piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
diodaix (2025-08-17 22:20:37+00:00): @user_5359 oh Hi! I am trying to repair my mistake on tagging the deprecated is_in tag. Nagari=* is temporary tag (formerly is_in:village) in-the-progress before I replace the whole nodes I created with ref:kemendagri_des. For the various ref:kemendagri_* tag, in the beginning I think to make a structured data from province, regency/city, district, and eventually the village would get a complete data. Perhaps now with your recommendation, we could make ref:ID:kemendagri instead for every division level? Then it's okay thank you for the recommendation👌
user_5359 (2025-08-19 07:42:36+00:00): Sorry for the late reply. I hope you haven't been waiting for confirmation. Can I help you with the implementation of the project?
diodaix (2025-08-19 07:55:08+00:00): Of course! We can use kodewilayah.id as source, it's free for use
eggie (2025-08-16 15:37:13+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback Geef svp aan wat je hebt toegevoegd. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
ratrun (2025-08-17 03:24:19+00:00): Hallo!

Mir ist bei diesem Changeset folgendes aufgefallen:
1) Bitte verbinde die neuen Wege. Normalerweise warnt JOSM dich unverbunde Wege hochzuladen. Bitte beachte diese Warnungen! Siehe https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=12.11828&lat=53.47479&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=unconnected_open_ends_1
2) Das Tagging 

bicycle 	no
car 	no
foot 	yes

auf einem highway=footway ist dreifach redundant und im Falle von Bicycle falsch, weil man sicher auch in Deutschland sein Rad dort schieben darf.

ratrun
Xre90 (2025-08-22 09:17:23+00:00): Moin,

danke für den konstruktiven Kommentar, das Tool kannte ich noch nicht, ich bin dabei die Wege auszuessern.

Beste Grüße
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-24 17:33:34+00:00): reverted edits that added suspect data, it is from a suspect account, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166617410  and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164649036 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163053969  remain not answered

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173729001
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 14:09:37+00:00): Nota resuelta #4911932
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 14:11:13+00:00): Nota resuelta #4911935
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 14:10:05+00:00): Nota resuelta #4911933
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 14:10:14+00:00): ok
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 14:10:29+00:00): Nota resuelta #4911934
JG Mazury (2025-08-17 09:08:04+00:00): shop=alcohol Żabka (?) - the flooring shop "Parkiecik" is located here

https://parkiecik.pl/?page_id=128
Map47 (2025-08-17 12:16:05+00:00): Hello felidaelynx,
As you can see here:
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=6.78823&lat=46.22018&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.14&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%2Cduplicate_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
The use of a multipolygon is not appropriate for defining the area as it generates several alerts.
The sub-areas do not overlap but are adjacent, and since they have different names, they cannot be combined into a single area with a single name, which is a characteristic of a multipolygon.
I would like to point out that the relation had already been correctly entered as a type:site relation, so I do not understand why you want to transform it into a type:multipolygon relation, which is not appropriate in this case.
Best regards
felidaelynx (2025-08-17 13:05:34+00:00): Hi Map47
Thanks for your explanation about what and why it is wrong!
I thought that since the Portes du Soleil represents an area the best way of representing that would be a multipolygon (but I now see that is wrong), especially since site=piste relations usually only have pistes and aerialways as members.
I will revert this change shortly.
Best regards
söm4324 (2025-08-19 18:43:09+00:00): Hallo Evros1969,

ich bin gerade dabei, über Maproulette mögliche Probleme mit Gebäuden zu begutachten und ggf. zu reparieren. 
Die Maprouletteinfos findest du hier:
https://maproulette.org/challenge/49603/task/302305306

Dabei sind auch einige deiner Gebäude aufgelistet, weil sie merkwürdig klein sind, zum Beispiel
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422664401
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422664402
und ein paar weiter an dieser Stelle.

Für echte Gebäude sind die Objekte tatsächlich sehr klein. Was genau sind die denn? Sind das Gebäude?

