piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
JRH50 (2023-02-05 22:57:46+00:00): The fort walls have the same form and function as a city wall, that is defensive fortification.  It is certainly not a perfect fit since it does not enclose a city, but it is less wrong than a simple wall that encloses a field or a yard: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dwall
Friendly_Ghost (2023-02-06 00:14:52+00:00): As you say, the walls do not enclose the city. Therefore, they are functionally different from city walls. I agree with you that the barrier=wall tag would be wrong and too generic to use here. That said, deliberately mistagging all structures as walls is not a workable solution either. 

Walls are usually regarded as linestrings, yet you have added the tag to OSM objects that are supposed to be closed ways (areas) instead. This leads to misrepresentations of the structures, for example at the tenailles and the redoubt.

Also, not every section is a separate fort. All sections are parts of Fort Adams, which, in accordance with OSM's "One feature, one OSM element" only be mapped once.

How is https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127882118 not a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11532810?
Friendly_Ghost (2023-01-31 15:30:36+00:00): Hey JRH50,

Why did you tag every single part as a fort? All parts belong to Fort Adams, which is one single fort (see the "One feature, one OSM element" guideline). Especially defensive works like tenailles are definitely not forts.

On top of that, these are definitely not city walls, so I don't understand why you used this tag here.

Also, what is the purpose of historic=military + military=fort? It looks like a duplicate of historic=fort, and military tags don't even apply here since the military is no longer involved.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
Luzandro (2024-01-26 05:52:11+00:00): construction laut note abgeschlossen und für den gesamten Verkehr freigegeben: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4078720
gurglypipe (2023-01-06 21:14:35+00:00): Hi, please don’t delete this path. It’s listed in Wainwright’s guidebooks and has a fairly strong trace on Strava heatmap.

Just because it’s listed in a mountain rescue callout doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be on the map.

It’s correctly tagged with sac_scale=demanding_mountain_hiking.

The problem with that mountain rescue callout was that AllTrails doesn’t indicate the sac_scale of a path to the user. That is a problem with AllTrails, not OSM.

Deleting the path will not fix the problem with AllTrails (there are likely other paths in the Lakes which could cause mountain rescue callouts like this), and it will likely be added back in future by someone who wonders why the path in their guidebook isn’t on OSM.

I’m going to revert this changeset. The path exists.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:05:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:09:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
Pisto81 (2024-06-27 18:49:47+00:00): some deletes buildings are not created with appropriate alignment and geometry#OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130962682
bkil (2023-01-07 09:21:43+00:00): Köszönjük a közreműködést. Megjegyzem, hogy a  közvetlenül egy megállóba telepített kukának van egy rövidítése, a bin=yes. Ha fedett akkor shelter=yes, ha pedig pad is van benne akkor bench=yes. https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:bin
mueschel (2023-01-14 12:40:16+00:00): Hi,
I found 5 areas with strange keys:

cced_id
comments
e_hold_id
nced_uid 

Please have a look and change them to common keys, e.g. ref:XYZ or description
Muhmaker (2023-01-07 08:53:25+00:00): Moin. Es gibt leider wieder einen seltsamen Eintrag durch deinen Editor. Diesmal an https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/960645448 Der iD Editor und touch-Geräte sind wohl keine gute Kombination. Es gibt auch immer mal wieder Fehler durch verdoppelte Knoten am gleichen Ort und doppelte Linienabschnitte von Usern die touch-Geräte benutzen. Ist mir hier bisher aber noch nicht aufgefallen. Falls du komplexere Änderungen an Linien planst, bitte nach Möglichkeit ein anderes Geräte verwenden.
DeFra85 (2023-01-07 09:02:41+00:00): Ja, mir reicht's mit dem Sch...teil jetzt auch! Trotz das ich jetzt AutoFill ausgestellt habe, macht er immer noch so einen Mist
JeroenHoek (2023-07-21 17:23:37+00:00): Wat is je bron voor die Toki Pona name:tok?
JeroenHoek (2023-07-21 17:24:20+00:00): ('ma Lise' voor Fryslân specifiek.)
JeroenvanderGun (2023-07-21 23:59:29+00:00): Eh, geen idee, waarschijnlijk heb ik names van de provincie-node en names van de provincie-boundary samengevoegd. Ik spreek geen tok in elk geval.
gurglypipe (2023-01-06 21:57:45+00:00): Hi, thanks for your edits around Cockermouth. Have those fence boundaries changed since the houses were constructed?

