piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
confusedbuffalo (2026-06-26 19:30:05+00:00): Hi, I'm just looking at Brook Terrace and I was going to neaten up the outlines a bit, but I can't see how to fit 11 houses into that space. Are there really 11 houses there?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1497761079
frydzio (2026-04-09 11:19:18+00:00): Why did you change addresses? They have been officially changed, see https://mapa.um.warszawa.pl/mapaApp1/mapa?service=mapa&L=PL&X=7504481.659886397&Y=5785600.452833819&S=16&O=0&T=7d800ffeffffe03db7fc7e21ffff10ffff80007fffe000006160500020f8000ffc7f812dbbfdb1900000000020380601800040008802c027cc08fb8e000010e000001fe00100100100100100100100100100300000000000000082082082082082000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000038xE6
Old addresses has been left in old_addr:* tags
apecutax (2026-04-09 17:23:17+00:00): These buildings have signs with this information.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:10:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
wanderer234678 (2026-04-18 13:57:00+00:00): Can be deleted, is replaced by https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/254743015
trigpoint (2026-04-14 14:17:50+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted by the DWG in changeset https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/181325174
pesec (2026-04-09 08:06:54+00:00): Здравствуйте.
Этот пакет правок добавляет точку лежачего полицейского возле дороги. Эта точка должна быть частью линии дороги.
Кроме того, в этом месте уже обозначен пешеходный переход с возвышением. Дублировать эту информацию не нужно.
trigpoint (2026-04-09 13:02:28+00:00): Hello
Phil from the Data Working Group here.
Can you be specific about the source you used as your comment in note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4205489 suggests an invalid source may have been used.
For the avoidance of doubt the statement facts cannot be copyrighted is the fact that the collection of them can be.
Vou should certainly read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Copyright_information_for_UK_mappers and pay attention to the part about Crown Copyright.
trigpoint (2026-04-14 11:49:03+00:00): No response so reverting this edit.
trigpoint (2026-04-14 14:15:07+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted by the DWG in changeset https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/181325174
Yog Sot (2026-04-09 22:35:49+00:00): jbc dla ściezek foot i bicycle yest domyslnie na yes, nie musisz specjalnie  tagować. 
A jak ściezka jest trudna, to nie daje się bicycle=no tylko ustawia się smoothness np. acess ustawia się tylko jesli są prawnie obowiązujące restrykcje.
kisielka14 (2026-04-11 19:50:01+00:00): dziękuję, postaram się zapamiętać
bartgron (2026-04-10 07:38:12+00:00): Dlaczego rozwaliłeś CPRy na osobne chodniki i ścieżki rowerowe?
Kamil Kalata (2026-04-10 09:56:46+00:00): Witaj!
Chciałbym zaznaczyć, że o ile dokumentacja na wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle?utm_source=chatgpt.com#:~:text=S5) dopuszcza rozdzielanie ciągów pieszo-rowerowych z rozdzielonymi częściami pieszą i rowerową na dwie linie, to w tym samym miejscu odradza stosowanie takiego rozwiązania ze względu na brak fizycznego rozdziału. Ponadto, w tym miejscu Twoje rozwiązanie nie zdaje za bardzo egzaminu, gdyż nawigacje sugerowałyby rowerzystom dwu-, a nawet trzykrotne skręty na wysepkach oddzielających prawoskręty, mimo że konieczny jest tylko jeden taki manewr.
Yog Sot (2026-04-10 12:02:02+00:00): mnie się podoba
Kamil, słuszny argument, ale jak to zrobisz jedna kreską to też nie jest dobrze, bo poza wysepka, gdzie infrastruktura jest rozdzielona, tracisz ta informacje, mi gdzie spodziewać się pieszego przekraczającego DDR, gdzie oraz ile jest tych punktów kolizyjnych. 

A przejscio/przejazdy rowerowe tez nie mają tagowania na wskazanie lokalizacji jednego względem drugiego. 

