piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Libya-truth (2026-07-06 13:28:17+00:00): Hello,

Thank you for your comment.

The intention of these edits is to restore and represent the historical Amazigh names of places in Libya, not to introduce arbitrary or personal names. Amazigh is an indigenous language of Libya and is part of the country's historical and cultural heritage, just as it is in neighboring North African countries.

OpenStreetMap already supports multilingual naming through language-specific tags, and similar Amazigh naming is widely used in other North African countries such as Morocco and Algeria, where Tifinagh and Amazigh names are included alongside Arabic and other languages.

The names I am adding are based on historical and local usage, and I am collecting references to support them. If additional sources are required for specific objects, I am happy to provide them and discuss each case individually.

My goal is to improve the representation of Libya's linguistic and cultural diversity in OpenStreetMap while following the project's verifiability principles.

If there are concerns about specific tags or objects, I welcome discussing them one by one to reach the best solution.

Thank you.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 13:52:06+00:00): Thank you for the detailed reply, I appreciate it.

Just to clarify: I am not a local contributor in Libya, and I am also not a specialist in multilingual name tagging, especially in a context involving Arabic and Amazigh/Tifinagh names. 

I noticed a larger number of name-related changes on important objects, so I thought it was appropriate to leave a changeset comment and ask for clarification.

Best regards, Pascal
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 16:07:46+00:00): I do not think Brussels is a suitable comparison here.

In Brussels, bilingual name=* values reflect an officially bilingual area where street/place names are actually established and signposted in both French and Dutch. That is different from adding a generated transliteration or script conversion to name=*.

If these Libyan village names are genuinely used locally in both Arabic and Amazigh/Tifinagh, please provide concrete evidence for each place, such as signage, official/local gazetteers, or other reliable local sources. But the Brussels practice does not justify constructing combined name=* values from general transliteration rules.

The issue is not whether bilingual names are ever allowed in OSM. The issue is whether these specific combined Arabic + Tifinagh forms are real, locally used names for these specific settlements, or just generated transliterations.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 13:08:12+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185375874
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 13:51:03+00:00): Hello,

As I mentioned earlier, I only wanted to provide feedback on the changes being made in Libya. They were flagged by my tools as potentially unusual and possibly inconsistent with common OSM tagging patterns.

Thank you for the detailed explanation. I do not dispute the historical or current use of Amazigh languages and Tifinagh in parts of Libya. You may also be right about bringing the discussion to the OSM forum.

However, my concern is not the historical names themselves, but rather the tagging approach and the evidence supporting the specific key-value pairs being added.

By the way, ISO 639-3 jbn refers to Nafusi, not to a separate Zuwara language.
Libya-truth (2026-07-09 13:56:25+00:00): Hello Pascal,

Thank you for the clarification and for your constructive approach. I appreciate that you took the time to review the changes and provide feedback.

You are right about ISO 639-3 jbn it refers to Nafusi, not Zuwara. I apologize for the error. Zuwara Berber is classified under ISO 639-3 as jbn for Nafusi as part of the broader Nafusi grouping, while Zuwara itself falls within the same language continuum. I will correct this in any future references.

Regarding the tagging approach: I understand your concern and I am open to discussing the best practices for key-value pairs. My priority is to ensure that Amazigh names are represented accurately and visibly. If there are specific tags or elements where you see an issue, I am happy to review them case by case.

Thank you again for engaging in good faith. This kind of constructive dialogue is exactly what makes OSM better.

Best regards
aTarom (2026-07-06 14:37:29+00:00): Hola, gracias por editar, una pregunta que no me aclara el discreto comentario del changeset "Actualización mapa";
se están eliminando varios survey_point, son incorrectos realmente?
por poner un ejemplo:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1143933247/history
Saludos
Nezaloth (2026-07-06 10:16:55+00:00): Ah, My Bad
Supaplex (2026-07-06 17:22:14+00:00): 請勿隨意塗鴨，OpenStreetMap是共同編輯的線上地圖
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185187094
b-jazz (2026-07-08 17:49:08+00:00): Putting the various fairways together into a multipolygon isn't necessarily wrong, but this isn't done anywhere else in the country. They are already associated with each other by the ref number. I'm going to undo this grouping for now, but am open to discussing the issue if you feel strongly about it.
arjunaraoc (2026-07-07 04:12:51+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  Andhra Pradesh page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Andhra_Pradesh) and  join OSM Andhra Pradesh Telegram channel (https://t.me/osmandhra). This software requires that I review everything as either good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. 

