piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2025-03-01 11:02:24+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

A: Inaccurate mapped. 
B: Overlapping buildings.

D: Connecting nodes of buildings to other buildings or features like roads and residential areas.
E. Rectangular buildings not squared.
F: Mapping of buildings partly hidden by trees.
G: include the shadow of a building in the mapping.
H: Incorporated the yard or a clearing into the mapping. Or mapped a yard as a building.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
gscscnd (2025-02-25 15:09:17+00:00): industrial nie jest dobre?
krzysiuup (2025-02-26 06:54:44+00:00): Zależy jak na to spojrzeć, osobiście uważam że industrial pasuje bardziej do typowo przemysłowych budynków związanych z jakimś procesem produkcyjnym (idąc za definicją z angielskiej wiki). Naciągając tę definicję, można uznać że nastawnia kolejowa uczestniczy (przynajmniej pośrednio) w procesie produkcji, ale właśnie wydaje mi się trochę na siłę wciśnięte. A co Ty o tym sądzisz?
gscscnd (2025-02-26 07:32:21+00:00): Budynki kolejowe na pewno są specyficzną kategorią i nie pasują do końca do innych przedstawicieli building=industrial, ale swojego tagu w większości nie mają (wyjątek to np. building=train_station), w przeciwieństwie np. do rozróżnienia landuse=industrial i landuse=railway. Infrastruktura kolejowa jako taka wydaje mi się naturalnie czymś przemysłowym, choć może jest to tylko moje odosobnione odczucie, upierać się nie będę. Różnie to można poukładać i na pewno powinno to być spójne w skali całego OSM.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 00:09:03+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164656299
Frans S (2025-03-02 09:57:50+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please tag the buildings you have mapped and don't forget to square the rectangular buildings with the Q key.
BCNorwich (2025-02-26 12:17:41+00:00): Reverted to remove duplicated highway.
Andrea Musuruane (2025-02-25 15:00:03+00:00): Ciao. Questi non sono i nomi delle vie, sono i nomi delle località. Per favore smetti di inserirle sulle highway. Grazie, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162934301
Andrea Musuruane (2025-02-25 15:21:41+00:00): Fatto revert.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162937194
Frans S (2025-03-08 11:13:22+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please take the time to map accurate.
See this webpage which shows your initial mappings (red) and the corrections we had to make.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=163334390
Best regards
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-26 06:08:59+00:00): Hi Shay1, welcome to OSM!

It seems that the changeset you created includes nodes and ways without any tags. Could there have been an issue during the mapping process?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
Frans S (2025-03-02 11:25:24+00:00): Hello. 
Please tag each building with the tag 
building=yes. I had to add  23 taggings.
And, square each rectangular building with the Q key when it is still selecter after mapping it.
Best regards
Frans S (2025-02-25 14:25:26+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please do not map structures without roof as a building. (when you see an object where you see the shadow on both opposite walls, it is not to be mapped as a building
Square the rectangular buildings and map more accurate please.
Best regards and keep mapping
Famlam (2025-04-01 20:00:56+00:00): Hoi Zandkuil, relatie 18752282 bestaat nu uit twee inners zonder outers, kun je dit oplossen?
dikkeknodel (2025-05-28 14:35:08+00:00): Ik kwam deze ook tegen via OSM inspector. Daarnaast is zowel op relatie 18752282 als haar leden de tag landuse=orchard geplaatst, dat hoort ook niet. Ik twijfel wel nog wat daar de beste oplossing voor is. Ik denk dat de individuele veldje ieder een boomgaard zijn, en dat Appelland als relatie meer het bedrijf/ de stichting erachter. Zou je dan een shop=farm tag aan de relatie hangen?
Frans S (2025-03-01 17:19:03+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapped. 
C: Collecting multiple buildings and mapping them as 1 building.
F: Mapping of buildings partly hidden by trees.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162934470
Frans S (2025-03-01 17:01:14+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please square the rectangular buildings with the Q key while selected.
Best regards
Frans S (2025-03-01 11:51:08+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapped. (rather poor)
D: Connecting nodes of buildings to other buildings or features like roads and residential areas.
E. Rectangular buildings not squared.
F: Mapping of buildings partly hidden by trees.
G: include the shadow of a building in the mapping.
H: Incorporated the yard or a clearing into the mapping.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
OSM_RogerWilco (2025-02-26 08:48:27+00:00): Magst Du noch Deine Quelle für die Hausnummern nennen?
chris66 (2025-02-26 12:34:57+00:00): Hi, in der Regel nutze ich Dienste wie mapillary und kartaview. 