I’m using the newer imagery at https://ecn.t{switch:0,1,2,3}.tiles.virtualearth.net/tiles/a{u}.jpeg?g=587&n=z and aligning it to the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels (since not all aerial imagery is correctly aligned). It shows the boundaries as they were mapped before your edit, and also the buildings not rotated.
chrismat (2023-01-06 22:38:34+00:00): Hi, no problem and thanks for your mapping in Cockermouth.

The fence boundaries have not chanced since construction. Looking at your source I agree your original mapping was better for the fence and building rotations. Apologies I don't know how to change it back. Can you help?

Thanks again.
gurglypipe (2023-01-06 22:49:15+00:00): Heya. Thanks for the speedy reply.

I’ve just used http://revert.osmz.ru/ to revert your changes in their entirety, and have manually re-applied the changes to the path and landuse areas.

Hopefully I didn’t miss anything! Please dive in and tweak things if I have messed up.

The changesets I’ve done are:
 - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130964659
 - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130964743

If you live locally, and want to easily map the house numbers and other detail on the estate, you might want to look at the StreetComplete app (https://streetcomplete.app/) which makes that pretty easy. I’m the other end of the county and have done my edits from aerial imagery and memory from visits, so unfortunately can’t add detail like that. :)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:06:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
Hufkratzer (2023-01-07 10:37:13+00:00): Hola, has etiquetado https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127902805 con https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:leisure=horse_riding. A mí me parece más como una https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:leisure=pitch#Pista_de_equitación
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:04:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:03:30+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
ExecutableFiles (2023-01-06 22:05:21+00:00): Added details to the Guion Substation. Added and adjusted buildings and details to Broad Ripple
ExecutableFiles (2023-01-06 22:05:38+00:00): (forgot to add a description)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:05:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
Palolo (2023-01-09 13:42:04+00:00): Thank you for fixing the incorrect tag. While you are making edits like this it also would be good to fix the geometry to create an orthogonal shape that accurately represents the building.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:08:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:07:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:09:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:06:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:04:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:08:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:07:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
ququruzka (2023-01-11 12:07:52+00:00): вітаю. 
Імена вулиць не треба виправляти, якщо вони внесені вірно (name= name:uk в нашому випадку). 
дякую.
Soshal Distan Singh (2023-01-14 02:11:27+00:00): Пример ошибки мультиполигона:

>https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15093695
>https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127915784

Теги продублированы и на линии (внешнем контуре), и на самом отношении. Зачем делать отношение из одного члена (way 1127915784) тоже непонятно.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:07:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-26 07:22:40+00:00): Hello, SIDOL JK

Thank you for your mapping contribution. I'm currently doing remote mapping to verify the road network's connectivity. I found a connectivity check issue on this road segment (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1127909128). I see you added the road based on osm history.

I'd like to resolve this connectivity check issue, but I don't have local knowledge and can't find or see the road clearly visible in Maxar, Bing, Mapbox, or Esri imagery. So, I have to ask, is this a new road? Do you have any other suggestions to solve the issue?

