piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NieWnen (2025-09-14 14:31:32+00:00): Odnośnie starej wieży, to nie wiem za bardzo o czym mówisz, ale jeśli się taka nawet gdzieś znajduje, to raczej kwestia zmapowania starej wieży, a nie drogi kołowania, czy pasa.

Resztę wypłytowania pasów masz teraz inaczej zagospodarowaną wg orto, więc nie, tutaj już nie mapujemy archiwalnych danych jak nowym śladzie znajduje się co innego.

Natomiast jeśli jest jakiś fragment, w którym zostały drogi kołowania i nie zastąpiła ich inna infrastruktura (drogi, budynki, parki itp.), to tak, to wtedy można rozważyć w takim miejscu o ile ma to sens. W powyższej zmianie linie szły po bardzo wielu obiektach, więc niestety jest to nieprawidłowe.
opendcc (2025-04-04 05:56:20+00:00): Ist bei DE:240 und Landwirtschaft frei nicht eher das Radwegtagging mit Path und vehicle=agri zu nehmen?
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-04 10:53:00+00:00): Hi, ich habe mich am getaggen traffic_sign orientiert, das mit 240 + LaWi frei gegeben ist. Das Vz Tool macht hieraus dann folgendes: 
https://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=240,1026-36
Also genau das, was ich getagged habe. Es gibt immer wieder eine hitzige Debatte, ob das nun track oder path sein sollte. Solange es kein hw=service ist, ist mir das recht schnuppe. Aber access=agricultural ist in diesem Fall schon richtig. Es gibt ja kein Vz250 oder 260....
Sieht in der Carto Map unglücklicherweise doof aus - aber meines Erachtens korrekt gemapped.  Zum Vergleich, es gibt ja auch Vz240 mit "Anlieger frei". Das wäre dann tatsächlich ein access=destination - und somit einer der ganz wenigen Fälle, in welchen access=destination wirklich korrekt ist.
SiennaShade (2025-04-03 20:50:38+00:00): I previously moved the traffic signals on Ocean Parkway service road intersections to affect only the cross streets because there are no physical signal heads there. 

However, despite there being no actual signals, it seems drivers on the service road cannot always proceed after stopping at the stop sign and must obey the signals on the main road (or even the pedestrian signals) for practical and safety reasons.
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:30:49+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164531140 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.
bielebog (2025-04-07 05:39:25+00:00): Hier wareb einige Gebäude aus dem ALKIS als construction eingetragen, von denen vor Ort noch gar nichts zu sehen ist. Ich hab die mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164616526 mal gemäß https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix auf planned:building zurückgesetzt. Ich persönlich bin ja eher ein Freund davon, erst ab einer tatsächlichen Baustelle das Mappen zu beginnen. Es gibt im ALKIS auch einige Gebäude, die schon ewig als geplant eingetragen sind, aber nie realisiert wurden.
piejahmo (2025-04-07 12:42:14+00:00): Guter Hinweis, das werde ich nächstes Mal beachten :+1:
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:31:17+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164531140 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group.
Taya_S (2025-04-06 10:27:06+00:00): reverted vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164583591
rempshaener (2025-04-04 18:31:44+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Näheres zu MTB-Trails findest du hier zusammengefasst: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Mountain_biking

Demnach solltest du das highway=track gegen ein highway=path ersetzen.
Die „Genehmigungsstufe“ (bicycle=…) könntest du ebenfalls noch einmal prüfen.
Entfernen solltest du den Namen, da dieser nur deskriptiv ist, aber kein „richtiger“ Name.