Additional comments for resolving the issue: 
The map from the website identifies a point only. Unless you have official plan of the proposed site, it is better to represent the feature by a point.  Can you revise and also update tags as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=residential
If you can't resolve, please respond to the discussion on changset, so that another contributor can help fix it.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185187174
eggie (2026-07-06 12:52:48+00:00): Welkom bij OSM,

Wellicht nog even kijken naar phone..
Dat begint voor Nederland met +31....
Mvg,
eggie
StC (2026-07-25 09:02:53+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
HellMap (2026-07-06 16:07:02+00:00): Hi,

Is this way really asphalted? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1042081654 This seems very unlikely unless something new was constructed.
MarinoBM (2026-07-07 09:33:15+00:00): Hola tomcat83, gracias por tus aportaciones a OpenStreetMap.
El nombre es solo nombre. Has cambiado el nombre para añadirle la descripción genérica de “Nacional”. El Nomenclátor de Carreteras lo recoge tal como estaba previamente.
https://catalogorce.transportes.gob.es/nomenclatura-carreteras-rce
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Nombre_es_solo_el_nombre
Si tienes dudas puedes plantearlas en el grupo de Telegram de OSM España.
https://t.me/OSMes
Un saludo.
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:35:56+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185262855
TriRIK (2026-07-06 10:50:37+00:00): Based on my latest trip to Slivnik
MarinoBM (2026-07-07 09:32:55+00:00): Hola tomcat83, gracias por tus aportaciones a OpenStreetMap.
El nombre es solo nombre. Has cambiado el nombre para añadirle la descripción genérica de “Nacional”. El Nomenclátor de Carreteras lo recoge tal como estaba previamente.
https://catalogorce.transportes.gob.es/nomenclatura-carreteras-rce
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Nombre_es_solo_el_nombre
Si tienes dudas puedes plantearlas en el grupo de Telegram de OSM España.
https://t.me/OSMes
Un saludo.
4004 (2026-07-19 23:36:07+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1535805873#map=17/53.737028/23.813617&layers=N teplotrassa a ne doroga
Supaplex (2026-07-06 17:22:10+00:00): 請勿隨意塗鴨，OpenStreetMap是共同編輯的線上地圖
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185190253
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 11:31:49+00:00): Hello, 
could you please discuss this change with the local/Libya OSM community before changing this administrative boundary from Jabal al Gharbi / الجبل الغربي to Nafusa Mountains / Amazigh names across many name:* tags?

This relation is tagged as an admin_level=4 administrative boundary with ISO3166-2=LY-JG and links to the Wikidata/Wikipedia item for Jabal al Gharbi District. “Nafusa Mountains” appears to be a geographic/mountain-region name, while the mapped object is the administrative district. Replacing the district name in many languages with the mountain-region name may therefore conflate two different features.

Please provide verifiable official sources for the administrative name change, especially for the main name=*, name:ar=*, int_name=*, and the many name:xx=* values. Also, please avoid mass-changing multilingual names based on political/historical interpretation or automatic translation unless each language value is verifiable and actually used for this administrative unit.

Could you please revert or adjust the names back to the administrative district names unless there is clear, independent evidence that the official/common name of this admin boundary has changed?
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 15:47:57+00:00): Thanks for the discussion. I found another source that seems relevant here:

https://web.archive.org/web/20220302150300/https://www.libyaobserver.ly/news/libyan-government-divides-country-18-provinces

This article reports that the Libyan government divided the country into provinces, and for this area it lists administrative units such as Gheryan, Zintan and Nalut. It does not list “Nafusa Mountains” as the name of an administrative province/district.