I really appreciate any information and advice you can provide. Thank you
SIDOL JK (2023-01-26 19:15:29+00:00): Chào DiahW IRM-ED,Cảm ơn bạn đã đặt câu hỏi cho tôi. Đây là tuyến đường quy hoạch mang số hiệu ĐT.883 được xây dựng mới để kết nối thành phố Bến Tre và ĐT.887. Tuyến đường này đã hoàn thành gần xong rồi bạn nhé. Vui lòng xem hình ảnh trên google maps mà tôi đính kèm theo.Trân trọng. SIDOL JK
Link: https://goo.gl/maps/pbiw6aWHCXV7qmRA7
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-27 07:47:02+00:00): Hi,SIDOL JK.

Thank you for your response on this issue, it really helpful for me.

Based on the information you provided, I conclude that the planned route DT.883 was recently constructed to connect Ben Tre and DT.887. The route is nearly finished and was created on OpenStreetMap using your local knowledge of the area.

Because I'm only a remote mapper, I can't rely on commercial or personal data sources. As a result, I need local knowledge information from mappers like you. If you added the statement "local knowledge" to the tag "source" whenever you updated, it would be very helpful for remote mappers like me.

Thank you and Happy Mapping!
DiahW IRM-ED (2023-01-27 08:41:10+00:00): Sorry, I meant to say that I need the "local knowledge" information in the "source" description not in the "source tag" whenever you updated data as a local mapper who knows the area. It would be very helpful for me. 

I hope what I'm saying is reasonable and doesn't offend you. Thank you again

Regards,
Diah
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:08:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:10:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:06:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:02:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
streckenkundler (2023-01-07 15:42:15+00:00): Hei,

schaue hier nochmal... Way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1125887577 scheint auch einen heftigen Lageversatz zu haben (versehentlich verschoben...)  

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=13.03082&lat=52.40330&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.99&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Danke,

Sven
user_177389 (2023-01-07 22:40:52+00:00): Hallo Sven,

den Verursacher verschobener Wege zeigt die History der Nodes. Ich setze dies zurück.

Grüße,  
Mario
user_177389 (2023-01-07 23:06:40+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, war doch beachtlich und unbemerkt. Sollte nun in Ordnung sein.
Langlaeufer (2023-01-07 10:11:17+00:00): Das ist keine baulich getrennte Spur. Sorry das ich es ohne Rücksprache schon wieder entfernt habe. Warum wolltest du die einzeln eintragen. Ich hab jetzt bus_bay verwendet. ggf. auch über lanes abzubilden.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130964929
VictorIE (2023-01-08 10:56:08+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1127912330

There are some self-intersecting ways here.
archpdx (2023-01-09 01:00:53+00:00): Hi,
As noted on the wiki article for the distance key (https://wiki.osm.org/Key:distance, other units besides kilometers should use one of the abbreviations listed on the Units wiki article (https://wiki.osm.org/Map_features/Units). In this case, the distance value should be '65 mi'.

Also, I mentioned in (https://osm.org/changeset/129888961) that we don't use the name tag to describe features in OSM, see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions. Can you please remove the name from this highway milestone?
marczoutendijk (2023-01-08 10:16:50+00:00): Is the name of that service road really "Burger King"
archpdx (2023-01-09 00:55:56+00:00): Hi,
As I mentioned in (https://osm.org/changeset/129888961), we don't use the name tag to describe features in OSM, see https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions. I've removed the name from this road in (https://osm.org/changeset/131034809)
Langlaeufer (2023-01-07 10:08:43+00:00): Ist da wirklich bauliche Trennung der Fahrbahnen?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130965255
Langlaeufer (2023-01-07 10:18:01+00:00): Ah, o.k. das westliche Gleis liegt auf einer Mittelinsel.
Die weißen Striche auf dem Bordstein waren etwas irreführend.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130965255
mueschel (2023-01-07 11:28:19+00:00): Please stop adding "test" tags and other "private_edit_type" tags to OSM!
muchichka_s (2023-01-08 18:34:19+00:00): Привіт. Ти рівняєш по неправильному зміщенню. Спробуй підключити шар Strava і подивитися, дороги після твоїх змін стають ще далі зміщені ніж було
sdvm (2023-01-24 01:02:38+00:00): Привіт
А де можна побачити цей шар 'Strava'? Не знав що такий є
https://i.ibb.co/s6PQgYf/Untitled.jpg
mike140 (2023-04-07 07:13:06+00:00): Можна додати власний шар з посиланням: https://proxy.nakarte.me/https/heatmap-external-a.strava.com/tiles-auth/all/hot/{z}/{x}/{y}.png . Але зручніше цим користуватись у Josm
BCNorwich (2023-01-08 07:25:40+00:00): Hi, Your residential area is a strange shape and also self-intersecting. Secondly, this area is within an existing large residential area, this one:- https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14008874#map=14/51.4459/0.0953&layers=N
Thus the new area is not needed (it's duplication) so I've removed it. 

