piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2026-03-31 10:27:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/2325333939 v6

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Fábrica de embutidos"
---
Por ejemplo, una versión más neutral y objetiva de tu texto podría ser: "Fábrica de embutidos"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-08 10:33:30+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/180666083
iandees (2026-03-31 12:50:30+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9705743626 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180672097, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
alena9292 (2026-07-24 03:50:01+00:00): Вы не правильно нарисовали дорогу.  Рекомендую пройти обучение, прежде чем вносить правки
ajmat (2026-04-02 04:51:30+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: 180748511
Nadjita (2026-04-03 16:27:51+00:00): > Gebäudeteil und Gebäudegrundriss müssen noch in Einklang gebracht werden

Wir kommst Du drauf? Das ist ein Dachüberstand und damit nicht Teil des Gebäudegrundrisses. Deswegen ja auch in einer Building-Relation, damit Renderer damit klarkommen.
civ2mapper (2026-04-03 21:11:44+00:00): um welches Gebäude geht es nochmal? Der Kommentar wurde zum Changeset gemacht. Ich kann hier gerade nicht überblicken, um welches Gebäude es sich konkret handelt.
Nadjita (2026-04-04 12:28:58+00:00): Das hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1349558242
NeisBot (2026-03-31 11:06:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13694981548 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Roofing company"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-04-08 16:33:06+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/181059209
(Clean up leftovers from previous edits)
dzamper (2026-03-31 11:16:33+00:00): Wg mojej wiedzy to nie jest prawda że nie było konsensusu

Zmiana została zaproponowana tutaj:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kategorie-drog/57996/596

i nie było przez 6 dni sprzeciwu
Kamil Kalata (2026-03-31 13:07:21+00:00): Mój błąd, po prostu zapomniałem o tym wątku, co mnie mimo wszystko nie usprawiedliwia.
Dimitar155 (2026-03-31 16:02:41+00:00): re: note/5206988

Ориентирах се по иглолистното дърво пред храма. Въобще не обърнах внимание на съседната сграда :)
AwFi (2026-04-01 13:34:24+00:00): Ciao, ho visto che hai modificato degli oggetti ferroviari ripristinando l'operator ad RFI. Dopo una discussione con la community si è deciso di utilizzare il nome esteso come da standard OSM. qui trovi la discussione: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rete-ferroviaria-italiana-differenze-di-nome-osm-wikidata-e-nome-ufficiale/140123
Buon mapping!
NeisBot (2026-03-31 11:42:37+00:00): Hello Djdkeidjdpejdk, welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions!

I've taken a look at your recent edits and wanted to discuss a few discrepancies I noticed regarding the surrounding environmental features. Specifically, the locations in your edits don't seem to align with the typical geographical characteristics expected in that area. Here are some (max 10) relevant links to the edits:
https://osm.org/node/13695071662
https://osm.org/relation/20394657

Could you please take a look?
Looking forward to your response.

#Somewhere
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=180668778
NeisRevert (2026-03-31 11:51:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/180669282
where the comment is: "Remove test edits"
martinst (2026-03-31 15:15:01+00:00): Reicht es denn aus die Tags zu Löschen, oder müsste die Historie komplett aus der Datenbank gelöscht werden wie z.B. hier geschehen:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/329621426/history
Rainero-repair (2026-03-31 17:09:39+00:00): Hallo martinst,

danke für das Beispiel. Ich frage nochmal bei der DWG nach. 

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
woodpeck (2026-03-31 17:41:32+00:00): Die DWG schaut sich das an. Rainero kann aber mit dem Revert weitermachen, das kommt sich mit einer eventuellen "redaction" nicht in die Quere.
Taya_S (2026-03-31 12:24:16+00:00): Reverted old_name:de edit, please read https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20077 again.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180670838
andrewsuzuki (2026-07-23 12:08:17+00:00): Please be more careful, you marked multiple paved roads as unpaved. Is this really based on a survey?
Nadjita (2026-04-03 16:16:41+00:00): Ich verstehe die Frage zum Board mit den Bekanntmachungen und anstehenden Veranstaltungen der Stadt Hannover und des Stadtteils Misburg-Anderten nicht. Was soll denn da gefixt werden? Es ist ein `board_type=notice` (Aushänge mit Hinweisen oder Anzeigen für lokale Veranstaltungen, die bald stattfinden) von `operator=Landeshauptstadt Hannover`. Einen Titel gibt es nicht, da sind nur Aushänge.
civ2mapper (2026-04-03 21:08:13+00:00): Vielen Dank für die Nachfrage.

