piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-08-20 21:42:26+00:00): Hoi... Ik heb de laadpaal niet aangepast. 
Wel die parkeerstroken. 
Mapse
eggie
eggie (2025-08-20 21:42:43+00:00): CTRL-F5 voor het effect
eggie (2025-08-20 21:55:42+00:00): Ik heb charging point veranderd naar charging_station.  Dan zal  het symbool renderen.
Moet wel zeggen dat de wiki steeds weer met wat nieuws komt en de kaartenmakers het denk ik niet bij kunnen houden met de rendering.
Glassman (2025-08-21 21:59:31+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/170747214
Gonéo (2025-10-10 15:05:42+00:00): Bonjour, tu as passé le pont sur l'autoroute à 30 km/h (attention tu avais laissé le source:maxspeed=FR:urban). L'open-data l'annonce à 50 km/h. https://data.grandlyon.com/portail/fr/jeux-de-donnees/chaussees-trottoirs-metropole-lyon/donnees. La communication de la ville aussi https://www.ecully.fr/fileadmin/user_upload/SUPP_ECULLY_OCTOBRE_WEB.pdf
Il n'y a pas d'imagerie récente pour confirmer. Tu confirmes que c'est 30 km/h sur le terrain ?
Cèparlà (2025-10-10 20:24:41+00:00): Bonjour, effectivement sur cette zone  les vitesses dont très mal indiquées . Le pont est bien a 50km/h. Voilà qui est mis à jour!
Cordialement
GinaroZ (2025-09-26 19:25:01+00:00): In case you're wondering this isn't an actual shop open to the public https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13085260216/history (unsure of exact tagging but that'll probably do...)
ExoMal (2025-09-27 08:25:11+00:00): Ah, that makes sense, cheers. That explains the absence of display windows.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-20 21:21:33+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13085241213

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
German C (2025-12-03 20:20:20+00:00): Hola Lolj, ¿por qué eliminaste las dos piscinas https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/719543927 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/719543928 que aparecen en la imagen satelital? https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=170747888 (en rojo aparece lo que eliminaste)
user_5359 (2025-08-21 07:10:16+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice this is a production database.
Please only draw in existing objects and facts. I can hardly see any buildings in the aerial photos, but rather trees at the locations.
user_5359 (2025-08-21 07:10:25+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice this is a production database.
Please only draw in existing objects and facts. I can hardly see any buildings in the aerial photos, but rather trees at the locations.
eggie (2025-08-21 06:18:13+00:00): Kijk even hoe ik het heb aangepast.
parking_space is altijd één vakje..
De street_side tags zit om alles heen. Daar staan de eigenschappen op als orientation, capacity e.d.
eggie (2025-08-21 05:53:24+00:00): Dag FdeM   En hier gaat het verkeerd.
Het grote vlak is de amenity=parking parking=street_side orientation=perpendicular 

, maar de parkeervakken erin tag je met amenity=parking_space
met evt de eigenschappen voor wie het is bedoeld.
Ik pas even wat aan..
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-08-21 06:12:17+00:00): Ik heb wat aangepast CTRL-F5 voor het effect.
Het zijn nu parkeervakken (parking_space) met daaromheen een amenity=parking parking=street_side.
Kijk even hoe het in elkaar zit.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side

De capacity voeg je toe aan het grote valk.
surface=rock  zal niet. 

Zelf teken ik die aparte parkeervakken niet in behalve als het bijzondere eigenschappen heeft. Bv toegewezen gehandicaptenparkeervak. 

Mapse
eggie
eggie (2025-08-21 06:19:42+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
Js7h (2025-09-14 22:11:28+00:00): Verlauf gefixt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171938220#map=12/47.1647/15.6669)
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-20 22:41:08+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3303422412
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1423692614

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-21 07:27:15+00:00): naprawione
eggie (2025-08-21 06:15:13+00:00): Deze zou je nog kunnen aanpassen zoals ik op het Engels Dorp heb gedaan. 

