piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2025-02-08 08:06:12+00:00): Hi Kasih Marentek, thank you for your contribution to the OSM project.

Over your latest stretch of time, you've made at least 29 changesets with minimal or no meaningful comments.

To enhance collaboration, please consider using the comment field to describe your map changes. This helps others understand and follow your adjustments more easily. You can find guidance on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

I've also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
rhtb0 (2024-12-12 09:47:21+00:00): village_green을 추가하지 마세요. 이 태그는 마을 녹지에나 사용하지 고속도로에는 사용하지 않습니다.
rhtb0 (2024-12-12 09:55:46+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=village%20green?uselang=ko
village_green는 중심가에 있는 독특한 잔디 공공 토지입니다. 도시 녹지에 대한 일반적인 태그가 아닙니다.
TrickyFoxy (2024-12-14 11:38:08+00:00): Что вы имели в виду?
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:08:23+00:00): Znów nie stosujesz się do zasad (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments) nazywania zestawów zmian - o co cię już kilkakrotnie w imieniu społeczności OSM prosiłem. Czy naprawdę tak trudno w trzech słowach skomentować to, co zmieniłeś lub dodałeś?
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 04:20:34+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164659597
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-14 05:04:44+00:00): Please don't add fake buildings in the ocean
reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160268719
Jay May (2025-01-07 19:15:03+00:00): Why removing Ukrainian names?
wizerbar (2025-01-08 04:54:52+00:00): because user avinet_ua made an AUTOMATIC translation from Russian to Ukrainian without taking into account Belarusian names. avinet_ua was banned for vandalism.
TrickyFoxy (2024-12-14 11:39:35+00:00): Не нужно номер дома писать в name=
fortera_au (2025-07-15 12:16:22+00:00): DWG revert - questionable edits - ticket #2025071510000279

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168962539
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
Grass-snake (2024-12-12 19:51:18+00:00): Здравствуйте, подскажите, эти дороги на самом деле существуют или только проектируются/строятся?
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-14 04:09:28+00:00): This changeset left the motorway ramp https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/628056983 disconnected from https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/175866203
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160194425
mavl (2025-05-13 15:04:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:15:59+00:00): Пожалуйста, соблюдайте правила комментирования ваших пакетов правок: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
fmc_Mlvln (2025-11-17 18:25:13+00:00): Hallo Claudia10,

ich weiß deine Änderung ist fast schon ein Jahr her.

Weiter südlich findest du die Büchereibushaltestelle auf der Dahmestraße (In der Standartkartenansicht "Carto" ist dort eine Hausnummer 33 zu sehen. User egolfo hat die Büchereibushaltestelle 2021 bereits eingetragen.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/107370855

Ich werde jetzt noch die Parkbeschränkungen eintragen.

Vielleicht, kannst du die Node von egolfo mit deinen Daten abgleichen und dann deine Node löschen?

Liebe Grüße
fmc_3 / Mlvln
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-18 04:06:15+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165094911
aharvey (2024-12-17 21:46:18+00:00): hi, welcome back to OSM. Some good changes here, but I also have a few comments:

1. The Northern Beaches Council Aerial Imagery is copyright, "The contents of this website are copyright and may not be reproduced in any form without the prior consent of Northern Beaches Council." as such the imagery cannot be used at all, as a reference to map from, or to trace features from. What in particular did you derive from the council images, as we'll want to remove/redo with imagery sources we can use.
2. Where possible it's good practice to keep the history of objects https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history. For example https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/11671234344 had a long history of 10 edits, people improving the data over time but then you've replaced it with a new object https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/12415070400 which makes it harder for people to identify the history of the object which can be useful for mappers to understand how/why/when different tags were added. I'll restore the original node here to retain the history.
3. From what I can see the playground entrance was deleted here https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/10104608514 and now missing. I'll re-introduce this node.
4. According to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural natural=scrub is "Uncultivated land covered with shrubs, bushes or stunted trees." while there are shrubs and bushes in the understory, there are more substantial trees and think natural=wood would be more appropriate.
aharvey (2024-12-17 22:07:45+00:00): I've made further changes to address 2, 3, and 4. But apart from that, good work on the other improvements.
aharvey (2024-12-17 22:12:42+00:00): 5. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1244811645 I had tagged as a service way. It's quite wide with a gate, and the connection with the driveway to me it's designed for emergency/service/maintenance vehicles to access. Therefore I think it's still best tagged as highway=service + motor_vehicle=private + foot=yes.
aharvey (2024-12-23 00:56:59+00:00): I've changed point 5 back to a service road now as it does provide service vehicle access.
MrYodaylay (2025-03-08 14:47:26+00:00): Hi aharvey! Thanks for double checking my edits and the quality checking. I was (and still am) relatively new to editing.

