piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
grzegorz75jan (2025-10-18 15:52:16+00:00): Ciekawa konstrukcja https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1443012927#map=19/49.720116/20.961580&layers=N

To zaznaczenie, obszar (zapewne mało dokładny) można oznaczyć bardziej jako teren (plac) budowy niż budynek. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:landuse%3Dconstruction
Nie wiem na jakim etapie to jest ale prawdopodobnie daleko temu jeszcze do bycia sklepem. Jeżeli budynek jest w budowie i "wyszedł z ziemi" to należy go oznaczyć jako https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:building%3Dconstruction
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173450540
SPalferro (2025-10-25 17:30:32+00:00): Hola, antes que nada, gracias por añadir información a OSM!
Vi que agregó varios nombres de calles en El Bañado. Para la próxima vez que añada nombres, le recomiendo consultar la política de OSM de no abreviar los nombres, incluso si aparecen abreviados en los carteles nomencladores. Puede ver más información aquí:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Nombres#Buenas_pr%C3%A1cticas

Si tiene alguna duda, puede consultar la wiki o preguntar en el grupo de Telegram de la comunidad: https://t.me/osm_ar 
Saludos!
eggie (2025-10-19 14:10:35+00:00): Dag hectodium. Mbv van een schuin genomen luchtfoto kun je geen gebouwen uitlijnen.
Het kan wel mbv de BGT of de kadasterachtergrond.

MVG
eggie
hectodium (2025-10-19 14:51:36+00:00): Hi eggie,
I used Bing maps, which is not at an angle as far as I can see, but I kept the building where it originally was anyways. In any case, if you thing it is misplaced i can try to align it with a different source
eggie (2025-10-19 15:00:30+00:00): Hi....   Bing is not okay at many places.
PDOK is okay, but is also a aerial imagery.
You may use the BAG or the BGT Omtrekgericht.
If you can't find that in JOSM. You has to instal those. .  Now editor iD has a BGT background for background-choise .

Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2025-10-19 15:01:46+00:00): In iD select  'PDOK BGT standaardvisualisatie' anyway.
eggie (2025-10-19 15:02:47+00:00): In JOSM

BGT implementeren 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=59021
Forumdraadje ..  De beste imagery layers om NL OSM te mappen met JOSM.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/de-beste-imagery-layers-om-nl-osm-te-mappen-met-josm/85393
eggie (2025-10-19 15:08:03+00:00): BING has perhaps not an angle here  but has a wrong position in OSM at many places.
hectodium (2025-10-19 18:42:41+00:00): Hi eggie,
Thank you for the help, I was not aware of the existance of BGT. I managed to integrate it into JOSM so I'll be working into shifting my edits in the spinozacampus to align with it!
eggie (2025-10-19 18:45:50+00:00): 👍
蕉饼电脑 (2025-10-18 20:35:32+00:00): References:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:admin%20level
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Role:admin_centre
smallCat (2025-10-19 01:49:13+00:00): 哦这样啊，我之前没注意到
smallCat (2025-10-19 01:51:06+00:00): 已于https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173472636 改正
nurdafur (2026-02-09 14:31:35+00:00): Hi Juraj
Me just again. Same in this changeset on this route: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19727279#map=13/46.88500/10.34580
Cheers
Urs
BCNorwich (2025-11-09 06:44:15+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I'm just letting you know that someone removed the node/point that you added to OSM because it held no information. Thus of no value to the OSM database. OSM is a live worldwide database containing ground truth information.

Regards Bernard.
eggie (2025-10-19 14:12:11+00:00): Dag Information... De tag bridge=yes met layer=1 ontbreekt.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-10-19 14:13:28+00:00): layer=1 was wel getagd.. Ik heb bridge=yes toegevoegd. Het is .. en.. en..
MVG
eggie
Information01 (2025-10-20 17:51:46+00:00): Eggie,

Ik meen toch dat ik die info toegevoegd had. Ik mis het ook niet wanneer ik de browser versie opzoek van deze wijziging.

Mvg. Allan
eggie (2025-10-20 17:56:29+00:00): Hoi Allan..
Klopt.. want ik heb bridge=yes toegevoegd.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1443019445#map=19/53.244982/5.782292

Groet..
eggie
Information01 (2025-10-20 19:11:43+00:00): Ik meende toch echt dat ik het toegevoegd had. Maar bedankt dat je het aangevuld hebt.

