piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Norbert Wołowiec (2026-05-13 21:10:23+00:00): Dzięki za zwrócenie uwagi. Miało być podzielone w tym miejscu poprostu ale odzielone. Maniewo niedługo też dostanie nazwy ulic i chciałem dociągnąć poprawnie nazwę Maniewska w Ocieszynie do granicy bo de facto do granicy tak się nazywa a nie tylko do skrzyżowania z Rolną
Yog Sot (2026-05-14 21:34:40+00:00): okejka, zapewne poprawiłes już. Ja wiem, że niestety każdy edytor jest trochę upośledzony w tym zakresie jak chce się np drogę podzielić dokładnie w miejscu granicy.
anidoja (2026-07-13 16:47:25+00:00): Por que borrás todos los senderos?
anidoja (2026-07-13 16:42:49+00:00): Por que borrás todos los senderos?
SomeoneElse (2026-05-16 12:22:41+00:00): https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=9476151 and https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=9476151 show a number of "stragglers" near Melrose - I guess that they should not be there any more?
Simon Sustrans (2026-05-19 08:25:41+00:00): Thanks, those stragglers have been removed.
Kamil Kalata (2026-05-14 16:52:08+00:00): Hello!
I have a few comments and questions about your changes related to Railroad 38 and Siedliska station:
1) Why have you changed the stop position (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12386260097) on Siedliska station to a station and added another one on the siding rail? According to Wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Railway_stations), there should be only one station node; moreover, the hypothetical stop position node on the siding rail is pointless, at least with public_transport=stop_position.
2) You added "número de línea" tag on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1512918761, but there is "ref" present.
3) You added usage=main on siding rail extension (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1512940994); I think it's just an oversight.
4) What's the true source of your changes? On the orthophotomap, I see only the construction site.
Tavi Alexandre (2026-05-14 17:45:53+00:00): Hello, there's a video filmed from the rear of a train after reopening of the line which shows two sidings as well as two tracks and two platforms on Siedliska and two tracks and a central platform in Woszczele: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GOGNCKYfA0
Kamil Kalata (2026-05-14 18:01:49+00:00): OK, I understand, but it makes your changes more questionable. Not only have you mapped the area quite badly (you haven't mapped the new platform and have mapped the siding rail shorter than it is, as it ends just by Road 655), but I also doubt you had obtained a permission for mapping from the video.
RoseArrow (2026-05-13 21:23:33+00:00): Correction: Source used was Vantor satellite imagery via Vantor Hub 2026-05-10
SomeoneElse (2026-05-14 09:43:39+00:00): Actually, no:  It wasn't an iD edit that caused this but a JOSM one, so iD is blameless here.
There _is_ a validate button in JOSM which would have caught this before upload, but that button wasn't pressed...
maro21 (2026-05-14 23:31:03+00:00): https://osm.org/way/1513216005 droga się z niczym nie łączy?
maraf24 (2026-05-15 19:10:35+00:00): Nie przyjrzałem się jej wystarczająco gdy tamtędy przejeżdzałem. Jest do sprawdzenia przy kolejnym przejeździe :)
maro21 (2026-05-19 22:34:48+00:00): chodziło mi o to, że usunąłęś tę drogę https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1171352242 / https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=182621468
a mimo tego dodałeś jej dalszą część ze szlabanem...
maraf24 (2026-05-29 08:52:53+00:00): To efekt podziału drogi. Szlaban i północna część drogi była wcześniej i pozostała, niczego tu nie dodawałem.
eggie (2026-05-14 05:51:37+00:00): Hi,
Ik removed name=Drenthe.
Why adding countynames to benches?

Greetz,
eggie
mini-me (2026-05-19 08:08:40+00:00): Здравствуйте. Обратите внимание, что границы населённого пункта не должны пересекаться с другими административными границами.
Можно подключить слой "Муниципальные образования" из НСПД.
Руслан Т (2026-05-31 21:51:27+00:00): Здравствуйте! Спасибо, обязательно буду обращать на это внимание.
silversurfer83 (2026-05-14 16:38:38+00:00): Hi.