I don't know why I didn't see any of your comments for the last 5 months until now, so apologies for that.

For this edit, I don't believe the Northern Beaches Council imagery has anything that isn't present on the DCS NSW Imagery, except different lighting conditions, so I don't think anything will have to be redrawn, but I am not an expert on copyright issues on OSM. 

My changes to some of the fences and were sourced from GPS traces that I took myself (but did not list as a source correctly). And my changes to placement of benches, taps, etc were based on my own visits to the park. 

Anything that is still in doubt I can confirm in person if needed to avoid copyright issues.

I am currently going through some of my old changesets to remove any information that was obtain exclusively from council imagery. 

For your other points, I believe these are all just mistakes due to my inexperience with this and I appreciate your corrections.
aharvey (2025-03-08 23:42:18+00:00): Thanks for replying, all good.
kuhni74 (2025-06-23 17:46:42+00:00): Was für eine "locality" soll "Kleintitlis" sein? Der Nebengipfel (war bereits richtig gemappt) des Titlis heißt "Klein Titlis".
TheNet1996 (2024-12-13 06:39:22+00:00): Hi Mark,
the official / designated speed limit ist 60. Why you have changed it to 100?
Best regards
Mike
Mark Davies1664 (2024-12-13 09:40:06+00:00): Hi Mike
This was based on multiple people travelling much faster and was flagged as incorrect, let me review
Mark Davies1664 (2024-12-13 10:03:15+00:00): Hi Mike, I can see many people sitting at 100KPH on this section of asphalt road, however you are correct its 60 from the park gate -24.486761, 15.800958
I will correct that
TheNet1996 (2024-12-13 10:38:12+00:00): Hi Mark,
yes, i can confirm, some people making their own rules here... but the road is designated with 60.
Thanks for correcting.
Best regards
Mike
eggie (2024-12-12 09:57:32+00:00): Dag Richard  Je hebt van de Spieringstraatgracht een tunnel=culvert gemaakt.
Waarom.. Dat is toch gewoon open water?


https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160196245

Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160196245
eggie (2024-12-12 10:01:42+00:00): Ik heb de duiker verwijderd die over de hele lengte van de Spieringstraatgracht liep.
Groet
eggie
Richard Advocaat (2024-12-12 10:51:07+00:00): Dit is zonder intentie gebeurd. De verharding van een aantal wegen was niet geclassificeerd. Wellicht tijdens wat checks iets verkeerd aangeklikt.
eggie (2024-12-13 10:03:45+00:00): No problem...  Het is weer oke nu.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-12-13 10:15:15+00:00): 'k Zie dat je nooit een welkomstmail hebt ontvangen. Wellicht niet in Nederland gestart. Per PB wat verlaat gestuurd.
eggie (2024-12-18 19:18:20+00:00): Hi,

This is not a road!
It's a powerline. What is your intention?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160196304
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2024-12-18 19:21:35+00:00): reverted by changeset #160365613
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:15:50+00:00): Пожалуйста, соблюдайте правила комментирования ваших пакетов правок: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
lipuma (2025-01-15 13:08:01+00:00): Hello gisbihor, I see you're adding a lot of adress nodes in Romania. The only source you provide is 'survey'. Are you actually surveying 1000s of adresses in Romania or do you have a source from which you're basing these edits/imports on?
Pierce (2025-02-02 05:26:59+00:00): I just noticed this changes and I just noticed that the tremendous amount of cleanup work that this will now require.

Can we rollback these changes until the import script is improved to assign the addresses to the buildings rather than creating superfluous nodes?
TheSwavu (2025-02-02 06:22:13+00:00): If you read the wiki page linked above, you will find that this import proposal was discussed in May 2021. It was discussed again in the Oceania category on the OSM Community forum in December 2024. 