Mvg Allan
rempshaener (2025-10-19 10:17:33+00:00): Hallo,
was ist der Grund für diese Änderung?
Es waren bereits Namen erfasst.
Das von dir verwendete Tag diente einem anderen Zweck, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE%3AKey%3Abridge%3Aname
Dort steht auch:
"Bitte beachten: Für separat mit man_made=bridge kartierte Brücken, sollte name=* verwendet werden. Ist eine separat kartierte Brücke noch nicht vorhanden, sollte sie selbst eingetragen werden."
Viele Grüße
GKremp (2025-10-19 15:01:22+00:00): Hallo,
der Grund ist folgender. Ich bin gestaltender Creator in der X-Plane Flugsimulator Community und arbeite an einem Projekt in dem der Rhein mit Rheinbrücken-Objekten bestückt werden soll um die Immersion zu erhöhen. X-Plane bezieht seine Daten aus OSM um Straßen, Bahngleise, Gebäude usw. darzustellen. Den Eintrag bridge:name benötige ich nun um spezielle Brücken in OSM auslesen zu können um sie in dann in X-Plane  ohne die spezifischen X-Plane Brückenpfeiler darstellen zu können.
Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2025-10-19 15:28:05+00:00): Hallo,

der name steht doch bereits dran? Wieso funktioniert der nicht?

Ich möchte ehrlich sein:
- Es widerspricht dem Wiki.
- Es ist teilweise inhaltlich falsch, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/369745779 mit "Düsseldorf" im Namen
- Die Analogie zum "Taggen für den Renderer" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Taggen_f%C3%BCr_den_Renderer) ist naheliegend.

Daher: das wird so nicht bleiben können.

Viele Grüße
GKremp (2025-10-20 10:02:26+00:00): Hallo,
habe es gerade verstanden und die bridge:name Einträge, an den betreffenden Brücken die schon die Einträge man_made=bridge und name= enthalten, gelöscht.

Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2025-10-20 10:14:56+00:00): Hallo,
danke dir.
Viele Grüße
habi (2026-05-04 19:09:16+00:00): Ciao nleanba
Du hast hier bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12254640939 die `ref`-Nummer entfernt.
Diese stammt (von mir) aus dem ursprünglichen Import der Daten: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/trying-to-bulk-import-locations/119788/, und wäre dazu gedacht gewesen, die Daten irgendwann mal ajour zu halten.
Bitte entferne den Tag nicht einfach "grundlos" auf OpenStreeMap-Objekten.
Gruss und happy mapping,
Habi
nleanba (2026-05-04 19:25:23+00:00): Achso, sorry.
Wenn ich mich recht erinnere, habe ich das entfernt weil ich es für die Parkplatznummer hielt (vom standort hat das etwa gepasst) aber auf verschiedenen fotos waren die Mietwagen auf verschiedenen Parkplätzen, darum hielt ich das für einen Fehler/überpräzision. Tut mir leid
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-18 16:51:57+00:00): Hello, please do not change "street:old_name" to "old_name." street:name refers to the name of an associated street of, say, a sidewalk. According to old maps of the area, the associated street was part of Brandywine Way. However, you tagged the footpath as "old_name=Brandywine Way," which is incorrect. See https://osm.wiki/key:street:name for more information.
So, then, with the street itself being tagged as "old_name=Brandywine Way," a natural extension/interpolation would be to tag the surrounding footpath as "street:old_name." Thanks!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173459509
mueschel (2025-10-18 17:02:32+00:00): "street:old_name" is not a tag that is in use anywhere. Adding an "old_" in the middle of any tag is very unlikely to be supported by any tool.

It is the name of a street that no longer exists (in the place this highway is located).  The proper tag, if you want to keep the "street:name" intact would be "was:street:name". 

As the street itself doesn't exist anymore and the footway is the sole thing remaining, "old_name" seems perfectly valid to use in this case.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-18 22:52:40+00:00): Neither of your scenarios are the case here. The road segment still exists, even if basically no one uses it anymore. Older maps of this area showed that Brandywine Way was connected to Lorenzi Street via this highway segment. However, the former's western terminus was moved from the latter to a cul-de-sac (dead end), where it remains today.
As mentioned before, the statement "The street does not exist anymore" is false; therefore, any other statements dependant on this one are irrelevant. Carto doesn't render it (presumably because it's tagged with `disused:highway=*`), but if you go to this location on any map service that provides satellite imagery, you too will see that the road still exists.
Also, there's this expression used in OSM: "Any tags you like."
NorthCrab_upload (2025-10-18 14:41:06+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3477894934
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/358558335

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/358558434

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-10-19 06:26:48+00:00): Merhaba. Uydu görütülerinde araçlar doğu batı istikametinde yan yana park ediyor gibi görünüyor. Fakat çizdiğiniz yollar kuzey-güney istikametinde. Çizdiğiniz yolların gerçekten eksenleri gerçekten böyle mi?

