piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
galen8183 (2026-04-14 17:12:38+00:00): of course there's plenty more cleanup to do around here and elsewhere that they've touched
NeisBot (2026-04-14 17:15:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/506187468 v4

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Zoo store"
---
Наприклад, більш нейтральна і фактична версія вашого тексту могла б бути: "Магазин зоопарку"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-05-26 01:33:17+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with many nonsensical tags and possibly Google Maps-derived data

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183182561
E-Ville Editor (2026-04-14 21:31:24+00:00): Thanks for adding this round about which just opened up.
007Transformer (2026-04-15 08:20:15+00:00): Thank you for the feedback! Glad the roundabout update is useful and reflects the latest changes.
osm_geedub (2026-07-02 20:11:18+00:00): This item is listed as a Flock camera but I don't see any camera.  There is a 5G cell tower in this location, but I don't see any camera mounted on it.
Natfoot (2026-04-16 06:09:58+00:00): see the map note: osm.org/edit?note=5249740
NeisBot (2026-04-14 17:24:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13730078621 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Medspa building"

#MapWithoutSpam
eggie (2026-04-14 17:54:29+00:00): Tip...Beter niet overlappen.
Met gras zie je het niet zo, maar bos water en gras over elkaar is ook de rendering door elkaar.
In Josm heb je gereedschap om het simpel op te lossen.
Gr eggie
MapBtch (2026-04-14 19:10:09+00:00): top, ik ga het losknippen zodat het niet meer overlapt
eggie (2026-04-15 06:59:06+00:00): Ziet er wel netjes uit.
Het westelijk water losgemaakt van het gras. Dat heb ik met een multipolygoon gedaan. Water de inner .. gras de outer.
De kennis over mp's komt vanzelf wel.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Multipolygon_Examples

Mapse
Natfoot (2026-04-16 06:06:31+00:00): this is a good house. for most it can be better, right click or hit the "q" key and it will square the boxes for you.   

do the rest of the houses if you feel compelled.  you can also add addresses https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses#How_to_map
NeisBot (2026-04-14 17:39:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 13 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/656571767 v6 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/880945792 v2 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/915966377 v1 | 3 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/4818550453 v2
https://osm.org/node/13158426536 v2
https://osm.org/node/4818555973 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181334755
iandees (2026-04-14 18:14:24+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4818550453, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4818555973 were moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181336163, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
Natfoot (2026-04-16 06:08:42+00:00): As I just commented on your other edit. right click and or use the "q" key to square the house. normally we don't name houses unless they have an official name.
NeisBot (2026-04-14 17:51:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 39 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1499398323 v1 | 39 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/7618990934 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181335300
Meromorphe (2026-04-15 06:34:47+00:00): De nouveaux travaux on supprimé le sentier. 
Photo: https://ibb.co/nMgvRPqW
Jakka (2026-04-15 07:30:05+00:00): quelque correction faites (photo) merci
ctrl+F5 pour voir
mcliquid (2026-04-15 11:51:34+00:00): Danke dir! Darf man die "Kreisverkehre" auch links herum befahren?
AlexanderF (2026-04-15 16:11:41+00:00): Auf den Bildern auf Mapillary sind keine Schilder z.B. vor den Inseln zu sehen. Insofern darf man theoretisch auch links vorbeifahren, wenn man dort in eine Einfahrt will.
grzegorz75jan (2026-04-15 14:04:15+00:00): To nie jest most i nigdy nim nie było. 
Popatrz czasem na inne orto (starsze lub e-mapa.net https://polska.e-mapa.net?userview=209952 geoportal, SIP gminy itp.
Tam jest raczej bród. Następny w prawo to może most jednak bardziej stawiał bym na przepust który może wyglądać na most jednak kwalifikuje się jako przepust