Regards Bernard.
eggie (2023-01-07 07:29:35+00:00): reverted by changeset #130970996

Hou Arno, 
Beter niets aan administratieve grenzen wijzigen. Die worden regelmatig geupdated. 

Wat was je bedoeling? 

MVG
eggie
ArnovanderMaarel (2023-01-15 13:38:00+00:00): Sorry voor late reactie.
Ik zag dat de grens tussen de voormalige gemeenten "Oud en Nieuw Gastel" en "Oudenbosch" nog op status van "gemeentegrens " stond. Ik dacht dit te verbeteren maar weet inmiddels dat ik dat beter niet moet doen.
eggie (2023-01-15 14:13:36+00:00): No problem..  😀
SzymonH (2023-01-09 07:49:11+00:00): Jest błąd w danych WTP bo zgodnie z rozkładami 70% kursów jeździ właśnie w relacji Skorosze - Rondo Daszyńskiego.
starsep (2023-01-09 07:53:14+00:00): Dzięki za informację. W takim razie warto zaznaczyć tę relację jako aktywną. Czy mógłbyś zgłosić ten problem do WTP?
NorthCrab (2023-01-07 07:30:44+00:00): Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Nie nadawaj obiektom nazw opisowych. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only Widać z oznaczenia że jest to boisko a dodanie tutaj nazwy jest błędem.
NorthCrab (2023-01-07 07:31:38+00:00): Identyfikator paczkomatu umieszczamy w polu ref= i nie nadajemy mu nazwy. Nazwa zostanie utworzona automatycznie.
flohoff (2023-01-07 14:31:07+00:00): Moin,
so als hint - wenn du was von track -> was anderem umtaggst dann kann das tracktype auch runter. 

Flo
NorthCrab (2023-01-07 07:33:58+00:00): Nie używamy polskich słów w wartościach danych. Zamieniłem sport na =soccer oraz usunąłem nazwę opisową. Jeśli nie jesteś pewien swoich zmian proszę proś o ich weryfikację przed wysłaniem w edytorze (jest przycisk). Możesz też wyszukiwać podobne obiekty i sprawdzać jak inni je oznaczyli. Pozdrawiam!
liske1 (2023-01-07 08:44:46+00:00): Dzięki za komentarz, na przyszłość - przynajmniej na początku - będę korzystał z tej weryfikacji
NorthCrab (2023-01-07 08:46:08+00:00): Okej!
BeKri (2023-04-23 12:07:49+00:00): Servus,
nur zur Info:
Die Wohngebäude auf den ehem. Jettankstellegelände stehen noch und bleiben es wohl noch länger ...
Angeblich Grundstück noch nicht verkauft und es soll 5 Jahre Baustop bestehen.
Ich lass sie trotzdem draussen,
ist ja absehbar, daß sie wegkommen ...
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
map per (2023-01-07 07:42:33+00:00): Wegen "Meine Änderungen überprüfen": Sieht gut aus, danke!
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:28:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-01-07 21:24:43+00:00): a mesma coisa em escada rolante, não deveria ter nome.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-01-30 13:29:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 131881160 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert. User replaced names without giving any source for that change.