piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-24 13:30:41+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/way/1175618781

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_18305684 (2023-05-24 15:32:10+00:00): I dont understand what you have done : some parts have a name planta solar aste, some parts have the name planta FV valdecariro, some parts have both names, some parts are in 2 different solar plants.

How many solar plants : one or 2 ? what is the good name ?
topolusitania (2023-05-28 23:22:04+00:00): Photovoltaic project of 190 MW of peak power, occupies an area of 385Ha belonging to the municipality of Alcázar de San Juan in the province of Ciudad Real. The project is divided into 4 plants with a total perimeter of approximately 24 km (Alcázar I, Alcázar II, Valdivieso and Valdecarro). Names under correction
user_18305684 (2023-06-03 17:11:13+00:00): Good work.

Best regards
Fumasu (2023-05-26 14:07:16+00:00): Keine Gebäude mehr vorhanden. Außerdem diverse Warnungen wegen kreuzender Linien. Reverted.
Fumasu (2023-05-26 14:03:59+00:00): Hier erkennt man nicht mal auf Bing ein Gebäude. Das ist ein Hof aus Betonplatten. Reverted.
googlenaut (2023-06-10 12:42:37+00:00): thanks for this info. fixed now.
matt_ellery (2023-05-24 15:15:42+00:00): Hi UtterClutter,

It looks like something's gone wrong with this changeset, as the same note has been added to all houses. Also, is the note really relevant information to be added to OSM?

All the best,
Matt
UtterClutter (2023-05-24 16:52:35+00:00): Thanks for pointing out my errors Matt. 
The erroneous notes have now been removed.
Fumasu (2023-05-26 14:02:33+00:00): Gebäude wurde abgerissen. Reverted in 136589714
user_1566574 (2023-06-02 13:50:58+00:00): Hi !
It seems like you added two viewpoints :
1. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10924930131
2. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10924158943

It is not required to add the name "Point de vue", "Viewpoint", or (I guess) the German "Aussichtspunkt", this information is already present with the tags tourism=viewpoint.

I will remove https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10924930131 because it seems duplicate, and the name Aussichtspunkt, but if you disagree let's talk about it and maybe undo this.

Thanks for your edits, feel free to ask for help! :)
lefuturiste (2023-05-24 14:40:37+00:00): Bonjour, je suppose que ce changeset est une erreur, le track ne fait pas le tour de la forêt ? De plus ce n'est pas propre, les tracks sont dupliqués. Veuillez vérifier et corriger vos changements si possible
lipuma (2023-05-25 13:41:07+00:00): Hi, in this changeset you added housename, but changed name into haus name. Now there's two tags describing the same thing, but they have a different value. Also, haus name is not a valid tag. Are you sure this is correct?
WasserGIS (2023-05-25 14:38:33+00:00): 
Hallo Kuchipatchi,
in diesem Gebäude arbeiten 2 verschiedene Firmen.
Ja so ist es richtig.
Deshalb hatte ich es so gemacht.
Trotzdem habe ich es wieder gelöscht
Friendly_Ghost (2024-01-13 01:27:11+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146200751
Fumasu (2023-05-26 13:59:16+00:00): Roof ist ein Gebäude und Gebäude ist nur ein Roof. Korrigiert.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136502236
Kovoschiz (2023-05-24 14:22:14+00:00): This causes a duplicate. Not the entire area is used for that either.
Javierpf (2023-05-24 17:41:44+00:00): Hola muralito, le sacaste los max speed a la AU9, por?
muralito (2023-05-24 20:24:02+00:00): Hola. Porque no es real que tengan esas velocidades maximas en las zonas de aproximacion al peaje. No me acuerdo cuales son, pero seguro que 130 no es, ni minima de 60 tampoco. Hay que relevar bien y poner lo que va.
Dimitar155 (2023-05-24 17:57:52+00:00): Привет Ники,

Може да добавиш access=private на частта от пътеката, която е преградена.