Sind das die Bunkereingänge, die du da erfasst hast?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182622375
SG86 (2026-05-14 17:36:29+00:00): Hallo,
ja, so ist es.
cubbe8 (2026-05-26 03:25:59+00:00): please survey before editing. if you cannot then don’t edit you are messing up peoples routes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183184496
carlosguerrero_lyft (2026-05-28 15:51:53+00:00): Hello, cubbe8, 
My name is Carlos, and I’m part of the OSM team here at Lyft. Thank you for reaching out regarding these edits, and thank you for the feedback.
The concrete curbs and impact attenuators (which match our internal telemetry) along with our street-view imagery made me confident that the edits reflected the current ground truth. However, since construction is technically still finishing up on-site, I’m happy to leave your layout as-is to maintain local consensus.
We value your local expertise and will incorporate these details into our future updates.
Happy mapping,
Carlos.
blacx (2026-05-13 22:30:06+00:00): es diu Edelweiss o L'Estanc de Ponts?
Comino (2026-05-13 22:39:22+00:00): Both
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-05-13 23:34:05+00:00): Thanks for your work on landcover in the Frenchman Range! It is paying off, as the area is now no longer just a boring gray wallpaper. How do you manage to do these accurately, and do you mind mapping the remaining landcovers around the Vegas metro area?
zunaKejas (2026-05-14 17:18:14+00:00): I use aerial imagery, though i do have some familiarity with the region. I usually add ridges, peaks, and cliffs first. The USGS 3D Elevation Program is good for this. and USGS Topo for finding elevations. The sand/shingle washes are good to add early on since they tend to divide the land uses. For adding bare rock, I use Esri Clarity, as it shows it quite clearly. The FastDraw plugin in JOSM can make this process much faster. For determining whether is a heath or scrub i use the pictures on their wiki pages as reference. I might map other areas around Vegas in the future.
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-05-24 19:38:21+00:00): Okay, thanks for the information! I also did not know about the FastDraw plugin. Perhaps I'll give it a try.

As for the portions around the Vegas metro area that need the most attention (IMO), I think the westernmost section needs the most attention, as most of it is covered by a giant sand multipolygon that I created. The other sides look good enough for now, but that, of course, doesn't mean they can't get better.
CAM-Gerlach (2026-05-23 18:48:25+00:00): NB, seems this changeset (possibly in combination with the previous) broke the BT Explorer Blue northbound bus route relation as it changed the member way order and did not insert the new way segments at the correct positions in the member list, breaking continuity and PTv2 schema compatibility. 

This was likely due to iD's relation handling, which is rather notorious for breaking these sorts of relations especially as far as ordering is concerned. You might want to consider using JOSM instead which (among many other reasons) doesn't have this issue and _should_ warn you about the problem (and potentially even automatically fix it, with the PT Assistant plugin).

Fortunately, having semi-recently completed my big PTv2 pass across all BT and Smart Way routes, I just got the Blacksburg Transit system added to PTNA https://ptna.openstreetmap.de/results/US/VA/US-VA-BT-Analysis.html and this got flagged on there, so I was able to fix it without much trouble in changeset 183080220

https://osm.org/changeset/183080220

Thanks!
skadi (2026-05-14 20:12:01+00:00): а что не так с жк "три богатыря" ?
skadi (2026-05-18 20:00:58+00:00): оно вполне себе гуглится как название, другое дело, что я не очень понимаю его статус. хотя та же "новая богданка" -- тоже какое-то локальное наименование 2.5 домов.
Enikkey (2026-05-18 20:06:58+00:00): Забыл его добавить на место, отрисовал его территорией, а не меткой
woodpeck (2026-05-14 09:06:47+00:00): information boards do not have names. @mcom-contributions please fix these (there are many other bad uses of the "name" tag nearby, not only in this changeset)
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 09:27:58+00:00): Thanks, I did notice this after the first batch so it is already in the program. I will manually fix these cases. There are also cases where name is added to a map, do you have any proposals on how to map that? or should I just go with `name` there
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 09:33:54+00:00): *it is already fixed in the program
SomeoneElse (2026-05-14 10:39:58+00:00): Was the mechanism by which "mcom-contributions" submits updates to OSM discussed with the community anywhere?
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 13:12:01+00:00): sorry for late reply