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-05 00:10:33+00:00): DWG revert - apparent vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164531971
KingKratos (2025-04-03 22:33:25+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Frans S (2025-04-18 08:25:51+00:00): Hello. 
Thanks for mapping here.
About mapping of high buildings

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z7uDwYm4oNmlexHIhJxGCjPpNhCQAgRia5aEJr_4MwM/edit?usp=sharing

best regards
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:33:01+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:33:07+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-03 21:05:39+00:00): Hej. Nie sądzisz, że nazywanie tego oczyszczalnią ścieków, to nadużycie? Tak jak napisałem, to bardziej wygląda na przepompownię ścieków, a nie cała oczyszczalnię. Nie znalazłem niczego na wiki, więc może warto spytać się na forum?
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-03 21:06:57+00:00): No chyba, że dotarłeś do jakiś materiałów o których nie wiem.
uprkos (2025-04-03 21:34:13+00:00): Hej, nie jestem ekspertem od ścieków, ale założyłem, że oczyszczalnie mogą być bardzo małe, a ten obiekt jest przy rzeczce, więc mi pasowało. Oczywiście nie upieram się, można zmienić na pump station, tylko nie wiem skąd dokąd w tym miejscu ścieki mogłyby być pompowane.
uprkos (2025-04-03 21:44:52+00:00): Zagłębiam się w fascynujący temat ścieków! A sumie schematem przypomina to tzw. PSOŚ, czyli małą oczyszczalnię:

https://www.filtry.net.pl/przydomowe-oczyszczalnie-sciekow.php
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-03 21:47:14+00:00): Podejrzewam, że ścieki sobie płyną z domów i ten obiekt przepycha dalej w kierunku oczyszczalni ścieków, która pewnie znajduje się kilka, a może i kilkadziesiąt kilometrów dalej. Ścieki same nie popłyną do oczyszczalni. Tak zerknąłem i wydaje mi się, że to by pasowało 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:landuse=industrial?uselang=pl
do tego w name dać przepompownia ścieków i powinno być ok. Tylko dobrze by było się upewnić, że to na pewno przepompownia ścieków.
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-03 21:49:15+00:00): Zerknij na to 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/452423823#map=14/51.11658/17.07456&layers=N
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-03 21:54:48+00:00): Tutaj masz przykładową przepompownię ścieków na dolnym Śląsku 
https://www.modernizacjaroku.org.pl/pl/edition/1104/object/1269/przepompownia-sciekow-pp-1-ul-glowna-psary
uprkos (2025-04-04 19:52:06+00:00): Dzięki! Przetagowałem. 'Nazwę' dodałem do opisu, bo nie widać by miało to jakąś nazwę własną.
mapowicz_pl (2025-04-04 21:34:29+00:00): Spoko. Takie coś chyba może być. Dzięki za rozwiązanie uwagi.
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:33:15+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group
Константин Гам (2025-04-21 08:57:01+00:00): Здравствуйте! Велодорожка ОТМЕЧЕНа на карте, так как она есть - а именно, велопешеходная единая линия. (см знаки на панорамах), вносить её отдельной линией, в данном случае, не верно.
jmapb (2025-04-04 23:33:20+00:00): Hi Ben Stillss, these changes appear to be vandalism. Reverted in changeset 164530980 and reported to the OSM Data Working Group
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-04-08 21:47:35+00:00): This changeset removed a number of highway tags
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483149
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:30:49+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

However, two buildings overlap. Also, when the imagery is taken from directly overhead, the roof line make it look the the building has points, but its actually a rectangle. Can you fix the overlap and roof line?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483613
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:33:18+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

One suggestion, select the building outline then just type a "q" to square them so they look professionally done. Can you go back and fix these buildings?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483653
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:24:11+00:00): I believe you want the tag natural=tree. natural=wood is usually a polygon around a number of trees. Can you fix these?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483690
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:35:24+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

One suggestion, square the buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q" to make them look professionally done.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483736
Claudio Tam (2025-05-29 13:08:43+00:00): Ciao!
Hai trovato l'esistenza e la posizione giusta della sorgente freddara? Io sono passato lì 10 mesi fa e non l'ho trovata. Non ho trovato nulla che potesse identificare l'area. Anche le tracce di sentieri erano quasi nulle.
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:35:59+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483809
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:31:36+00:00): Square the buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483845
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:33:54+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

same request to square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483852
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:25:13+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good. Don't forget square buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164483891
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:37:33+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