Поздрави,
Митко
Glassman (2023-05-25 16:57:18+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/136503679
Glassman (2023-05-25 16:57:36+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/136503912
UtterClutter (2023-05-24 18:54:59+00:00): A slip of the finger surely?
Jez Nicholson (2023-05-24 18:58:09+00:00): It did make me laugh :)
user_5359 (2023-05-25 09:39:37+00:00): Hello! Please have a look http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1175639265. What is the mean of this foreign keys? No valid OSM keys on this way
Fidelis Assis (2023-05-25 13:54:23+00:00): Hello! I'm aware and I've already told you that.

I've been updating thousands of boundary ways and during the manual procees (copy and paste from shp with official borders) eventually I forget to delete some original key/value pairs. But, often I use an overpass key to detect and delete them.

Don't worry, you can stop sending such messages!
Fumasu (2023-05-26 13:44:33+00:00): Diese Tanks wurden 2022 abgerissen. Wir haben in Berlin sehr viele aktuelle 360° Mapillary-Bilder. Die Luftbilder des Berliner Geoportals sind ebenfalls aktueller als Bing. Bitte überprüfe deine Änderungen.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136504245
Fumasu (2023-05-26 13:50:45+00:00): reverted in 136589092
googlenaut (2023-06-10 12:39:45+00:00): thanks for this info. fixed now.
Fumasu (2023-05-26 13:29:55+00:00): Baucontainer, nicht mehr vorhanden. Bind-Bilder sind nicht aktuell.
Fumasu (2023-05-26 13:36:24+00:00): reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136588305
user_390227 (2023-07-18 19:23:38+00:00): Was soll der Schei...?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3787235
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:00:57+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as 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. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136505280
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:01:30+00:00): There was a existing node with the same business. I went ahead and merged them
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136505280
Arnaugutiii (2023-05-24 15:12:23+00:00): Bona feina1
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:04:58+00:00): Along with a name, a tag describing the business should also be added. I'm not sure if this is just an office or a place for patients to visit. Let me know and I can try to help.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136505343
mavl (2023-05-24 15:16:42+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 136369618, 136369639, 136369954, 136369984, 136370019, 136370127, 136370144, 136370312, 136370346, 136370359, 136370541, 136370821, 136444838, 136446315, 136446424, 136458335, 136477427, 136492274, 136492527, 136492634, 136492666, 136492806, 136492891, 136494531.
mueschel (2023-05-25 08:57:13+00:00): Something went wrong here. You uploaded a huge amount of irregular shapes here. Please make sure you upload buildings in their real shape and do not upload your raw output of whatever "AI" tool you use. 

Also, please check for buildings that were already mapped before - there are many overlapping with buildings that were already mapped in their proper shape earlier.
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 09:04:18+00:00): Hi, changes and corrections will be made to the uploaded data. Also, the overlapping buildings will be corrected, the task of correcting them has been set up and begin. Thanks for the notice.
mueschel (2023-05-25 09:09:31+00:00): For future uploads, could you make sure that quality checks are done before uploading? The OSM database is not the right place to dumb any messy data and hope that somebody else will clean it up later.  The various QA tools already generated thousands of errors and warnings because of this upload which in turn keeps other mappers busy checking what is going on here. 

Btw, if you say "the task has been set up", this seems to be some sort of mapping within a larger group? In that case there are some guidelines to follow: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines
mueschel (2023-05-25 09:11:18+00:00): I strongly suggest to not to try to clean up this import of >100.000 unchecked objects by hand. Instead, I propose to do a full revert, so that this data can be uploaded again, after checking and fixing all the issues in a clean way.
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 09:16:12+00:00): okay, i think the revert will be a good idea. Then import the clean data later on. How do i go about the revert of the uploaded data please, any link for that?
lipuma (2023-05-25 09:42:44+00:00): JOSM Reverter is a thing:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Reverter