So this source does not support renaming the administrative boundary LY-JG / Jabal al Gharbi District to “Nafusa Mountains”. If the 2022 administrative reform is relevant for OSM, it would rather suggest that the current administrative boundaries may need to be checked or updated according to the new province structure. But that would be a separate mapping issue and should not be mixed with the geographic/mountain-region name “Nafusa Mountains”.

In my opinion, the current changeset applies the name of a geographic region/mountain range to an administrative boundary, and this source does not justify that.
Flynn Marquardt (2026-07-06 11:05:35+00:00): Correction of comment:
Add way to fix border relation/5327789
MarinoBM (2026-07-07 09:32:36+00:00): Hola tomcat83, gracias por tus aportaciones a OpenStreetMap.
El nombre es solo nombre. Has cambiado el nombre para añadirle la descripción genérica de “Nacional”. El Nomenclátor de Carreteras lo recoge tal como estaba previamente.
https://catalogorce.transportes.gob.es/nomenclatura-carreteras-rce
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Nombre_es_solo_el_nombre
Si tienes dudas puedes plantearlas en el grupo de Telegram de OSM España.
https://t.me/OSMes
Un saludo.
marcmarti (2026-07-06 15:59:53+00:00): Hello,
This turn restriction you have added is only for vehicles weighing more than 5 tons. The correct way to do it is to tag the way with the restriction. Please review the changesets that you and other members of the Lyft team are making, as I've had to repeatedly correct a lot of them.

I've already corrected the restriction, but pease review every changeset before adding inaccurate information to OSM, which companies can use for routing information.
sanjanasharma_lyft (2026-07-08 06:38:46+00:00): Hi marcmarti,
My name is Sanjana, and I am a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your detailed feedback and for taking the time to remove the restriction.
I appreciate you pointing out that this restriction applies only to vehicles over 5 tons. Upon reviewing the edit, I recognize my mistake and understand the importance of accurately representing conditional and vehicle-specific restrictions.
I also appreciate your broader feedback regarding the quality of our edits. We take these concerns seriously, and I will be more diligent in reviewing my changesets before uploading them. Thank you again for your patience, your corrections, and for helping maintain the quality of OpenStreetMap.
Best regards,
Sanjana
Frans S (2026-07-06 12:57:55+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please do not cluster groups of buildings but map each as individual buildings.
Best regards
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 11:32:35+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185190515#c1621870
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:35:55+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185262855
MarinoBM (2026-07-07 09:32:26+00:00): Hola tomcat83, gracias por tus aportaciones a OpenStreetMap.
El nombre es solo nombre. Has cambiado el nombre para añadirle la descripción genérica de “Nacional”. El Nomenclátor de Carreteras lo recoge tal como estaba previamente.
https://catalogorce.transportes.gob.es/nomenclatura-carreteras-rce
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Nombre_es_solo_el_nombre
Si tienes dudas puedes plantearlas en el grupo de Telegram de OSM España.
https://t.me/OSMes
Un saludo.
Jordi MF (2026-07-08 07:17:38+00:00): El usuario continua modificando las denominaciones y sin responder. Yo revertiría los cambios.
MarinoBM (2026-07-08 08:27:16+00:00): Los conjuntos de cambios que le he comentado los he revertido pero, como sigue con la misma actitud, habría que bloquearle hasta que dé explicaciones y revertir de forma más  general.
tomcat83 (2026-07-08 11:18:14+00:00): Buenos días
Creo que incluir la denominación de "Nacional" sirve a para aclarar al categoria de la misma y distinguirnos de otra carreteras de tipo autonómico, provincial, local, etc.
Como se denomina la red de carreteras nacionales del estado
MarinoBM (2026-07-09 10:27:48+00:00): Eso que "tú crees" es una apreciación personal tuya que no se ajusta a la normativa sobre nombres y, tal como insinúas, la "aclaración" va en la referencia, en el tipo de carretera o de red, no en el nombre.
Jordi MF (2026-07-09 16:18:54+00:00): Lo que Marino quiere decir es que si tenemos que añadir el nombre de una carretera, debería de ser el oficial, el que aparezca en el catálogo del Ministerio.