One suggestion, square the buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q" to make the buildings look professionally done.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164484008
Glassman (2025-04-04 17:36:19+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164484114
birdlawyer (2025-04-03 21:49:44+00:00): Reverted changesets 163855483, 163855790, 163856324, 163857302, 163857645, 163858293, 163858955, 163859762, 163859931, 163863141, 163863560, 163902620, 163903050, 163903305, 163903682, 163903891, 163904255, 163904514, 163904841, 163905131, 163905408, 163908672, 163909323, 163909673, 163910191, 163910641, 163956032, 164000037, 164001190, 164001491, 164001782, 164087217, 164088139, 164088498, 164089130, 164286048, 164290236, 164291077, 164297313, 164354607, 164375656
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164484271
Jordi MF (2025-04-03 22:54:03+00:00): Este cambio ha sido revertido por tratarse de una multicuenta creada para evitar bloqueos:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164485477
SomeoneElse (2025-04-04 11:14:07+00:00): Hello,
I think that this change might have accidentally deleted part of some townlands - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4211826 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4189619 .
Do you need help fixing these?
Best Regards,
Andy
Upper Rusheen (2025-04-04 11:41:15+00:00): Yes please Andy.
SomeoneElse (2025-04-04 12:12:00+00:00): OK - that's now done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164504900 .  I just added the missing relations to the stretch of untagged way in the gap, and checked that the relations were valid with JOSM's validator (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/SomeoneElse/diary/406398 for that).
Slightly confusingly here, there are two similarly-named relations here - there is https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4189620 (An Roisín) and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4211826 (An Roisín Riabhach).  These do have different logainm references and URLs, though.
Jordi MF (2025-04-03 22:54:33+00:00): Este cambio ha sido revertido en l siguiente changeset por tratarse de una multicuenta creada para evitar bloqueos:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164485474
iandees (2025-04-04 01:50:55+00:00): These areas shouldn't get names unless there's a special or unique name for them. "Farmland 4" isn't a very specific name.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164484615
NeisBot (2025-04-04 04:08:06+00:00): Hi Mario Endrigo ramos, and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

Over the past 7 days, you've made more than 100 changesets without adding any comment.

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments.

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment
NeisBot (2025-04-04 04:09:09+00:00): Hi Gukox, and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear or difficult to understand.

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments.

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment
jmarchon (2025-04-04 03:07:06+00:00): Looks good. Welcome to OSM!
rempshaener (2025-04-04 18:53:00+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Auch hier ist das Gebiet geografisch und thematisch zu groß.

Was mir ansonsten aufgefallen ist:
- Das ergänzen um bus=yes irritiert mich, da in diesen Fällen genau die gleichen Anpassungen anderer Mapper bereits revertiert wurden. Bist du dir sicher bei dem, was du tust? Ich möchte zum Vergleich auf diese Diskussion hier hinweisen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/78383738
- Das Umtaggen (und Löschen) von Adress-Nodes auf ways ist nicht okay. Beide Methoden sind zulässig, ohne Anlass ist das Ändern fragwürdig. Siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/769198408 

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
mrtna (2025-04-03 22:34:32+00:00): Le titre n'est pas correct : j'ai allongé le chemin de terre jusqu'à au bout
mtmail (2025-05-21 12:04:24+00:00): Can you review this address? It's the same as https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11249217 , the postcode and city doesn't match anything nearby. Does RAF Chetwynd have its own address?
Fgjgdrou (2025-05-21 12:18:08+00:00): I'm not local to the area, so the address seemed accurate (read later in message). When I went through the AIP, there were a few clearly incorrect addresses that I didn't add (mostly for sites that are just a field with a few small buildings). The AIP addresses are moreso for contacting, but generally appeared to be on the airfield/base. I didn't realise that they shared an address, in fact looking back at it, I'm not sure what I was thinking with the address, given that it's so clearly different.
Fgjgdrou (2025-05-21 12:18:35+00:00): Thanks for noticing it though, I'll remove the address from RAF Chetwynd now.
Fgjgdrou (2025-05-21 12:22:06+00:00): Done!
If you notice something else like that, please reach out!
rempshaener (2025-04-04 19:10:40+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Auch hier ist das Gebiet geografisch und thematisch zu groß.
Was ist die Quelle deiner Bearbeitungen?
Nur zur Klarstellung: das Ändern auf Grund bloßer Hinweise von QS-Tools oder Editoren ohne Kenntnis der Gegebenheiten vor Ort ist problematisch.