"Przepust to konstrukcja służąca do przeprowadzania wody pod drogą, natomiast most to budowla umożliwiająca przejście nad przeszkodą wodną

z internetów

Przepust
Budowla o przekroju poprzecznym zamkniętym, przeznaczona do przeprowadzania cieków, szlaków
wędrówek zwierząt dziko żyjących lub urządzeń technicznych przez nasyp drogi, o następujących
wymiarach minimalnych:
• średnicy wewnętrznej nie mniejszej niż 0,6 m dla przepustów rurowych,
• świetle (poziomym lub pionowym) nie mniejszym niż 0,6 m dla przepustów: płytowych,
ramowych lub sklepionych,
• lub most o rozpiętości w świetle podpór nie większej niż 3,00 m.
Przez obiekt o rozpiętości w świetle nie większej niż 3.00 m należy rozumieć most przekwalifikowany
na przepust zgodnie z definicją zatwierdzoną w dniu 17.09.1993 przez Zastępcę Generalnego
Dyrektora Dróg Krajowych i Autostrad d/s Organizacyjnych.

W myśl obowiązującej definicji obiekt o zamkniętym kształcie przekroju poprzecznego i będący
równocześnie elementem korpusu drogi (z nadsypką nad nim) oraz świetle (pionowym lub poziomym)
większym od 3,00 m pozostaje przepustem. (edited)


czyli w skrócie jeżeli dobrze rozumiem to jest przepust a nie most gdy:

– rozpiętość podpór mniej niż 3 metry, jeżeli jest nad wodą

– nie zależną rozpiętość podpór, jeżeli jest "obiekt o zamkniętym kształcie przekroju poprzecznego i będący
równocześnie elementem korpusu drogi" "
Tu https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1499400582 może jest jakiś residential ale nie w tym kształcie i powierzchi. To bardziej teren kolejowy i jest tam nawet nie czynna stacja czy budynek dworca a ta wąska część na prawo za ... blokiem pomiędzy ekranami a drogą to też teren kolejowy, ewentualnie tzw. pas drogowy.

Trochę za dużo usuwasz obiektów poprzedników. Co to dało https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1499410379 usunięcie i stworzenie nowego. A lasy przy PERN oraz po prawej przy Kobylance. Można to było przerobić. Usunąć dla ułatwienia parę węzłów (zaznaczając je z Shit-em.
rarad74 (2026-04-14 19:09:02+00:00): Salut Ai  doar 8 editari si ne trantesti o explicatie gen "reorganizare". Poate ne explici si noua mai in detaliu ce ai facut. Asta daca nu vrei sa iti dea cineva un revert la ce ai editat. Multumim.
NeisBot (2026-04-14 18:00:22+00:00): Hi kward1899, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 81% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 13 amenity(s)
- 11 barrier(s)
- 5 building(s)
- 17 highway(s)
- 2 landuse(s)
- 3 leisure(s)
- 13 name(s)
- 3 sport(s)
- 1 surface(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181335644
kward1899 (2026-04-14 18:05:17+00:00): Deletions were part of demolition during construction of the new campus.
Glassman (2026-04-14 22:11:09+00:00): Check out Mapbox Imagery or ESRI World Imagery. Not sure which is more current, but both are more current than Bing.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181335644
Bill Spies (2026-04-15 02:52:23+00:00): There was major construction over the last two years, and recently the City of Mason OH changed the name of the street from SportsCenter Complex to Legacy Park Way.  Street signs went in recently.  Buildings parking, old routes, lots to be deleted.  I think the edits to put the two new buildings together look good.  They've added courts for pickleball and some kind of paddleball too.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-04-16 23:04:13+00:00): Hello JeAlexY & welcome to OSM! Sorry, but we have a couple of questions regarding your edits? Here, you've mapped an apartment building in the middle of the road, with an address that doesn't match the name of that road? At the same time, you've mapped a waste basket a couple of hundred km away? Could you please explain what you're doing? Thanks. 
Graeme Fitzpatrick, Moderator, OSMF Data Working Group
Fizzie-DWG (2026-04-25 05:41:07+00:00): DWG revert - strange mapping then no response

