piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
grzegorz75jan (2025-02-01 11:44:38+00:00): Brakuje podanej wysokości. Co ciekawe na południe jest dodana Góra wilcza https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12241024538

Jeżeli usunąłeś budynek a na podkładzie orto wygląda on dość dobrze oraz istnieje w warstwie ewidencji budynków to istnieje ryzyko, że ktoś go doda ponownie. W tym przypadku warto zostawić budynek i dodać jeden z tagów https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix W większości budynek zniknie z mapy a inny edytujący go zobaczy i znajdzie odpowiedni tag więc będzie wiedział by go nie dodawać. W pomocy edytora masz też opisane różne skróty klawiaturowe które pozwalają lepiej widzieć podczas edycji oraz ją ułatwić.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian

https://youtu.be/xBMIoypkdI4?list=PLTgtPjgzssHzsgAqYbi2QfRoRk1S9ioX5&t=2596 > opisy

https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40

https://play.google.com/store/search?q=streetcomplete&c=apps&hl=pl

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=info.zverev.ilya.every_door&hl=pl
jaap de vries (2025-02-03 08:28:56+00:00): Tomas,

Brandgangetjes en achtpaden tussen de huizen geven we zo aan:
highway=footway
footway=alley
Tomas09 (2025-02-05 16:34:04+00:00): ok
angys (2025-01-31 18:04:17+00:00): Hii, please do not add street name in full caps thank you
justin5822 (2025-02-01 00:44:47+00:00): Hello, I see that you have just joined OpenStreetMap and have started to make many edits around Dothan. Some of the changes you have made have been incorrect and/or harmful to the map. I have spent many hours improving the Dothan area and would appreciate it if you could take some time to learn how we as a community make edits so that you don't introduce any more errors.

Thank you
Johnwhelan (2025-02-28 14:20:31+00:00): Try using JOSM and the buildings toolplugin currently you're adding a node outside the building occasionally
Đuro Jiří (2025-03-23 10:41:57+00:00): Ciao pio1976, appena ho corretto alcuni errori che hai fatto a Lido di Jesolo.

Qui hai cancellato l'edificio e aggiunto numero civico. In Italia non si aggiunge numero civico sul edificio, però come nodo lì dov'è esposto, cie, ingresso, cancello,...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1226944937/history#map=19/45.524619/12.706582&layers=N

Su questi campi sportivi hai aggiunto nome Bellevue, però Hotel Bellevue è gestore (operator).
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/127219009/history

Qui hai aggiunto numero civico e nome "Residence 5R" su ogni singolo edificio, che non serve, perché hai bene aggiunto nome su intera l'area.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1356416162#map=17/45.524856/12.707185&layers=N

Su quesa piscina hai aggiunto access=private, però dev'essere access=customers, visto che ospiti del Hotel Mediterraneo lì possono andare.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1228718472/history#map=18/45.525852/12.709623&layers=N
SekeRob (2025-02-02 10:31:02+00:00): Hi,

Don't know why you keep adding nodes to circles, buildings, watertowers, roundabouts, wastewater clarifiers and the like over and above what the editors auto-calculate depending on the size of the ring as good enough to get a fluid round ring in map rendering, but it's being noticed. Adds zero value to the map.

cheers

PS There's the record keeper who put 400 on a larger roundabout... I apply reversal or simplify, only when I stumble on them ,O)
vasony (2025-02-09 18:58:06+00:00): csomagpontok jelölése:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Jel%C3%B6l%C3%A9si_p%C3%A9ld%C3%A1k#Csomagpont