Was mir ansonsten aufgefallen ist:
- Was möchtest du mit dem layer=-1 hier ausdrücken https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1374544379? Vermutlich fehlt ein tunnel=culvert.
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6950476894: Du hast hier eine Doppelung durch amenity=vehicle_inspection und service:vehicle:inspection=yes herbeigeführt.

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
s777n (2025-04-05 08:03:57+00:00): Здравствуйте. Удалил вашу правку. footway это не дорога а тропинка. Не меняйте типы дорог просто ради навигатора.
s777n (2025-04-05 08:06:50+00:00): Шлагбаум это lift_gate. и access должен быть private а не no. если там кто-то может проехать Исправил
s777n (2025-04-05 08:08:02+00:00): Шлагбаум это lift_gate и  если там кто-то может проехать то access должен быть private а не no. Исправил
s777n (2025-04-05 08:08:10+00:00): Шлагбаум это lift_gate и  если там кто-то может проехать то access должен быть private а не no. Исправил
aTarom (2025-04-04 10:45:04+00:00): un dubte si em pots ajudar, el tag
"language:sp"
pot ser
"language:es"
 amb més usos, o potser estic equivocat i hi ha diferència entre es i sp
Salutacions
eggie (2025-04-04 06:14:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
NeisReview (2025-04-04 06:34:48+00:00): #HighwayChanges

Hello, welcome to OSM.

In this changeset, some types of highway are being added or modified by you. 

Could we know the sources that you used? Thank you.

https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=164486613
ColbyTheWorldTraveler (2025-04-04 20:13:32+00:00): BYU-Idaho was my Alma Mater, so I suppose my source is personal experience. Having spent years on campus, I know the routes pretty thoroughly. Specifically, the rules at BYU-I are that bicycles are allowed everywhere on campus, with a speed limit of walking speed. Let me know if you need anything else or if I missed something!
Allison P (2025-04-05 16:37:09+00:00): That does not necessarily make them cycleways. See the wiki. I am guessing none of these paths match any of the examples https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcycleway
ColbyTheWorldTraveler (2025-04-05 19:56:40+00:00): So, if I've read it right now, I guess the right markings would be "Footpath" with the "Cycle = Yes" tag. Do I have that correct?
Allison P (2025-04-05 21:29:20+00:00): If they are like paths on most college campuses, I would agree.
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-04 11:12:54+00:00): Bzgl. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/258550386
Das stimmt so nicht. Nutze bitte das Vz Tool, bei unklaren Gegebenheiten: https://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=242,1026-35,1022-10
Wegeschlenzer (2025-04-06 09:35:56+00:00): da verstehe ich dich jetzt nicht. Diese Verkehrszeichen habe ich ja aufgelistet. Meinst du die Reihenfolge?
Ich habe jetzt motor_vehicle=permit gesetzt für die Sondernutzung auf dem Platz/der Fußgängerzone. Das war vorher zu allgemein mit motor_vehicle=yes und Hinweis auf die Verkehrszeichen. Meintest du das mit unklarer Gegebenheit?
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-06 09:58:03+00:00): Nein, ich habe die drei von dir aufgelisteten Verkehrszeichen in das Verkehrszeichentool eingegeben. Das daraus resultierende Tagging ist gänzlich anders als von dir umgesetzt. ZB kein path. Vergleiche bitte das von dir gesetzte Tagging mit dem des VZ Tools.
Wegeschlenzer (2025-04-06 11:09:31+00:00): okay, verstanden. Die hier geltenden Verkehrszeichen hatte ich nur für die Fußgängerzone getagged, nicht für den Pfad. Und "pfad" ist daher auch nicht korrekt...
Ich meine/hoffe, jetzt passt es.
Geo-Tobi (2025-04-06 13:08:52+00:00): Schau mal, da ist noch ein Fußweg:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1014928346
Muss vermutlich bitte noch angepasst werden.
citrula (2025-04-07 15:37:13+00:00): Can you provide your source for this edit? As far as I can tell, any further development of I-70 was dropped in the 80s.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-23 05:09:45+00:00): I removed this claimed highway=proposed - as user edits and has not responded here
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-23 05:10:41+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165312579
Frans S (2025-05-06 07:58:04+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
The buildings mapped by you were mapped with Bing Imagery as background,
The instructions mention to use the ESRI imagery.
Quite a number of buildings need to be adjusted, mapped or placed on the correct footprint.
Most buildings have a regular pattern and square. please map accordingly and square the buildings.
Best regards and keep mapping
MassCartog (2025-04-05 02:32:37+00:00): Hi Biking in Bend, looks like you are a new mapper. Welcome! One thing to note is on OSM we don't remove trails that exist, even if they are private, we use the tagging system instead. In this case it might be "access"="private".