Viele Grüße,
Thomas
Evros1969 (2025-08-20 05:29:21+00:00): https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=47.4904884&lon=11.0764071&zoom=19&camera.phi=-26.957  
https://photos.app.goo.gl/WtzsCUccMYCpAdTD9
söm4324 (2025-08-20 16:24:59+00:00): Ah, danke! Das sind dann quasi Werbetafeln. Dafür sind zum Beispiel diese Tags ganz gut:
man_made=advertising
advertising=billboard

Gebäude sind es jedoch keine. Das müsstest du bitte umändern.
felipeeugenio (2025-08-16 15:49:46+00:00): Priority edits - Revisión completa de atributos de calles, geometrías y otros detalles en Sectores de La Cisterna #Kaart 2025
johsin18 (2025-08-21 14:47:58+00:00): Hallo Rangerdienst,
die Änderung am Akazienweg ging wohl ein bisschen zu weit (vgl. https://www.gvm-ag.ch/auftrag/zollmessstation-lange-erlen.html ).  Ich habe das korrigiert, sodass man vom Eisernen Steg wieder in den Otterbachweg gehen/fahren kann.
Dass man den Akazienweg im westlichen Teil nicht mehr queren kann, ist hier in der Karte noch nicht umgesetzt.  Steht die Signalisation wirklich schon jeweils am Anfang eines querenden Wegs (wie im obigen Link durch die roten Kreise angedeutet), oder wird man erst durch die eigentliche Baustelle blockiert?
Rangerdienst Landschaftspark Wiese (2025-08-23 09:28:02+00:00): Hoi Johsin18
Ja, der Akatzienweg ist so gesperrt wie es in der Publikation angegeben ist (und jeweils steht schon an den Kreuzungen in die Zufahrtswege ein Fahr-/resp. Betretverbot, das jedoch um den Hinweis ergänzt ist, dass der Zutritt bis zur Baustelle erlaubt ist). Danke dir für die Korrektur.  Jedoch ist der Otterbachweg und alle Megelwege im Baustellenbereich (Abgesehen von der Wiesendamm-Promenade wo die Umleitung durchführt) für Fahrräder gesperrt.
baby-banana (2025-09-11 14:33:27+00:00): Hi, you have moved a bench into a building. I suspect this was done accidentally. Could you please move it back to its correct location?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6888682615

Hallo, Sie haben eine Bank in ein Gebäude verschoben. Ich vermute, dass dies versehentlich geschehen ist. Könnten Sie sie bitte wieder an ihren richtigen Platz zurückschieben?
eggie (2025-08-16 15:41:28+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback  Wat is de bedoeling van je toevoeging onder commentaar van 'n fxnxfnxf' ? 
Is dit opeens een woonwijk? 
Realiseer je dat alles wat je toevoegt ook werkelijk op de wereldkaart komt. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-08-16 15:43:42+00:00): reverted by changeset #170529687
AndyB_66 (2025-10-30 15:22:29+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
SekeRob (2025-08-17 07:53:39+00:00): Hi CCCGGG,

It's overdue to start using JOSM as there are several forest outline parts that should be outer, not inner. JOSM would warn before saving. Also at 1807 members way overdue to split this MP relation. The OSM recommended maximum members for any MP relation is 300. If you need help doing that, in JOSM that's substantially a piece of cake.

Happe mapping.

SekeRob
CCCGGG (2025-08-26 11:36:30+00:00): Yes, I know. My bad. As soon as I'll get my newer PC learning JOSM will be one of my priorities.
eggie (2025-08-16 15:45:43+00:00): Beste Joost. Die accesstags zijn allemaal default en hoef je niet toe te voegen.

We voegen alleen de uitzonderingen toe. 
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=170528176
MVG
eggie
Xernover (2025-08-16 15:16:00+00:00): A hídat azért töröltem, mert kiépitett híd nincs
eggie (2025-08-16 17:49:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-08-16 17:55:31+00:00): Je info heb ik samengevoegd met adresnode nr 18
gr eggie
Larmax (2025-08-16 20:18:54+00:00): Hei, voisitko kirjoittaa pelkän viivan sijasta mitä muutoksia teit?
AndreaDp271 (2025-08-16 22:19:12+00:00): Hi there, and thanks a lot for your contribution! 🌟 Just a little tip for future edits: keeping changesets small and local can make things smoother for everyone. It helps prevent conflicts, makes it easier for fellow mappers to review, and keeps the map even more accurate.

A few friendly suggestions: 
• Focus edits within a small geographical area (like a single city, district, or province) 
• Try not to mix far-apart locations in one changeset 
• Save/upload before starting work in a totally different area

If you’re curious, the wiki explains more here: osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks again for your mapping energy, and happy mapping! 🗺️
Lumikeiju (2025-08-17 01:43:00+00:00): Hi AndreaDp271 - please note that any changes to large relations (such as the United States, as this changeset modified) necessarily result in world-spanning bounding boxes and it is impossible to avoid this, so leaving changeset comments suggesting to use smaller bboxes does not make sense.
limes11 (2025-08-17 09:18:32+00:00): In this case, however, following the wiki

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name:zh?uselang=en

it is *not* recommended to set name:zh since name:zh-Hans and name:zh-Hant have already been in use. name:zh only serves as fallback in case the other tags are absent.
eggie (2025-08-16 16:10:42+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback Svp niet naar de daken kijken en dan gebouwen aanpassen. Dit zijn vaak schuin genomen luchtfoto's.

