piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2026-07-05 06:09:14+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Alle taging is in UK English. Dat zijn vaste waarden.
Probeer als het kan op de adresnode bij te taggen.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-07-05 06:13:02+00:00): Hi .. Please comment your edits.

Greetz,
eggie
Marvk (2026-07-04 23:19:02+00:00): Hi BrotGoesSchwarz,

ein paar Punkte, die mir aufgefallen sind:

(1) Überall, wo du bicycle=designated bzw foot=designated getaggt hast, wäre es super, wenn du noch traffic_sign=* und segregated=* ergänzt, eine hervorragende Referenz dafür ist https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren

(2) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24794423 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/818306590 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/479986997 hier hast du maxspeed=30 getaggt, aber source:maxspeed=DE:urban nicht angepasst. Hier bräuchte es source:maxspeed=sign und traffic_sign=DE:274-30

(3) An den straßen, wo du maxspeed=100 getaggt hast, wäre vermutlich noch maxspeed:source=DE:rural angebracht

(4) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26428853 highway=service service=driveway sieht hier irgendwie unplausibel aus. Passen die access-Werte nicht, es sei denn, die Beschilderung hat sich seit diesem Mapillary-Frame geändert: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1400185027931480 

Wenn diese Beschilderung noch besteht, würde ich highway=track tracktype=grade1
motor_vehicle=agricultural
traffic_sign=DE:260,1026-36 
vorschlagen.

Lass mich gerne wissen, was du darüber denkst.

Beste Grüße
Marv
maro21 (2026-07-22 21:41:19+00:00): Proszę nie łączyć landuse i ścieżek. Gdy dodajesz ścieżki, wyłącz pozostałe warstwy mapy.
Myazyk (2026-07-07 17:41:24+00:00): Ти так поправив ліс із поділом лінії, що він пропав із мапи
mike140 (2026-07-07 22:44:51+00:00): Він раніше пропав. Я з мобіли частково поправив, але треба в josm дивитися
Marcos Dione (2026-07-05 07:36:12+00:00): Hola. Gracias por los aportes. Para la próxima, no hace falta que diujes cada cuadra de cada calle individualmente; podés hacerlo todo en un solo trazo.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185115588
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-07-07 12:05:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/21065396

jesteś pewien że to wymogi https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary=forest%20compartment spełnia?
Yog Sot (2026-07-07 20:01:29+00:00): yup, granice wydzieleń oraz wartość atrybutu `adr_les` możesz zweryfikować w bdl
DENelson83 (2026-07-04 23:49:17+00:00): In View Royal, not Langford.
Aya Samir (2026-07-06 10:43:27+00:00): Hello alain2003,
Thank you for your contribution to OpenStreetMap.
I noticed that you removed the toll=yes tag from these ways: way 155708388 and way 141179276.
Please note that adding or removing this tag must be based on an official source.
If you have a source you used to remove the tag, please share it with me; if not, please revert the change.
Best regards,
Aya
alain2003 (2026-07-07 11:04:47+00:00): Somme section of the toll-roads in Morocco are free tu use,especialy around city's where the traffic is intens.
exmp.: The section on A7 between Tetuan and Cabo Nagro and vice versa is free to use,there are no booth tolls at all(ive been there,so local knowledge)
The section on A5 between Ksar sghir and Port Tanger med and vice versa is also free(local knowledge).
The section around Kenitra between Tollbooth Kenitra North and Tollbooth Kenitra South is also free of charge(local knowledge).
I hope i clarifed this.
Best regards
Aya Samir (2026-07-07 11:51:53+00:00): Hello alain2003,
Thank you for your quick reply and for helping to improve the map!
Best regards,
Aya
Baloo Uriza (2026-07-06 16:24:40+00:00): This was added almost exactly in the center of the intersection where it'd be physically impossible to place a camera.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185116307
Glassman (2026-07-06 00:00:40+00:00): There doesn't appear to be a restaurant there. Can you please confirm the location.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185116336
pwbriggs (2026-07-13 20:53:04+00:00): Removed because of no response. Street-level imagery indicates that this is a utility box cover.
pwbriggs (2026-07-13 18:13:58+00:00): Looks like a typo on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/184237077/history/8. Did you mean 10 meters?
schobbish (2026-07-05 00:23:39+00:00): denton drive smh
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2026-07-23 05:02:59+00:00): شذيبة اسم لم نجد له مصدر نرجوا توضيح نوع المكان ومن الذي سماه ب"شذيبة"
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-07-07 04:06:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185241667.
eerib (2026-07-05 02:50:46+00:00): Dear EricJMilannn12,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for contributing your first edits.