Az elv, hogy az üzlet egy tulajdonsága az, hogy csomagpont, nem egy külön pont a térképen.
Taksine (2025-02-02 05:08:42+00:00): ？你确定这地方改成停车场了？这地方上次看好像还是篮球场啊
Rouyki (2025-02-10 01:14:57+00:00): 你看错地方了？还是点错变更集了
Taksine (2025-02-10 01:28:21+00:00): 噢我说的是这两个建筑旁边那个停车场，你确定他改成这样了吗
Rouyki (2025-02-10 10:22:16+00:00): 又看了一眼KK兑换处以南，F区以北，W1以东，8个带P的停车场是这样的。KK兑换处下面是两个水池，老KK区的篮球场地三块，在原来板房区右上角。
Leo Slager (2025-02-01 11:21:20+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
jfd553 (2025-07-09 17:26:10+00:00): Vraiment cool tes mises à jour!
J'importe les adresses de Sherbrooke et ça m'évite d'importer des adresses/bâtiments qui n'existent plus.
Frédéric Brière (2025-07-15 03:28:11+00:00): Toujours heureux de rendre service! ☺
perenniallylate (2025-02-03 13:24:00+00:00): Good changeset! Always interesting to see new construction being added so nicely :)
I just edited the way to the underground parking entrance to a driveway, as I believe it fits the situation better. Feel free to change if you think its wrong. 
Additionally, way 1355692740 doesn't have any tags, is this a mistake? 
Is every Hof completely covered by greenery? If not, I don't think the tag landuse=greenery is the correct choice, at least not for the complete area.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161982724
meshworx (2025-02-03 14:11:06+00:00): Thanks for letting me know. Driveway indeed is better for the underground entrance. 1355692740 was indeed a mistake. I upload it asap. And no the Hof consists out of private garden areas (sometimes stone sometimes gras) and common parts with raised beds for flower or even trees and seating arrangements and bike parking. Could you hint me to the correct tags (leisure? landuse? amenity? ...?) in the wiki?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161982724
UT93 (2025-02-03 16:41:31+00:00): Danke für das eintragen der dort entstandenen Baukörper. Was jedoch ziemlich sicher nicht so sein kann, ist die Parkgaragen-Einfahrt, westlich des Gebäudes mit der Hausnummer 3!
Wenn ich dann auch noch auf meinen Hinweis https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4512818 aufmerksam machen dürfte, so erscheint es mir, als sei zwar die Baustelle entfernt, das Wohngebiet aber noch nicht an das überbaute Areal angepasst worden.
meshworx (2025-02-03 17:53:57+00:00): Besten Dank für den Input - bin noch neu und lerne gerne dazu. Die Häuser sind schon alle fertig erstellt und bis auf die Mängelbehebung abgenommen. Heisst auch die Wege sind final fertig. Bzgl. 12546613339 Garagenzugang. Dies ist der Fusszugang für die Untergrundgarage und nicht für die Autos (Autos ist Node 12546613356) . Deswegen hatte ich den Tag foot:private verwendet (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=parking%20entrance) . Falls dies nicht korrekt ist bitte könnt ihr mir helfen die richtige Tags zu finden. Danke
perenniallylate (2025-02-03 18:07:44+00:00): Habe den Eindruck das der Tag für den Fussgängereingang von der Parkgarage richtig ist. Zumindest laut dem englischen Wiki sollte man das so machen.
Lezurex (2025-02-03 19:08:37+00:00): Danke fürs Eintragen, sieht grundsätzlich schonmal gut aus.

Der Fussgängereingang zur Garage sollte entrance=yes sein, die Parkmöglichkeit als Garage ist ja bereits mit dem anderen gegeben und durch den Fussgängereingang kann man glaube schwer mit dem Auto durch. Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_entrance zweiter Satz. Der Way da hin hat noch keine Tags, ist vermutlich ein highway=steps?

Ich nehme an, die Footway-Areas grenzen direkt an die Gebäude? Dann auch die Nodes so mappen, dass Gebäude und Area diese teilen, wo sie (fast) überlappen.

Wie schon angemerkt wurde, landuse=greenery und highway=footway passen glaube nicht so ganz zusammen (ausser man läuft dort durch einen Dschungel ;D).
perenniallylate (2025-02-04 14:39:00+00:00): Ich hatte wohl den englishen Wiki Eintrag falsch verstanden :) entrance=yes macht wohl für den Fussgängereingang Sinn, aber wie kann man diesen dann sinnvoll mit der Parkgarage verknüpfen?
Lezurex (2025-02-04 20:17:00+00:00): Der korrekte Weg wäre es wohl, dann die Parkgarage zu mappen, aber das ist privates Areal (und mal ernsthaf: übertrieben). Alternative wäre evtl. auch eine Site-Relation, dann wird das Parking-Symbol aber wohl in der Mitte davon gerendert, was der Sache auch nicht wirklich dient.

Da der Eingang sowieso privat ist spielt das auch keine Rolle. Jene, die dort rein können, wissen ohnehin, wo es da hingeht.
meshworx (2025-02-05 16:27:07+00:00): Besten Dank. Ich habe jetzt den Fussgängertiefgarageneingang nach den Kommentaren angepasst. Mit den Höfen bin ich noch etwas unschlüssig. Werde sie dann noch genauer mappen (da es z.b. Fahrradunterstände gibt und Hochbeete mit Bäumen. Wäre für die Hofläche dann highway=pedestrian oder sogar place=city_block oder place=plot passend um jeweils die drei Häuser als HOF A,B,... zu Kennzeichnen ?
felipeeugenio (2025-02-01 12:24:45+00:00): Buena Vicente. Eso si en :street lo solo se agrega el nombre de la calle, no si es al poniente o el oriente. Lo corrijo.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161982786
tomhukins (2025-03-13 11:44:11+00:00): Are you sure this change makes sense?

