piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Norbert Dichter (2025-04-11 09:54:47+00:00): Hello, thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. Thank you for your contribution. The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. Or just hit the Q-key.
Also please keep in mind: many buildings are very close but do not actually touch each other, try to map them close to each other without letting them connect or share nodes with each other, roads, or residential area outlines. In the iD web editor, holding down the "alt" key will keep nodes from "snapping" to each other and accidentally connecting.  Thanks so much for your contribution, Norbert 'Nodi' Dichter, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164790742
yrtimiD (2025-04-13 16:01:07+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM!
couple of important notes:
1. we can't use govmap for anything, not for naming not for street-checking. it's public for private usage, while mapping is essentially not private usage and copying of proprietary data. So, all you did here is illegal. If you want to fix names - you can either look the up on kartaview or mapillary or (best option) - go check the physically on the ground.

2. you removed a road mapped by another (very experienced mapper). there for sure was reasons why this road was mapped, so you'd better contact the original mapper and try to resolve problem if any.
MxxCon (2025-04-14 19:31:44+00:00): Hello.
You added a tree at node/12745687639 and tagged it with wikidata= and wikipedia= tags. Unless those 2 tags are about literally that specific tree, a correct way to tag what type of tree it is  would be species:wikidata=Q26745
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164790885
rskedgell (2025-04-11 07:17:41+00:00): These roads are visible in aerial imagery as under construction and are in use by construction vehicles. Some even have clearly visible road markings.

If your navigation software is so broken that it cannot process access=no (this should be actually be access=private), that is not a valid reason to delete objects from OSM.

I have reverted your changeset and made a few other changes.
- the roads to the south of The Boulevard have been changed from highway=proposed + proposed=* to use a lifecycle namespace as proposed:highway=*
- changed access=no to access=private in most cases
dadavid (2025-04-22 14:34:43+00:00): Hallo Aragon217, 

willkommen bei OSM und danke für deine Bearbeitungen :) 

Bitte achte darauf, dass Namen, insbesondere Straßennamen, so erfasst werden sollen, wie sie vor Ort stehen. Der Name "Bäderstraße mit Schleuse" ist also falsch, da es eher eine Beschreibung ist. Auch den Tag ref=* hattest du hier als Dopplung des name Tags verwendet, was nicht richtig ist. 

Ich habe das jetzt korrigiert, schau gern nochmal drüber :) Auch das OSM Wiki hilft immer gut weiter, wenn du dir mal unsicher sein solltest: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:name

Viel Spass beim Mappen weiterhin 

VG David
Vinber-Pro (2026-01-27 08:35:41+00:00): bonjour,
je vois que tu as mis ifaid en amenity=library, je pense que je vais le repasser en office=association ou educational_institution ? 

Qu'en penses-tu ?
Norbert Dichter (2025-06-06 10:12:15+00:00): I squared all of your mapping, and split some.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164791599
NeisRevert (2025-04-11 05:21:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/164797056 where the changeset comment is: 
Remove vandalism
chinook17 (2025-05-14 15:42:10+00:00): Salut,
Je vais rétablir cycleways shared lane sur la rue Alexandre de Sève car il y a des chaussées désignées, même si on s'entend que ça veut pas dire grand chose!
Sam Wilson (2025-04-12 13:01:40+00:00): These are slipways, not drydocks. Actually, I wonder if we should even call them slipways, perhaps abandoned:service=slipway would be better? They're not usable and are maintained as museum exhibits.
TheSwavu (2025-04-12 22:48:02+00:00): One of them still kinda works... it's got a sub parked on it. Maybe add a historic tag?

Either way they are not dry docks.
aharvey (2025-04-14 04:14:02+00:00): Based on these comments I've reverted to restore the slipway ways, then added access=private based on the tag's introduced with this change.
Sam Wilson (2025-04-14 07:43:19+00:00): Thanks!
aharvey (2025-04-14 04:08:23+00:00): correct based on what? What's the signage on the ground say?

Also note that previously we had alt_name=Grimwade Road but now both alt_name and name have the same value, which isn't right.

Also the short section up near Noggerup was missed.
Suvarna Mithun (2025-04-14 05:13:09+00:00): Hi, Landgate is the official source of information for Western Australia.
You can see the correct map under https://map-viewer-plus.app.landgate.wa.gov.au/index.html.
aharvey (2025-04-15 05:58:02+00:00): It's been pointed out previously to you at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162379793 that Landgate data can't be used to update data in OSM, their data is copyrighted they don't permit OSM to use their data, as such we can't risk using it.
aharvey (2025-04-15 06:19:50+00:00): Main Roads WA have released their data under CC BY and have completed the OSMF waiver allowing us to use their data, we even have a background layer available in JOSM and iD out of the box.