Gr eggie
Js7h (2025-08-20 22:43:36+00:00): GIS Steiermark und folgende Seite https://app.verkehr.steiermark.at/strassenverzeichnis/landesstrassen.php sind sich uneinig zu welcher Landesstraße der Abschnitt, der in die L408 mündet, gehört; die aktuelle Version folgt dem GIS Steiermark
Js7h (2025-08-20 23:04:36+00:00): Nachtrag: Das Verzeichnis zu finden in https://www.verkehr.steiermark.at/cms/ziel/155689159/DE/ folgt jener Version des GIS Steiermark; daher erscheint mir die Version GIS Steiermark bzw. obiger Seite die aktuelle zu sein.
AndreaDp271 (2025-08-22 16:13:49+00:00): Hi there, and thanks a lot for your contribution! 🌟 Just a little tip for future edits: keeping changesets small and local can make things smoother for everyone. It helps prevent conflicts, makes it easier for fellow mappers to review, and keeps the map even more accurate.

A few friendly suggestions: • Focus edits within a small geographical area (like a single city, district, or province) • Try not to mix far-apart locations in one changeset • Save/upload before starting work in a totally different area

If you’re curious, the wiki explains more here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks again for your mapping energy, and happy mapping! 🗺️
samuelzammit (2025-08-20 23:41:06+00:00): Comment should read 109 instead of 82.
samuelzammit (2025-08-20 23:42:28+00:00): And 109A instead of N82.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-20 23:51:11+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2977329848
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/395765049

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/896806692
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1135168444

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-21 12:45:51+00:00): Naprawione
santamariense (2025-11-21 16:33:53+00:00): HBFJ,

Notei que tu adicionou código de rodovia à tag name=*, como em name=BR-070

É preciso observar que cada tag no OSM serve para um propósito. A tag name serve para se colocar o nome próprio da rodovia, caso ele tenha. Do contrário, mantenha em branco. Os códigos de rodovias devem ir em ref=* exclusivamente.

Se a BR-070 tivesse um nome próprio, daí sim deveria ser colocado na tag name. Exemplo:

Rodovia Fulano de Tal

Como não tem, deve-se manter o campo vazio.

Qualquer dúvida, sinta-se à vontade para perguntar.

Bons mapeamentos!
user_5359 (2025-08-21 06:58:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful! You move the node https://www.osm.org/node/4226758890 (a bus stop) more 100 meters. Please check the position.
If you need help: You are welcome.
Larshei (2025-10-11 17:16:59+00:00): Heb jij met deze changeset de gebouwen van Doggersvaart 2/4 weer ingetekend? Ik meen dat ik die al weggehaald had. Die gebouwen zijn dit voorjaar/afgelopen zomer gesloopt.
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-08-30 17:37:46+00:00): Please do not add names to objects unless they have an official name. The golf course the holes belong to is already implied by being inside a named golf course area. In this edit, you also replaced an official name from a golf hole and changed it to the name of the golf course. This is incorrect.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170751867
Gregory Peony (2025-08-22 01:31:59+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You spotted buildings in imagery, but many of the footpritns you mapped here envelope either multiple buildings or entire plots. 

Each footprint should represent one building. Use shadows and colours and plots to discriminate between adjacent buildings. 

Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170752133
Gregory Peony (2025-08-22 01:33:54+00:00): Some of the footpritns you mapped here are quite accurate, but oversized. 

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint.  Keep in mind that you are looking at the roofs of buildings, but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag.  Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.
LordGarySugar (2025-10-24 17:02:56+00:00): There seems to be a lot of untagged duplicate nodes that were created by this changeset, for example along https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1423713656
I don't know how widespread this is because I don't know how to overpass for untagged nodes...
LordGarySugar (2025-10-24 18:17:16+00:00): See this overpass query, there's about 1000 that were created around Pontypridd and Caerphilly https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2ehz
kitsee (2025-10-24 19:01:24+00:00): Hi there Gary, 
It doesn't appear to be widespread, affecting only affecting a couple of areas in this grid. honestly no idea why this happen. I've now delete them. Thanks for point this out.
willkmis (2025-08-21 13:31:08+00:00): These appear to be fictional edits, so I'm reverting them. OSM is not a toy. If you want to create fictional maps, you might enjoy UMap: https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/.
LordGarySugar (2025-08-21 02:12:12+00:00): Hi, thanks for updating these roads, do you know what road number has been assigned? If it's an A road it should be marked as primary, if it's a B road then secondary. If you know the number it you could add it under ref for all the sections of road it applies to :)
AA_NP (2025-08-28 10:58:07+00:00): As above comment. If assigning A road, etc - there must be a road number allocated to it. Is it possible to obtain a full road drive video perhaps?
AA_NP (2025-08-28 11:01:38+00:00): Just seen a sign at Sandy Lane Relief Road and Berrywood Road Roundabout - A428. Does that mean the A428 from Harlestone Heath to Town Centre has been downgraded?
user_5359 (2025-08-21 18:11:21+00:00): Welcome to OSM! The key building=school only means that the building looks like a school. 