I noticed that you deleted IMBA mtb difficulty ratings from several trails with the changeset comment that the trails are not designated mtb trails. In OpenStreetMap, a trail's difficulty rating does not imply that the trail is authorized, recommended, or appropriate to use, instead it just notes the trail's difficulty are per the specific rating system. To attribute a trail as unauthorized we use the informal tag with the "yes" value, which all of these trails have. In addition, the portions of these trails within Pinecone Burke Provincial Park are also attributed with the legal access tag bicycle=no and mtb=no because these are not designated cycling trails within the park.

You can read more about the various tags on the OpenStreetMap wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:informal

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle

If you have any questions about trail tagging or other OpenStreetMap conventions, please don't hesitate to ask. Thank you again for joining the project.

Thank you, eerib
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-07-06 20:06:12+00:00): have you discussed this change with community?

if yes where it happened?

see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/reviewing-recent-changes-by-flap-slimy-outward/144716/43
Flap Slimy Outward (2026-07-07 04:04:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185241605.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 07:28:50+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. 

Could you please explain this edit? 

This changes a previously mapped building=house at 26 Hollyhock Lane into landuse=commercial, adds the name “YourSoCal”, a website, official_name, and contact email.

From the tags and location, this looks like a private residential building rather than a publicly verifiable commercial feature. OSM should map real, on-the-ground features, not use a private house/building outline to advertise or list an online guide/website. If YourSoCal has a verifiable office or shop at this location, please provide the on-the-ground source and use appropriate feature tags. Otherwise, please revert/remove the business/website/contact/name tags and restore the residential building tagging.

Thanks.
蕉饼电脑 (2026-07-05 22:26:02+00:00): Hi. Did you download the platform elements? The platforms are not aligning with the tracks. Also, could you fix https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4617862
eerib (2026-07-05 02:51:08+00:00): Discussion in

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185118783
VictorIE (2026-07-30 14:24:32+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1535321670
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1535645212
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1537511824

There are several changesets here where house=* has been corrupted by other text. Total of 169 objects involved: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2u43
confusedbuffalo (2026-07-07 18:36:36+00:00): Hi, thanks for doing this, remember to update the type when you split though, so building=house and house=terraced. I've done that here now
ChloeEdmondson (2026-07-07 18:57:40+00:00): thank you for fixing the tagging
Metzor (2026-07-05 09:21:58+00:00): Danke :-)
Frans S (2026-07-06 11:05:26+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped them. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks that might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards, and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185121498
nevw (2026-07-06 09:01:18+00:00): Hi, I noticed you added the waterbody area to the Waiuku Stream waterway relation.
The osm wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway states that the waterbody (area) or riverbank of the river should not be included in waterway relations. I have fixed this.
Prosperosity (2026-07-06 21:35:38+00:00): Hi nevw, there's a couple of reasons why I did this.
1) it's part of the formally recognised polygon for the waterway on the NZ Gazetteer (https://gazetteer.linz.govt.nz/place/47278)
2) While this feature does not have a page, including waterway areas to relations is extremely helpful for graphical displays on Wikipedia.
3) Not including an area clashes with the concept of one feature=one item, where there are parts of a feature found on the map, but not included in the relation.

I'm not planning on adding any further river areas to relations at this stage, but at some point in the future I'd like to discuss this as a change at the OSM Wiki.
aharvey (2026-07-05 06:26:09+00:00): You need to add access=private to private features like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13989264242/history otherwise they'll show up as public playgrounds.

Though I would argue that personal trampolines that are movable and not permanently fixed shouldn't be mapped.
Wildsharky (2026-07-06 11:58:52+00:00): Partially reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185193862
MappingMore (2026-07-06 10:10:55+00:00): Partially reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185187725
felipeeugenio (2026-07-05 13:26:40+00:00): Hola. no entiendo. hace unos días agregó El Refugio Piedra Linda como hamlet, siendo que no se observa población aún. De hecho lo iba a pasar a proyecto.
pero ahora, a unos metros agrega el Fundo Piedra Linda como hamlet pero con la misma descripción. Puede por favor aclararnos qué significa realmente? para ver qué tags usar.

