piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-30 11:40:34+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12499128880/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
M!dgard (2025-01-13 23:11:23+00:00): Source character limit reached. Source for location of FCT:

https://web.archive.org/web/20250113225819/https://www.vliz.be/imisdocs/publications/ocrd/262253.pdf#page=35 page 33 (PDF page 35)
mrpulley (2026-02-28 05:25:38+00:00): Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked at survey)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-30 06:28:05+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12499160483/history has shop = service that was added in this edit
shop=service ? What kind of service? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop for possible values - though maybe new one is needed)
Fizzie-DWG (2025-01-27 02:07:28+00:00): DWG revert - Google Maps used as Source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161801348
DRenfr (2025-01-22 02:17:48+00:00): This is a decommissioned trail that has been removed by the landowner.
silversurfer83 (2025-01-14 21:43:52+00:00): Hello :)

Are you really sure there's a 50 (!) meter high cliff in the middle of a city? cliffs are natural features. When it's man made we call them either embankment or retaining wall...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dretaining_wall
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161328185
joost schouppe (2025-10-07 07:50:23+00:00): Jij een idee waarom de oorspronkelijke bron https://www.gem.wiki/Zeebrugge_2_Fluxys_power_station dit aangeeft als een voormalige productiesite?
M!dgard (2025-10-09 08:23:18+00:00): Bij "retired year" staat er 2024 met een bron, die bron is een tabel van de FOD Economie die zegt dat deze generator definitief buiten dienst gesteld is.

Geen idee wat dat betekent voor de situatie op het terrein.
smichae (2025-01-14 01:06:37+00:00): Thanks for the updates, this is just terrible in scale. I noticed on your earlier updates that you marked the individual home polygons as destroyed as well but haven't yet on some of your newest sets. I don't want to make your work harder by updating some if you're in the middle of that.
felipeeugenio (2025-02-19 17:36:41+00:00): Hola, Buenas tardes.
Te escribo porque acabo de pasar varios días en San Martín de Los Andes y aproveché de recorrerla entera con mi familia, pero además recorrí todo el centro con una cámara 360°, que está ahora disponible en Mapillary.

Encontré varios detalles en la ciudad y me llamó mucho su sistema de clasificaciones, y me disponía a cambiarlos, porque la verdad es que no cumplen mucho los parámetros de decisión que se requieren para elevar/rebajar clasificaciones en una ciudad.

Pero me topé con que muchas de las clasificaciones estaban bien anteriormente y que las cambiaste todas hace un mes.

Además, se hace mención a una ordenanza municipal y, como consecuencia, se le cambió el rol a una RN, lo que entiendo que una ordenanza no tiene el poder de hacer.

Adicionalmente se borraron unas aceras que existen en terreno.

He estado mostrando la escena a otros maperos para ver si están viendo lo mismo que yo.

Los cambios fueron muchos como para conversarlos solamente en los comentarios de un changeset, por lo que ni siquiera voy a intentar enumerarlos por acá.
Le pregunté a Andrés si acaso te podía ubicar por Telegram para ver si formamos un chat todos juntos. Creo que vale la pena, ya que se tendrían que compartir muchas imágenes y considerar un par de detalles que quizás solo conoces tú, que vives más cerca.

Saludos
silversurfer83 (2025-01-14 20:02:22+00:00): Hallo

woher weißt du, was das für ein Gebäude ist? Wenn da nur ein Sport ausgetragen wird und der Großteil vom Gebäude eher Vereinsheim ist, dann ist das sicher kein sports_centre
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161328730
MHD (2025-01-14 22:23:23+00:00): Aufgrund der Größe und Lage des Gebäudes direkt an die Schießbahn anschließend ist davon auszugehen das noch mindestens 4m im Gebäude der Schießbahn zuzurechnen sind daher bleibt nicht genug Platz für andere Nutzungen.
silversurfer83 (2025-01-15 09:00:02+00:00): Ich halte einige dieser Schützenänderungen von dir für etwas optimistisch. Meiner persönlichen Meinung nach sollte an vielen Stellen, wo du zB sports center erstellst viel eher ein Hinweis mit Bitte um Überprüfung vor Ort hinterlassen werden oder es sollte erst eine ausführliche Recherche im Web erfolgen (wobei survey immer besser ist).
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-01-15 19:28:19+00:00): This changeset removed roads, added incorrect tags, moved features from their correct location, deleted buildings, unnecessarily split roads, misaligned roads, and I'm having difficulty finding any useful changes.
reverted.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161328775
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-01-15 19:31:11+00:00): No bus stops were added in this changeset.
CurlingMan13 (2025-01-14 17:11:11+00:00): Hello,

What source did you use for this plaque/sign?
fjavier_gr (2025-01-14 20:22:54+00:00): Hola,

Creo que no es correcto como has dejado la nueva rotonda con varias conexiones de doble sentido.