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
FANLIRIBA (2025-08-16 16:03:09+00:00): I live near Fanliriba and contributed a description to improve details of the village for better local mapping.
eggie (2025-08-16 16:15:24+00:00): Dag Stargazer.. Wat bedoel je hier met sport =korfball? Een pitch  en club?
sport=korfball doet niet zoveel in osm. 
MVG
eggie
Marbled Stargazer (2025-08-16 17:50:57+00:00): Hallo Eggie,
Sorry het is inderdaad en pitch
eggie (2025-08-16 17:51:59+00:00): Oke.. leisure=pitch toevoegen :)
joost schouppe (2025-09-04 09:01:30+00:00): Je hebt hier van building=chapel building=yes gemaakt, waardoor het object niet meer herkenbaar is als "slechts een kapel, geen echte kerk". Ik pas het terug aan.
user_5359 (2025-08-17 19:15:09+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/220868501. What is the mean of the tag "ref:" = "VC 13"? What ist the correct ref value "C 13" or "VC 13"?
Hufkratzer (2025-08-16 22:12:43+00:00): Hi,
You have tagged 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/119303155 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422659691
as equestrian centres (leisure=horse_riding). It is very unlikely that these two areas are two separate equestrian centres, so I think this tagging is inappropriate. If these two objects belong to the same equestrian centre this equestrian centre should be mapped as a separate object (node or area). Example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/409319823#map=19/45.541388/9.092237&layers=P . https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422659691 is probably an outdoor arena and should be tagged with leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (and not leisure=horse_riding). Compare https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)

Traduzione automatica:

Ciao,
hai taggato 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/119303155 e
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422659691
come centri ippici (leisure=horse_riding). È molto improbabile che queste due aree siano due centri ippici separati, quindi ritengo che questo tagging sia inappropriato. Se questi due oggetti appartengono allo stesso centro ippico, quest'ultimo dovrebbe essere mappato come oggetto separato (nodo o area). Esempio: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/409319823#map=19/45.541388/9.092237&layers=P . https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1422659691 è probabilmente un'arena all'aperto e dovrebbe essere contrassegnato con leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (e non leisure=horse_riding). Confronta https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)
Hidden Mountain (2025-08-25 13:23:09+00:00): Добрый день, откуда известно название вершины Акбулак? Есть какие-то подтверждения? Если назвали Вы, то нужно подтверждение восхождения на нее, иначе я буду вынужден откатить.
Squirtolog (2025-08-25 13:32:44+00:00): Вершину назвал мой знакомый, который там был, какие подтверждения нужны? 
Знакомого зовут Данил, но все его знают как Фил
Hidden Mountain (2025-08-25 14:12:47+00:00): Да элементарно ссылку можете выслать на пост в соц сетях через личное сообщение, чтобы тут не палить. Ну или сразу сюда. Просто убедится, что название было принято не с дивана, иначе бардак начнется на карте))
Squirtolog (2025-08-25 14:22:12+00:00): Он мне скинул фото с вершины, пойдет?) и куда скинуть их можно?
Hidden Mountain (2025-08-25 16:26:02+00:00): Проверьте почту в профиле
Hidden Mountain (2025-08-25 17:22:08+00:00): Хотя сейчас ещё раз пересмотрел высоту точки, на которой вы решили указать вершину. Там нет превышения относительно соседнего перевала, это просто гребень, поэтому буду откатывать, сорри.
Famlam (2026-01-04 17:33:31+00:00): Hi Remlicht, er zit een typo in de openingstijden van de poller (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11877098756). Ik heb er echter geen bron voor wat de juiste tijden zijn (is hij inderdaad di-do gewoon naar beneden?), dus zou jij het kunnen oplossen?

Sowieso zit er een dubbel haakje aan het eind
Remlicht89 (2026-01-04 18:08:12+00:00): Bedankt voor het doorgeven.
 