Więc tak czy się nie jest zbyt dobrze. Zasadne było by się skupić nad poprawianiem dokumentacji i logiki OSM zamiast ciągłe kopanie sie z tymi samymi problemami.
NeisBot (2026-04-08 19:36:40+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 15 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/879412653 v3 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/482557823 v5 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/383959935 v8 | 5 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/4753696731 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181066758
iandees (2026-04-08 20:30:36+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4753696731 was 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/181068730, 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!
Filip009 (2026-06-08 06:58:47+00:00): Zdravím, jedná sa o názov turistickej trasy, alebo zmena jeho prevádzkovateľa? https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1701177 Neviem o tom, že by sa na smerovníkoch uvádzal tento názov. Viete prosím poskytnúť informácie, odkiaľ tento názov pochádza?
Filip009 (2026-06-08 07:20:13+00:00): Okej, našiel som to, pardon za vyrušovanie.
NeisBot (2026-04-08 20:00:46+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/12187956823 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Nail salon"
---
Na przykład, bardziej neutralna i obiektywna wersja Twojego tekstu mogłaby brzmieć: "Salon kosmetyczny dla paznokci"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-04-16 22:33:07+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/181433899
(Restore previous tags. No changes)
pesec (2026-04-09 08:02:51+00:00): Здравствуйте. 
Этот пакет правок добавляет точку лежачего полицейского возле дороги. Эта точка должна быть частью линии дороги.
Кроме того, в этом месте уже обозначен пешеходный переход с возвышением. Дублировать эту информацию не нужно.
eggie (2026-04-08 20:08:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Volgens mij is hier iets niet helemaal goed gegaan.
Hier lijkt een fietspad in de knoop te liggen. Denk niet dat dat je bedoeling is.

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-04-08 20:12:41+00:00): De schade heb ik hersteld...  Je eigen edits.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-04-08 20:19:57+00:00): https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=181067680
Wildsharky (2026-04-13 11:43:31+00:00):  Reverted in changeset id:181089308
stasiu512 (2026-04-08 20:22:48+00:00): Cześć, pamiętaj proszę w następnych zmianach o uzupełnieniu restrykcji. Poprawiłem zepsute restrykcje w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181068427.
Pozdrawiam
eggie (2026-04-08 20:19:08+00:00): Dag Gerrit,

Dan is access=private toch voldoende?
Dat houdt alle 'verkeer' tegen.. ook wandelaars. 

MVG
eggie
NeisBot (2026-04-08 20:21:43+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/13507190220 v4

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 13:46:34+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184915321
Frans S (2026-04-09 08:23:20+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181068420
eggie (2026-04-09 05:38:48+00:00): Welkom bij OSM,

Bedankt voor je bijdrage. Wel svp de aard van het bedrijf toevoegen. Bv office=company ..
Alleen een naam doet niets.
Mvg,
eggie
eggie (2026-04-09 10:34:05+00:00): Aangepast als bovenstaand. Bag hersteld
gpserror (2026-04-10 09:36:03+00:00): Isn't this duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8089966550 ? Perhaps need to merge the two or something
BittyBoo-Boo (2026-04-12 15:20:05+00:00): Yes, those points are marking the same community college, but the entrance is where I placed it, at the corner of the building.
Alexandre148025 (2026-04-27 10:39:26+00:00): Bonjour,
Pouvez vous expliquer le taggage Bapaume =town et pourquoi pas les autres villages de Picardie, France, Europe?
Alexandre148025 (2026-04-27 10:39:49+00:00): *pas-de-Clais
NeisBot (2026-04-08 20:39:43+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/13525170948 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Boat lift factory"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-04-08 22:33:18+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 13:45:53+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184915297
qstep (2026-04-09 13:19:13+00:00): Szia. Eltörted a https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3822829 útvonalat, javítottam.
leveskockaa (2026-04-09 16:32:48+00:00): Szia! Köszi, ha jól látom, zokert kollégával keletkezett egy ütközés, ő törölte véletlen.
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/3822829
NeisBot (2026-04-08 20:51:43+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/13520040949 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 13:45:15+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184915255
Fraxi (2026-04-08 21:11:16+00:00): Неееее :(
Dimitar155_bot (2026-04-08 21:14:41+00:00): Мерси за коментара. Трябваше ми тест да видя дали писмата достигат правилната поща. Достигат успешно :)
thebrad1111 (2026-04-08 21:20:35+00:00): Forgotten comment: Add buildings to Tapton View Road
Baloo Uriza (2026-04-11 21:10:45+00:00): Usually better to add this kind of thing as a Note instead of a fixme, as Notes tend to get picked up by Osmand and StreetComplete in the field.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181070521
weblogdryads (2026-07-06 18:27:31+00:00): okay fixed
MappingMore (2026-04-09 09:33:23+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:181087262
ion_chi (2026-04-09 17:35:35+00:00): Hi, I think this is a parking=lane, and any parking mapped separately should be mapped as an area. That's why there's a warning on this changeset. 