If you want to indicate a theatre school, for example, you should add the tag amenity=theatre_school. For details, please refer to the wiki at https://wiki.osm.org.
grzegorz75jan (2025-08-21 07:06:26+00:00): "lepsze zdjęcie niż kategoria, zdjęcie się wyświetla na OpenAEDMap"

mapy.com mają gdzieś całe Wikimedia bo uparli się na Wikidata a dane Wikidata nie zawsze są dostępne a jeżeli już to nie zawsze mają fotę i to taką sensowną a kategorie jakoś tam raczej nie są podpinane. 

OsmAnd też coś ostatnio ponownie świruje pod względem wyświetlania zasobów Wikimedia jeżeli nie ma dodanych Wikidata.

Nie będę jakoś mocno faflunił o to (twoją zmianę) ale rozważam wycofanie tej edycji ponieważ moja edycja była poprawna i zgodnie z tradycją to OpeanAEDMap powinien się dostosować a nie by edycje w OSM były przerabiane pod każdą aplikację z osobna bo zrobi się bajzel. 

Proponował bym zgłosić zagadnienie do OpenAEDMap by coś z tym zrobili.

Znacznik Category: jest poprawny oraz udokumentowany więc piłeczka po stronie OpenAEDMap.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170753129
grzegorz75jan (2025-08-21 07:06:54+00:00): "lepsze zdjęcie niż kategoria, zdjęcie się wyświetla na OpenAEDMap"

mapy.com mają gdzieś całe Wikimedia bo uparli się na Wikidata a dane Wikidata nie zawsze są dostępne a jeżeli już to nie zawsze mają fotę i to taką sensowną a kategorie jakoś tam raczej nie są podpinane. 

OsmAnd też coś ostatnio ponownie świruje pod względem wyświetlania zasobów Wikimedia jeżeli nie ma dodanych Wikidata.

Nie będę jakoś mocno faflunił o to (twoją zmianę) ale rozważam wycofanie tej edycji ponieważ moja edycja była poprawna i zgodnie z tradycją to OpeanAEDMap powinien się dostosować a nie by edycje w OSM były przerabiane pod każdą aplikację z osobna bo zrobi się bajzel. 

Proponował bym zgłosić zagadnienie do OpenAEDMap by coś z tym zrobili.

Znacznik Category: jest poprawny oraz udokumentowany więc piłeczka po stronie OpenAEDMap.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170753129
user_5359 (2025-08-21 06:55:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful!  You move the node https://www.osm.org/node/11240409070 (a firehydrant) more than 100 meters.
Please check the position!
If you need help: You are welcome!
nevw (2025-08-21 04:25:55+00:00): Hi, the building draw at 7-9 Wadham Parade is actually two separate houses
buy_osmand (2025-08-22 08:36:31+00:00): I, buy_osmand, have intentions to mark this edit as Good, but specifically invites 25or6to4, an active mapper of the state of Texas to provide his comments firstly.

25or6to4 , good mapper, is this all to the tee 😳⁉

Disclaimer: I am a mapper not of the land as the both you gentlemen, please explicitly instruct me to mind my own business if found to have offended the locals of Texas.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170753588
25or6to4 (2025-08-22 08:58:12+00:00): I see no problems here. Mark it as Good.
buy_osmand (2025-08-22 09:02:01+00:00): Following the comment from 25or6to4, I, buy_osmand, hereby fulfills the initial intention.

Thank you Milroy1812, good mapper of the state of Texas, for your current and future works. 

