piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MakKey (2024-05-17 20:11:06+00:00): Goedenavond Eggie!

Of deze borden er al staan kan ik niet direct met zekerheid zeggen, wat ik wel zeker weet is dat de paden al wel actief gebruikt worden als fietspad. Zie hier de plannen van de gemeente voor de nieuwe constructie van de Grote Markt: https://imgur.com/a/xIPIGvw

De gehele constructie is al rond met uitzondering van een klein stukje aan de noordkant van de nieuwe bomen, inclusief de fietsroutes.
eggie (2024-05-17 20:17:53+00:00): Oke.. uptoyou...  Soms gaan zaken langzaam.
Zeker als er bebording moet komen.
Het lijkt me oke zo. 
Houd het even in de gaten, want het riedeltje klopt nu niet met de tagging van een fietspad.
bicycle=no hoort er niet, maar vehicle=no ook niet.
Maar er zijn genoeg ervaren mappers in Groningen die wel willen helpen.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-05-17 20:22:51+00:00): Je wijzigingen heb ik even doorgestuurd naar een ervaren lokale mapper. Even gevraagd om assistentie.

Veel plezier met mappen, 
eggie
user_3216889 (2024-05-18 10:04:48+00:00): De 'fietsroutes' op de Grote Markt zijn geen fietspaden, maar voetgangersgebied waar fietsers toegestaan zijn (net als taxi's en bevoorrading 5-12u).

Voor volledige bebording, zie:
https://zoek.officielebekendmakingen.nl/gmb-2024-136189.html
eggie (2024-05-18 10:13:59+00:00): Oke Henk....  Dan zijn het dus 'fietsroutes" in een 'voetgangersgebied' en dus gewoon highway=pedestrian
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-05-18 10:17:03+00:00): reverted by changeset #151486436
to wrong interpretation cycleway versus pedestrian.
eggie (2024-05-18 10:20:03+00:00): Het zal in ieder geval gewoon routeren voor fietsers.
Denk dat het zo weer klopt.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-05-18 11:56:42+00:00): Hoi MakKey,

Wellicht dat er nog een keer gekeken kan worden naar de zuidelijke aansluitende straten op die 'fietsroutes', want daar ontbreekt de uitzondering voor tweewielers op oneway=yes
(oneway:bicycle=no)  Maar wellicht zijn tweewielers daar niet uitgezonderd.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-05-17 20:04:49+00:00): Dat is maar de vraag.
Welk bord staat hier vooraan.
Ervaren mappers zijn hier al mee bezig geweest.
Graag reactie
mvg
eggie
eggie (2024-05-18 10:15:33+00:00): reverted by changeset #151486401
JuanCarlos80 (2024-05-17 21:14:08+00:00): vgl. https://www.lz.de/lippe/detmold/23854841_Statt-Strassenlaerm-Drei-neue-Wege-fuehren-durch-Detmolds-gruenen-Norden.html
miluethi (2024-05-17 21:48:55+00:00): Hi Tanya,

Please square out all your new buildings in OSM. It's easy: just press the "Q" key with a selected building shape. 

Thank you for contributing to OSM Nicaragua
dzamper (2024-05-18 10:00:51+00:00): Gargantuiczny landuse (jeśli z grubsza poprawny) jest zdecydowanie lepszy niż jego brak…
zuicz (2024-05-18 10:27:29+00:00): Zacząłem już go przywracać ze znacznie większą dokładnością od strony Mąkołowca, także wróci ;)
NieWnen (2024-05-18 11:52:15+00:00): Nadal lepszą metodą jest sprzątanie kawałek po kawałku.

Jako, że korzystasz z JOSMa jest to bardzo wygodne – ctrl+x do cięcia, albo po prostu przesuwać :P

Wysłanie nawet ze 100 zmian ze zmniejszaniem tego będzie lepsze, niż usunięcie i zostawienie bez niczego na jakiś czas.

W tym czasie ktoś może akurat zachować dane OSMa na lata bez tego/wydrukować/analizować dane 
w oparciu o landusy i wyjdą błędne wyniki itd.
NieWnen (2024-05-18 11:53:18+00:00): *alt+x (utilsplugin)
zuicz (2024-05-18 12:30:03+00:00): Nie znałem, przyda się następnym razem, dzięki
eggie (2024-05-17 19:57:51+00:00): reverted due to pokemonvandalism by changeset #151470100

Wees even voorzichtig met het aanbrengen van nieuwe edits.  
Mocht je op deze manier doorgaan zal er overwogen worden een (tijdelijke) stop op je account te plaatsen.  
http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_working_group 
MVG
eggie
MxxCon (2024-05-20 05:37:01+00:00): You sure it's error 404 and not 418?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151470296
cat_not_deprecated (2024-05-20 13:53:31+00:00): These curbs are not teapots, and they will not brew coffee either
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151470296
eggie (2024-05-17 20:28:33+00:00): Dag acimanx