Además, las calles del loteo no tienen porqué llevar el mismo nombre del loteo. Si no tienen nombre simplemente no se les pone, pero no es automática la herencia del nombre.


Saludos y gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185123901
StreicK (2026-07-05 14:00:35+00:00): Hola! Son 2 parcelaciones distintas pero con nombres similares (puedes googlearlas si tienes dudas).

En ambas hay casas en construcción, desconozco cada cuanto tiempo se actualiza el mapa.

Respecto al nombre de calles, si te parece lo dejas sin nombre, pero ese es el nombre que tienen para justamente diferenciar los proyectos.

Quedo atento a cualquier consulta,
Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185123901
felipeeugenio (2026-07-05 14:27:10+00:00): Ok, le agradezco su tiempo. queda claro. Saludos
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 07:26:12+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. 

I noticed that this changeset adds/keeps full personal names as name=* on many private houses/residential areas, e.g. “... xonadoni”. Could you please clarify the source and whether these are publicly signposted/verifiable names of the features, not resident/owner names or cadastral/household data?

In OSM, name=* should normally be the real, commonly used/publicly visible name of the mapped feature. Full names of private residents/owners should generally not be added to houses or parcels, especially when they are not visible on the ground. Also, Bing imagery alone cannot verify those personal names or property boundaries.

Could you please review these objects and remove the personal names / private ownership information where it is not publicly verifiable? Thank you.
Stalker61 (2026-07-05 18:25:45+00:00): Ну что скажешь. Молодец!!! Одна беда, 2-х этажное здание снесено несколько лет назад. Нет там ничего. Поэтому и адрес стоит в виде точки на участке. Удаляю отсебятину.
geo_ozon (2026-07-06 13:51:55+00:00): Добрый день! Подскажите, будет ли корректно в таком случае проставить точке тег was:building? Или как альтернатива - создать полигон с таким тегом?
Stalker61 (2026-07-06 15:50:37+00:00): Добрый вечер. Тег was:building присваивается полигону здания, когда на снимке подложки здание есть, а по факту давным-давно снесено. Снимки обновляются с очень большой задержкой. В данном примере прошел уже не один год. На точке тег was:building не вносится, т.к. это классическое сохранение адресной информации отсутствующего здания. В результате тег является корректным, виден на карте и доступен для адресного поиска.
geo_ozon (2026-07-06 16:10:52+00:00): Да, снимок тут действительно староват, по нему здесь будто бы и правда есть домик, так сходу и не поймёшь, что он снесён. Вы не против, если я добавлю здесь полигончик с тегом was:building? Для прозрачности обстановки в этом месте, других участников, будущих поколений...)
Stalker61 (2026-07-06 16:30:33+00:00): Не надо изобретать велосипед. В Хантах я уж самостоятельно разберксь.
geo_ozon (2026-07-06 20:26:54+00:00): А почему это изобретение велосипеда? Вы же сами написали, что тег was:building присваивается полигону здания, когда на снимке подложки здание есть, а по факту давным-давно снесено. Здесь именно такой случай. Я без претензий если что, просто пытаюсь понять логику.
MappingMore (2026-07-07 05:26:05+00:00): Partially Revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185124805
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 07:26:32+00:00): Same again:

Hello, and welcome to OSM. I noticed that this changeset adds/keeps full personal names as name=* on many private houses/residential areas, e.g. “... xonadoni”. Could you please clarify the source and whether these are publicly signposted/verifiable names of the features, not resident/owner names or cadastral/household data?

In OSM, name=* should normally be the real, commonly used/publicly visible name of the mapped feature. Full names of private residents/owners should generally not be added to houses or parcels, especially when they are not visible on the ground. Also, Bing imagery alone cannot verify those personal names or property boundaries.

Could you please review these objects and remove the personal names / private ownership information where it is not publicly verifiable? Thank you.
ajmat (2026-07-06 08:54:24+00:00): Partially Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185184047
RentKA (2026-07-06 10:07:30+00:00): Hello ajmat,

Thank you for reviewing my changes.