Un saludo.
Nazanial76 (2025-01-14 20:46:35+00:00): Hola
Nazanial76 (2025-01-14 20:47:35+00:00): Me he guiado por lo que aparece en Google maps que puede estar equivocado nada más.

Un saludo
fjavier_gr (2025-01-16 19:07:32+00:00): Hola,
La rotonda estaba bien como la dibujé y si no hay imagen aérea no le veo sentido a cambiarlo a como esté en Google que tiene fallos y no hay imagen actual.
Un saludo.
Nazanial76 (2025-01-16 19:37:34+00:00): Perfecto favier_gr, tienes razón siento haberme fiado de google y TomTom si lo crees conveniente devuelve la forma a la que le asignaste inicialmente.
Un Saludo
fjavier_gr (2025-01-17 08:52:49+00:00): De acuerdo, precisamente la había dibujado tal como está en TomTom, te dejo enlace y lo puedes ver:
https://plan.tomtom.com/es/location/id/VD8MBZnx54EeKamovknu7g?p=39.45018,-5.88084,17.65z&q=10200%20Trujillo
fjavier_gr (2025-01-17 09:01:27+00:00): Por cierto, según TomTom, la nacional sigue discurriendo por las calles de la Encarnación y de la Merced.
fjavier_gr (2025-01-17 09:06:25+00:00): Perdón, acabo de comprobarlo en el visor de la Junta de Extremadura y efectivamente, la carretera nacional ahora discurre por la Avenida.
Un saludo.
fjavier_gr (2025-01-17 09:09:46+00:00): Perdón  de nuevo. Veo que en el visor están las dos opciones, así que no sé realmente cuál es la válida para la nacional.
fjavier_gr (2025-01-17 09:14:00+00:00): Último comentario. Revisando la información de las capas en el visor, veo que la que dibuja la nacional por Avenida de... es la versión 1.0, mientras que la capa que dibuja la nacional por las calles de la Encarnación y de la Merced, es la versión 1.3. Por lo que creo que la nacional debería estar dibujada como en TomTom. Voy a realizar los cambios. Un saludo.
Leo Slager (2025-01-14 23:06:49+00:00): Dag Skywave,
Met deze changeset heb je 20 busroutes beschadigd.
Dat kostte me ruim  1 1/2 uur om het allemaal weer te repareren.

Wees even voorzichtig met het op deze manier wijzigen van het wegennet, vooral als er routerelaties over lopen.
santamariense (2025-01-18 13:23:36+00:00): Olá ViniciusRibeiro,

Estive revisando sua edição. Está muito boa.
A única coisa que precisa ser corrigida é a tag addr:street=* que deve bater 100% com no nome da rua, conforme está na rua e não abreviada. Corrigindo isso, fica 100% funcional.