Also this website exists:
https://revert.monicz.dev/
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 10:10:30+00:00): Hi, thanks for your help. i tried https://revert.monicz.dev/ with one of the changesets 136505916 with the "Newest only" but i cant see no changes. or should i just delete the uploads manually?
mueschel (2023-05-25 10:26:09+00:00): I can have a look later today. It seems we need to revert 23 changesets with > 200k objects.
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 10:37:46+00:00): Thank you, do you think i should manually delete then before you free to have  a look?
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:01:52+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/136505568
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:02:35+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/136505568
Aleksandar Matejevic (2023-05-24 16:57:12+00:00): Hi jabal2017, 
your edit broke the relation of Sidon https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14889636 

Can you please fix this?
literan (2023-05-24 16:55:45+00:00): адрес, название лишние.
теги на русских языках в OSM не используются.

Все это удалю.
basmanny district (2023-05-25 07:14:02+00:00): поняла, спасибо
Josef73 (2023-05-27 19:29:05+00:00): Hello, can you the values of the tag opening_hours. Please check the wiki-site at: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours for the right syntax. Thanks.
wireguy (2023-06-05 23:23:13+00:00): VLD272, can you relook at {Relation id=224848 version=3 VT [way 39941827, way 39941828]}	MemberInfo{roles='outer', positions='1'}	

relation is now broken.  thx.
VLD272 (2023-06-06 15:49:48+00:00): Thank you for reaching out to me.  I've addressed the problems and updated both relations in the area.
user_5359 (2023-05-25 09:58:47+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1175670457. What is the mean of the tag Class=0? AlsoI don‘t believe this a building (To much node and unusual  angles)!

Have also a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1175685753. this overlaps a existing building.

This import has a bad quality and should be reverted!
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 10:16:50+00:00): Hi, i have been trying to revert it but it seems im not noticing any revert after running the tool. Do you suggest i revert it manually by deleting?
user_5359 (2023-05-25 13:11:52+00:00): I have delete all building with key Class. But you import also building without this keys.
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 13:17:52+00:00): Thank you for your help, could you also help with deleting the other AI mapping uploaded as i'm having issues with reverting. Will also be happy if you can help with learning the reverting tools. Thanks a lot
user_5359 (2023-05-25 18:20:54+00:00): I have deleted all of your paths in JOSM that obeyed the following conditions.
building user:ola_ooo version:1 type:way
tags:0 user:ola_ooo version:1 type:way
Please check your results before uploading.
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 18:59:21+00:00): Thank you very much, this wont happen again.
lipuma (2023-05-25 09:39:18+00:00): Hi, I'm sure you already noticed but I just wanted to let you know. In your recent changesets you added the tag `Class=0' to 15347 buildings.

https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/Class#overview

Out of personal interest, what are all these tiny, strangely shaped buildings? What AI tool are you using? How are you going to validate these changesets?
ola_ooo (2023-05-25 09:50:19+00:00): hi, im trying to revert all the uploads now as they were meant to be corrected and updated but i was advise to revert and correct before uploading. still figuring how to revert all changes made yesterday
lipuma (2023-05-25 10:03:35+00:00): Check out my comment in this changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/136505448

I listed two tools to revert changesets with
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:02:07+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/136505937
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:02:33+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/136505937
Hb- (2023-05-25 04:43:41+00:00): Sind die Relationen (B1, BAB40, Flix-Bus-Linien usw.) auf den eingefügten Autobahnabschnitten beachtet worden? Wahrscheinlich Nacharbeit erforderlich.
krb100 (2023-05-25 13:09:33+00:00): Hallo, ich habe keine Lücken gefunden. Danke für die Mitteilung :)
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:02:29+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/136506184
silversurfer83 (2023-05-24 16:46:35+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OSM :)
Schön, dass du hilfst die Karte zu verbessern.