I added suit 4 while mentionin redco plaza i guess that must be fine now
ajmat (2026-07-09 03:59:04+00:00): Hello RentKA, thank you for reaching out.

 The addr:housenumber key is intended to contain only numerical values (or simple letter modifiers). Since Redco Plaza appears to be the building name and Suite 4 is the unit number, I would suggest updating the address tags as follows, if they reflect the on-the-ground situation:

Remove: addr:housenumber=Redco Plaza

Add:

addr:housename=Redco Plaza

addr:unit=4

For more information, please refer to:

Addresses - OpenStreetMap Wiki 

Key:addr:unit - OpenStreetMap Wiki 

 Thank you for your contribution, and happy mapping!
alpacaMaps (2026-07-27 21:36:33+00:00): Howdy!

Thanks for mapping in your area! We appreciate everyone who is involved.

In this case, we received communication that the nodes placed in Spencer Iowa are traffic cameras and not Flock/ALPR nodes.

When identifying it can be helpful to reference https://deflock.org/identify, as it has examples of what each system looks like.

Thanks!
alpacaMaps
alpacaMaps (2026-07-27 21:36:32+00:00): Howdy!

Thanks for mapping in your area! We appreciate everyone who is involved.

In this case, we received communication that the nodes placed in Spencer Iowa are traffic cameras and not Flock/ALPR nodes.

When identifying it can be helpful to reference https://deflock.org/identify, as it has examples of what each system looks like.

Thanks!
alpacaMaps
alpacaMaps (2026-07-27 21:36:31+00:00): Howdy!

Thanks for mapping in your area! We appreciate everyone who is involved.

In this case, we received communication that the nodes placed in Spencer Iowa are traffic cameras and not Flock/ALPR nodes.

When identifying it can be helpful to reference https://deflock.org/identify, as it has examples of what each system looks like.

Thanks!
alpacaMaps
Sanniu (2026-07-19 09:45:10+00:00): Hi, is it a roundabout? (With roundabout signs on it)
rajdhani (2026-07-06 09:26:40+00:00): Revert of https://osmcha.org/changesets/185124411
ivandhfr (2026-07-06 09:36:48+00:00): @rajdhani Can you explain your comment? I don't get it.
rajdhani (2026-07-13 05:15:50+00:00): Hi ivandhfr, 
Thank you for your response, and sorry for any confusion caused by my previous comment.

Your changes have reverted the incorrect edits introduced in an earlier changeset by another community mapper. I simply added this information to the changeset for record keeping. My comments do not apply to your edits. 

Thank you again for your understanding.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 07:41:49+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. 

Could you please clarify whether “King Tide Marketing” is a real, physical, publicly verifiable office at 74 Lyon Street, or whether this is a private/home address for your business?

OSM should map on-the-ground features, not be used mainly as a business directory or advertisement. If there is a publicly visible/signposted office at this location, the business POI may be appropriate. If this is only a home-based/online business or a private address without a verifiable public-facing office, please remove the name, office, opening_hours, phone, and website tags from the address node.

Also, please be careful when adding your own business information: it should be neutral, factual, and independently verifiable. 