De naam van de veerdienst staat op het veertraject.
Op de Ferry terminal hoort de naam van de halte
Dus Gouderak en Moordrecht

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-05-17 20:29:02+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 (2024-05-17 20:35:09+00:00): Ik heb het aangepast.
A Walla Wallan (2024-05-17 20:58:59+00:00): typo - should be "tasting" room downtown. There are many winery tasting rooms in downtown Walla Walla.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-05-19 23:22:47+00:00): Ale to obowiązuje od 2026. Nie jest jeszcze 2026.
pavvv (2024-05-20 09:01:27+00:00): Wycofałem. W Szczecinie nazwy typu aleja, park, most pisze się małą literą. Do tego nie usuwaj obiektów dodając je ponownie, tylko edytuj sam obiekt https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 16:02:33+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151471116
danieldegroot2 (2024-05-18 18:38:45+00:00): Hey Aarogya Pandey,

Thank you for taking your time to review changesets for your open mapping hub's program.

I would recommend you focus on 'New mapper' changesets, especially those with 'Review requested' label.
You can also use the 'Filters' => 'Reasons for Flagging' to get only these changesets, or use the 'Location' filter to get only changesets in a certain area. i.e. it may be useful to look only at the area which is the focus of your open mapping hub, where you have the most experience. Local mapping guidelines elsewhere may differ from what you are used to.

You're welcome to review more experienced mappers' changesets, though try to avoid reviewing multiple by the same user in this case, unless reviewing as bad. Also, some users do not like such 'thank you for mapping' messages as they may appear copy-pasted and do not contain any feedback on how to improve mapping, which may be wasting your and/or the users' time.
Though, your comment otherwise looks fine of course.

Sidenote: areas such as this which are on a slope may have an offset applied to some objects. Also, some street level imagery and GPS traces may have been aligned to existing (old) mapping by the application (or are simply too poor), therefore can not be used to determine the precise location of objects.
This may not be directly useful to you as reviewer but it helps to understand why some objects may be at a (seemingly) incorrect position.

Regards,

Daniel
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-21 14:52:00+00:00): Hello Daniel,
Thank you for your suggestions and motivation for me to carry out the work in more sensitive way. I am very thankful for your suggestions and will follow your suggestions to carry out the work. 
Regards,
Aarogya
Geo-Tobi (2024-10-27 07:10:40+00:00): Hi, ein Vz239 wäre foot=designated, nicht yes. Bitte ggfs um Korrektur.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37843963
Grüße
martinst (2024-10-27 15:28:07+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis!
Korrigiert in Changeset 158418231.
Viele Grüße
TausifJutt (2024-05-27 22:24:54+00:00): This Jalalpur Bhattian Bypass Road is a very strange coincidence, a road that Coop has not seen and you are changing it. You made a main road a local road and made a local main road. Not that we should bother everyone
OSMCowboy (2024-05-29 16:06:38+00:00): Hi TausifJutt, thanks for reaching out! If I have made classification changes that don’t align with the road design, please feel free to make the edits and I will defer to your judgement here. Happy Mapping!
MxxCon (2024-05-20 05:42:04+00:00): Hello.
This edit made the geometry of these intersections less accurate.
Before this change curbs were positioned where they actually were. You moved them into the middle of sidewalk.
Additionally, now you connected sidewalks THROUGHT a curb, as such when you get pedestrian navigation/route with consideration for wheelchairs or strollers there's now a problem because such routers discourage crossing curbs. But in reality you can walk from one sidewalk to the other without ever crossing a curb.
Accurate curb position and connection is important.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151471327
robbie_morrison (2024-05-17 20:55:43+00:00): charging station operator website at: https://www.eze.network
MxxCon (2024-05-20 05:43:13+00:00): This changeset has the same problem as the previous. And since this seems to be your style of edits, your other changesets probably have these problems too. 🫤
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151471667
VLD168 (2024-05-20 22:59:48+00:00): Hello MxxCon,

Thank you for your comments on changesets 151471667 and 151471327. I have gone back and changed them in a way that should correspond to what you mentioned as needing attention. I am glad you reached out and am happy to listen to any other feedback you are willing to give.