Bons mapeamentos!
santamariense
ViniciusRibeiro (2025-01-18 17:26:34+00:00): Olá amigo. Obrigado pela dica, já vou corrigir! Abraços.
mrpulley (2025-12-13 10:54:42+00:00): Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked at survey)
Kovoschiz (2025-01-14 04:41:53+00:00): Why did you delete a sidewalk section?
mrpulley (2025-12-13 10:58:03+00:00): 664135781 - maxspeed 50 (not 100). Others correct. Fixed at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169812849
balchen (2025-03-05 06:40:05+00:00): Hei. Lenge siden sist. Har vært ute og kikket på de nye sykkelveiene til nye SUS. På en liten del av strekningen er de rampet ned til ordinære, oppmalte sykkelfelt. Lurer på om du har noen innspill til hvordan dette kan tagges?
gormur (2025-03-14 23:34:07+00:00): Jeg tenker det er fint med noen små korte "link" veier. Slik som denne, f.eks? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/953504657 eller https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086550171 ?
balchen (2025-03-17 06:36:15+00:00): Du tenker å avslutte de tegnede sykkelveiene og bytte til cycleway=lane på denne strekningen?
gormur (2025-04-03 16:03:22+00:00): Jeg funderte på det samme da jeg var innom dagen før bussene begynte å kjøre der. Jeg tegnet det litt "forenklet" da, så kan det raffineres litt når vi får flyfoto, tenker jeg...
balchen (2025-04-04 07:20:07+00:00): Blir komplisert, men korrekt, tagging. Ikke så komplisert i dette tilfellet, for det er bare ett segment hvor de gjør om til sykkelfelt, men Oalsgata i Sandnes skal ha dette i hvert kryss, så da blir det mer omfattende.
balchen (2025-04-04 07:22:49+00:00): Tror det er planlagt 16 skifter mellom sykkelfelt og enveis-sykkelve i Oalsgata.... på hver side....
Frank Peng (2026-01-13 04:51:27+00:00): Do not delete existing map elements and redraw them anew. Doing so is against OSM good practice. For the parking areas you deleted in this changeset, you could've just modified their geometry by adding or moving nodes on them instead of deleting the parking areas and redrawing them anew.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1108008942/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1108008943/history

Please take a few steps to help preserve the history on OSM.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

You can visit the FacilMap link of this changeset to see which elements you created, which elements you modified, and which elements you deleted: https://facilmap.org/#q=changeset%20161330743
aceman444 (2025-01-27 00:12:52+00:00): What is the point of this change? Just adding postcodes on random shops? We already have postcodes on addresses in the building and also whole postcode boundaries in the city.

These changes are unneded.
TYAS123 (2025-01-27 02:20:06+00:00): I added the new opening hours, but since I was editing with Organic maps, which contained data from a month ago, only the postcode was updated.
aceman444 (2025-02-06 09:14:13+00:00): So it seems the Organic maps app add those postcodes automatically? Please configure it so that it does not do that.
Glassman (2025-01-14 17:36:22+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/161331072
BTC Map (2025-01-14 05:49:29+00:00): Hi! I noticed that currency:XBT tag was removed, did you stop accepting bitcoins?
vcpavao (2025-01-14 15:54:42+00:00): Official trail map is here: https://www.kestreltrust.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/11/BWB-NATURE-RETREAT-TRAIL-MAP_11_2024_FINAL.pdf
Fjellrev (2025-01-27 17:22:26+00:00): Hi @Yuvaan
Thanks for your updates to Openstreetmap.
Here you made actually too much ;-) These roads have no name - which is quite normal in rural areas - which can be tagged as noname=yes so tools like street-complete and alike do not complain.
The adress is then mapped as addr:place=Degernäs intead of addr:street= plus a housenumber.
I might change it in the coming days.
mavl (2025-05-13 15:08:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
samho1234567 (2025-01-14 04:17:32+00:00): *Gangxia station
mtmail (2025-01-20 13:06:48+00:00): House number 251 is directly on the highway https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12499994960 Is there a house hidden in the woods to the south? I noticed because the addr:postcode is not a number
Theresa Ellingsen (2025-01-20 19:57:51+00:00): I believe that it is/was the mailing address for am RV/mobile home trailer to the north between 231 and 271, or it may just be a mailbox on an empty lot. I corrected the postcode but i'd have to drive by there to check on the address again.
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-01-17 06:38:16+00:00): 17529646, 17529648. 2 turn restriction đã được ghi rất rõ lí do vì sao tạo ở phần history comment changeset. Bạn vui lòng đọc lại hoặc có xóa thì nêu rõ lí do vì sao xóa, sau đó sẽ thảo luận để đi đến phương án cuối.
Vinber-Pro (2025-02-12 16:43:34+00:00): Bonjour,
si le collège n'est pas encore sorti, peut-être mettre un landuse=construction ?

Ton avis ?
Vinber-Pro (2025-02-12 16:45:02+00:00): cela donnerait cela https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341542275
dknelson9876 (2025-02-04 03:53:53+00:00): Hi fryguy09, I have some concerns about the tagging you've used here. 