Ich möchte dir an dieser Stelle zwei passende Artikel aus dem OSM-Wiki verlinken, die deine aktuellen Änderungen betreffen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:natural%3Dtree

Die einzelnen Eigenschaften siehst du beim Bearbeiten links in der Spalte wenn du ganz nach unten zu "Eigenschaften" scrollst. 

Bei Fragen immer raus damit

Cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136506616
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-24 15:50:18+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/way/310569765
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/310569785

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_1566574 (2023-11-25 10:36:03+00:00): Hi!
Please, avoid deleting buildings, consider the prefix demolished:building otherwise it could be re-imported, re-deleted, re-imported...

(I was about to reimport it. Instead I have to restore the one you deleted)

Anyway, thanks for your edits!
Joel Amos (2023-07-02 04:14:00+00:00): My impression was that the convention for camp_pitch is to specify the pitch number using only ref and not name.
beddy (2023-07-03 20:42:27+00:00): While https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dcamp_pitch doesn't say explicitly not to use name, I will also add to my OSM list to go back and add them to ref as well.
Kovoschiz (2023-05-24 16:57:02+00:00): Please transfer all the tags if you ever want to delete something...
aceman444 (2025-03-30 20:03:10+00:00): Zdravim, pri tej Skolskej ulici v Rovinke sa mi to nezda spravne. Na severnej strane ukazuje Ortofotomozaika jednosmernu cyklocestu a na juznej strane chodnik. Opacnym smerom (na juhovychod) idu cyklisti po ceste.

Neviem aka je realita dnes, ale robili ste to v roku 2023, z podobneho casu su aj snimky Orotofotomozaiky. Takze treba to preverit.
seeergiofdez (2023-05-25 16:12:42+00:00): Hola! Si pudieras añadir las etiquetas "name" y "ref" en la plataforma de parada para el nombre y el número de parada, sería de mucha utilidad! Puedes encontrar info oficial en https://www.crtm.es/widgets/#/
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136508294
silversurfer83 (2023-05-24 16:52:24+00:00): Hi again
I see you're using OSMand. That app always offers the "name" tag. Please don't use it to add descriptive names. Best to leave it blank if there's no proper name. Thank you
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136509058
Minh Nguyen (2023-06-13 18:12:13+00:00): These names were probably place names. Since it’s possible that these names came from a survey that’s difficult to reproduce, consider bringing back the names as place POIs. Otherwise, this changeset results in a loss of information.
user_3022894 (2023-05-27 12:17:11+00:00): Hi Jörg,

bei dieser Frage von StreetComplete bitte darauf achten, ob auch Schuhe angenommen werden.

(Diese können in SC zusätzlich ausgewählt werden).

Ich weiß jetzt nicht, ob das hier immer noch der Fall ist, aber zumindest bisher waren Schuhe auch angenommen worden:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6702793624/history

Ggf. kannst du nochmal schauen, ob das nach wie vor vor Ort ersichtlich ist?

Danke!

LG
silversurfer83 (2023-05-24 20:43:16+00:00): thanks for taking the advice :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136510590
RicoElectrico (2023-06-30 20:54:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15901856/history - there's an empty tag here. Please check ;)
user_5359 (2023-05-25 06:42:36+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please don‘t use standard names (Sidewalk is more a description, also given by the other tags). Also connect the footway with the other highways.
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:44:54+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as 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. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136511218
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:46:09+00:00): I've reverted this changeset. sidewalks should end at the curb. highway=footway + highway=crossing should be used to connect the sidewalks when they pass through the street.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/136511218
Glassman (2023-05-25 17:48:55+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/136511223
Hugoren Martinako (2023-05-24 19:38:15+00:00): Creo que deberías echarle un ojo a este documento: https://sede.asturias.es/Asturias/descargas/toponimia/LLANES.pdf
user_5300487 (2023-05-24 19:59:39+00:00): Ese documento se trata de un documento autonómico, válido para documentos oficiales de tipo autonómico y local. Si el mapa hubiese sido editado en Asturias sería una toponimia totalmente válida. Pero debido a que la sede de la fundación OSM se encuentra en Reino Unido (Junto a sus servidores) y careciendo el Asturiano de oficialidad tiene, en todo caso, que estar la acepción en español incluida en el nombre. Por ello la toponimia en asturiano tiene un carácter complementario pudiendo ser usado con "/" pero siempre junto a su acepción en castellano. Te invito a que leas el siguiente análisis jurídico de la toponimia en Asturias. 
https://vlex.es/vid/juridico-toponimia-asturias-luces-sombras-66989835
Te invito a que si quieres añadas la acepción en asturiano mediante su correcta forma [Toponimia en español/ Toponimia en asturiano]. Quiero creer que compartimos el deseo de una legislación más clara al respecto que genere ningún tipo de duda y te mando un cordial saludo.
David Rubquín (2023-05-24 20:28:01+00:00): Yo le invitaría a usted a que dejase de enredar, los preámbulos de los decretos de oficialización son claros:

https://sede.asturias.es/bopa/2021/10/06/2021-08708.pdf

La Ley del Principado de Asturias 1/98, de 23 de marzo, de uso y promoción del bable/asturiano, respecto a la toponimia, establece que los topónimos de Asturias tendrán la denominación oficial en su forma tradicional, atribuyendo al
Consejo de Gobierno del Principado de Asturias la competencia para determinar los topónimos de la Comunidad Autónoma sin perjuicio de las competencias municipales y estatales y conforme a los procedimientos que reglamentariamente
se determinen en desarrollo de la Ley, previo dictamen de la Junta Asesora de Toponimia del Principado de Asturias.
El Decreto 98/2002, de 18 de julio, por el que se establece el procedimiento de recuperación y fijación de la toponimia asturiana, determina en sus artículos 1 y 5 que el Consejo de Gobierno, previo dictamen de la Junta Asesora de
Toponimia, determinará mediante Decreto los nombres oficiales de los concejos, sus capitales, parroquias rurales y
núcleos de población que, a partir del momento de la entrada en vigor de dicho Decreto, tendrán la consideración de
denominaciones oficiales.

Pero es que además para justificar estos cambios argumentas que OSM está en RU, como si a una empresa privada le influyese las normas de un país extranjero y cuando OSM tiene unas directrices de etiquetado.

Pero ya la peor parte es enlazar un texto de un autor asturianista y pro oficialidad del asturiano que en el apartado
4.4 EFECTOS JURÍDICOS DE LA OFICIALIZACIÓN DE LOS TOPÓNIMOS
dice que:

• En primer lugar, los topónimos oficializados son los únicos legales a todos los efectos en el territorio asturiano.

En tercer lugar, que de la oficialización de los topónimos se derivan tanto derechos como obligaciones que inciden en el ámbito público como en el privado. El derecho de uso (y, por tanto, de demandar su uso, en especial por las administraciones públicas) y la obligación de usarlos, que se hace más patente en el caso de la Administración del Principado de Asturias, por imposición de la norma estatutaria y la Ley 1/1998, obligación de cumplimiento gradual, pero ineludible.

• En cuarto lugar, en relación con el uso de los topónimos por el sector privado y por los ciudadanos en general, dado su carácter oficial, no se puede invocar el derecho de opción lingüística propio de un sistema de doble oficialidad o de pluralidad lingüística (usos oficiales de varias lenguas, aunque alguna de ellas no tenga el estatuto de oficialidad): esto es, salvo los casos de denominación oficial bilingüe (por ejemplo, Xixón o Gijón), el ciudadano solamente podrá hacer uso de la denominación oficial que es la única legal.

La oficialización también afecta, como no puede ser de otro modo, a la Administración del Estado que tendrá que emplear las denominaciones oficiales en la señalización de las vías de tráfico de su competencia, y en los documentos, permisos, licencias o autorizaciones que expida (permiso de conducir, documento nacional de identidad, pasaporte, etc.).