The wiki advises it's easier to add the parking tags directly on a segment of the street, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dlane#How_to_map
cheddar_bunny_wizard (2026-04-09 20:29:43+00:00): Hi, thank you for your feedback! 

I went back and forth on whether to map parking by way or directly tagged onto a segment of the street, so I would love your opinion. The right and left sides of the block have different segments of parking rules that don't align nicely, do you think area mapping would be better for this location?
scrambling_panda (2026-04-10 01:52:01+00:00): On the wiki page for amenity=parking, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking , you can see in the "Used on these elements" section that the only two valid uses are on nodes or closed areas - not simple ways.

So the choice is really between whether to map the parking as areas along the street, like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1463506566 , or directly on the street centerline like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1201582529

There's a brief discussion of the tradeoffs at the top of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Street_parking#Tagging

But basically, mapping it separately allows more precise detail and has the benefit of not needing to split the street centerline. But it is much higher "effort" than mapping on the street centerline, since you need to accurately draw each area.

Centerline is probably easier to start with, at least.

And to handle different rules on the left side and right side, you can use parking:left or parking:right and the subtags, combined with splitting the centerline where you need to when the rules change on one side or the other.

It may also be helpful to take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Street_parking/Advanced_examples if the rules are particularly complex.

With the "tagging on centerline" approach, I think your current tags would become:
parking:both=lane
parking:left:markings=yes
parking:left:orientation=parallel
parking:left:maxstay:conditional=15 minutes @ (8:00-21:00)
parking:left:restriction:conditional=no_parking @ (Tu 02:00-07:00)


(also, remember, the times are in "military time" to that currently means 2AM to 7AM - not sure if that's intentional or not)

Hope that helps!
rempshaener (2026-04-09 08:13:59+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Ich habe folgende Fragen bzw. Anmerkungen:
- Handelt es sich wirklich um zwei Wasserbehälter? Einer sitzt auf dem Gebäudeumriss, einer daneben.
- Das fire_hydrant:type=wall dürfte nicht richtig sein. Ich gehe davon aus, dass es sich um eine fest verrohrte Saugstelle handelt? Dann wären das fire_hydrant:type=pipe.
- Sofern das Wasser angesaugt werden muss, wäre noch die Angabe fire_hydrant:pressure=suction sinnvoll.

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
eggie (2026-04-08 22:03:44+00:00): Hoi.. Hier nog even de website verwijderen.
Mapse
eggie (2026-04-08 22:05:18+00:00): Denk dat alles weg kan. De oorspronkelijke BAG node is er ook nog.
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-11 18:21:18+00:00): Bonjour,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/47002732 est une voie verte (C115). Aussi, le designated foot/bicycle était correct : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle#Voie_verte
À moins que la signalisation soit différente sur ce tronçon. Les panneaux n’étaient pas encore posés lorsqu’il a été ouvert il y a environ 2 mois.
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-11 18:32:30+00:00): Vous avez basulé https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/159170039 d’une voie de service à un path. En aérien, la largeur n’est pas celle d’un path et il n’y a pas d’élément pour bloquer un accès 4-roues. Cela semble également incorrect. Sauf si vous avez des informations pas visibles.
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-11 18:37:11+00:00): Idem https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/219687980
En plus vous laissez la limite de vitesse et le sens de circulation ce qui n’a pas sens. Sur Bing, c’est clairement accessible aux voitures. Donc path n’est pas le bon type de voie ici.
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-11 18:41:22+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1107061923
Les access foot/bicycle=no sont bizarres. Cela signifie qu’une voiture peut aller sur cette voie mais pas un piéton. Cela semble illogique. Pas sûr que que vous vouliez faire ceci. Est-ce une voie privée ?
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-11 18:45:54+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361997435 n’est pas une piste cyclable (aucune signalisation).
De plus, cela empêche maintenant l’accès à https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/159170062. Je pencherais plutôt pour un path à partir de l’intersection car il y a un bloc à la fin du chemin pour empêcher un 4-roues de passer.
Maxxim62 (2026-04-16 09:46:08+00:00): Bonjour Sebastien, concernant  way/159170039 effectivement, j'ai repassé la voie en voie de service.
Maxxim62 (2026-04-16 09:49:13+00:00): way/1107061923
Il s'agit d'un acces au bassin de retention, l'acces est fermé par une grille et est interdit au public.
Maxxim62 (2026-04-16 09:57:08+00:00): way/1361997435 en arrivant par l'Est, l'acces a la route est fermé par une butte de terre, le sol est peint avec logos Pietons et Cycle, il s'agit d'un cul-de-sac pour les véhicules. (et suis la voie pieton dans sa continuité). Effectivement l'acces a l'entreprise est toujours ouvert aux vehicules motorisés. Je vois sur les streeview de 2023 que ces logos peints au sol n'existaient pas a l'epoque. C'est le cas maintenant, j'y suis passé a velo il y a 10 jours. Je vous laisse decider de la definition de cette route avec ces infos. Merci
Sébastien Pi (2026-04-16 21:34:08+00:00): Bonsoir Maxxim62,