In einigen Fällen ergibt sich die Nummer aus Extrapolation. Oder man sieht aufm Luftbild dass es sich gar nicht um ein Wohnhaus handelt. 

Grüße Chris
OSM_RogerWilco (2025-02-27 07:02:03+00:00): Au Backe. OK, habe verstanden. ;-)

Dann kontrollieren ich die lieber nochmal vor Ort. Wie Du aus dem Forum weißt, gibt es tatsächlich auch doppelte Hausnummern.
Frans S (2025-03-01 16:02:12+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please square the rectangular buildings you map with the Q key, with the object selected.
Best regards
b-jazz (2025-02-25 18:50:25+00:00): Those are some good looking golf course edits! In chance you want to help me with more golf courses? Check out mpr.lt/c/50926
Frans S (2025-02-25 17:01:20+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
* Don't cluster a group of buildings by making it 1 building
* Always square your building (use the Q key in ID editor) except round huts and curved walls of course
* Don't connect buildings with nodes to highways (which is an error, roads do not go through buildings). 
* Avoid connecting nodes of buildings to each other. (They mostly do not share walls).
* don't tag (walled) yards as a building.
* don't include (court)yards in a mapping of a building.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
b-jazz (2025-02-26 17:45:41+00:00): Hi Averytt10, thanks for contributing to OSM and improving golf course maps. I wanted to let you know about some best practices before you do any more mapping.

You shouldn't create bunkers that intersect with fairways. By doing so, you are saying that any area that they overlap is somehow considered both sand and grass, which doesn't make sense. The fairway needs to be adjusted to no intersect. Depending on what you see in imagery, the fairway should go around in such a way as to include or exclude the bunker. If the fairway completely surrounds the bunker, you need to combine the two objects into a multipolygon.

The same thing can be said about greens and fairways. They shouldn't be intersecting and partially overlapping. 

You might want to read over the wiki to see examples of how to map golf course features: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course

Thanks.
Marek-M (2025-02-25 16:37:54+00:00): Thank you for correction my typo! :)
user_15543111 (2026-07-09 14:29:23+00:00): Why did you removed the Arabic name completely and replaced it with a different language? You even did not specified, in which language the name is you added.
Libya-truth (2026-07-09 14:50:20+00:00): Your claim that I "removed the Arabic name completely" is false.

Fact 1: On way/996004768, I am the one who added the Arabic name "قاعدة الوطية الجوية" it had no name before my edit (v1 had no name tag).

Fact 2: On way/688314943, the original name was "قاعدة الوطية الجوية عقبة بن نافة". I removed "عقبة بن نافة" because the base is locally known simply as "الوطية." 

Fact 3: I acknowledge that in a subsequent edit (v4), the name:ar tag was incorrectly set. That was a mistake which has now been corrected all three elements now have proper trilingual names with Arabic fully preserved.

Fact 4: The element currently had no name at all because a third user (ABDULLAH AL WERFALLI) deleted everything in v5 — not me and not you.

Before accusing others, please check the edit history carefully.

Best regards
Frans S (2025-03-01 10:21:16+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
A few issues, Please do not map courtyards as a building. Take a close look to identify buildings.  Often, a wall is visible as well and might be mapped. 
Square each rectangular building with the Q key after selecting it.
Where trees hide a part of a building, extrapolate the rooflines as you might expect they do,
Best regards and keep mapping
santamariense (2025-07-09 18:28:41+00:00): Olá Carlos Monteiro 30,

Bem-vindo ao OSM.

Vi que tu deletou algumas linhas como esta [1] provavelmente por ter achado que não fazia sentido. Porém, elas fazem. São linhas "imaginárias" que delimitam bairros. Não as remova pois isso danificou diversas delimitações de bairros.