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181792047
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-15 05:08:51+00:00): skąd ta zmiana?
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-15 07:23:08+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181335978 skąd tutaj ten link?
Fizzie-DWG (2026-04-16 23:04:55+00:00): On this edit, you waste basket is again in the middle of the road?
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-15 05:23:15+00:00): Chwila, czemu to poprawa? Skąd takie dziwne kikuty?
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-22 18:21:00+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/is-link-supposed-to-be-used-in-such-weird-way/143254
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-22 18:42:03+00:00): Czy jest jakakolwiek nawet przyczyna by ten _link się tak dziwacznie urywał w tym miejscu?
GanKonMalade (2026-04-14 18:50:24+00:00): Bonjour,

Je vois que vous avez mis l'attribut access=customers sur ce chemin : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/177631212#map=18/43.646037/7.030119&layers=N 
Ne serait-ce pas plutôt access=private dans le cas d'un accès résérvé aux riverains?
Lulucmy (2026-04-14 21:01:37+00:00): Bonjour,

Effectivement, erreur de ma part !
Le wiki recommande access=destination pour les panneaux "sauf riverains" : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Key:access#Valeurs_possibles
sheldonelectric (2026-05-09 11:20:04+00:00): Hey there, is there really 2 charging stations in this Aldi? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13728545518
On their website I see only one...
sifila29 (2026-05-11 15:27:09+00:00): Hello. Yes, there are two charging stations. One of them is from Aldi, the other is from a different provider. The other charging station is not yet in operation, but has already been built.
sheldonelectric (2026-05-11 16:46:08+00:00): Did I mark correctly the Aldi one? I used their website and satellite imagery, so I don't know which is which...
sifila29 (2026-05-27 09:42:44+00:00): Yes, the one located right next to Aldi is the one run by Aldi.
Kamil Kalata (2026-04-17 15:37:48+00:00): Hello!
Why have you changed highway category between the roundabout and the motorway junction from trunk_link to motorway_link? The trunk road link leading northwards (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/796242768) justified the previous category.
AnnaCatarina (2026-04-22 09:50:36+00:00): Hello Kamil,
commonly, links are starting at the last other road connection/junction, in this case the roundabout. Even this is part of the DK44, the higher category has to be chosen.
The link northwards into S1 should be also motorway_link, because S1 is generally mapped as motorway. I do not know, why this part is not categorised as motorway, even the S1 is not complete yet inbetween Bierun and Myslowice.
Regards,
Anna Catarina
Kamil Kalata (2026-04-22 16:00:33+00:00): Hello!
While I know and agree, that links begin at the last junction, I have to disagree, that the part between Bieruń and Oświęcim junctions should be tagged highway=motorway. At first, the signs marking the begin and the end of expressway are placed around where highway=motorway currently begins or ends, therefore the current tagging of the main road meets Polish highway tagging rules (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Znakowanie_dróg_w_Polsce). Moreover, the suggested tagging would violate tag criteria, especially the "two lanes per direction" and "some grade of separation" ones, and be divergent from what Polish law states on motorways, which newly-built expressways are similar to, that is they shall have median strip or at least other kind of separation between carriageways. Note that temporary bollards being placed every few dozen meters don't count as appropriate separation. Please also look at Slovak D1 motorway between Beharovce and Široké, which is tagged highway=trunk because of being single-carriageway.
Regards
Kamil Kalata
AnnaCatarina (2026-04-23 08:58:10+00:00): Hello Kamil,
all my info and aerials show structurally separated two carriageways with grade separation in the section roundabout to S1 and also inbetween Bierun and Oswiecim exits. Except from the second bridge over Gostynia, which is still under construction.
And, of course, the road sign D-9 "start of motorway" should be located directly behind the roundabout, because otherwise people not allowed to use the motorway will come into trouble.
I do not see temporary bollards anywhere except from the bridge construction site. Where do You have this info from, inbetween roundabout and S1 is no structurally separation of the carriageways?
Regards,
Anna Catarina
Kamil Kalata (2026-04-23 11:23:00+00:00): Hello.
I have to acknowledge the presence of the fully functional median strip between Bieruń junction and the bridge over Gostynia river. However, only one lane is available to traffic, what is clearly visible on photographic documentation (https://www.s1-myslowice-bielsko.pl/zdjecia-lotnicze-o1a.html) and what warrants the use of highway=trunk.
Regarding the sign, I don't know the place personally or impersonally, but I expect the B-6/8/9 sign (no bicycles, agricultural vehicles, or carriages allowed) being placed by the roundabout exit.
Regarding the bollards, not only they are placed on the bridge construction site, but also on the dual-carriageway section of the main road. Also, in between the roundabout and Oświęcim junction there are indeed none of them, since construction of the section is fully complete, and there is also a median strip. However, my arguing didn't concern this section, but only the main road, and by "suggested tagging" I meant the use of highway=motorway tag there. The Oświęcim link just adopts appropriate highway=*_link tag, depending on the lowest-hierarchy road which is linked.
Regards,
Kamil Kalata
DaryaSea (2026-04-16 18:22:04+00:00): Correction: Comment is Missing streets added in Babi Qadeem in Pakistan #adt
FajrAl (2026-04-14 18:35:29+00:00): Done
gurglypipe (2026-04-17 10:59:02+00:00): Heya, welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits around Furness. :)