You appear to have connected the pedestrian area outside Piccadilly station to the sidewalk that runs alongside Store Street underneath.

There is no way these two routes are connected: making wildly incorrect changes like this is incredibly unhelpful, and it's sad to see Facebook paying people to do this.

Please revert these mistaken changes that will mislead people using the map and avoid editing places you do not understand.
VLD292 (2025-03-14 15:54:00+00:00): Hello Tomhukins,

The connecting pathway you mentioned was created after the separation of another path (w1345994827), which was previously linked in changeset 160576889. Our objective in this case was to resolve crossing pathways and to introduce pedestrian crossings that had not yet been added. I appreciate you bringing this to my attention, and I have now removed the connecting walkway. This was an oversight that we should have identified, and I will make every effort to prevent similar errors in the future.

Best regards,  
VLD292
tomhukins (2025-03-21 12:08:02+00:00): I see no evidence that you have understood or fixed the problem I described.

I strongly encourage Meta / Facebook to stop clumsily editing the map in parts of the word that you have no knowledge of and do not understand.

I will tidy up the mess you made myself in due course.
rskedgell (2025-08-20 16:22:23+00:00): I have deleted these useless sidewalks. As a pedestrian, I find it terribly inconvenient to move 5 metres vertically between footways, even when there isn't solid concrete inbetween. I have deleted this useless and irresponsible fiction.

The mapping of pedestrian infrastructure in OSM is actually used by real people in the UK and doing it badly causes real inconvenience. This is an area where doing the job badly is invariably worse than not doing it at all.
rskedgell (2025-08-20 16:24:24+00:00): (User reported to DWG)
tomhukins (2025-08-20 18:55:57+00:00): Thank you, rskedgell.  It's great to see you looking after the map, unlike the clumsy Meta / Facebook employees who don't seem to care.
RVR015 (2025-08-20 19:27:44+00:00): Thank you for this update, rskedgell. Our team is reviewing the complete edit history. The reported account is archived, but I'm more than happy to correspond with DWG as needed. We appreciate your local expertise. Thank you for extending your time and contributions to OSM.
rskedgell (2025-08-21 09:29:49+00:00): I'm actually based in London rather than Manchester, but stayed there last weekend. I noticed some unusual behaviour planning running routes and while using StreetComplete/SCEE and decided to take a closer look.

In the last year, there was a Map with AI project using a task manager to add pedestrian infrastructure in Manchester (and in several other cities in the UK and US). While this is a good idea in principle and could provide better routing for pedestrians and those with mobility or visual impairments. In practice having separate sidewalks and crossings added as a checkbox exercise by inexperienced mappers with inadequate supervision and review can produce results which are worse than if nothing had been added. Typically, we end up with mis-mapped crossings, crossings at a crossroads where 8 sidewalk ways and 4 crossing ways share 4 kerb nodes (causing routing along edges which do not cross roads to traverse misplaced kerbs), unconnected/dead end sidewalk segments, separate sidewalks added to minor roads with no crossing infrastructure, and pretend crossings added in an attempt to make the preceding item "work".

In this case, it was one or more MwAI users who added incomplete separate sidewalks parallel to Store Street where it passes in a tunnel underneath the forecourt of Manchester Piccadilly station. They failed to add appropriate layer or tunnel tags to those sidewalks and must have ignored editor warnings about crossing ways. This was compounded by VLD292 simply connecting those sidewalks with that of Piccadilly Station Approach without adequately checking aerial or street side imagery to establish whether they were physically connected, which would have confirmed that they are not.