Sugiro fortemente que até mesmo evite clicar em deletar qualquer coisa até que as entenda de fato. 

[1] - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934490928

Exemplo de um bairro que teve linhas que faziam parte de sua delimitação apagas. Como é possível notar, apenas partes das divisas ainda restam: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12622423

Qualquer dúvida estou a disposição.

santamariense
Frans S (2025-02-27 11:29:18+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map more accurate and follow the outlines of buildings. Square the rectangular buildings with the Q key.
Best regards and keep mapping
Frans S (2025-03-01 11:41:41+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapped. 


D: Connecting nodes of buildings to other buildings or features like roads and residential areas.
E. Rectangular buildings not squared.
F: Mapping of buildings partly hidden by trees.
G: include the shadow of a building in the mapping.
H: Incorporated the yard or a clearing into the mapping.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
Vinber-Pro (2025-02-26 09:53:11+00:00): Bonjour,
l'attribut que tu as utilisé n'est pas vraiment existant building=maison_d'hotes.

pour une chambre d'hote on mettra https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house

j'ai modifié https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/548946684

on en discute :)

à plus
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-05 15:13:02+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/588432907/history - why you think that 89 cm wide way is highway=pedestrian ?
s777n (2025-02-25 21:39:33+00:00): Здравствуйте. Вы забыли удалить proposed:building=construction c построенного здания. Исправлено
eggie (2025-02-26 08:51:55+00:00): Hoi,

Geen gebouwen op gebouwen stapelen. Gewoon een node gebruiken. Meestal zet ik de info dan op de laagste adresnode.
Dat bedrijven en instellingen zich twee adressen toeëigenen klopt niet met de kadasterinfo.
Ik zet de info even op een node.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-02-26 08:56:22+00:00): Info samengevoegd met nr 53.. Nr 55 bestaat niet meer in het Kadaster.
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/?searchQuery=Rotterdamseweg+53&objectId=0642200000014481&theme=BRT+Achtergrond&geometry.x=104559.39840596858&geometry.y=425845.99693922355&zoomlevel=15.288

Die dubbele nummers zijn hardnekkig.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-02-26 08:59:37+00:00): Adresnode 51 teruggeplaatst
Zie https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=162936280
huxbie (2025-02-26 10:36:18+00:00): Hoi, bedankt weer.
Ik had Sint Nicolaaskerk in Amsterdam gezien, daar is ook een overkoepelend objecttype. Vandaar dat ik eens wilde checken.
aldoende blijft men leren.

ciao,
Hubert
eggie (2025-02-26 10:46:29+00:00): Oke... maar de St Nicolaaskerk is 3D gemapt. Dat gaat heel anders met building:part delen.
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=52.3764787&lon=4.9012531&zoom=19
huxbie (2025-02-26 11:49:09+00:00): Dat is next level, die sla ik nog ff over ;)
Frans S (2025-02-25 16:21:51+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
* Mapped many (big) clusters of buildings as 1 building.
* Always square your building (use the Q key in ID editor) except round huts and curved walls of course
* Don't connect buildings with nodes to highways (which is an error, roads do not go through buildings). 
* Avoid connecting nodes of buildings to each other. (They mostly do not share walls).



Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
Frans S (2025-02-25 16:50:14+00:00): Another issue.
You often included a yard into your mapping. Just map the building!
Best regards
NeisBot (2025-02-25 17:04:34+00:00): Hi Milena1919, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

PS: I’ve also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#ClearComments
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-27 19:47:24+00:00): Wow, what a creative use of hashtags! 

I almost thought I was reading a social media post instead of an OSM changeset comment. 

If only there were a way to explain what exactly was mapped or edited—imagine how much easier it would be for others to follow along. 

But hey, who needs clarity when you can have an alphabet soup of project codes, right?
</ironic>

#hotosm
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 14:33:38+00:00): I must now apologize retrospectively for my previous comment. It was sent too quickly by me out of emotion, without taking enough time to think it over. I would be glad if you continued to actively contribute to the OSM project. 