If you don't participate in the AU community discussions, then I don't know how you expect to be involved.
aharvey (2025-02-02 06:47:19+00:00): I'll echo TheSwavu's comments, this was already discussed. It was a conscious decision not to merge addresses onto other features on the map as part of the import.

Firstly there's different ways addresses can be mapped, as a lone node, on the building, on the landuse representing the lot, and the import took the simplest option leaving it to local mappers to decide the best option for each location.

Secondly, there is more risk merging to buildings, particularly in areas of high density, like narrow terraces the risk of mis-assigning address to the wrong building was too high so this was left to be done manually.

The notion that it requires cleanup to attached addreses to buildings in an opinion about how addresses should me mapped, it's also not incorrect for them to be simple nodes, so I reject that they require cleanup. You may improve if you like, but it's not required.
Pierce (2025-02-11 13:57:00+00:00): Woah, so I was not expecting the tone I received here. So I’ll keep it blunt.

> If you don't participate in the AU community discussions, then I don't know how you expect to be involved.

Sorry, but I can't accept that for me to be a contributor to OSM, I need to be an active participant on a forum.
Everyone has the ability to see who are active contributors for a given area.
To neglect the actual maintainers of parts of a huge swathe of a region is negligent. Due diligence was definitely not undertaken. You've effectively vandalised the map based on your own preconceptions of what's appropriate, asking only in your own echo chamber.

An official classification of vandalism can be read here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism you guys have checked plenty of these boxes.

Stating how far back you had these discussions is completely arbitrary. 

> Firstly there's different ways addresses can be mapped, as a lone node, on the building, on the landuse representing the lot, and the import took the simplest option leaving it to local mappers to decide the best option for each location.

> […] it's also not incorrect for them to be simple nodes, so I reject that they require cleanup. You may improve if you like, but it's not required.

As a whole. You're correct. 
At the local level, you've fragmented the map style, and the data. Making these opinionated and egregious changes without notifying the local editors is wild.

The simplest option you've taken here, is evidently not the best one. Imposing your own decisions onto others is just self-centred.

I can't find a ledger on the wiki of why you made the decisions you made. Just what you did, and in part how.
No link to the original decision-making process.

How this was green-lit is insane.
How seemingly other random users became the arbiters of a large part of the map is insane.

2 decisions can be made by your cartel.
* Revert the changes. Reevaluate your script if you can't commit to making it properly factoring in risks that require "the community" to clean up the mess. Give up.
* Don't do anything. I'll take it up with the chain of command and get approved reverts treated as vandalism. Regardless of whether it was your intent, it is what it is.

3 possible outcomes could happen.
* Data gets rolled back. Import is abandoned completely by the brains trust that planned it.
* Or maybe you will try again successfully? Which evidently not likely due to the arrogance and cocksureness I'm reading in the replies here.
* My appeal fails to admins, and the vandalism persists. I'll have to waste time to write ANOTHER script to fix the changes in my area, as to ensure not to step on others’ toes.

I am legitimately flummoxed by how offended you are to even consider your multi-year effort a compromise to the integrity of the data in OpenStreetMap. Absolutely flabbergasting.

I'd love to read the forum thread to try and rationalise the decisions that were made here. Because from this side, it falls well short of being the best possible "conscious" decision.

Lmk what you wanna do.
aharvey (2025-02-11 22:59:15+00:00): Firstly I value local mappers and everything to do with this import was done in consideration of how it would impact mappers, the intent was to support local mappers and minimise disruption and grief. So I'm disappointed that you feel otherwise.

You don't need to be active on the community forums, but at a point we need to collaborate as a community, you don't need to partipate, but if you don't then you may miss out on an opportunity to shape the project direction.

The Community Discussion points were documented at https://gitlab.com/alantgeo/vicmap2osm/#community-feedback with most of the discussion happening in the thread at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2021-May/014622.html

You're welcome to take this up with the DWG, of course I welcome any review of my work on this import, at all times I've tried to balance all community feedback and points raised. The vast majority of feedback I've recieved has been positive, but I do understand you feel this import missed the mark for you. In a broad community, not everyone will be happy.

Regarding your specific issue, you're arguing that addresess should have been added to existing buildings rather than as nodes, and that's you're only issue? Take it up on the community forum, and we can have a discussion there.