Tijden had ik aangepast n.a.v. informatie van de website van Centrummanagement Cuijk. Dit lijkt te zijn gegaan om oude informatie, excuses.  Informatie teruggedraaid zoals het stond en zoals zichtbaar op het onderbord via Google Streetview. https://maps.app.goo.gl/xooYbDTD81X5BhPq6
joost schouppe (2025-09-04 07:35:27+00:00): Bedankt voor je bijdrage! Ik verzet de naam wel van de velden naar het hele sportterrein, aangezien het om de naam van de club gaat die het hele terrein gebruikt en de velden zelf wellicht niet eens een naam hebben? "natuurgras" hoort niet direct thuis in de naam (tenzij mensen echt dat als naam gebruiken), maar eerder als surface tag. Ik pas een en ander aan.
user_23193104 (2025-08-16 20:08:12+00:00): Źródło: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:highway=trunk

"Znacznik highway=trunk przeznaczony jest dla dróg o wysokich parametrach technicznych lub o dużym znaczeniu, które nie spełniają wymagań dla zastosowania highway=motorway"

oraz:

"Są to drogi o wysokich parametrach niebędących autostradą lub dwujezdniową drogą ekspresową. To drogi bezkolizyjne lub drogi ekspresowe, które nie spełniają wymogów dla highway=motorway."
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-17 04:25:33+00:00): a, to ktoś się pospieszył ( https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stosowanie-tagu-highway-trunk-w-polsce/122106/607 )

poprawię wiki
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-17 04:26:54+00:00): poprawione w https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Pl:Tag:highway%3Dtrunk&diff=prev&oldid=2885964
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-17 04:28:37+00:00): Jeden z problemów tutaj jest że całkowicie nieistotne drogi mogą być bezkolizyjne, przynajmniej na jakichś ich fragmencie.

Patrz też np. Trasa Wolbromska w https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=17/50.113599/19.91556
NieWnen (2025-08-16 21:54:36+00:00): Cześć,
budynki dodajemy jako obszary (zamknięte linie), nie punkty.
Warto użyć tutaj warstwy EGiB (Ewidencji gruntów i budynków) jako odniesienia. 

Poprawiłem dodany punkt.
Nougcat (2025-08-16 22:16:58+00:00): dzięki bardzo, trochę jest to dla mnie przekomplikowane, więc dziękuję za poprawę
Sylabowy Kot (2025-08-17 10:52:51+00:00): Dodam przy okazji, że EGiB przedstawia prawie że zawsze obrys parteru, stąd miejscami może się wydawać, że coś jest nie tak.
Baloo Uriza (2025-08-18 15:30:43+00:00): Looks like you turned 8th Street into a 5 block long bridge??
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170534590
W Craig Coffman (2025-08-18 15:38:33+00:00): I did not change SE 8th street.  I added the cycle path alongside it.  it cross over 8th several times.  The only bridge I added was to the cycle path where required as the system recognized the path crosses  an intermittent stream just to the west of South Irving Street.
W Craig Coffman (2025-08-18 15:44:38+00:00): I see that it shows 8th as a bridge as you say & gives me credit for the change.  Not sure how I managed that (not intentional).  Clearly it is not.
AlbaireN (2025-08-24 20:43:33+00:00): Bonjour, je n'avais pas vu que l'itinéraire Nord-Sud avait été jalonné, c'est récent ?
Filip009 (2025-08-18 13:13:55+00:00): Zdravím, mtb trasy sa do máp pridávajú pomocou relácií.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-08 20:09:27+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13074752263/history has guest_house = hotel that was added in this edit
Would it be hotel? ( tourism=hotel - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dhotel )
Guest house? ( tourism=guest_house - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house )

Something else?
joost schouppe (2025-09-04 08:43:48+00:00): Dit lijkt me zeker geen museum, maar:
"tourism=gallery - An art gallery. Art galleries may sell the works, but this is not the primary purpose. The distinction with art shops may be tricky. Many art shops are named as a "gallery" but are clearly still art shops. Sometimes a place may be very much styled as an art gallery, but private galleries which are primarily funded by selling the works to visitors would still be tagged shop=art. Meanwhile a private gallery with a high turnover of visitors and relatively infrequent sales (expensive art!) would count as a tourism=gallery."
Zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dart
Eerder shop=art denk ik hier; ik pas het zo aan
kabelhaai (2025-09-04 10:21:51+00:00): Oke bedankt
kingkingHK (2025-08-17 06:30:14+00:00): Are you sure the tunnel geometry changes are correct?