Not in any public room or official channels, the mechanisms have been discussed with some community members who focus on importing data into OSM in private. My friend is already drafting the wiki page and i will not continue with submissions until it's done and all problems that surfaced so far aren't resolved.

you can find the source code at https://codeberg.org/osmcz/mcom-contributions
SomeoneElse (2026-05-14 13:16:52+00:00): I suspect that at least you should be following https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_edits and possibly also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines .
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 15:48:57+00:00): Yes, we are working on it
rajdhani (2026-05-14 09:01:33+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:182636658
DFW-Backyard7 (2026-05-14 02:45:37+00:00): Reverted because this is not a natural gas power plant, it's a natural gas wellsite, which it was already tagged as

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182626744
DFW-Backyard7 (2026-05-14 02:50:43+00:00): To clarify, although the iD editor doesn't have a preset for it, the normal tag for this is industrial=wellsite on an industrial area

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:industrial%3Dwellsite
rajdhani (2026-05-14 11:53:27+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 182644909
ika-chan! (2026-05-14 02:35:48+00:00): The proposed road at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/690813874 was also pulled due to insufficient progress in years. IMO, it only makes sense to add proposed roads when the construction contract is signed and construction is imminent.
user_5359 (2026-05-15 10:07:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13826012539. What is the mean of the tag TFG = TERRENO?
user_5359 (2026-05-15 10:10:45+00:00): Welcome to OSM (again)! Why did you delete the street name (key name) but leave the alternative name key alt_name)?
jwynne11 (2026-05-14 00:08:42+00:00): #cwugeog
Glassman (2026-05-15 02:33:11+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/182624169
Wildsharky (2026-05-15 09:19:01+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:182681216
ivanbranco (2026-06-24 15:48:39+00:00): Hi CS2100,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1471468834

here you changed bicycle from yes to yesN. Where you trying to add "no"? Or is just a typo and is still yes?
CS2100 (2026-07-04 01:13:17+00:00): Hi ivanbranco,

Sorry, that was a typo in the tag. The correct value is yes, and I have fixed the error.
rajdhani (2026-05-15 10:29:21+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:182690926
Wildsharky (2026-05-18 03:55:11+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:182809799
ajmat (2026-05-17 05:20:09+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 182766869
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 00:31:01+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12566227452

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 07:55:59+00:00): Hi, not sure if this is an automated message or not, but thanks for noticing anyway. I did a manual review but totally missed this is a parcel locker. These rules are basically global so i guess i can just add a check for that.

I also may have misinterpreted one field in the dataset with an ambiguous name that could signal the contribution is verified. Will investigate that before pushing anything more from the backlog.

Thanks,
Vojtěch Fošnár
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 00:31:03+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13447055784

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Vinber-Pro (2026-05-14 09:31:31+00:00): Hi
please changeset covering a smaller area. not all the world :)
Taya_S (2026-05-14 09:55:47+00:00): I disagree. A single (or a few) globe spanning changesets that are thematically consistent are much better than dozens of hundreds of small ones. Especially considering that this was a discussed automated edit and the changeset description accurately details what this changeset does.
Vinber-Pro (2026-05-14 10:16:34+00:00): i also disagree because, modifications concerns 5-6 countrys, but all the contributors of around fifty countrys are informed ...

my 2 cents
Zkir (2026-05-14 10:57:13+00:00): Colleagues, splitting such changesets in geographical areas (countries) makes such changes completely unmanageable. 

If someone disagrees with the changes in essence, or it turns out that the changeset is faulty for some reason, a global changeset will be much easier to roll back than 50 local ones.