Sincerely,

VLD168
Soshal Distan Singh (2024-05-18 22:32:54+00:00): >https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/125079759/history

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151507057

https://reforma-development.ru/suncity
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3eLtet88n0
https://rgis.spb.ru/mapui?location=46948
https://pkk.rosreestr.ru/#/search/59.73239643365303,30.072146316254013/18/@4bzedjk0u
Константин Гам (2024-05-19 10:10:00+00:00): Спасибо за исправление!
canfe (2024-05-19 09:29:35+00:00): Bel lavoro ma io lascerei l'edificio come builnding a se e metterei i CC come pin da solo.
Così compare pure l'iconcina e se uno ha davvero bisogna salta subito all'occhio!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151472163
rempshaener (2025-08-12 12:30:06+00:00): Hallo,
ein "Trampelpfad" auf einem Strand stelle ich mir im OSM-Kontext eher schwierig vor. Stichwort Ground-truth: wie stellt man denn die Lage vor Ort fest? Oder anders gefragt: was ist die Idee dahinter?
Viele Grüße
Vinber-Pro (2025-02-12 16:40:28+00:00): Bonjour Keima,
je me permets de te signaler que dans school:FR=collège, il y a bien l'accent. Erreur sans gravité car c'est surtout l(ajout du collège qui est important !

merci pour cela !
VARVAR8 (2024-05-17 21:43:20+00:00): Upd.: Ivano-Frankivsk region
felipeeugenio (2024-05-19 00:46:36+00:00): eliminado objeto inexistente
stimme-logistik (2024-05-21 08:42:28+00:00): Vielen Dank für die Hilfe! Wir haben den Kreisverkehr auf oneway=yes geändert, da es hier eine vorgegebene Fahrtrichtung gibt.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-17 22:20:27+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11914319634
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11914319635

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MapSpot (2024-07-30 21:00:30+00:00): Hi Quincylvania,
I notice you tend to add the parking=yes tag for slipways and access points that have nearby car parking available. I would recommend not using this tag on elements which do not have the tag amenity=parking. It's customary in OSM to map parking separately from business, building, and other amenity elements.

parking=yes and parking=no are considered a common tagging errors according to the Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Aparking
quincylvania (2024-07-31 02:05:21+00:00): Hi MapSpot, thanks for the note. I think the wiki means `parking=yes` and `parking=no` are mistakes when used on `amenity=parking`. I'm using the tag to indicate the presence of the amenity regardless of whether it is mapped separately (similar to `toilets`, `bin`, `camping`, etc.). We can't expect every app to run a spatial query to find all the parking near a thing, and even if parking is physically nearby it doesn't mean it's accessible to the POI. If there is a better tag to use then please let me know, but I think the wiki just needs clarification. It's critical to know whether parking exists at a water access point so paddlers can find drivable put-ins and take-outs (as opposed to mid-route stopping points).
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 16:01:17+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151473508
Yurikson (2024-05-19 20:35:03+00:00): Thanks you for reviewing my changeset!
EUMapper (2024-05-18 18:08:21+00:00): Hello,
isn't it a parking surface? I changed it, as I was there
SHARCRASH (2024-05-18 18:47:59+00:00): Hi,
I guess you are talking about www.openstreetmap.org/way/489617566/history  You are the one who tagged it as "street_side" at v3. At v4 you added "parking:orientation=perpendicular" but you didn't change what kind of parking it is. Now few minutes ago you deleted orientation and you set as parking=surface. 

So I didn't change anything tagwise for the parkings, otherwise i would have written in my changeset description "parkings corrected" or "detailed" if I would have added extra tags. The parkings i edited were only for their position and one extended.
rskedgell (2024-07-22 14:01:06+00:00): I DO know, and access=yes is not the correct way to tag a pedestrian zone which prohibits motor vehicles and had a signed list of exceptions.

https://www.bing.com/maps?toWww=1&redig=0E61462A315B4089ADF0DBB49CFAA9E5&cp=50.906948%7E-1.404601&lvl=21.3&mo=om.1&pi=-2.8&style=x&dir=351.5
rskedgell (2024-07-22 14:18:44+00:00): (already reverted by other users)
mueschel (2024-05-18 09:07:49+00:00): Hi,
I just fixed several "maxwidth_physical" tags. The common spelling is with a colon: 
"maxwidth:physical".
Tallguy (2024-05-18 11:16:20+00:00): Thanks for that - not sure how I ended up using the wrong key. I'll do a search and change to the correct one. Probably be able to do it Sunday evening.
NeisBot (2024-05-17 23:00:06+00:00): Hi Billy Racette, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1284257589

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:22:42+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151639530
LucGommans (2024-05-22 17:36:07+00:00): There are street lamps, but the parking lot is not actually lit at night
NeisBot (2024-05-17 23:15:06+00:00): Hi Xenith_23, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/308010324

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-18 20:54:00+00:00): Hi Xenith_23,

I have been unable to find any evidence of a beach here. This pond appears to be associated with drainage from the surrounding area. Can you provide some kind of evidence on this?
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:21:23+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151511752
nevw (2024-05-18 08:59:32+00:00): Hi, the onramps were correctly mapped already. A separate way only extends to where there is a physical barrier separating them like a concrete barrier of fence and not to where they are only separated by painted lines.
The lanes tag is used to define how many lanes are across the road:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/
nevw (2024-05-18 10:33:34+00:00): For your convenience, I reverted this in changeset 151487052
NeisBot (2024-05-17 23:15:07+00:00): Hi Billy Racette, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1284259141