😳👍 Good,
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170753588
nevw (2025-08-21 04:33:08+00:00): Hi, the tree row is not present in satellite image and the footway appears incorrect.
Stalker61 (2025-08-25 15:15:37+00:00): Здравствуйте. А зачем на сарай адресную информацию дублировать?
geo_ozon (2025-08-25 19:00:09+00:00): Не заметили дубля, спасибо, что исправили
b-jazz (2025-08-22 17:35:43+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/13015737063

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas must not cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green along with the right way. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD (built into openstreetmap.org) will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you could go back and clean up where you've made this mistake, that would be great. But more importantly, if you could stop from doing this in the future, it would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-15 17:27:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 185798781 where the changeset comment is: Reverting fiction added in error by OSMNAXA.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20923
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-08-21 11:49:22+00:00): Merci pour cette mise à jour. Cependant, attention lorsque vous mettez des tags access=no à des éléments en construction temporaire ou en fermeture temporaire, car il y a risque d'oublier et que cette voie reste innaccessible aux engins de calcul de chemin pendant des mois après la réouverture. Il est préférable de garder les accès ouverts et de mettre seulement une note. À vous de voir. Merci!
Tulatu (2025-08-21 12:48:45+00:00): Si  « construction » est interprété par votre algorithme comme « inaccessible », je ne modifierai plus les accès.

Merci et bonne continuation.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-08-21 15:47:22+00:00): highway=construction n'est pas considéré comme routable dans la plupart des engins de calcul. Ce n'est pas mon algorithme, mais bien la plupart des algorithmes, comme OSRM qui est un des plus utilisés.

access=no aussi bloque complètement l'accès. Ce n'est pas un problème aujourd'hui puisque c'est bel et bien fermé, mais la plupart du temps, les gens oublient et ça reste fermé dans OSM bien après la réouverture. Il est plus prudent de mettre une note: "Fermé pour construction" que de mettre access=no et highway=construction

Toutefois, sur le wiki officiel on dit qu'on peut mettre les accès en mode construction et access=no si la fermeture est pour plus de 6 à 9 mois (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:construction). Mais si possible mettez-vous une alarme dans votre calendrier pour ne pas oublier de réactiver l'accès l'an prochain au printemps si c'est complété.

Merci!
mcliquid (2025-08-21 07:07:37+00:00): Hallo Pathumthani, mir ist die Verwendung von "router_marker:ref" zum ersten Mal aufgefallen; bisher scheint es insgesamt nur 3 Einsätze dieses Tags zu geben. Gleichzeitig steigt die Nutzung von "guidepost:ref" stark an – innerhalb der letzten Tage auf 27 Einträge. Da diese Schreibweisen bisher nicht dokumentiert sind, wäre eine kurze Erklärung von dir hilfreich: Warum wurde hier ein neues, nicht dokumentiertes Schema gewählt? Vielen Dank!

Referenz:
- https://taghistory.raifer.tech/#***/guidepost%3Aref/&***/route_marker%3Aref/
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:information%3Dguidepost#How_to_map
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Guidepost
Pathumthani (2025-08-21 09:24:03+00:00): Ein GerdP hat in der Region für Wegweiser und Wegmarkierungen ref eingeführt und meint damit die völlig bedeutungslosen Kataster-Nummern an den Schildern. Bei Radknoten ist aber doch mit ref die Nummern der Routen (Wiki) gemeint. Um dieses Durcheinander zu entflechten und seine Arbeit nicht zu löschen, fiel mir nur diese Lösung mit guidepost:ref ein.
mcliquid (2025-08-21 09:43:32+00:00): Danke für deine Antwort. Aus meiner Sicht muss man hier Unterscheiden zwischen der Nummer der Wegweiser (laut Wiki "ref" an dem Node mit "tourism=information") und der Route (laut Wiki "ref" an der lcn/rcn/ncn-Relation).