Best regards,
Zkir
9_tab (2026-05-14 20:44:41+00:00): Doing 5 by country changesets is frequently a bad idea: at least when the bounding boxes end up overlapping anyways .. So neighbors just end up getting 5 cs and not 1.
smilytruffle (2026-05-15 20:55:17+00:00): There is value to global changesets that fix a specific issue as Zkir pointed out. Ultimately, I think a lot of the frustration with these changesets comes from how openstreetmap.org/history shows changesets whose bounding boxes contain the area in view, rather than changesets that include changes within the view. This seems to me to be a problem with how these data are presented, not with the changesets themselves.
Zkir (2026-05-15 21:38:01+00:00): >a lot of the frustration with these changesets comes from how openstreetmap.org/history shows changesets

Absolutely. It's what we complain 20 years already.
rajdhani (2026-05-15 10:46:29+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:182691699
Wildsharky (2026-05-18 03:51:41+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:182694080
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-14 00:50:54+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13327022343

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Tatfahren (2026-05-14 07:58:47+00:00): Die website gehört wohl eher zum amenity=school nebenan. Vielleicht müsste der aber noch über das Gelände der Sporthalle gezogen werden. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23838061
Wildsharky (2026-05-18 03:53:28+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 182775983
eggie (2026-05-14 07:54:52+00:00): Hi,

This is a redundant tag bakeryshop.
I see also a bakeryshop with a different name on the buildingshape?
Perhaps the buildingshape-name is outdated?
Greetz,
eggie
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 09:07:53+00:00): The dataset also mentions the POI at way/117269161 got "closed", but I'm skipping import of closed elements for now, because it's hard to implement it exactly because of cases like this, where bakery and building are tagged together...

I manually resolved this issue, thanks for noticing. Right now I'm at ~1/17th of the backlog, so the remaining cases shouldn't be that hard to audit.
eggie (2026-05-14 09:12:06+00:00): I added addr:city=Lannion
eggie (2026-05-14 05:48:11+00:00): Beste   Een bankje heeft toch niet de naam van de straat.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-05-14 05:49:01+00:00): Please don't give steetnames to objects
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 07:02:46+00:00): Hi, thanks for the feedback.

By streetname you mean name of a nearby street or a name people use to call this bench but is not official?

This is an attempt at restoring contributions from Mapy.com. Their maps outside of Czech Republic are primarily based on OSM and they used to contribute their changes back to OSM directly themselves. Since around the end of 2025 they chose to stop this process and instead publish their changes as geojson on their website. These changes, as far as we have been told through unofficial channels, should be validated by Mapy.com mappers and the only drift is supposed to be in how they structure their data compared to OSM.

Given this context, do you see any automated way this error can be prevented in the future, or would only a human review help in this case?

Thanks, Vojtěch Fošnár
eggie (2026-05-14 07:12:02+00:00): Hi Vojtech,

Yes.. streetnames and countynames (Drenthe) . 
I'm afraid not automated.  We have validators in the Netherlands. They are familiar with our way of tagging. So no problem. 
Benches may have inscriptions.. for sure and even sometimes the have a name or a number. 
Keep on the good work. 
Greetz,
eggie
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 07:41:59+00:00): Sorry for the spam of bad contributions then, I tried my best reviewing them but I miss the local context. I will review them again with this knowledge and revert what doesn't make sense.

I also may have misinterpreted one field in the dataset with an ambiguous name that could signal the contribution is verified. Will investigate that before pushing anything more from the backlog.
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 08:47:43+00:00): No luck with that field...