Its clear from aerial imagery, strava heatmap data, and street level pictures, these trails running though the field do exist.  

Please read:
osm.wiki/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ground_truth

Let me know if you need help restoring the trails and tagging them appropriately!
Biking in Bend (2025-04-05 18:43:20+00:00): Thanks for the review MassCartog. There are two different edits. The Canal trail is privately owned so I updated the "Allowed Access" section to "private" from "permissible". That community is very against public access. No changes should have been made to the actual path though. If this still isn't correct, please let me know.

The second change was in a dirt field/construction site where satellite imaging is outdated. In the south-easter part, those paths do not exist at all. There aren't even informal desire paths as far as I could tell. I could not confirm the one on the western side (the part that had the Strava heatmap activity and was more defined on satellite imaging), so I added that back based on your recommendation.
MassCartog (2025-04-05 22:08:43+00:00): Thanks for the response and quick updates! Happy future mapping!
Yura Novikov (2025-04-06 22:47:19+00:00): Зачем удалили дорогу, хотя по факту она открыта? А если бы сказали снесут пол города, тоже удалили бы?
RonaldVan (2025-04-04 03:37:51+00:00): Hello! Please use meaningful changeset comments. "Fixed" gives little info on what you are doing. Have a nice whatever time of day- Ashton
ma-rt-in (2025-08-02 11:06:53+00:00): Hi,
schau mal hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4887367
Du hattest den Radweg eingezeichnet. Stimmt das so?

vg
kadiwa (2025-08-02 12:01:39+00:00): Danke für den Ping. Ich mach gleich mal ein paar Fotos und antworte dann bei der Notiz.
Frans S (2025-04-07 14:21:46+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
You tagged a number of building wrongly. Just a node on a corner.
Don't you have the building tool plugin not installed ? With that tool you map nice squared or rounded buildings which are tagged as building=yes
Best regards
RonaldVan (2025-04-04 03:35:22+00:00): Hello! Please use descriptive changeset comments. "update" gives little info on what you are doing. Thanks- Ashton
RonaldVan (2025-04-04 03:29:56+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM! It is good tp use descriptive names when making changeset comments. Thanks- XenoEclipse
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2025-04-30 01:21:37+00:00): Please attach speed cameras to the road.

Or create a maxspeed enforcement relation.

See:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dspeed_camera
Kovoschiz (2025-04-30 08:32:27+00:00): @Niels Elgaard Larsen 
It seems to be a  OSMAnd problem. They should not allow creating these if they are unable to attach it to the road. This should be reflected to them.
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2025-04-30 11:45:58+00:00): Good point-

It is still useful if you recheck you own edits when you get back home and can use e.g., JOSM.

Maybe OsmAnd should at least add a fixme such nodes
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2025-05-01 10:12:04+00:00): https://github.com/osmandapp/OsmAnd/issues/22491
JJIglesias (2025-04-04 22:31:10+00:00): Saludos, esos numeros de Ref se pueden usar? no pienso construir relaciones pero como estoy editando al sur del Salar, tal vez colocarle el Ref seria bueno.