If you’re going to be adding significant amounts of geometry (like mapping houses), please make sure to align the aerial imagery to a source of ground truth before starting to edit. The easiest way to do this is to align it to the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels layer (in the Background Settings panel on the right in the ID editor).

Aerial imagery is not aligned by default, as the alignment varies across the country (even between villages) and changes when the imagery is updated.

The offset for the Bing imagery for this area of Swarthmoor at the moment looks like -3.02, -0.91 metres.

I’ve updated your changes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181452067 to realign them.

Hope that makes sense! I realise it’s a bit complicated to begin with, but it’s important for keeping the map accurate. Happy to answer any questions :)
a-sav (2026-04-17 12:55:30+00:00): Hi, thank you for the useful comment - I will definitely be taking that on board! Sorry you had to amend my other edits - I will come back to them as well to ensure the geometry of semi-detached houses meets exactly at the cadastral parcel line.
gurglypipe (2026-04-17 13:06:41+00:00): No worries, they were easy to amend as everything was nicely drawn and joined up properly already!

I didn’t change the join line of the semis as that was a bit more work, but it would be great if you could do so. I typically align the join to the (aligned) aerial imagery, rather than necessarily to the Cadastral Parcels line. Sometimes the detail of the parcels are imperfect, as they have been traced off various old records at various times by different authorities; or land has changed hands informally or since they were last updated. On average though, the Parcels are high quality and correctly aligned to ground truth.

It looks like you have worked this out already, but watch out for parallax error in the imagery too — always align to the visible base of a building or fence :)
bxl-forever (2026-04-14 20:02:02+00:00): Hello,

I had a second look at your edits and was intrigued by this one.

This quest about whether objects are indoors or outdoors adds a tag which is used to show/hide objects based on times of the day (for instance, some devices like ATM machines are not available 24/7 when they are inside buildings that close during the night).  Some apps look for this information.

The post box is clearly *outside* the building: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=3906274416172863

StreetComplete sometimes asks silly questions, but always answer them correctly, to make sure users can trust OSM data.  If you click on the wrong answer by mistake, it is recommended to hit the Undo arrow in the corner of the screen.