Pedestrian mapping at major transport interchanges in particular needs to be done carefully by experienced mappers who actually care what they are doing. A missed plane, train, or coach resulting from failing to take a short-cut which does not exist could be very expensive and inconvenient.
SomeoneElse (2025-08-31 21:37:55+00:00): In order to help tidy some of this stuff up, https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2aUO is a query for nodes and ways last edited by @VLD292 in Northern England, and https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2aUP is the Southeast.  There's some "unclear sourcing" at the very least in there - for example, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1355696177 has added "surface=paving_stones" with "source=Bing", but a glance at the Bing imagery in iD shows that the alleged pavement surface is entirely obscured by a large building.
For those reasons we're reliant on people on the ground to tidy these errors up, but they will be able to look at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=21941706 and see previous problems that were reported and treat anything by VLD292 at Facebook as "in need of remapping".
RVR015 (2025-09-02 20:09:47+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to our attention. The way mentioned is adjacent to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/662332132/history/2, which is also surface=paving_stones tagged by another user. As well as this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1024398493/history/2. More than likely, VLD292 was trying to follow the OSM tags of the adjacent footways. Just providing some perspective on what most likely happened in this instance. This, however, does not negate the importance of verification, which I talk about in this post: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/the-walkabout-london-complex-intersections-pedestrian-mapping-initiative/134887/5
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-10 18:50:47+00:00): Hello!

You used
access=private01
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9655041514/history

Have you maybe meant
access=private
?

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?
wolfy1339 (2025-04-10 21:24:48+00:00): Hi, indeed it was simply a typo, and `access=private` was meant. I have fixed it
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-07 19:40:00+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12546684103 - have you wanted to add ele=687 ?
vojtechzaboril (2025-12-07 19:50:47+00:00): Hi, yes definitely. I fixed it now. Thanks for notice.
Alexmol (2025-01-31 16:23:23+00:00): Por lapso o comentário não está correcto.
Actualização de postos de carregamento.
maraf24 (2025-05-30 13:37:34+00:00): source=survey;local knowledge

No chyba nie. Nazwy przystankow to Trzebusz - Suszarnia, a nie Trzebusz - Kolonia, co od lat można przeczytać na przystankach.
Skąd więc są te dane?
Michaall99 (2025-05-30 21:04:01+00:00): Nazwę Trzebusz - Kolonia zaczerpnąłem od jedynego przewoźnika który się tam zatrzymuje, mowa o Express Bus Kołobrzeg.
maraf24 (2025-06-04 07:59:28+00:00): Przewożnicy często stosują własne nazwy. Przy kilku przewożnikach jeden przystanek może mieć nawet kilka nazw.
W osm, o ile nazwa widnieje w terenie, to taka powinna być używa (zasada ground truth).
grzegorz75jan (2025-01-31 21:00:53+00:00): A jak te szlabany miały funkcjonować prawidłowo jeżeli nie miały dodane żadnego access. Drogi które podlegają pod te szlabany też powinny mieć dodany access i wtedy dopiero jako komplet będą poprawne. Tak na szybko zauważyłem zdublowane przejścia dla pieszych. W losowych węzłach dróg dodane access=yes oraz tu i uwdzie jakieś  dziwne tagi. Magazyn GPS na węźle drogi oznaczony jako wejście. Obrysy budynków jakbyś nie wiedział o istnieniu warstwy podkładu obrysu budynków. Jakiś pomnik zupełnie źle oznaczony. Jakieś drogi prowadzące po chodniku lub zupełnie poza osią drogi oraz narysowane dwie drogi na fizycznie jednej. Chodniki oraz drogi poprzypinane do obrysów budynków bez oznaczenia takiego połączenia jako wejście.

Konto w OSM masz od dawna oraz niby nabite trochę tych edycji ale bez czytania pomocy do obiektów oraz samodzielnego głębszego wnikania to nic z tego dobrego nie będzie a kiedyś ktoś inny będzie miał co poprawiać jeżeli z zasady nie usunie tego bo a łatwiej i szybciej zrobić to od zera niż poprawiać.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian

https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40

https://play.google.com/store/search?q=streetcomplete&c=apps&hl=pl

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=info.zverev.ilya.every_door&hl=pl

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLTgtPjgzssHzsgAqYbi2QfRoRk1S9ioX5 > czysta lista
SomeoneElse (2025-08-31 21:39:30+00:00): (for the benefit of anyone looking at edits by this Facebook mapper):
There's some "unclear sourcing" at the very least in there - for example, osm.org/way/1355696177 has added "surface=paving_stones" with "source=Bing", but a glance at the Bing imagery in iD shows that the alleged pavement surface is entirely obscured by a large building, so clearly that imagery is not the source of that tag.
Yog Sot (2025-02-01 13:33:21+00:00): hm, a jesteś pewien, że nie ma nazwy? podkład  'Geoportal 2: Nazwy ulic` informuje, że jednak Złotnicka
pavvv (2025-02-01 13:50:42+00:00): Później zauważyłem, że nazwa ciągnie się do końca. Możesz ją dodać. Na pewno tag, który został użyty to oznaczenia nazwy jest niepoprawny. Do tego użytkownik dodał nazwę na podstawie GM.
pavvv (2025-01-31 16:51:57+00:00): bbox mylący – wycofane zostały jedynie edycje wokół węzła Kobierzyce pod Wrocławiem
StreetSurveyor (2025-02-15 12:06:47+00:00): Hi, please do not mark these private all, it removes the intent of your change.
aceman444 (2025-05-18 20:06:51+00:00): Why? You provided no reasoning for this change. Border crossing checks can be performed at any time (and they often are!). It is good to have those points marked in the map.