Firstly, admin_level=5 would indicate an administrative authority between a state and a county according to the wiki page for US admin levels (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States_admin_level), which doesn't match here. In fact, since based on the name it looks like this boundary has no administrative authority, or place-finding use, I'm not sure it belongs in OSM at all. If you're looking for a boundary that is just underneath a city, I think the city's community councils fit the bill, although I have yet to reach out for permission to use their maps for OSM.
nevw (2025-01-14 18:56:12+00:00): Hi, the highlighted ring can’t share the border in a multipolygon
nevw (2025-01-14 18:56:29+00:00): https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.18658&lat=-27.69526&zoom=16
Tech Dec (2025-01-19 00:04:46+00:00): Hey nevw. I can't see any issues in geofabrik. I checked each filter but there's nothing displaying.

I realise now you've fixed it in changeset #161401170 thank you! Silly mistake on my part. I know not to do that in future.
nevw (2025-01-19 05:25:41+00:00): Sorry, apologies for not leaving another comment.
mavl (2025-05-13 15:06:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
trial (2026-03-15 17:26:56+00:00): circumference=40 m for height=5 m, impressive! ;-)
user_5589 (2026-03-17 10:17:41+00:00): Oops. Thanks for catching that units error.
trial (2026-03-17 12:30:37+00:00): You can thanks a import from Bulgaria that was using the values in cm... so we looked at some other outliers.
mrpulley (2025-12-13 11:07:05+00:00): 199323925 - maxspeed correct. Others not checked.
mrpulley (2025-12-13 11:09:18+00:00): 1115640414 was also checked. Maxspeed in this section 50 (not 100), fixed at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169613072
Frank Peng (2026-01-13 05:39:33+00:00): Please do not remove map elements you don't need or don't like. It looks like you adjusted some existing roads in this changeset, but merged a few roads into one road. Inaccurate mapping is not forbidden, but you certainly should not work the other way and remove details that someone else added. It is known that not everything is always needed by everyone, but you must not remove map elements just because you do not need it or you think it is stupid.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_objects_that_you_don't_need_or_like

You also incorrectly spelled "Belview" in this changeset's comment. "Belview has one "l", not two l's.

You can visit this FacilMap link of this changeset to see which elements you added, modified, or deleted: https://facilmap.org/#q=changeset%20161332512
Supaplex (2025-01-14 10:12:45+00:00): 清潭->青潭
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161332750
mavl (2025-05-13 15:07:31+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:04:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mcliquid (2025-01-14 09:02:03+00:00): Ist die gesamte Fläche ein einzelner Parkplatz?
frantsch (2025-01-14 12:26:12+00:00): Die betreffende Fläche ist eine Hausein- und zufahrt und nur zum Abstellen privater Fahrzeuge gedacht.
mcliquid (2025-01-14 12:58:22+00:00): Danke! Dann ist es also doch ein normaler, privater Parkplatz für private Kraftfahrzeuge. Somit mit "access=private", wie es bereits zuvor war. Korrigierst du das wieder oder soll ich das tun?
frantsch (2025-01-14 13:43:23+00:00): kein parkplatz! private hauszufahrt oder hauseinfahrt! wenn die fläche als parkplatz kategorisiert ist, erscheint dort ein P-Symbol in der Darstellung, das ist auf einer Hauszufahrt nicht korrekt!
mcliquid (2025-01-14 15:09:22+00:00): Danke dir!
Aleksandar1994 (2025-01-14 09:38:22+00:00): Hi Molandfreak,

I noticed that you've been working on this boundary recently. However, it seems that the multipolygon isn't closed. Do you have any local knowledge or insights that could help resolve this issue?

Thank you!
Support ULTAXI (2025-01-14 07:14:34+00:00): Коллеги, приношу извинения, движение в другую сторону не на всем участке, а только на том, что выходит на пр-т Созидателей
eggie (2025-01-14 07:18:05+00:00): Dag Erwin..
Lijkt me oke.
Wanneer het prive terrein is zal ook op de weg foot=permissive gelden ipv yes 
Bij een hek kun je ook nog toevoegen 
.. locked=yes of no
Mapse..
eggie
Erwin (VRG) (2025-01-14 07:23:32+00:00): Goedemorgen Eggie,

Dank voor je reactie.

Voor nu laat ik het zo, ik weet niet namelijk niet of het een (Tijdelijk) afgesloten hek is of niet.
Of het een privé terrein is, ik denk het niet. Maar ook dit heb ik niet 100% zeker. 