But regardless I'm still not seeing how the integrity of the data in OSM is compromised by this import. It didn't delete any existing addresses, and mostly didn't add any duplicates, or even modify existing ones even when Vicmap data disagreed with what was in OSM.                                                                                            

A valid option from the community could have been "no we don't want this data imported, we'll keep adding addresses by survey only" however this was not what I heard from the community, I head that an import is best.

If you want to do an automated edit to merge these address nodes onto the buildings, then please as an automated edit please post your plans and methodology to the community forum for review and discussion.
CBDNorth (2024-12-12 08:28:01+00:00): For more Info click here now https://cbdnorth.co/
MrYodaylay (2025-03-08 15:13:48+00:00): For future reference: 

I am rechecking all my changesets that list Council imagery as a source for copyright reasons. I am comparing my changes to the DCS NSW Imagery and I believe that all changes in this changeset can be attributed to sources that do not include the council imagery.

In particulatr, the dirt path drawn from the playground to the start of the waterway, which is not visible in the DCS Imagery is also not visible in the council imagery and was based on my own local knowledge. 

If you are viewing this changeset and have concerns about copyright, please let me know.
Branko Kokanovic (2024-12-13 17:44:08+00:00): You are already warned not to add non-exististent footways between graveyards and yet you continue to do that. Since you are reading this messages (we know as you are replying to some), I assume you decided to ignore them without answering. I removed all footways from Lesce that you added.
---
Vec smo ti rekli da ne dodajes pesacke staze na groblja, ali ti nastavljas da to radis, iako ocigledno citas poruke (jer odgovaras na njih). Pretpostavicu da si odlucio da ih ignorises bez da odgovaras na njih, pa cu obrisati sve staze sa Lesca koje si dodao.
ilias_ (2024-12-18 01:08:29+00:00): Hi Nona Mostafa,
Thank you for your changes. You probably changed this road from trunk to motorway because the other part was changed to motorway but not this one, so you made the "logical" move. I just wanted to inform you that the user that originally changed the classification made some very dubious changes to the whole road network of the city. This road is not a motorway, it is still a trunk (you would think a motorway doesn't have roundabouts...). I left a comment of one of his changesets https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160089188#map=13/33.54039/-7.70293. Just wanted to let you know. Thank you for your great edits.
nona mostafa (2024-12-19 10:31:49+00:00): Hi  ilias_,
Thank you for sharing this information with me
Happy Mapping!!
kind regards,
nona mostafa
BCNorwich (2024-12-13 09:29:41+00:00): Hi, Something went wrong with several features in this area. Seems to be from a few of your changesets, could you have a look/repair please?

Regards Bernard.
Anon1966 (2024-12-13 13:16:53+00:00): New Streets were added which visited and then corrected and the Street look in order now.
If i have inadvertenly done something non Streets to buildings then please correct that or advise me how to. Thanks
BCNorwich (2024-12-18 15:43:27+00:00): Hi, All corrected now.

Regards Bernard.
Anon1966 (2024-12-19 16:20:48+00:00): Thank you
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-07 22:16:41+00:00): Removed SEO spam and cleaned up other tags for POI in changeset 183801697

https://osm.org/changeset/183801697
Soft Gear 3264 (2024-12-13 11:54:35+00:00): Looks like this is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1333787249#map=19/45.516164/9.227073 ?
Hilton Hotels (2024-12-17 13:40:18+00:00): Hello, Soft Gear 3264,

Indeed, this was a duplicate of Hilton Garden Inn Milan North. The same has been removed.

Thank you for pointing this out.

Regards.
Gregory Peony (2025-04-12 21:09:27+00:00): I think that many of these footprints are invalid and you may have mistaken other features for buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160198618
Taya_S (2024-12-12 12:53:23+00:00): Hallo Dennis3,

Ik heb deze edits teruggedraaid. Jouw edits hebben de bus relaties zwaar beschadigt.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160206927
Langlaeufer (2024-12-12 09:15:10+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?note=4382021
Antonio 1 (2025-01-06 04:34:52+00:00): The road grades in the adjusted Mudanjiang urban area are relatively high. Does the original bus data still exist？