Please revert this back.
GBAB (2025-05-19 07:48:52+00:00): Dear Aceman444,
most of the border crossing points disappeared already several years ago.

This is in line with the whole Schengen Area: actually there are hundreds (perhaps thousands) of roads crossing the borders in the EU and only a handful of them has (yet) a border_control tag: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/24oq

Kind regards

Gábor
aceman444 (2025-05-25 12:02:03+00:00): Sorry, that is not true. The border controls exist and are happening right now. Austria does checks on "Berg" border control station. Hungary, Czech republic,Poland does checks of hgvs transporting animals, due to the current cow disease spreading.

Just because the border control police does not stop all cars, it does not mean they are not there. They may stop you any time so that information in OSM is useful.

You can see the same problem (removing barrier=border_control) is discussed in Czech OSM forum at https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz/c4061#map=8/49.799/15.439&layers=d and they do not agree with it.
Tomas_J (2025-05-25 12:13:24+00:00): Hi. I agree with aceman4444. The border checks points exist and are very frequently performed from different reasons (COVID, migrants, spreading diseases, any  other reason the involved states invent). I find it very useful to have the border check point in the map. The lifecycle prefixes can be used if you are sure there  will be no checkings performed for longer period (6 months?).
GBAB (2025-05-25 16:47:26+00:00): Dear All,
I have removed merely a small fraction of all the possible border crossings. Most of them were removed already years ago, so even if you revert my edit, it won't solve anything.

Police can stop you anytime anywhere, also at the borders.

In the last years EU member states are consantly playing of restoring and abandoning border control:
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/policies/schengen/schengen-area/temporary-reintroduction-border-control_en

However, most of the time you can cross the borders absolutely free, even at times of temporary reintroduction of border controls (as I have done several times in the last years on the borders of Austria). So even if there is theoretically a border control in force, in practice you do not notice it most of the time. Therefore, I do not think we should map things that function only very rarely like during Covid19 and similar events that are, fortunataly, pretty rare…

Moreover, I don't think we have capacity to follow all the potential reintroduction of border controls and switch the tags accordingly several times a year on thousands of kilometers of internal EU borders.

Anyway, if you think border control is of importance, just feel free to redraw them around your countries. In Hungary, this is not an issue nowadays, the community seems to be happy without these nodes.

You can find here a list to begin with:
https://home-affairs.ec.europa.eu/document/download/e9e9e193-3cb1-43da-99e0-ec29a91ec4d0_en
(You can legally use it like any EU document of data.)

Cheers

Gábor
aceman444 (2025-05-25 20:22:00+00:00): Can you prove that people have actively removed the border controls from OSM (in Schenger) and there is a global agreement on that? Just becouse the border controls are missing in OSM does not mean people have removed them. There is the possibility people have never put them into OSM within Schengen area because OSM is newer than Schengen area and people may have the same reason as you. But we have put some of those border controls in Slovakia and you are now removing them.

Even recently people are adding border control points and facilities like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1002726506 . YOu can even see on geoimage.at imagery that the straight road is blocked by bollards so that all cars must pass along these buildings to be checked. Yes, the officers may pass some cars, but they check passports of some. I can confirm this happens regularly even recently.

Yes, some of the controls may be temporary but they may still happen. So having the information where it may happen is useful in OSM.
Yes police can stop you anywhere, but they cannot disinfect your HGV anywhere :) Also, there is a much lower probability of that than on the border.

Can you show Hungarian community is fine with the removals? Did they even notice it yet that you have removed the controls? You hide the removals under very vague changeset descriptions like "Schengeni kiigazítások" (e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161316247 ) .

So I suggest the barrier=border_control nodes stay in place but maybe you can find a tag that refines them to say not everyone is always stopped/checked but the possibility is there. People may want to plan their journey avoiding possible border controls and you deprive them of information where the controls may be.