#HappyMapping
Frans S (2025-02-28 14:59:28+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping. 
You are a new mapper I see.
A few issues here.
You tagged buildings correct as building=yes. But ! don't ad a generic name like name=house. Building=yes is sufficient.

Square also all the rectangular buildings with the  Q key while the object is still selected.
Your mappings are rather inaccurate. Take the time to map accurate by following the rooflines.
Be sure it is a building, you are mapping. Best is to see a shadow or it is obvious that an object is a building and not all walled yard.
Where a road is partly visible between trees, those spots are no buildings.

Take a look to this webpage where you see your mappings and the corrections i have to make.

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=163056030

Best regards and keep mapping
VladaC (2025-03-05 23:27:58+00:00): Ahoj, podle OSM wiki by tag place=hamlet měl být výhradně na uzlu, ne na ploše. Asi bych nechal landuse=allotments a place= bych dal jako bod uvnitř.
Honza 😎 (2025-03-08 20:43:11+00:00): Aha, máš pravdu. Upravím
NeisBot (2025-02-25 17:04:37+00:00): Hi Marc Gardner, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

PS: I’ve also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#ClearComments
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-27 19:47:31+00:00): Wow, what a creative use of hashtags! 

I almost thought I was reading a social media post instead of an OSM changeset comment. 

If only there were a way to explain what exactly was mapped or edited—imagine how much easier it would be for others to follow along. 

But hey, who needs clarity when you can have an alphabet soup of project codes, right?
</ironic>

#hotosm
Marc Gardner (2025-02-28 08:52:09+00:00): Oh wow some one is very patronising!  sadly we can't report people like you who will now mean I never map again! If only I could report your comment.

This was my first time mapping with a charity group and they asked us to put the # so they could see where we did. I followed their direction.

Sleep well #patronisingahole
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 09:00:06+00:00): Hi Marc Gardner, ah, I see now and thanks for your kind words (at the end).

The hashtag master plan — following the charity’s direction, of course. I apologize if my comment came off the wrong way; I was just trying to make it easier for others to follow your work.

#HappyMapping
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 14:22:37+00:00): I must now apologize retrospectively for my first comment. It was sent too quickly by me out of emotion, without taking enough time to think it over.
Marc Gardner (2025-03-01 04:55:45+00:00): Accepted, I enjoyed the mapping and would like to do more will read up on how to put comments. The charity we did it for said we had to put the # so that they get credit or something.
NeisBot (2025-02-25 17:04:38+00:00): Hi Humidify, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

PS: I’ve also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#ClearComments
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-27 19:47:37+00:00): Wow, what a creative use of hashtags! 

I almost thought I was reading a social media post instead of an OSM changeset comment. 

If only there were a way to explain what exactly was mapped or edited—imagine how much easier it would be for others to follow along. 

But hey, who needs clarity when you can have an alphabet soup of project codes, right?
</ironic>

#hotosm
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 14:33:43+00:00): I must now apologize retrospectively for my previous comment. It was sent too quickly by me out of emotion, without taking enough time to think it over. I would be glad if you continued to actively contribute to the OSM project. 

#HappyMapping
watmildon (2025-03-07 21:30:17+00:00): So good! Thanks for adding it!
Zeliene (2025-03-12 17:24:11+00:00): No problem. Happy to help. I checked out your mascot map and I really like it. Those icons really make it eye-catching!

I added some more mascot tags here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163537488
This seems to be all in this area. They should work with your map with no modifications.
watmildon (2025-03-12 19:33:17+00:00): Wonderful!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-03-22 06:50:49+00:00): Reverted by DWG - deleting valid information

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163933728
NeisBot (2025-02-25 17:04:46+00:00): Hi Oybek Karimjonov, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

PS: I’ve also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#ClearComments
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-27 19:47:43+00:00): Wow, what a creative use of hashtags! 

I almost thought I was reading a social media post instead of an OSM changeset comment. 

If only there were a way to explain what exactly was mapped or edited—imagine how much easier it would be for others to follow along. 

But hey, who needs clarity when you can have an alphabet soup of project codes, right?
</ironic>

#hotosm