Ursprünglich hatte die Informationstafel den Eigenname "Information". Der ID-Editor hat angemerkt, dass eine Informationstafel mit dem Eigenname "Information" kein guter Eigenname sei. Deshalb habe ich den Eigenname entfernt und den Fixme-Tag hinzugefügt. Vielleicht gibt es einen besseren Eigenname oder er bleibt leer. Die vor-Ort-Prüfung steht auf meiner Todo-Liste.
Erklärt das den Fixme?
Nadjita (2026-04-04 12:30:25+00:00): Ich hab das `name`-Tag jetzt nach `board:title` gepackt. Das gab's damals entweder nicht, oder es ist mir nicht aufgefallen. Jedenfalls steht auf dem Schaukasten nur „Information“. Ich habe außerdem einen Beschreibungstext, worum es sich handelt in die `description` gepackt.
t_ja (2026-04-02 18:48:21+00:00): Ahoj,
chcem upozornit na pravdepodobne nespravne hodnoty tagu "railway:signal:shunting:states", vid OSM Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:railway%3Dsignal#railway:signal:.2A:states

Spravna hodnota by mala byt "shunting_disabled" a nie "shunt disabl" (bez znaku "_" a navyse orezane, bez konca "ed").  Rovnake plati aj pre "shunt enabled" -> "shunting_enabled".

Ak je moje podozrenie spravne, mozes opravit svoje data? Alebo ich mam hromadne opravit ja?

Tibor
HaPe-CZ (2026-04-07 09:30:42+00:00): Ahoj, viz zpráva uživatele, o víkendu jsem nečetl poštu.
Ótzï fón GlüϷgor (2026-03-31 12:48:34+00:00): Why was Kuckelbrod's name removed? It's in old_name:de (not name:de), so why should that be wrong? At least that's how the name was listed on Wikipedia.
Taya_S (2026-03-31 13:19:19+00:00): please read osm.org/user_blocks/20077 again.
Ótzï fón GlüϷgor (2026-03-31 13:22:08+00:00): So it's only because the post came from me?
Ótzï fón GlüϷgor (2026-03-31 13:23:11+00:00): Wasn't it stated in the forum that old_name:de should be used for names that are no longer actively used? Or is there a new rule again?
Taya_S (2026-03-31 13:28:55+00:00): You seem to be pushing german names regardless of quality, regardless of whether they are applicable, and regardless of what the community consensus is. 

I do not trust your judgement when it comes to adding names. You are still welcome to do other types of mapping activities.

Best regards,  
Taya Snijder,  
On behalf of the OSMF Data Working Group
Ótzï fón GlüϷgor (2026-03-31 13:32:28+00:00): Where is the quality deficiency in this situation? The name comes from Wikipedia; if you don't believe me, read the article that's directly linked to the object, and under "historical names" you'll find the designation I added.
dcapillae (2026-03-31 13:25:33+00:00): Hola. Gracias por los últimos cambios.

Hay otra línea que habría que revisar para ver si todavía existe sobre el terreno: la línea M (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11518956).

 Durante un tiempo estuvo gestionada por la EMT, aunque no sé si todavía lo está o si incluso sigue en funcionamiento.
rochirochi (2026-03-31 13:41:20+00:00): Hola. No, no existe desde hace años.
Warin61 (2026-04-11 00:37:57+00:00): Err no.
Multipolygon outer ways cannot share segments.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=174.74034&lat=-36.73953&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&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

Make a simple way that is the building foot print, plce the tags on that and delete the relation. If you want you could tag the individual ways as building:part... or simply delete them too.
Wildsharky (2026-04-03 06:10:48+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180763298
NeisBot (2026-03-31 12:51:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13695259287 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Live chat office"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-04-08 16:33:11+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/181059211
(Clean up leftovers from previous edits)
JassKurn (2026-03-31 13:14:27+00:00): "Vandalism". Editor reported. Reverted in changeset 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180673004
rskedgell (2026-04-01 09:38:21+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

These ways were already tagged with foot=designated (preferred or designated route), so changing it to foot=yes (the public has an official, legally-enshrined right of access; i.e., it's a right of way) shouldn't have any effect on pedestrian routing. Are you having problems with a specific app or service?

The service road(s) serving the car park should probably be access=destination or access=customers
lw@acl (2026-04-01 09:46:40+00:00): Hi, and thanks!

As this my first venture into OSM any guidance is appreciated.

The parts of the service road were showing as private for 'allowed access' which I assumed was preventing the journey planner from finding a route from the Crematorium to the bus stop?

Other service roads were all showing as 'yes' for all modes so I assumed that was the issue on the entrance/exit?