Además, hay que tener en cuenta que no usamos nombres descriptivos: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions Por lo tanto, es innecesario añadir el término 'Nacional', la misma etiqueta ref=N-601 ya nos ayuda a entender su categoría.

Sobre el idioma
SomeoneElse (2026-07-17 16:14:07+00:00): I'd definitely suggest discussing this in the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/es/51
SomeoneElse (2026-07-17 16:14:13+00:00): Sin duda sugeriría tratar este tema en el foro https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/es/51
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 13:09:43+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. Could you please explain the reason for deleting these driveway/service ways?

This changeset deletes several ways that were tagged as private/service driveways. In OSM, private driveways and private roads can still be mapped when they exist on the ground; they should normally be kept with appropriate tags such as highway=service, service=driveway, and access=private, rather than deleted just because they are private.

If these driveways no longer physically exist, or were clearly incorrect/misplaced, please mention the evidence/source. Otherwise, could you please restore the deleted driveways and keep the access restrictions instead? Thank you.
marcmarti (2026-07-06 12:23:50+00:00): Hello,
Many turn-restiction changesets that lyft is making, including this one, fail to take into account exceptions, for example exceptions for residents, service vehicles, parking, etc.) which could be better represented in the way itself, and in most cases is already represented, making the changeset redundant and inaccurate. Please review the changesets that you and other members of the Lyft team are making, as I've had to repeatedly correct a lot of them.
sbedwal_Lyft (2026-07-08 04:40:30+00:00): Hi marcmarti,
My name is Santosh, and I am a mapper on the OpenStreetMap team at Lyft.Thank you for bringing this to our attention, and we apologize for the oversight.
According to Lyft-owned aerial imagery source from May 2026(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1ClJsT2J291eukRb0HO3uAJLcnxeF2zJu/view?usp=sharing), construction elements are visible in this area, and there is currently no traffic flow. Therefore, removing the TRs would be more appropriate,as the situation may change in the future(Changeset:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185247056).Additionally, the exception was not clearly visible in our sources, which led to it being missed(https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rhiz_6sZRgIBWs22heHdTRb9jDN4ek7d/view?usp=sharing).If you have any additional local knowledge of this location, please feel free to make further adjustments as needed to ensure the map reflects the current on-the-ground conditions. I apologize for any inconvenience my changes may have caused and will be more careful with future edits.
The images will be available for a month. Please let me know if you are unable to view them within this timeframe – I could generate them once again.


Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Santosh
silversurfer83 (2026-07-06 19:37:43+00:00): Moin

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/106254501 hier hast du den Namen nun doppelt erfasst. Kannst du bitte wieder entfernen, da er am isolated_dwelling schon dran ist.

Grüße
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185192001
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 13:09:40+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. Could you please explain the reason for deleting these driveway/service ways?

This changeset deletes several ways that were tagged as private/service driveways. In OSM, private driveways and private roads can still be mapped when they exist on the ground; they should normally be kept with appropriate tags such as highway=service, service=driveway, and access=private, rather than deleted just because they are private.

If these driveways no longer physically exist, or were clearly incorrect/misplaced, please mention the evidence/source. Otherwise, could you please restore the deleted driveways and keep the access restrictions instead? Thank you.
Andador da Mata (2026-07-07 10:01:01+00:00): Hello Rajdhani, I know the area well, I am a local. This rail does not even exist or existed in this locality, the referred to 'Usina Santa Tereza' is in another municipality, the railroad that passed through this area was designed differently.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185192090
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 11:37:04+00:00): Hello, 
could you please discuss these edits with the Libya/local OSM community before making further mass changes to place names in this area?

The changeset comment says that indigenous Amazigh/Tifinagh names were added across name:ber=*, but the edit also appears to change the main name=* on many place nodes from the existing Arabic/local name to a combined Tifinagh + Arabic form, and in some cases also changes other language tags such as name:en=*.

In OSM, name=* should normally contain the common/default local name of the feature, not a combined multilingual label unless that exact combined form is verifiably used on the ground. Additional language forms should be kept in the appropriate language-specific tags such as name:ber=* / name:zgh=*, without replacing established main names or English names unless there is clear evidence and community agreement.