Die einzelnen Knotenpunkt-Relationen haben ja bereits alle eine ref, beispielsweise hier die 9-9: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19340073

Die Wegweiser dürfen deshalb aus meiner Sicht sehr wohl die eindeutige Nummer als "ref" führen. Was spricht aus deiner Sicht dagegen?
Pathumthani (2025-08-21 10:03:42+00:00): Im Gegensatz zu einem anderen beleidigenden User werde ich das dann wohl akzeptieren müssen und werde, sofern Zeit vorhanden, allmählich korrigieren. Nachzuvollziehen fällt mir schwer!
mcliquid (2025-08-21 10:56:33+00:00): Ich würde mich sehr freuen, wenn du bei unserer gemeinsamen Diskussion im Forum dabei wärst. So können wir gemeinsam herausfinden, was wir denken und fühlen, und uns vielleicht sogar einigen: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/user-andert-ref-zu-guidepost-ref-bzw-route-marker-ref/134451
Supaplex (2025-08-21 09:54:20+00:00): Hi您好

OpenStreetMap為一即時的系統，一旦送出即在資料庫當中，甚至可能被用OpenStreetMap為資料來源服務取用。如有測試需求請用測試站

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170769107
nevw (2025-08-21 05:12:59+00:00): Hi, you accidentally dragged 8 Stocks Road node from its correct location.
evgenykatyshev (2025-08-21 15:05:33+00:00): Reverted because this settlement already exist on the map with names in all languages. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/540348494

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170785112
arjunaraoc (2025-12-19 00:18:04+00:00): Hello  Siva SaiKrishna,  Can you confirm  whether  https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13086218063  corresponds to Grama sachivalayam, Kaikaram-2 as government data is showing a different location 16.813325	81.366199. Kaikaram-1 is  close to https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13086218061
arjunaraoc (2025-12-19 00:28:23+00:00): Sorry, I found Grama Sachivalayam, Kaikaram-2 is properly mapped as https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13086218064/history/3 ,  So  Kaikaram-1 correct location needs confirmation among the two choices (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13086218063 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13086218061 )
arjunaraoc (2025-12-20 14:01:01+00:00): Sorry for raising the issue. I corrected my mistake, as Grama Panchayat is found to be separate from Sachivalayam.
rempshaener (2025-08-21 18:48:26+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Ein anderer Mapper hat deine Anpassungen bereits überarbeitet, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170760814

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
Glassman (2025-08-21 22:15:50+00:00): I don't think that this fits the wiki definition of an informal crossings. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:crossing=informal. If you agree, can you correct it?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170757372
jacobwhall (2025-08-21 07:04:03+00:00): https://www.reddit.com/r/rva/comments/27bcaj/richmonds_mcvcapitol_square_underground_tunnel/
DD1GJ (2025-08-21 06:52:05+00:00): Revert

Hallo Rene Lübeck, willkommen bei OSM. Ich habe diesen Änderungssatz komplett zurückgesetzt, da Du ein großes Chaos verursacht hattest: verschobene Straßen, gelöschte Bushaltestelle, ...

Siehe https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=170757915
Glassman (2025-08-21 22:10:08+00:00): Why did you remove the tags amenity=cafe and cuisine=coffee_shop? You were correct when you first added them. Can you add them back?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170757998
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-10 11:42:26+00:00): Seems like the Kendall County GIS account inexplicably left a "good" (thumbs up) OSMCha review on [changeset 170758159](https://osm.org/changeset/170758159), which is obvious SEO spam with a blatantly advertising description=*, nonsensical or outright objectionable tags (`Google Business=*`, `Description=*` [sic], etc.), malformed tag values, (e.g. `addr:street=*` abbreviations, nonexistent `healthcare:speciality=*`, invalid `phone=*` syntax, etc), and to top it all off having a `source=*` of Google Maps right on the changeset itself.

This is basically as bad as it gets for any changeset on OSM that isn't large-scale intentional vandalism, and it was accordingly reverted by DWG along with a ring of hundreds of other SEO spam accounts this one is a part of, so I must assume the review was a careless mistake. As unfortunately only one mapper can review a changeset on OSMCha (or add tags, etc), only they can fix this. Could they please retract the incorrect review, and either correctly flag it as bad with `Intentional`, `Severity: High` and `Resolved` tags, or let me know once they've removed your review so I can do so?

Thanks!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-10 12:12:58+00:00): (Fixed, thanks!)