I fixed your edit.
Charlaiz (2026-04-14 20:43:36+00:00): Thanks for shadowing me and quickly fixing mistakes :) Guess I was too fast and interpreted the question as 'is it still there'.
MappingMore (2026-04-16 05:48:55+00:00): Partially Revert of 181337202
geomaniX (2026-04-16 05:17:43+00:00): Moin!
Ist die Fuß-/Radwegbrücke Zum Guten Hirten/Pleistermühlenweg (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/11609407) wieder fertig?

VG geomaniX
Brummelwuff (2026-04-22 06:02:08+00:00): Moin,
ja die Brücke ist seit ein paar Monaten fertig, grade werden die Rampen zu den neuen Wiederlagern fertiggestellt, nachdem vor ein, zwei Wochen die Ersatzbrücke abgebaut wurde.
Wildsharky (2026-04-16 09:26:10+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:181393567
NeisBot (2026-04-14 19:06:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13730622422 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Cheer gym"

#MapWithoutSpam
cowboyxup (2026-04-15 06:36:34+00:00): Hello vmicho,
did you check the turn lanes markings in a site survey or only on satellite images. According to recent street imagery this turn restrictions are false. See: https://api.panoramax.xyz/?focus=pic&map=17.06/47.275699/11.432718&pic=ab8a64dc-96e9-4fb8-9cd4-58dac27e2796&seq=7cdba1f2-9745-4fee-9bcb-ed2472fe53ce&speed=250&theme=default&users=default&xyz=64.59/-22.11/30 or on mappilary.
vmicho (2026-04-17 19:18:53+00:00): hi. Checking ...
vmicho (2026-04-17 19:57:26+00:00): They are same (aerial + panoramax). I went thru once also last weekend.
Turn lanes are OK: first two are left, next two are for straight. If you mean the markings, we can add lane marking tag too (turn lanes and lane markings are not the same stuff)
cowboyxup (2026-04-18 09:25:52+00:00): The turn lanes are not ok, only the left lane are turning left to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/874271927 the two left arrows turning slight left to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24831180, so they must be turn:lanes=left;slight_left|slight_left|through|through 

Also the on the bus lane, no taxi is allowed, to it must be bus:lanes instead of psv:lanes.
Happy Mapping
eggie (2026-04-14 19:49:56+00:00): Tip... De eindnodes van de wegdelen moeten verbonden zijn met het vlak man_made=bridge

Gr eggie
eggie (2026-04-14 20:27:04+00:00): Als voorbeeld de eindnodes van de wegdelen met de brug verbonden.
De link naar de wikipedia gaat anders.
Niet via een websitelink.
MVG
eggie
dzamper (2026-04-15 08:09:59+00:00): Czemu edytujesz obiekty nawet nie czytając notatek które na sobie mają?
NeisBot (2026-04-14 19:27:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13479975819 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Variety Store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-04-14 22:33:19+00:00): 🕵 It looks like you reintroduced text that was previously flagged as promotional and removed after a review. Could you please explain why it was added again?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 11:36:47+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values in changeset 184908960

https://osm.org/changeset/184908960
MassCartog (2026-04-14 19:38:07+00:00): Hello, welcome back to OSM. Features you removed in this changeset are valid. Please don’t remove valid OSM data.

You might not be aware, on OSM, we do not remove features if they exist on the ground. If it exists on the ground, it is valid data regardless of a feature being public or private, designated or informal/illegal/unauthorized. Removing features that exist is actually considered vandalism.

It's clear that these features still exist on the ground. Not being public access areas is an invalid reason to remove data from OSM. So this edit is incorrect and damaging to valid OSM data.

The correct way to handle this is to use OSM's tagging system. access=private, or access=no would be appropriate if they are closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
JAnder12 (2026-04-14 20:04:02+00:00): The Director of Carleton's Arb is the person to determine what is or is not a trail in our arboretum. This particular foot path is not to be used, for good reason. I've now marked it as private, but that doesn't seem strong enough in this case.