Burası bir otopark alanı mı? Eğer öyle ise saha sınırı diye adlandırdığıız alan amenity=parking etiketi ile işaretlenmeli. "saha sınırı" ifadesi de bir özel ad olmadığı için bu ad da silinmeli. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1443022325

İyi günler.
JeroenHoek (2025-10-18 18:05:04+00:00): Weet je zeker dat het een ruiterpad is? Ik weet dat hier aan de randen van dit bos wel van die bordjes staan, maar niet precies hoe of wat. Of je er ook mag lopen hangt van de aard van de bordjes af.
Information01 (2025-10-18 18:23:39+00:00): Het is inderdaad lastig. Er staan geen borden. De persoon welke de andere "ruiterpaden" in openstreetmap gevormd heeft zal hetzelfde probleem hebben gehad. Het pad wat ik toegevoegd heb is zeer zeker een pad in het bos, maar er is niet aangegeven dat het een ruiterpad of wandelpad is.
JeroenHoek (2025-10-18 20:21:40+00:00): Dat was ik, op basis van de bordjes die er staan. Omdat het geen G9 bord is maar een onderbord (zonder bovenbord), is het aannemelijk dat het hier om een dubbelfunctie gaat. Je zou dan foot=yes kunnen toevoegen, zodat ook voetgangers erover kunnen in navigatie.
danieldegroot2 (2026-04-28 10:24:08+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13240842747

Changed entrance tag shop => yes
There is currently no (longer) a shop here, nor a workshop facility.
It is maybe still used as private shed, but not as workshop as far as I can see.
b-unicycling (2026-04-28 21:54:35+00:00): The intended use was shop entrance, but this solution is fine with me, too.
danieldegroot2 (2026-04-29 08:04:49+00:00): If there is/will be a shop, could you link to where it mentions this please?
Otherwise, I assume 'shop' is a typo for 'workshop' in your last comment.
ceirios (2025-10-19 10:36:03+00:00): Hi R_Lewis,

Croeso i OSM - I do understand your frustration about people accessing (your?) land without permission. You did the right thing by adding the access=private tag, however it's still important that they are seen as driveways!

It takes time for data consumers (like satnavs) to receive OSM data, it's not instant.

Please see the Wiki for more information
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

Diolch
Ceirios
pitfire (2025-10-19 10:17:23+00:00): Hi  El_Lutzo,

bist Du sicher, dass ein Bücherschrank auf einem Freigelände eine eigene Adresse haben sollte und was bedeutet der Eintrag "covered" üblicherweise wenn sich mehrere Objekte überdecken. 

VG pitfire
El_Lutzo (2025-10-19 16:31:16+00:00): Hi, pitfire
Ich hätte angenommen, dass Go Map!! hier so etwas wie ref:addr:* setzt, die Tags scheinen aber kaum benutzt zu werden. Ich werde das über den Tag location ändern.
El_Lutzo (2025-10-19 16:40:43+00:00): Das Tag covered wurde mir auch von Go Map!! vorgeschlagen, macht bei Schränken im Freien nicht viel Sinn, das sind geschlossene Bücherschränke; geändert.

Ich hoffe, es passt jetzt so.
Danke für die Hinweise. :)
AndyB_66 (2025-10-19 18:51:36+00:00): Twoje komentarze ("akt.") do zestawów zmian nic nie wnoszą - zapoznaj się z zasadami dobrego komentowania zestawów zmian (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian) i stosuj się do nich.
Dawid2849 (2025-11-09 15:04:59+00:00): Skąd pochodzi ta droga? Czy jest w realnych planach? Łódź słynie z dróg, które są w planach od wielu lat.
nihlede (2025-10-18 15:24:53+00:00): Pas certain de s'il reste ou non des données/attributs à "transférer" de l'ancien point (au 59 route de labège) vers le nouveau (2721 route de baziège) avant de supprimer.
DD1GJ (2025-10-18 18:48:44+00:00): Revert aller bisherigen Änderungssätze in Deutschland.