In this case Main Roads WA have the name "Grimwade Road" however this doesn't necessarily mean we should go ahead and change it, instead best to check what's signposted on the ground and ask prior mappers for any background.

In OSM it's good practice to map what's on the ground (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground) and therefore the road names in OSM may not always match in any particular government dataset, and that's okay and to be expected.
Suvarna Mithun (2025-04-15 06:34:27+00:00): Hello, i work at the department of fire and emergency services and we publish warnings to the western Australian communities when any hazards like bushfire happens. This is to ensure that the community is safe.
So road names plays a very critical role when we put out these warnings.
Our website https://www.emergency.wa.gov.au/ uses mapbox and we want the road names to be updated like what is in Main roads.
If you could help that could be greatly appreciated.
aharvey (2025-04-15 06:45:41+00:00): It sounds like neither of us know what signage is on the ground, if any. I've asked the originally contributor of Belkin Road for feedback at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/2393286.

Without any other information, or feedback from other mappers it's fine for this one to be renamed per Main Roads WA data, just not from Landgate data.
Suvarna Mithun (2025-04-15 07:05:39+00:00): There is signage in google which shows Grimwade Rd.
Treadly (2025-04-15 09:01:30+00:00): Using Google street view, the actual sign for the road at the Noggerup end says Grimwade Road. Have a look for yourself. The sign is about 100 metres up from the actual intersection.
fortera_au (2025-04-15 22:49:03+00:00): Google isn't a source we can use, it's copyrighted.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164793552
Suvarna Mithun (2025-04-16 01:23:08+00:00): You can look at main roads https://travelmap.mainroads.wa.gov.au/Home/Map and this shows the road name as 'Grimwade Road'.
aharvey (2025-04-16 02:21:04+00:00): The only sources we can use are those at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#Western_Australia which are CC BY 4.0 with a waiver marked as green which includes selected Main Roads WA open data which is CC BY 4.0 and which Main Roads WA have provided OSM a waiver for -> https://catalogue.data.wa.gov.au/dataset/mrwa-road-network. This dataset is already in editors as a background layer, which is fine to use and indicates Grimwade Road, so no problem with that.

travelmap.mainroads.wa.gov.au -> personal non-commercial use only
landgate.wa.gov.au -> all rights reserved
Google Street View -> not permitted

We can't use any of those.
Treadly (2025-04-16 03:22:59+00:00): The signage on the ground says it's Grimwade Road. Why on earth would you call it anything different to what the actual signs say?
aharvey (2025-04-16 03:54:19+00:00): That's my point, in general in OSM we prefer to set the name based on what the signage on the ground says. This whole discussion originated from the fact that the road name was changed based on another map and not from an on the ground survey of the signage, so it was unclear what the ground truth was.

You can't determine this from Google Street View, this is legally unclear and against OSM's policies, you must physically survey or use another compatible source like Mapillary, etc.
Treadly (2025-04-16 04:04:07+00:00): I live about 20km from this road. I have driven it many times. I have seen the signs with my own eyes. The signs say Grimwade Road. Go and have a look for yourself. The signs have been erected by Main Roads.
aharvey (2025-04-16 04:12:39+00:00): That's great, and thanks for confirming. This is exactly why I flagged you about this change at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/2393286 so you, who originally contributed this way as Belkin Road could be notified about the change to Grimwade Road and given a chance to give feedback about the change. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/40306252
Treadly (2025-04-16 04:35:05+00:00): "Formerly Bekin Road, a “made” name from abbreviating the Balingup/East Kirup/Noggerup Road, it is now just Grimwade Road. 
It was not until the early 1970s that the Department created its own Nomenclature Committee. 
From then on, while name generation continued to be from the field, the final decisions on acceptance lay with the Committee whose decisions, and in most cases with an explanation for the choice, were formally recorded. "
aharvey (2025-04-16 05:34:26+00:00): (For anyone else interested) the above is from https://www.foresthistory.org.au/Proceedings2004/141.pdf
OldManCelli (2025-05-15 17:04:11+00:00): Hello CAT Fijn, please don't add the address of a house to the name. residential houses generally don't have names. add an address if you would like to. Also, please don't add buildings on top of other buildings.
Jofban (2025-07-07 09:40:31+00:00): Warum hast du bei den Straßen `bicycle=no` ergänzt? Ich glaube, du meintest `oneway:bicycle=no`.
Bitte korrigier das. Diese Änderung macht sämtliches Fahrradrouting kaputt.
Allison P (2025-04-11 01:52:41+00:00): About 80 left, almost all in Northeast Meridian.
eggie (2025-04-11 05:37:46+00:00): Dag Acheel Abouhamoud,