调整后的牡丹江市区道路等级偏高，原有公交数据还是否存在
A67-A67 (2024-12-12 11:35:16+00:00): Reverted incorrect brand-tag change of SPAR city.
JeroenHoek (2024-12-12 13:21:49+00:00): Why did you change the name of 3066947732? The name 'Bike Totaal Mient de Vries' is what it says on the store front. That's the ground truth. Why do you think that is wrong?
JeroenHoek (2024-12-12 13:23:16+00:00): The same goes for 10928642347. You are erasing the names of people's shops!
A67-A67 (2024-12-12 13:39:25+00:00): This edit and similar edits this morning look like mechanical edits done with the iD validator without checking. There are many errors in changing shop names and brands, adding incorrect network relations to trains, adding redundant tags like bicycle=designated to cycleways. 

Were these mechanical edits discussed anywhere?
JeroenHoek (2024-12-12 17:19:39+00:00): Reverted because Nathan is not bothering to reply, even though they are still making new changesets.
4004 (2024-12-22 16:32:52+00:00): thanks for this. construction=yes won't be enough if the road is impassable, highway=construction is needed
Taya_S (2024-12-12 12:57:15+00:00): Hallo Dennis3,

Ik heb deze edits teruggedraaid. Jouw edits hebben de bus relaties zwaar beschadigt.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160207090
Taurus3 (2024-12-12 13:04:00+00:00): Dit lijkt me niet de bedoeling, aangezien de lijnen zijn gewijzigd, vandaar dat de relaties zijn gewijzigd. Kan je jouw wijzigingen weer terugdraaien?
Taya_S (2024-12-12 13:09:57+00:00): Ik raad jou aan om eerst te leren hoe je met relaties moet werken. JOSM is hier ook geschikter voor dan iD.

Het is goed om buslijnen te updaten of nieuwe toe te voegen, maar het is niet de bedoeling om tijdens dat process hele bus relaties kapot te maken.
Taya_S (2024-12-12 13:18:43+00:00): Zo zijn beide bus 12 relaties bijvoorbeeld nu nog steeds kapot na jouw wijzigingen. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/360042
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/538847
Taurus3 (2024-12-12 13:41:13+00:00): De oude bus relaties kunnen worden verwijderd, die zijn niet meer actueel
Taya_S (2024-12-12 13:45:15+00:00): Volgends RRReis bestaat deze buslijn nog gewoon. Als een buslijn de route aanpast, dan zal deze in OSM ook aangepast moeten worden. Niet verwijderd.
Taurus3 (2024-12-12 14:54:12+00:00): Klopt maar de lijnen wijzigen overmorgen, dit is hierop vooruitlopend.
Taya_S (2024-12-12 15:06:23+00:00): Wil jij beweren dat dit de toekomstige busroute is? https://imgur.com/a/fPqoLdE
Hebben de bussen tegenwoordig teleportatie technologie?
Leo Slager (2024-12-12 23:35:17+00:00): Dag dennis,
Het bewerken van routerelaties met de editor iD is gewoon onmogelijk.
Deze editor plakt alle nieuwe haltes en wegen gewoon achter aan de route vast.
Dan staan ze dus niet op de juiste plaats in de route en er blijft dus altijd een gebroken route achter.
Wil je serieus met de OV-relaties aan het werk dan zul je gebruik moeten maken van de editor JOSM.
Die heeft een apart bewerkingsvenster zodat je haltes en wegen in de juiste volgorde kunt plaatsen.
Groet
Leo
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2024-12-18 08:20:18+00:00): Hi @surveyor54,
mir ist aufgefallen, dass mit diesem Änderungssatz im Knoten https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/240128258/history ein paar Tags entfernt wurden (population, wikidata, wikipedia, ele und website).
Bevor ich die Tags wieder einfüge, wollte ich kurz nachfragen, ob es einen Hintergrund zu dieser Änderung gibt oder einfach Versehen?
Danke für kurze Rückinfo
surveyor54 (2024-12-18 08:43:33+00:00): Hi,
folgendes, die Daten zu Gebieten  sollen in die zugehörigen Grenzrelation eingetragen werde. Dieser node dient nur als (mögliches) label für den Ortsnamen.
Die Daten befinden sich in der Relation.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/338875#map=12/50.2375/8.6042

Da gab es vor längerer Zeit eine Diskussion mir dem user Jo_Cassel.

Gruß
surveyor54