Hallo lele5111, willkommen bei OSM. Leider hast Du in allen bisherigen Änderungssätzen in Deutschland Gebäude und Straßen über bereits bestehende Objekte geladen. Bevor Du mit JOSM arbeitest, musst Du die Objekte des zu bearbeitenden Gebietes zuerst in die Arbeitsumgebung herunterladen: Datei -> Daten herunterladen bzw. grüner Pfeil nach unten in der Symbolleiste. Mehr Informationen findest Du unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf
Madi-Red (2025-11-28 08:24:02+00:00): Hello Kingsley AMANKWE, thank You for your contribution. I corrected all issues related to building and highway intersections within our Africa - Fix Building and Highway Intersection challenge. Make sure that there are no validation errors before data upload. Happy Mapping!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-12 10:28:46+00:00): Reverted addition of a SEO spam POI from Google Maps with blatant advertising tags in changeset 184010124

https://osm.org/changeset/184010124
user_5359 (2025-10-19 20:03:43+00:00): Hello! Short hint: the term Tag is the name from the combination of key=value and not part of the key.
achpav (2025-10-21 13:21:10+00:00): OK thanks!
Kovirii (2026-05-17 16:10:35+00:00): Has Fire Station 6 been expanded from 2 bays?
valaise (2025-11-03 04:19:40+00:00): Hi, I noticed a few issues with this changeset related to street connectivity:
- The south end of Beach 33rd Street passes through two chain link fences
- The service road extension at Beach 36th Street also routes through a fence

Details of these connections may not be visible in aerial imagery, but ground surveys confirm these connections are not physically accessible.

I'll proceed to correct these specific routing errors. When mapping from imagery, please cross-check with recent survey data and other map information. Thanks!
snake21 (2025-11-03 04:56:47+00:00): Thank you!
YomanNH (2026-01-13 07:46:36+00:00): Hej, na jakiej podstawie zmieniłeś drogę https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/725892866/history z drogi w strefie zamieszkania na highway=service?
Baconcrisp (2025-10-21 19:28:44+00:00): Hello Flap,

Can you explain why you changed the tag "old_name=*" to "street:old_name=*"? There's no information regarding this tag on the wiki and the only use cases are in this changeset.

What is the purpose of this tag?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173459509
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 01:30:07+00:00): I explained this in detail on a previous changeset involving these ways. Long story short, the name of the associated street was Brandywine Way, but this segment is no longer in use, despite being completely intact otherwise.
Baconcrisp (2025-10-22 14:25:42+00:00): I understand that part. My question was why you changed the "old_name=*" to a tag you made? The old_name tag was correct as it was.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 19:04:44+00:00): Because the key `old_name` does not apply to the sidewalk. If I had tagged the sidewalk as `old_name=Brandywine Way`, that would've meant that the sidewalk itself used to be named "Brandywine Way," which is incorrect. `street:old_name` perfectly encapsulates the situation I am accounting for here, where 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝗲𝗲𝘁 𝙖𝙨𝙨𝙤𝙘𝙞𝙖𝙩𝙚𝙙 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗲𝘄𝗮𝗹𝗸 used to be called Brandywine Way.
Baconcrisp (2025-10-23 14:06:50+00:00): Thank you for the explanation. Whereas it is good to preserve historical information, this tag probably could be removed altogether since the street no longer exists. 

If you want to preserve this information you can add it to OpenHistoricalMap instead of creating a new tag.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-23 16:59:13+00:00): Except that I have an objections: it still does exist (go to this area on Bing Maps Aerial, for example), but it's not used anymore (hence disused:highway=residential).
NeisBot (2025-10-18 17:00:41+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 #Tags #Description
NeisBot (2025-10-18 17:00:41+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form:
"Architecture and interior design firm"
NeisReview (2025-10-22 15:57:51+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/173635329
elsy1 (2025-10-20 14:18:25+00:00): reverted vandal edit
elsy1 (2025-10-20 14:19:00+00:00): ویرایش خرابکارانه و اشتباه شما برگشت داده شد لطفا تکرار نفرمایید باتشکر
habi (2026-03-02 08:44:49+00:00): Both underpasses are mapped as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25169401 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/25169395 since 17 years (!).
I removed both your fixme-nodes.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-10-18 20:22:21+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/1443047572

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
maddin3000 (2025-10-18 17:14:58+00:00): Achtung, die Satelliten-Bilder sind veraltet
Thibault Rommel (2025-11-08 13:32:57+00:00): Hello
I notice you separated the cycleways from the main road.
Please notice that you need to add oneway=yes to the cycleways and bicycle=use_sidepath on the main road to avoid routing issues.
Could you please correct this?
robbieonsea (2025-11-08 16:27:12+00:00): I'm not sure if the cycleways are definitely one way (can't remember precisely), some were wide enough for two way passage. One should be able to tell from Mapillary images.
As to use 'use_sidepath' - I'm not familiar with signage and/or Belgian law too know if that is the case. I'll leave that to those with more experience to improve that detail.
Thibault Rommel (2025-11-09 17:48:58+00:00): I can tell you from the street signs that the cycleways are in fact one way. Two way cycle paths are very rare, especially over longer distances, when there are cycle paths on both sides. (For reference, new one-way cycleways are built 2-3m wide, and two way 3-6m).
Driving on the roadway where there are marked cycle paths is not allowed, thus bicycle=use_sidepath when the cycle path is drawn in separately.
literan (2025-10-19 11:38:39+00:00): можно вас попросить не делать правки сразу по всей стране, ограничив их меньшей площадью?