Hope that makes sense?
rskedgell (2026-04-01 10:09:31+00:00): Yes, that all makes sense. I'll take a more detailed look later and see if I can find anything else which might be causing a routing problem.
lw@acl (2026-04-01 10:26:44+00:00): That would be great thank you.
nevw (2026-03-31 14:05:27+00:00): Hi, many of you edits are incorrect because you sre using out of date old Bing imagery. Please check the edit by also referring to later Esri or Mapbox imagery. Some of the building you have added have been demolished or replaced by a newer building.
nevw (2026-04-01 01:27:27+00:00): I have now deleted or redraw out of date building imagery from old Bing. Please check Esri and Mapbox imagery too.
Huai Shao (2026-04-01 01:54:58+00:00): Cheers mate, it is just for the school project so I'm not taking it too serious. Thank you for your redrawing.
George Sears (2026-03-31 14:00:40+00:00): Ciao, se questo è un marciapiede non va taggato come highway=pedestrian
Ti invito a dare un occhio alla wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:highway%3Dpedestrian
Clown Pennywise (2026-03-31 18:14:43+00:00): Ciao George, l'area, così come disegnata, non è propriamente (o solo) un marciapiede riservato ai pedoni, è una zona rialzata e separata dalla carreggiata (come un marciapiede) ma include sia spezzoni di marciapiede lungo alcuni edifici sia zone (credo di proprietà privata ma comunque abitualmente percorse a piedi da chiunque) adibite a parcheggio di autovetture e ingressi/uscite dai box auto delle palazzine adiacenti.
LordGarySugar (2026-04-04 17:08:00+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding this! If you switch to Esri imagery in the iD editor, you'll see that it's much newer, but lower resolution. I've added the roads and building shape I could make out from it.
Kovoschiz (2026-04-01 08:00:04+00:00): You are still mixing `=informal` and `=unmarked`
szkwok (2026-04-01 10:59:34+00:00): Except for the "unmarked" crossings next to Man Mo Temple, crossing Hollywood Road and Ladder Street. (Please check Google Maps street view) All the other ones are marked as "informal."
swinetown (2026-03-31 13:29:56+00:00): Forgot to add source; postcodes are from ONSPD postcode centroids and housenumbers are from OS 1:1250 (A-Edition).
NeisBot (2026-03-31 13:36:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/813676828 v6

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Marketing agency"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-08 16:33:15+00:00): 🤔 The text has been updated, though I’m not entirely sure it’s an improvement.
MFlamm (2026-04-01 08:02:50+00:00): Hello Ian,
Thanks for adding those steps, that have been overlooked by earlier mapper. 
A few hints for you to progress in your understanding:
1) Some ways in that area are tagged as highway=path and some others as highway=footway. Please check the following wiki page to understand the difference, notably the implicit access values for bicycles: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dpath
2) On footways, bicycle=dismount is an implicit default value, so you don't need to add that tag ;-)
3) You draw this "steps" segment https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1494611595 above another existing "path" segment. This generates an unwanted ambiguity in the data. Try to correct it by cutting the "path" segment at both ends of the steps!
4) The tag width=* accepts non integer values and they are by default in meters (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:width). Please add only precise values that you have measured!
Happy mapping!
ChrissW-R1 (2026-04-01 21:23:43+00:00): What is this way? It looks very strange.
NeisBot (2026-03-31 13:42:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13695383120 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Swimming pool contractor"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-08 16:33:18+00:00): 🗑️ Element deleted by https://osm.org/changeset/180759697
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-01 02:19:50+00:00): po co ta edycja była? Jak nie ma żadnej zmiany danych?

Przy okazji - skąd ta aplikacja Asfalt_Premium ?

Może to jej autor coś skopał, ale nie wiem jak się z nim skontaktować
NeisBot (2026-03-31 13:45:46+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/813676828 v7

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Marketing agency"
---
Par exemple, une version plus neutre et factuelle de ton texte pourrait être : « Agence de marketing »
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-08 16:33:22+00:00): 🤔 The text has been updated, though I’m not entirely sure it’s an improvement.
Growebis (2026-04-01 09:46:36+00:00): Some satellite imagery may be wrong due to an offset. To check if the imagery is actually aligned, record a GPS track going along some roads, then upload it to OSM (set it as private so no one can see it) and manually correct the satellite imagery. Also i recommend using something else other then Bing, as they are outdated and blurry. Use Esri or Mapbox, via the Background setting (in ID Editor)
Growebis (2026-04-01 09:58:21+00:00): Organic Maps supports recording a track so use that to your advantage.

Thank you for contributing to Jeddah ❤️
eteb3 (2026-06-09 17:16:40+00:00): Thanks from me for contributing mosques!

Just so you know, it seems you have added Tin Mosque twice. 