Could you please provide verifiable sources for the changed main names and other language-specific names, and revert the name=* / name:en=* changes where they are based on “toponym restoration” rather than current common usage? Thank you.
aceman444 (2026-07-08 13:48:25+00:00): Again, what "tagging issues" are you fixing here? All caps name is no issue. Show me where this is disallowed generally in OSM.
Have you been to the place to see how they spell the name on the site?
Comino (2026-07-08 17:01:27+00:00): According to OSM's official guidelines

- Names should be adapted to local capitalisation rules — title case is generally preferred
- Stylized spellings in ALL CAPS should be normalized — for example, a sign that reads "TACO BELL" should be written as name=Taco Bell (normal case, not all caps)
- The only exception is when changing the capitalisation would cause confusion or when the original spelling is much more common in everyday usage

So while OSM follows the "on the ground" principle (using names as they appear on signs), this specifically does not apply to stylized uppercase spellings — those should be converted to normal capitalisation according to local language rules.

Source: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions
Read: Proper name spelling
aceman444 (2026-07-09 19:13:53+00:00): Thanks.
Yes, the first sentence starts "If the name isn’t present on any signs". So have you been to the places and checked the signs? Were you able to determine if it is just stylized spelling and not official company name? All the rules on that section apply if you construct the name because there is no sign.

Also, foreign people may know know the capitalization rules of the local script so they may not be able to read random capitalization changes. They may not know 'A' is the same letter as 'a'. I may not be able to  do that in Cyrillics, Arabic, etc. Would you?
If the sign differs from the official company name, you can always write the official name into 'operator', 'brand', etc. tags. There is no reason to randomly mangle the 'name' tag to differ is from the sign on the ground.
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:35:54+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185262855
Szymson (2026-07-06 14:13:39+00:00): Po co ten industrial w miejscu rozebranej WMB? Teren jest aktualnie sprzątany i doprowadzany do pierwotnego stanu, a nie użytkowany przemysłowo.
czebureks (2026-07-06 15:02:21+00:00): Mapuję, co widziałem. Jak będzie tam rosła trawa, to zmienimy na trawę. Jeżeli jesteś pewien, że to już teren poprzemysłowy, no to możemy zrobić na razie landuse=brownfield.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-06 13:09:14+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. Could you please explain the reason for deleting these driveway/service ways?

This changeset deletes several ways that were tagged as private/service driveways. In OSM, private driveways and private roads can still be mapped when they exist on the ground; they should normally be kept with appropriate tags such as highway=service, service=driveway, and access=private, rather than deleted just because they are private.

If these driveways no longer physically exist, or were clearly incorrect/misplaced, please mention the evidence/source. Otherwise, could you please restore the deleted driveways and keep the access restrictions instead? Thank you.
DressyPear4 (2026-07-07 12:35:53+00:00): Este changeset foi revertido com changeset/185262855
DressyPear4 (2026-07-06 15:16:38+00:00): Em um trecho em curva e povoado?
Caso correto ainda é necessário ajustar elementos ao entorno, evitando "sobras" como por exemplo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9838828818

Novamente insisto em abrir uma discussão nos grupos ou fórum sobre essas alterações, caso contrário farei a reversão de todas suas edições.
Szymson (2026-07-06 14:11:15+00:00): Z tym, że to flaga Kaszub bym się wstrzymał. Wieszają tam również flagę państwową RP, co jakiś czas następuje zmiana.
czebureks (2026-07-06 15:08:11+00:00): Widzę, że rok temu specjalnie po to postawiono ten maszt, by powiewała na nim flaga Kaszub: https://radiogdansk.pl/wiadomosci/region/kaszuby/2025/07/05/najwieksza-flaga-kaszub-zawisla-na-wezle-w-szemudzie/

Myślę, że rozsądnym rozwiązaniem w takiej sytuacji jest zastosować takie tagi, które odpowiadają sytuacji najczęstszej. A wygląda na to, że jednak to flaga kaszubska wisi tam częściej niż polska.

Analogicznie, tutaj: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6018150556 - już parę razy widziałem kaszubską, ale przez zdecydowaną większość dni w roku jest polska.