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:21:04+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151639462
CurlingMan13 (2024-09-20 03:25:53+00:00): Generally, when you add water, you use a way/area, not a node...
Fraxi (2024-05-17 23:52:29+00:00): Използван и  Bing Streetside
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 15:59:46+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151474889
MxxCon (2024-05-20 05:50:18+00:00): colour= value is invalid here.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151475011
IraGersh (2024-05-20 17:32:32+00:00): Will look tonight.  I thought I used black.
IraGersh (2024-05-20 22:01:55+00:00): I know what happened.  I hit Ctrl-V (paste) to copy the item and it just added what I had in the clipboard to the tag.  I have to click off the item I want to copy before copying it with Ctrl-C.
MxxCon (2024-05-20 05:53:09+00:00): Is Odessa Steward Street no longer the name of this segment? Or both names apply?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151475269
IraGersh (2024-05-20 17:34:25+00:00): I left Odessa because that may be what the street sign on Amsterdam says.  The street sign on Broadway doesn't say Odessa anything and I only photographed that sign.  I'll have to look at 103rd and Amsterdam.  I left it with both names.
MxxCon (2024-05-20 17:46:38+00:00): But then you get data inconsistency with alt_name= and alt_name:en= not matching/being translation.
IraGersh (2024-05-20 17:51:36+00:00): I'm open for suggestions.  I'll remove the new tag as either way there is an issue. I'll try to visit the Amsterdam and 103 intersection tonight.
MxxCon (2024-05-20 17:57:41+00:00): You can list multiple names separated with ;
Or we also have honorary_name= and official_name= tags. I don't know what exactly those names are so apply tags as appropriate.
IraGersh (2024-05-20 18:01:51+00:00): Can I semicolon separate the honorary names as I believe both alt names are honorary? I'll make alt_name:en honorary first to see if I can search on it.
IraGersh (2024-05-20 21:32:53+00:00): I made it an honorary_name.  Search doesn't work.  I'll just leave it like that.  I'll still go out and look at Amsterdam and 103. I'm very curious.
NeisBot (2024-05-18 01:00:06+00:00): Hi gotchhhhh, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1284271530

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:20:12+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151639426
NeisBot (2024-05-18 01:00:07+00:00): Hi gotchhhhh, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1284271615

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:19:05+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151639382
Frans S (2024-05-24 15:03:31+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
You added sometimes a label +1 or -1 to a building. To avoid errors ?
Just adjust the building.
Best regards
Skydog1960 (2024-05-27 19:45:49+00:00): Hello Frans - thank you so much for the feedback. I will now know what to do in the future. Is there anything else I need to do for this task?
Kind regards.
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 15:58:09+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151475651
mueschel (2024-05-19 10:02:06+00:00): Hi,
these ways got a large amount of tags that look like they shouldn't be in OSM. Could you check that? This import is also missing the source of the data.
emeadows (2024-05-19 15:59:51+00:00): Thanks mueshel. This was the first time I used JOSM to load shapefiles up to OSM. I wrongly assumed OSM would strip unneeded fields from the files. We'll be updating this area a lot since there are several more trails than what's showing. Now that I know what OSM needs and what it doesn't, I'll be fixing these files.
mueschel (2024-05-20 08:21:02+00:00): I removed those tags.
citrula (2024-05-18 08:52:39+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM. Please don't make fake parks for pokemon go :)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151483165
Kovoschiz (2024-05-18 07:31:16+00:00): This is not a conflict, but caused by existing issues. `landuse=railway` is correct. Problem is housing estates don't have a feature, so they have to use `landuse=residential` + `residential=apartments` .
AR_Mapper (2024-05-19 10:53:11+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151528562
AgusQui (2024-11-12 01:50:26+00:00): hola, en este tramo https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/457118526 marcaste que hay una banquina transitable por ciclistas en ambos lados, me parece que ni siquiera hay banquina allí.
Hugoren Martinako (2024-11-08 17:21:39+00:00): Boas!

Un consello: cando anadas un nodo faltante que está moi preto doutro co mesmo nome (e que de feito, tecnicamente, é o mesmo elemento, pero pertence a parroquias ou concellos distintos, e por iso ten dous códigos), eu sempre engado a mesma nota: "Esta entidad está dividida en dos municipios, una mitad pertenece a <UNO> y la otra a <DOS>, y cada uno tiene diferentes datos estadísticos".

Digo isto precisamente para evitar isto outro: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157001406

Máis info: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/entidad-de-poblacion-dividida-en-mas-de-un-municipio/7072
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-18 15:56:18+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151476906