As a way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1494613388
As a node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13691368668

You could do one of two things:
1) Tag the building as building=mosque, and then remove the amenity= and religion= tags (assuming it is built as a mosque, and isn't a commercial building used as a mosque)
2) move the tags from the node to the building and delete the node.

I usually do (2), but either is acceptable.

I can do it if you like, but you may prefer to learn how to yourself - again, your choice.

Happy mapping.
Đuro Jiří (2026-07-25 09:23:36+00:00): Bok DAVOdado, "Groblje", "Dječje igralište","Tenk","Časma",...nije ime.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name?uselang=hr
Fraxi (2026-03-31 18:35:19+00:00): Почему Вы удалили этот адрес? Он можно будет в пользо потребителей тоже.
iandees (2026-03-31 14:48:01+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12817052424, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3012919399 were moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180678057, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
EP_Repair (2026-05-25 16:20:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183166530 where the changeset comment is: Revert changesets adding vegetation traced from water and boundary ways, causing disruption to both features. User block issued.
ajmat (2026-04-02 03:46:48+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 180747376
Wildsharky (2026-04-03 06:04:10+00:00):  Reverted in changeset id:180747791
Jarek 🚲 (2026-05-26 00:13:23+00:00): Hey, just a heads up that setting access=no and bicycle=designated (I think with the "bicycle path" setting in iD?) like you did on the Gordie Howe Bridge MUP access path (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1480556248) results in it being tagged as open to cyclists and pedestrians (because the more specific bicycle/foot tag overrides the access=no tag).

As a result OSM will currently route bicycles and pedestrians across the bridge which is not yet open, see for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=42.284294%2C-83.086563%3B42.30932%2C-83.09722 . Any app that depends on OSM data to do routing will do the same.

I have added a barrier on the Canadian side https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13879289652 that will hopefully stop it for now once the routing updates, but something to keep in mind for the future!
Wildsharky (2026-04-03 06:10:13+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180762095
007Transformer (2026-04-01 06:30:29+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180703140
NeisBot (2026-03-31 14:54:22+00:00): Hi aymanben, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 2 barrier(s)
- 56 building(s)
- 31 highway(s)
- 1 leisure(s)
- 1 sport(s)
- 19 surface(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=180678225
woodpeck (2026-03-31 14:58:24+00:00): Aerial imagery seems to support this deletion.
pitscheplatsch (2026-03-31 14:59:58+00:00): Looks legit based on the ESRI imagery.
aymanben (2026-03-31 18:23:18+00:00): Yes, what I did was intentional.
Kauna (2026-03-31 15:18:35+00:00): Über die App war es wohl schlecht beschreibbar, daher hier der Kommentar. Im Dönerladen (ehemals Amerikanisches Fastfood) ist der jetzige Betreiber nach eigenen Angaben seit September letzten Jahres, da wurde es Zeit das abzuändern. Der Takko ist seit Anfang des Monats raus und innerhalb Rödentals umgezogen, nur grobe Location bekannt, wenn ich das genaue Geschäft geprüft habe trage ich auch das noch nach
surveyor54 (2026-04-01 13:05:25+00:00): Hallo 253-himmelblau,
willkommen bei Openstreetmap.

Bitte Gebäude die abgerissen wurden, aber noch im Luftbild vorhanden sind, als demolished:building" eintragen, um zu verhindern, dass andere Mapper versehentlich abgerissene Objekte neu eintragen, die noch in Luft- oder
Satellitenbildern verfügbar sind. 

Ich habe es schon geändert.

Gruß und weiterhin frohes Mappen
surveyor54
surveyor54 (2026-04-01 13:06:31+00:00): Hier noch zum Nachlesen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:demolished:building
eggie (2026-03-31 16:38:23+00:00): Dag Maikool,

Soms verandert de wereld en OSM gaat dan mee. Lijkt me oke.
MVG
eggie
yelisey90 (2026-03-31 16:30:18+00:00): Hi! I've reverted your edits since you had deleted the way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/190595192 — it's used only for buses (access=no, psv=designated) and is a member of several relations for bus routes. Please redo you changes without deleting that way
eggie (2026-03-31 16:46:42+00:00): Dag VRNHN Johnie Garstenveld,

Ik heb motor_vehicle=no verwijderd. Dat hoort niet op een paaltje.
Die tag houdt moped en mofa tegen.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dbollard

Je kunt wel aangeven of de paaltjes fixed zijn of removable.
bollard=removable (can be removed, sometimes a special tool is required)
bollard=rising (can be lowered to allow passage or lifted to prevent it)
bollard=foldable (can be folded/rotated such that the bollard lies on the ground)
bollard=flexible (made of soft material so that it can bend)

MVG
eggie