Je vraagt feedback...  Er zijn al adresnodes... dus je hoeft geen adressen toe te voegen aan de gebouwomtrek.
Ik heb het adres weer verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
muralito (2025-04-11 13:29:10+00:00): Hi. Are you sure, with a changeset count of 4927 that this is an element place=island?

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:place%3Disland
Masyas (2025-04-13 03:40:14+00:00): landuse和道路别贴一起，休息日变工作日给你改这个
s777n (2025-04-14 20:51:56+00:00): Здравствуйте. Пожалуйста не убирайте "улица" из имени улиц. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Россия/Соглашение_об_именовании_дорог Уже исправлено.
NeisBot (2025-04-11 04:15:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment
NeisReview (2025-04-11 08:03:45+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/164802959
watmildon (2025-05-01 03:50:26+00:00): beeeefy changeset. Nice work!
Tex2002ans (2025-05-20 02:52:46+00:00): Thanks. :)

Occasionally, I flip over here when I need to "take a break".

I saw someone did a lot of good work here years ago, but everything was marked with generic "building=yes", so I decided to touch it up and add little details too.

A huge chunk of the E is done, but the S+W still needs some work.
MosKartograf (2025-04-14 16:26:48+00:00): 👍
limes11 (2025-06-29 22:05:14+00:00): Hallo basti78, 

dieses CS wurde zurückgesetzt.

Das Auftrennen eines Wegs lediglich zur Kennzeichnung unterschiedlicher Tempolimits ist nicht nötig, das lässt sich über die Tags regeln.

Diese Aufsplittung hatte leider einen großen Einfluss auf die hier befindlichen Busrouten, so dass der Revert nötig war.

Bitte als Neuling nicht ohne Absprache Änderungen dieser Größenordnung vornehmen, das Einzeichnen komplett neuer Hauptverkehrsstraßen ist fast nie nötig und sollte im Bedarfsfall in einer solch komplexen Situation den erfahrenen Mappern überlassen werden.

Wenn Du kommunizierst, welches Tempolimit hier in welche Richtung gilt, trage ich es ein.

Schöne Grüße und viel Spaß weiterhin mit osm

Limes
Jrachi (2025-04-11 08:16:10+00:00): Ciao.
Posso chiedere che senso abbia una relazione di tipo route hiking su una via ferrata?
E mettere come source la proposta della relazione di via ferrata?
Forse volevi mettere route=via_ferrata e ti sei sbagliato? 
Ci sono tag ripetuti tra way e relazione.
Quando avrai deciso se usare route=hiking oppure route=via_ferrata ti consiglio di fare pulizia.
Un'ultima osservazione se permetti.
In italiano racchiudere una o più parole tra virgolette significa isolare il nome proprio nella frase.
Quindi,  scegli:
1) name=Via ferrata Fausto Susatti
2) name=Fausto Susatti

Ivo
Arminus (2025-04-11 08:45:07+00:00): Hi,

sorry, I obviously missed that there is already a relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/59148665 - which is kind of strange because it includes much more than the *actual* ferrata (climbed it myself twice so I have some onsite knowledge).

Can we agree that I delete the new relation again but also combine the 2 ways of the actual ferrata (way 76618462 and way 76618437) into one way?

Point is: It would be nice to either have a relation (or a single way) which only includes the actual ferrata, not an entire trail where only ~ 20% of it is the actual ferrata (which in this case can also be climbed from Biacesa and not only like https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2227233 maps it.
Warin61 (2025-12-24 01:05:39+00:00): Humm...
These carry access tags of foot=yes and no for the rest of the tagged access ... would it not be better to tag access=no and let the foot=yes remain?
LuxuryCoop (2025-04-11 10:22:02+00:00): 건물번호(addr:housenumber)가 "610.0"과 같이 소수점으로 나타나는 개체가 있는데, 수정해 주실 수 있으신가요?