Looking at the dataset, most of the changes do seem validated, I couldn't find any obvious errors or intentionally wrong data except for misusing the `name` field, so i would assume this comes from Mapy.com's conventions drifting from those in OSM. Do you think it would be acceptable to add `fixme:mapycom:proposed:name`=`de Eekhof` instead of `name` for elements where misuse of the field is common like benches or parcel lockers? We already use this syntax with elements where a `name` tag is already present in OSM to not overwrite good values and we are working on a minimal web tool to audit and resolve these cases.
eggie (2026-05-14 08:55:31+00:00): I will suggest to ignore these proposals.
Benches never get streetnames. 
So also no using proposed:name

For parcellockers it's perhaps different.
They have operator= etc.
mcom-contributions (2026-05-14 09:22:30+00:00): I don't want to ignore the name field completely, at least not for now. In case of benches, ignoring may result in losing some important names for tourist location / historic event / etc. benches. At least that's a case for Czech Republic, in my are we have:
- bench named after first patient who died because of Covid
- benches in each city where a popular singer had his last tour
eggie (2026-05-14 09:36:27+00:00): For sure...Most of the time I think inscription= ..... not name=..     That's why it's sometimes difficult in case you are not familiar with the location.
For exceptions the are names to remenber persons but not the streetname or provincename.
felipeeugenio (2026-05-14 18:48:53+00:00): Hello. Permisive means that everybody can circulate in that road, but the road has an owner and that owner can shut the access down.

Private is that there is a gate or simil and the roads access is forbidden.

I doubt that those roads are permissive.

regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182625210
BholeKiBhasam (2026-05-14 22:51:14+00:00): good day,sir..updated...
eerib (2026-06-03 06:06:16+00:00): Hello RNWhis,

I wanted to provide you an update on this trail.

I have updated the trail in changeset #183573168 from construction=highway to highway=path for the following reasons:

1. The trail is substantially complete and the average trail user would not consider any portion of the trail to be under construction.
2. No recent construction works were noted.
3. No construction warning signage was noted.
4. No tool stashes were noted adjacent to the trail.
5. No deactivations were noted.
6. The trail entrance is not hidden.
7. The trail entrance is flagged.
8. The trail exit is not hidden.
9. The trail signage states the trail is ridable.
10. The trail is already seeing good use.
11. The trail is equal in difficulty (IMBA double black) to the trail it branches from (Gargamel).

I also took a look at TrailForks and saw that the trail is no longer showing up anymore on that platform. The trail will still show up on Gaia but in their next update it will be denoted as unsanctioned, include difficulty symbology, and be rendered in thinner lighter grey to emphasize that it's an unsanctioned trail.

Cheers eerib
RNWhis (2026-06-04 19:11:10+00:00): 1) The trail is not substantially complete and there is multiple sections that are being worked on or re-worked.
2) There is no deactivations noted because I took people down it in a guided tour Saturday last week and due to weather and work conflicts I have not been able to go back up and make changes.
3) I do not have construction warning signs printed and have just been working on fixing parts of the trail or finishing the top.
4) There are multiple tool stashes along the trail, I am glad you cant find them!
5) I am doing the whole thing myself and I am only re-working small sections at this time. There will be a bigger part removed later this summer once a few people are able to volunteer for a bridge re-work.
6) The trail entrance was not announced last year, but people started finding it, and hiked up from the bottom on multiple occasions to find the top.
7) The trail entrance was never flagged previously. So unless you went up and flagged it yourself, this is incorrect.
8) It's hard to hide something that you yourself have decided to make public and dramatically increase the traffic on.
9) The trail signage is from last year and does indeed say its rideable. It is not however in a condition to support being public on trailforks because the increased wear on the trail will degrade a few sections that require rock armoring that is incomplete.
10) There was roughly 200ish people through the trail in the last 18 months. You putting it up before I can get it finished and properly armored in the loose sections will make it dangerous!
11) The difficultly rating was a suggestion from the chief trail builder from WORCA.

The trail was requested to be removed from trailforks because it has been claimed, named, and reserved for future publication. Your obsession with promoting this before it is ready and complete has rushed a lot of timelines.

Do I need to go make a custom sign at the top spelling out all this to you personally? I have better things to do. I was origionally planning on putting a sign up that called you out personally and had a lot of snark. But I am instead focusing on my job / family / and finishing this 5+ year project.

How about you play along and help me keep this removed from the apps until it is finished later this summer. It is not a big ask, and it will be public soon enough.