Gr.,
NorthCrab_upload (2025-01-14 07:10:48+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/912013279
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/931225649

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
P_kawa (2025-01-14 21:06:02+00:00): Wkrótce zajmę się uzupełnieniem brakujących danych
eggie (2025-01-14 07:24:17+00:00): Dag Erwin..
Of het in de praktijk gaat werken is maar de vraag.
In ieder geval een verbetering.

Mvg..
eggie
jbcharron (2025-02-08 17:05:08+00:00): Bonsoir,
Merci pour vos contributions sur les adresses dans la région.
Pour s'assurer que les relations d'adresses fonctionnement correctement, les tags dans la relation doivent être type=associatedStreet, ID a tendance a retirer la majuscule dans la valeur ce qui fait que ce n'est plus considéré comme une relation d'adresses.
Bonne soirée
Antoinesk8 (2025-02-11 10:00:29+00:00): Bonjour,
Sérieux ! Je ne savais pas que la majuscule était importante ! Je ferai attention les prochaines fois. Merci pour tes corrections :-)
DaanLT (2025-01-14 08:26:20+00:00): Čia nėra paštas, čia siuntas vežanti įmonė kaip paštas - jų paslaugomis pats dažnai naudojuosi. Taigi prašom netrinti kai nežinai kas ten yra. Pakeitimas atšaukiamas
Nana Rave (2025-01-21 09:09:33+00:00): tai aišku kas ten yra. Ne paštas kaip ir pats parašei
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-08 15:49:18+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12500312450/history has shop = تاسیسات that was added in this edit
shop=تاسیسات ? What is the meaning of that shop value? What kind of services or products are sold here? Is anything from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_for_key_%22shop%22 fitting? Maybe new value needs to be invented? Maybe this data is wrong and there is no shop here? Maybe it is not a shop but something else?
Tomas Straupis (2025-01-14 10:19:10+00:00): Convenience bebūtinai turi reikšti savitarnos. Jei ten parduodama daugmaž „viskas“, t.y. ir kažkiek maisto, ir kažkiek kitų prekių, ir tai nedidelė parduotuvė - tai ir „convenience“.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-01-14 08:02:13+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/305715752

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
A35K (2025-01-14 15:28:11+00:00): In diesem Naturschutzgebiet ist das Fahrrad fahren verboten. Ausgenommen davon sind ausgewiesene Radwege, diese sind auf der linken Seite der NSG Beschilderung aufgezeichnet. Der hier geänderte Weg ist keiner dieser Radwege und damit ist es auch nicht erlaubt auf diesem zu radeln. 

Hat sich hierbei etwas verändert oder kann ich wieder bicycle=no hinzufügen?
acbauer (2025-01-14 17:48:30+00:00): Es gibt eine Handvoll nicht gesiegelter Hinweistafeln, die diesen Weg weglassen und dafür andere Wege, die schon vor mehr als 20 Jahren zugewachsen sind als benutzbar ausweisen. Diese weisen ein saisonales Betretungsverbot für die FLÄCHEN aus; von einem Fahrradverbot steht dort nirgends etwas!
Insofern: So lange dieser Weg verkehrsrechtlich mit Zeichen 260 gewidmet ist, ist die Befahrung selbstverständlich zulässig!
A35K (2025-01-14 18:42:17+00:00): Ich meinte die Tafeln welche die Ge- und Verbote für das NSG auflisten. Auf diesen Tafeln ist dieser Weg nicht als "Radweg" gekennzeichnet, rechts daneben dass durgestrichene Fahrradsymbol, welches das Fahrradverbot zeigt. Vorallem da es bei Verstößen zu Bußgeldern kommen kann finde ich schon, dass die Wege auf denen das Fahrradfahren nicht erlaubt sind mit bicycle=no getaggt werden sollten. 
https://imgur.com/9PK2R2P
acbauer (2025-01-14 20:44:38+00:00): Auf exakt diese Tafeln bezog ich mich! NIEMAND konnte erklären, warum dieser Weg auf den Tafeln verschwunden ist, andere, seit 20 Jahren zugewachsene Wege aber eingezeichnet sind. So lange das LRA die Widmung des Wegs nicht aufhebt, die Wegweiser nicht entfernt  und da regelmäßig Kraftfahrzeuge fahren, gibt es keinen Grund den Weg als bicycle=no zu führen.