수정이 어려우시다면 말씀해 주세요. 그러면 이미 올라와 있는 데이터를 일괄 롤백해 드릴 테니 그 뒤에 다시 수정된 데이터로 업로드하시면 됩니다.
캔디레인 (2025-04-14 00:24:01+00:00): 알려주셔서 감사합니다.
주소를 정리한 엑셀파일에는 housenumber에 소수점 등 오류가 없는데, 업로드 하면서 뭔가 오류가 발생한 것 같습니다.
2644건 중 어느 것에서 오류가 발생하였는지 알기 어려워서요. 데이터를 롤백해주시면, 좋을 것 같습니다.
업로드 시 오류가 안 생길 방안을 찾아보고 재 업로드 하겠습니다.
감사합니다.
LuxuryCoop (2025-04-14 12:28:08+00:00): 지금 확인해 보니, 다른 분께서 ".0"이 들어간 데이터를 고쳐 주셔서 되돌릴 필요는 없을 것 같습니다.

OSM에 기여해 주셔서 감사드립니다.
honnip (2025-06-12 05:54:00+00:00): 이 바뀜집합에서 추가된 마디의 상당수가 중복인 것 같습니다. (현재 `network="서울자전거 따릉이"`인 마디는 2703개 입니다.)
honnip (2025-06-21 02:57:49+00:00): changeset/167896336 에서 되돌렸습니다.
Gregory Peony (2025-04-11 21:12:17+00:00): The vast majority of contributions here have resulted in improvements to map data. e.g. Modifying highways and residential areas to avoid overalps. All footpritns are valid and appropriately shaped. Most are accurate. Beware that landuse and highways should not share nodes (the grey ones). --- made some edits to the data here in Changeset: 164833898. --- Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164799268
Gregory Peony (2025-04-11 21:21:47+00:00): The buildings here are valid and appropriately squared they are quite accurate, but include a portion of the shadow they cast. Pitched roofs usually overhang the walls of buildings by some ammount so 'colouring within the lines' leads to more accurate sizing. --- appropriate modification of a residential area. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164799579
s777n (2025-04-14 20:53:45+00:00): Здравствуйте. Ваша правка была удалена потому что вы продублировали школу. Школа уже была отмечена -https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9108141
dcskobuffs (2025-04-16 19:57:24+00:00): Hello Acimut,

I see you have made classifications along Autopista Nacional and have reclassified links such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23848277, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/111708591 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40555757 from motorway link to the other highway classification of what the link terminates at. According to OSM policy (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link) links are “usually the higher classification of the intersecting highways” and mappers should “try not to split up the link into one part belonging to one road and one to the other with different classifications." There are no documented exceptions for Cuba that I know of in respect to classifying links differently. How would you feel about changing these back to the higher classifications for consistency across Cuba and more broadly in OSM? Happy to discuss further if needed.

Thanks and happy mapping!

Hola Acimut,

Veo que has realizado clasificaciones a lo largo de la Autopista Nacional y has reclasificado enlaces como https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23848277, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/111708591 y https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40555757, pasando de un enlace de autopista a la otra clasificación de autopista donde termina el enlace. Según la política de OSM (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link), los enlaces suelen tener la clasificación más alta de las autopistas que se intersecan, y los cartógrafos deberían intentar no dividir el enlace en una parte perteneciente a una carretera y otra a otra con diferentes clasificaciones. No conozco excepciones documentadas para Cuba en cuanto a la clasificación diferente de los enlaces. ¿Qué te parecería volver a las clasificaciones más altas para mantener la coherencia en toda Cuba y en general en OSM? Con gusto hablaremos más sobre el tema si es necesario.

¡Gracias y que disfrutes de la cartografía!
Acimut (2025-05-08 14:40:34+00:00): Hello dcskobuffs
Sorry I didn't reply sooner, I've been busy.
Thanks for the correction. I'll be correcting those links and any others I've changed.
dcskobuffs (2025-05-09 16:52:08+00:00): Thank you for making those corrections!
fortera_au (2025-04-11 07:23:40+00:00): Most of that way has parking along it, and the parts that aren't I wouldn't really class as an alley, wouldn't they be better just left as a generic service road
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164799948
Supt_of_Printing (2025-04-11 13:09:07+00:00): Fair enough, it could be just a service road but it's definitely not simply a parking aisle.
fortera_au (2025-04-11 07:21:55+00:00): Hi there, i'ts best to edit existing data, not delete it and replace it, as we lose the history attached to that object.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164800107
NorthCrab_upload (2025-04-11 07:20:50+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/node/12224100110
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1136752593