1. Is aerial imagery the only source? This is on a hillside, so the accuracy wouldn't be great.
2. Other aerial imageries seem to disagree with the new geometry.
3. From my east-bound bus-taking experiences for TKO tunnel, exiting the bus interchange and into the tunnel is almost straight, while other vehicles have to bend slightly left to align with the tunnel approach, before turning slightly right again immediately after entering the tunnel, which seems to correlate with the old geometry better.
4. Under the new geometry, the west-bound tunnel turns slight left before exiting, then turns right again. I find this road design rather unbelievable, and while the former western tunnel approach has seen a lot of works after the demolition of the toll plaza, it can't possibly change the tunnel alignment, right? (Is it even possible to move a tunnel? If not, then the tunnel geometry should be the exact same as the original plan in the 1980s, and I don't think a sensible planner would make such curves.)

As such, I highly doubt the accuracy of the "calibration" and "beautification" of the path shapes here, and I would suggest using other tools to verify the alignment. See also another reverted dubious hilly calibration: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168519808
vectorial8192 (2025-08-17 07:31:19+00:00): Hi there!

Re aerial imagery source. It should be a community consensus to use the ESRI aerial imagery (not "ESRI Clarity beta"!) since it is often the latest (I think now is July 2025), and it is OK-ish clear to correctly see the features. This changeset was made with this ESRI imagery.

Re altitude distortion. Yes, your view is correct, and I also know about this.

Re quoted dubious calibration. Yes, it was also made by me (woah).

My objective in this changeset is to look at the imagery and describe the latest observed "new roads" from imagery. However, doing so requires alignment with satellite imagery, which existing roads do not align well. Some creative work is done to balance between aligning with satellite imagery and retaining reasonable curves with existing data.

Ultimately, if we really need actual GPS tools to correctly provide the coordinates (tools which I do not have), then I believe we may be requiring too much a barrier for OSM editing. And, as much as Sisyphus is concerned, GPS coordinates can self-drift by itself, and imagery can also self-drift by itself, so requiring absolute accuracy is too nihilistic.

IMO, a bigger context is that, there is a guideline that discourages using Bing imagery (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hong_Kong#%E7%8F%BE%E6%99%82%E8%A6%86%E8%93%8B%E7%8E%87_Current_coverage ), and when I see the roads distorting too much from imagery, I cannot help but think "perhaps this was first made with Bing", and then go edit them. There is a real chance the initial shape is just too bad, and my improvements are legitimate.

But for real, if you think the changeset was too bad, you can go improve upon it. Chances are I won't notice subsequent edits, and there will be no edit wars.
kingkingHK (2025-08-17 13:38:06+00:00): Thank you for your reply. Apologies if my intention to write a comment was not clear - I didn't mean to say I somehow know better and could confidently improve this changeset, nor did I mean to discredit your intention and effort in attempting to improve geometries, both for this changeset and other calibration works you have done - I simply wanted to point out a few things that I assume you overlooked while working on this. Sorry if that was not clear in my initial comment.

Regarding aerial imagery, I am aware that ESRI imagery is preferred. When I used the iD editor to inspect this area, only the ESRI imagery seems to supports the new geometries, while Bing, "ESRI Clarity Beta", and Mapbox all show a much straighter tunnel approach. This led me to think that the new geometries were due to ESRI's or the altitudes's distortion, hence points 1 and 2.

Regarding barriers for editing, I honestly did not have a clear "other tools" in mind when I said "I would suggest using other tools to verify the alignment". I just thought "mappers more experienced than me might have better ideas of which mapping techniques to use in a specific situation, so maybe they can try alternative tools here to clear things up!", which is why I wrote that point.

Regarding absolute accuracy and balancing, while I understand that it's impossible to have pixel-perfect alignment with the real world and that compromises have to be made, the problems I pointed out in point 4 are just too obvious imo; it goes beyond what I personally consider to be "reasonable" curves. It seems like the west-bound tube is bent south suddenly at the end of it, just so that it fits the aerial imagery without needing to modify the other parts of the tunnel? No insult intended, but it feels like a very lazy and minimal workaround to avoid dealing with the bigger question of the accuracy of the geometries of the tubes and the eastern portal. At the very least, the transition from the existing data that was not modified to the new data should be somewhat believable, unlike that current mapping, which is blatant enough that an unexperienced user like me noticed something's wrong just by taking a glance.

Now again, I'm not saying that I can do better or improve on this; I just want to point out things you probably didn't consider while working on this so that you can make a better judgement on what to do with this changeset.