not squared as well.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631736
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:10:59+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
The objects you mapped here are no buildings.
A validater has removed them
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151631781
nikospag (2024-05-24 08:20:46+00:00): Changeset 151631798 reverted
julcnx (2026-03-31 15:44:43+00:00): Hi Peetang618,

I noticed that this changeset adds a large number of natural=peak nodes, including features that appear to be derived from DEM/SRTM local maxima (e.g. points along slopes or ridgelines without a distinct summit).

I’ve started a discussion with proposed guidelines for mapping peaks in Thailand, along with a planned cleanup of this data:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/natural-peak-mapping-guidelines-for-thailand-proposal-cleanup-notice/142734

The goal is to align on clearer mapping practices and improve overall data quality.

Your input would be very welcome.

Thanks!
julcnx (2026-04-09 05:54:22+00:00): Update: I removed unsupported natural=peak nodes (slope points, ridgeline clusters without distinct apex) based on the discussion above. See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181079175
dcskobuffs (2024-05-21 14:35:00+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery; Mapillary.
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:00:45+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. However, a few mappings are incorrect 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
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/151631972
puchaczowsky (2024-05-22 12:14:41+00:00): nie wydaje mi się, że oznaczenie tego miejsca jako muzeum jest odpowiednie

czy jest ono ogólnodostępne na co dzień? bo raczej wątpię
Catchfly (2024-05-22 17:03:55+00:00): A ja nie wątpię. Jako pracownik tegoż muzeum wiem, że interesanci przewijają się codziennie przez biura składnicy muzealnej, ponieważ to tam wydawane są promesy depozytowe potrzebne przy inwestycjach budowlanych. Stąd też wiem, że ludzie często skarżą się na słabe oznaczenia naszego oddziału na mapach. Magazyn czy składnica nic im nie mówi, muzeum jest zrozumiałe.
puchaczowsky (2024-05-22 18:24:49+00:00): rozumiem, ale z twojej odpowiedzi i tak wynika, że temu miejscu bliżej do biura niż muzeum

owszem, użycie tagów muzeum bardziej "wyróżnia" miejsce na mapie, ale jest mylące dla ludzi, którzy faktycznie szukają muzeum jako atrakcji turystycznej
Catchfly (2024-05-22 19:22:56+00:00): Ale klienci ośrodka szukają muzeum, a nie biura. I nie dotyczy to tylko osób ubiegających się o promesę, ale również osób z kręgu nauki, które przyjeżdżają na różnego rodzaju badani i kwerendy do muzeum właśnie. I może Pan wierzyć, że jeszcze żaden zwiedzający nie pojawił się w ośrodku przez pomyłkę, ale za to wielu szukających ośrodka zjawiło się w muzeum, bo zazwyczaj wiedzą, że mają się zgłosić do muzeum, a na mapie Głogów jest tylko jedno muzeum.
puchaczowsky (2024-05-22 20:53:28+00:00): domyślam się, że ludzie szukają muzeum dlatego, że ośrodek ten jest nazywany "oddziałem muzeum", mimo że przypomina on bardziej biura/pracownie

tak a propo - na stronie facebookowej ośrodka oraz stronie muzeum przydałoby się dla ścisłości dodać jego adres: Portowa 1C
Catchfly (2024-05-23 05:02:50+00:00): Przydałoby się, ale to już nie leży w mojej gestii. A jako, że ostatnio trafiły do mnie uwagi na temat nawigacji na mapach, stwierdziłam że może jednak warto dodatkowo oznaczyć budynek. Kwestie akceptacji tej zmiany zostawiam bardziej doświadczonym użytkownikom.
woodpeck_repair (2026-02-13 21:36:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 178522771 where the changeset comment is: remove SEO edits
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:18:54+00:00): See my comment on another changeset.
Issues here:
Sometimes inaccurate mapped.
Included a yard.
Mapped a whole plot with small building as 1 building, including the yard.
Best regards
Connected nodes.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632069
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:03:02+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Clustered buildings.

Sometimes inaccurate mapped.  


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632091
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:09:17+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
Please don't include the shadow of a building.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632100
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:30:38+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. However, Be sure an object is a building. You mapped a few objects without showing a shadow as buildings.

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/151632175
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:08:12+00:00): See my comment on another changeset.
Here you did not follow the roofline accurate.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632187
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:46:32+00:00): Hello. 
This building is inaccurate mapped and not squared.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632377
Frans S (2024-05-22 10:16:07+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
Here you clustered a number of buildings. They need to be mapped individually.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632411
rudychung (2024-05-21 15:33:23+00:00): Hi, Innertia, 

我發現這五個 peaks 都重複了，變成每個 peak 都兩個 nodes。就保留原來的 nodes (因為比較都資訊 tags)，把你的刪除了。

向榮 (2482557203)，v5
長濱山 (2482609193)，v5
脹脹埔山 (2482609220)，v4
下安通山 (2482609324)，v4
大庄山 (2482624890)，v5

不確定為何你沒看到原來的點位。如果有疑問的話，請跟我說。謝謝！  ^^

Sincerely,
Rudy  5/21
Innertia (2024-05-21 17:09:47+00:00): 因為我正在編輯中 lol 上面幾個都是挖出更舊的被刪除的node，晚點會合併...... 啊不過現在我的 iD 上傳時卡衝突，如果不幸要重弄的話就不是「晚點」可能要再隔一陣子
Innertia (2024-05-21 17:12:00+00:00): 忘了解釋，挖出更舊的node是因為想 preserve edit history
rudychung (2024-05-22 13:57:26+00:00): 嗯嗯，瞭解，只是怕有看漏了，導致兩邊編輯衝突了。

謝謝說明喔！  ^^
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:45:49+00:00): Hello. 
A remark. These are 2 buildings with a courtyard.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632476
SomeoneElse (2024-05-26 11:16:37+00:00): Gosh, there are a lot of "natural=peak" here?
Are these all really peaks, or are some of them just spot heights?
If some are "more like peaks than others", would some other tags such as "prominence", "natural=hill" or "peak=hill" work?
Best Regards,
Andy
SomeoneElse (2024-05-26 11:17:04+00:00): เอ้ย มี "natural=peak" เยอะที่นี่เหรอ?
ทั้งหมดนี้อยู่บนยอดเขาจริงๆ หรือบางส่วนเป็นเพียงความสูงที่มองเห็นได้?
หากบางแท็ก "เหมือนยอดเขามากกว่าแท็กอื่นๆ" แท็กอื่นๆ เช่น "โดดเด่น", "natural=hill" หรือ "peak=hill" จะใช้งานได้หรือไม่
ขอแสดงความนับถืออย่างสูง,
แอนดี้
Frans S (2024-05-22 09:38:47+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped. Follow the rooflines more accurate
Buildings not squared.
Connected nodes of buildings together.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632486
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:43:02+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Oversized mapped.
Building not squared.
Please don't upload each single building.
Upload when you want to stop or when all buildings on a task are mapped.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632515
Frans S (2024-05-22 11:54:18+00:00): Hello. See my comment on another changeset,
Issues here:
inaccurate mapped. Not following the rooflines.
Buildings not squared.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632567
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:06:55+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped.
Included the yard into a building.
Buildings not squared.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632641
Frans S (2024-05-22 12:03:30+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
You collected adjacent buildings. 
Oversized a building.
Central courtyards not mapped. ( See par, 11 on attached document.)
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151632678