Thank you.
user_5359 (2026-07-07 09:36:22+00:00): Welcome to OSM! What is the mean of the tags
reade wjirmen stifting foar keunst en ierde = 1
‘t Swellenêst = 1
Please notice we use (british) English of keys.
ferrie = differentieel (2026-07-07 09:51:26+00:00): hi, thank you for the welcome,
the language used is original Frisian - the second language in the Netherlands - the word "t Swellenêst" means in English 'swallow nest' but that aint Frisian - if someone in the neighborhood asks; where is the swallow nest they will never find the place
for the tag "reade wjirmen stifting foar keunst en ierde" means 'red worms foundation for art and earth' it is the same - that someone does not find the place 
i assume that we make maps for travelers and art lovers not for accountants (unless they are art lovers)
if you look a little more to the south you find another piece of art 'Ha we dat oan tiid?' which is also Frisian and on the same landsite of 'De Nije Mieden' can also not translated
user_5359 (2026-07-07 09:48:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please check the website "DNS_PROBE_FINISHED_NXDOMAIN"
ferrie = differentieel (2026-07-07 09:53:31+00:00): Hi, Welcome back, sorry but this text is not understandable
JeroenHoek (2026-07-13 10:39:03+00:00): Die website waar je naar linkte is niet on-line.
ferrie = differentieel (2026-07-13 10:44:31+00:00): dank Jeroen voor de melding - ik zie daar inderdaad een typefout in staan - nu moet ik neg even ontdekken hoe ik dat kan verbeteren - zal ik vanmiddag doen
ferrie = differentieel (2026-07-13 11:12:54+00:00): url aangepast - link werkt
dank voor je geduld
url checked - link is working
thank you for your patience
小原酱 (2026-07-05 08:23:24+00:00): 证据https://ditu.amap.com/ssr/place/B02EF0IQK5?id=B02EF0IQK5&name=%E6%AD%A6%E6%B1%9F%E5%8C%BA&source=history
SpaghettiMapper (2026-07-06 05:57:35+00:00): 浈武交汇处并非处于洲心岛上，而是原本的，洲心岛以西、“马踏飞燕”尖端正对的地方，即河面上风采街道、车站街道与新华街道三区的交界点。因为浈江区、武江区就是以武江、北江两河为边界的。
小原酱 (2026-07-07 12:01:02+00:00): 河流区域原本前2版本的是在桥交汇的，前一版本是在马的，我改一下
SpaghettiMapper (2026-07-07 12:06:00+00:00): 我已经把河流交汇点改回了此前Higashimado绘制的版本，无需再做更改啦:)
evgenykatyshev (2026-07-05 12:55:58+00:00): Откатываю лично мнение и описание из назваиня объекта

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185138793
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-05 18:50:58+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising, malformed tags/values in changeset and implied source of Google Maps in changeset:

https://osm.org/changeset/185156494
jcnl44 (2026-07-05 23:50:22+00:00): Bonjour,
Etes-vous certain qu'on puisse nommer la partie piétonne qui traverse les nefs "Machines de l'île" ?
Il s'agit d'un élément indépendant des Machines de l'île qui sont seulement une des activités présentes sur les lieux. Je suggérerais de la laisser sans nom, ou de mettre un name:signed=no plutôt.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-05 09:21:07+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 185130061 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'undisussed restorations' - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20908
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-05 09:21:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 185130061 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'undisussed restorations' - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20908
Supaplex (2026-07-05 15:01:50+00:00): 請問有名稱嗎？
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185129011
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-05 18:54:14+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other incorrect tagging in changeset:

https://osm.org/changeset/185156644
wolfbert (2026-07-22 09:14:38+00:00): Hallo Harald, bitte setze in AT keine postal_codes, werden nicht mehr benötigt. Habe die beiden letzten schon entfernt.
Supaplex (2026-07-05 15:01:40+00:00): 請問有名稱嗎？
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185129307
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-05 09:21:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 185130061 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some 'undisussed restorations' - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20908
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 10:34:33+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contribution! I noticed that the name=* tag for this isolated dwelling is set to '19', which seems more like a house number. Could you please clarify how the name '19' is verifiable, such as whether it appears on a sign or is commonly used locally as the feature's name?
Marcapus (2026-07-05 12:19:24+00:00): Yes, this building is house number 19 of route de Peronne, villers bretonneux. There is a black number on the left brick pillar of the entrance.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 12:28:01+00:00): Thanks for your reply.
But you have added place=isolated_dwelling ?
Marcapus (2026-07-05 13:05:17+00:00): This is a mistake I corrected it
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-05 13:10:36+00:00): Thanks @Marcapus

#HappyMapping
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-07-05 09:21:09+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 185128649, 185128795, 185129049, 185129596.
evgenykatyshev (2026-07-05 12:53:48+00:00): What kind of place it is? Church?

Anyway please split name into different language specific tags. Let me know if you need help with it.
eggie (2026-07-05 10:18:48+00:00): Best gummy,

Probeer concreet te beschrijven wat je hebt gedaan svp. ..details zrgt niemand iets.
Probeer als het kan restaurants op dr adtesnodes bij te taggen. Dan is het bedrijf ook makkelijker vindbaar.
Mvg,
eggie
Supaplex (2026-07-05 14:52:53+00:00): 請清楚標示資料來源
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185131578