Merci pour vos réponses.

Concernant https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1107061923, pouvez-vous ajouté la grille ?
Et sur les accès, il y a actuellement :
bicycle	no
foot	no
horse	no
Ce qui autorise de facto une voiture par exemple sur la voie.
Il faudrait plutôt mettre à la place access=private (s’il y a un cadenas par exemple qui permet d’ouvrir la grille). no est plutôt à utiliser pour une interdiction légale (marcher sur une autoroute par exemple).

Quelqu’un a recorrigé way/1361997435. Oui, la butte bloque l’accès, j’avais vu https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6878316972. Est-ce qu’il y a un paneau qui interdit à un véhicule d’aller de l’ouest jusqu’au cul-de-sac ? Si non, il faut laisser la route comme une route. Si oui, il faut la passer en track. track = assez large pour un véhicule à 4 roues / path = pas assez large. Avec le « bloc » déclaré, les applications de routage vont de fait empêcher le trafic automobile (sauf destination).
C’est important de laisser une route comme une route. Des services de secours utilisent OSM (https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/tuiles-bloquees-depuis-lapplication-du-samu/42533 par exemple). Et s’il faut intervenir dans le coin, savoir qu’ils peuvent emprunter cette voie jusqu’à tel emplacement peut leur faire gagner du temps sur les interventions. C’est pareil avec les access de la voie précédente. C’est intéressant d’ajouter la grille si elle est verrouillée.
Tomas09 (2026-04-09 21:54:14+00:00): Didn't mean to request help oopsieee
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2026-04-09 11:03:30+00:00): Hi!
There seems to be some changes on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1497800290 and some objects nearby that were not meant to be part of this changeset: can you double-check that it's alright?
Have a nice day,
Martin.
ellieamcb (2026-04-09 11:54:44+00:00): Sorry about that, I forgot to upload to the task before moving areas it isn't correct. I'm not sure how to fix this, so if you could help that would be appreciated.

Thanks,
Ellie
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2026-04-09 12:17:56+00:00): No worries: this happens ☺ There is no need to fix anything if the buildings you have added in Canada are correct.
literan (2026-04-09 19:00:28+00:00): а зачем менять тип переходов со стола на хамп? там именно столы (совмещенные с переходом), а не просто широкий лежачий. Откачу.
LordGarySugar (2026-05-20 15:52:19+00:00): Hi, please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182689403, this person strongly believes that the path you updated here and paths around are private. If you don't believe that's correct, let me know why and maybe we can work it out. I have at least made sure the public footpaths through here are correct.
MassCartog (2026-04-09 15:19:03+00:00): Hello, A lot of these trails have pretty active heatmap data showing they exist. We do not remove trails that exist. Also, avoid replacing them, rather updating the paths that already exist.

Do not remove trails because you believe they are inaccurate, you can choose to update them or leave them alone. "Hopefully" getting to re-adding them later is not applicable, OSM data is live production, when you remove things they are removed immediately. These trails have been restored.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Joseph R P (2026-04-12 21:57:51+00:00): What's the reason for this one little section being tagged as a motorway? It's only a quarter mile between the frontage road access and the exit ramps.
NeisBot (2026-04-09 03:12:40+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 48 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1159572633 v4 | 22 crossings
https://osm.org/way/778701902 v7 | 21 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/4927829240 v2
https://osm.org/node/10783643201 v4

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181076110
iandees (2026-04-09 03:38:39+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10783643201, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4927829240 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/181076568, 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!
Glassman (2026-04-10 02:27:07+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/181076185
Masyas (2026-04-09 23:36:31+00:00): 添加完建筑后，建议对其使用直角化工具进行直角化