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
gurglypipe (2025-04-11 07:48:58+00:00): Hiya, access=customers isn’t quite the right tagging to use for these footpaths, as it implies customers are allowed vehicular (and bicycle, and horse) access on the footpaths.

foot=customers is the right tagging
gurglypipe (2025-04-11 08:53:11+00:00): Apparently fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164804059, thanks
ticho2 (2025-04-16 13:45:51+00:00): Ahoj, tag "blockage" sa nepouziva, takze ziadna aplikacia ho nezohladni. Odporucam dat tam skor do stredu toho useku jeden node s barrier=debris. Pripadne ak je ta cesta uz uplne neprejazdna, ale peso sa tam da prejst, zmenit ten usek na highway=track alebo highway=path.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164800833
VladKac (2025-04-16 17:19:47+00:00): Feature tunela je highway=unclassified. Na mape sa zobrazuje ale routing cezeň nevytvorí trasu.
Tunel pod Vážskou kaskádou je v súčastnosti napoly zanesený bahnom a zaplavený vodou. Na tento stav sa hodia štítky surface=dirt a blockage=dirt.
Štítok barrier=debris by som pridal na prístupovú cestu tunela na ľavom brehu kanála pretože je tam mierny návoz štrku.
ticho2 (2025-04-16 19:12:22+00:00): Hm, vyzera ze "blockage" sa predsa len aspon neoficialne pouziva, akurat to nie je oficialne zdokumentovane: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/blockage#values

Nuz, preco nie. :) 👍️
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164800833
eggie (2025-04-11 07:29:15+00:00): Dag Sander,

Beter geen dubbele adressen aanmaken. Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode en weer teruggeplaatst op het gebouw.

MVG
eggie
BCNorwich (2025-04-12 06:33:40+00:00): Many fictional duplicating highways were removed. Please do not duplicate highways, it disrupts routing.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2025-04-12 08:44:11+00:00): It's just 6 in Maa- ja Ruumiamet.

https://xgis.maaamet.ee/adsavalik/ads?ads_oid=ME03983393
MD Mostakin Islam Mim (2025-04-11 07:38:01+00:00): may be this is a road
ticho2 (2025-04-16 13:36:43+00:00): Ahoj, neda sa tam vobec prejst ani popod most na druhu stranu kolajnic? Minimalne na juznom konci mostu vyzera ze tam od cesty vedie vyslapana cesticka z druhej strany.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164801926
VladKac (2025-04-16 17:08:55+00:00): Čau, prejsť sa tam dá cez železničný most ale nie je tam chodník takže je možný prechod len na vlastné riziko.
Rovnako sa prejsť dá priamo z železničnej zastávky ale na konci je značka, která zakazuje prechod.
ticho2 (2025-04-16 19:04:56+00:00): Jasne, rozumiem. To len tak pre istotu, z leteckej snimky to vyzeralo ze mozno by to slo. Kazdopadne dik za skvele upravy!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164801926
AjBelnuovo (2025-04-11 15:38:29+00:00): Qual é a fonte do nome da via?
THIAGO SAN (2025-04-11 15:58:51+00:00): https://m.camarapiracicaba.sp.gov.br/consuelo-sunega-gibelli-da-nome-a-rua-no-bairro-cidade-judiciaria-59494 

Google Maps

Meu comprovante de endereço
AjBelnuovo (2025-04-11 17:35:47+00:00): Só que ela não é a via que dá acesso ao bairro.

https://siave.camarapiracicaba.sp.gov.br/arquivo?Id=478187
THIAGO SAN (2025-04-11 18:12:29+00:00): É a via que dá acesso aos Condomínios Reserva Taquaral I e Reserva Taquaral II. É a continuação da avenida Charles Wesley e a junção é numa rotatória após o viaduto sobre a Rodovia SP 308, no quilômetro 155. O CEP da avenida Consuelo Sunega Gibelli é 13423-498.
THIAGO SAN (2025-04-11 18:13:13+00:00): Correção: o CEP é 13423-790.
Andrea Musuruane (2025-04-11 13:52:14+00:00): Ciao. Non e' corretto inserire in questo modo il cancello. Inserisci un nodo SULLA strada e etichettalo con barrier=gate, ecc. Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164802308
AjBelnuovo (2025-04-11 14:25:38+00:00): Qual é a fonte dos nomes das vias?