это неудобно и неуважительно по отношению к другим участникам проекта
AnnaDr (2025-10-19 18:06:49+00:00): Добрый день. Я отсматриваю наличие школ и добавляю их, опираясь на реестр МинОбра с известными адресами. Поскольку реестр не сортированный, получается по всей стране. Я учту Вашу просьбу работать регионально.
literan (2025-10-19 18:33:28+00:00): я поясню, почему это неудобно. Участники, следящие за правками в своих регионах, получают в свои списки наблюдения инфу о ваших правках, так как их регион "накрывает" прямоугольником. Хотя в их регионе правок нет
AnnaDr (2025-10-19 18:41:07+00:00): Ok!
Frans S (2025-10-19 14:39:22+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
About tagging of highways
An entrée to a farm is not a track (see the definition of tracks on the highway wiki.)
Tag them as highway = service
Highway without or limited lined with buildings in wood areas are no residential highway. Unclassified is a better tag

Best regards and keep mapping
osmviborg (2025-10-18 18:31:09+00:00): Man tegner kun svingbaner hvis der er en fysisk adskillelse af de enkelte vognbaner. Det her spindelvæv er overkill. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Divided_highways
osmviborg (2025-10-19 10:06:55+00:00): Tilpasset med færre link forbindelser, erstattet af turn:lanes
Phnoggie (2025-10-19 13:42:45+00:00): Takker, kan se at nogle relationer er blevet brudt, er det bevidst?
Btw har opdateret 3. kryds i rækken der er magen til resten pr. oktober 2025 :-)
osmviborg (2025-10-19 13:56:56+00:00): Jeg mener at havde tilpasset alle busforbindelserne. Supercykelstien er jeg ikke helt sikker på. Check gerne.
t_ja (2025-10-18 19:58:00+00:00): Ahoj.
s https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/239210857 si slapol vedla, staci si pozriet kataster, kde je napisane, ze dana budova (byvaly hotel Kysuca) ma supisne cislo 1331. V RA je pozicia zla, kedze je na priemyselnej budove, ktora nema priradene supisne cislo.

Prosim vrat to naspaet.

T.
Dodko (2025-10-19 16:20:40+00:00): Opravené.
t_ja (2025-10-19 16:24:33+00:00): Dakujem za promptnu opravu 👍
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-10-18 18:08:32+00:00): 🔒️ Logging in to OpenStreetMap
👤 Welcome, 快乐的老鼠宝宝!
☁️ Downloading changeset 173350722
[1/?] OpenStreetMap …
[1/2] OpenStreetMap: 68 elements
[2/2] Overpass (1 partition) …
[2/2] Partition #1: OK
[2/2] Overpass: 68 elements
🔁 Generating a revert
🛠️ Performing advanced revert on way/671116030
💡 Performing DMP patch on way/671116030
[DMP] Patch failed (duplicate)
[DMP] Retrying in reverse
[DMP] Patch failed (duplicate)
🌍️ Uploading 68 changes
⚠️ Please verify: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/671116030
✅ Success
✅ https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173462055
🏁 Total time: 15.3 sec
Exit code: 0
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-10-18 18:16:47+00:00): way671116030 was checked and nothing further need to do, great
nona mostafa (2025-10-19 08:30:52+00:00): Hi Younes_Agadir,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
I noticed that you've changed the link from construction to operational.
For example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361781791
and removed access=no from some streets.
For example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1441626352,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1435908773,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1441604680,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1441604682,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/569419428,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1364984124,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1441604677,
and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1441604678.
It still appears closed based on the recent image "Vantor satellite imagery via Vantor Hub 2025-10-17."
If you have a more recent source, could you please share it with me?
If not, please revert this location as is.
Thank you again for your efforts and for helping improve the map!
Best regards,
nona mostafa
Youness_ss (2025-10-19 12:16:48+00:00): Hi, the streets is recently opened, you can see this video on YouTube:
https://youtu.be/kV39AUjAlIU?si=xWHOgiI7FS1nIJAg
Thank you for your note!
nona mostafa (2025-10-20 06:57:34+00:00): Thanks for your prompt reply and for sharing the video with us.