piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
LakePoopó (2026-04-24 18:45:32+00:00): I appreciate you reaching out. I want to clarify that I didn’t intend to disregard your edits, and I’m very open to discussing this further.

MapKarta was not used as a source for my changes, it was an existing tag that remained after a way was split. My edits were based on publicly available aerial imagery and surrounding contextual data, interpreted alongside the Malaysian Road Tagging Guidelines. I also took into account that many of the roads that were upgraded had historically been mapped at lower classifications by other contributors in the region, which is an important factor when considering reclassification.

According to the Malaysian guidelines, secondary roads are defined as “roads that connect key places across a state (e.g., between villages and nearby towns).” In practice, this suggests routes that link larger destinations and form part of a broader, interconnected network.

Tertiary roads are described as “roads that act as connector roads between a village and a main road,” which typically applies to routes branching from more major roads and serving larger villages. Unclassified roads “act as feeder roads… carrying traffic from villages (or residential areas) to a major road.” While this can overlap somewhat with tertiary in definition, the distinction often comes down to traffic volume and the scale or importance of the destinations served.

Because the guidelines leave room for interpretation, I think it’s important to evaluate each road within the context of the surrounding network. For example, the secondary road at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4703310957 appears to connect multiple significant areas and contributes to the larger through-network. More broadly, across Malaysia, secondary roads typically do not terminate in rural areas; instead, they tend to carry higher volumes of traffic over longer distances between major destinations.

By comparison, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/153772993 is a good example of a tertiary road connecting villages to more significant routes, while the unclassified at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/334276076 and the residential at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/221577743 serve smaller, more rural settlements similarly to Kelait / Entangor Road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/400767273).

That said, I value community input and would appreciate any sources or further reasoning you can share to help me understand your perspective. My goal is to maintain consistent classifications across Malaysia while aligning with the existing road network established by the OSM Malaysian mapping community. Hopefully that explains my reasoning, and I look forward to hearing your further thoughts.
Jeffry Mardyo (2026-04-23 15:48:49+00:00): Q1167 is a tertiary road that’s set to be officially designated as a state road.
LakePoopó (2026-04-24 18:49:13+00:00): Hello Jeffry Mardyo,

I reclassified the road after reviewing its function on the ground, as it doesn’t appear to serve as a neighborhood connector or a general through-route. Instead, it primarily provides direct access to a small number of buildings, which aligns more closely with the definition of a service road in the Malaysian Roads Tagging guidelines (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Malaysian_Roads_Tagging#State_roads).
Since you mentioned that the road is officially designated as a state road, would you be able to share any sources that indicate such? I’d like to better understand the basis for that classification. Thank you!
Wildsharky (2026-04-28 10:41:25+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:181744358
jbcharron (2026-04-22 19:07:57+00:00): Bonjour,
Le tag contact:website aurait du être conservé l'ancienne URL est plus pertinente la nouvelle ajoutée
Bonne soirée
Digitaleo (2026-04-23 07:54:23+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour ce retour, vous mettez le doigt sur un vrai point d'amélioration de notre côté.

Sur le renommage `contact:website` → `website` : c'est bien un choix assumé. Nous suivons la recommandation du wiki OSM qui privilégie la clé `website` plutôt que `contact:website`, donc notre système effectue systématiquement ce remplacement lors de nos contributions.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:website#Usability

En revanche, vous avez identifié un vrai bug : dans ce cas précis, l'adresse web présente sur OSM était plus pertinente (page dédiée à l'agence) que celle que nous avons poussée (page d'accueil générique, telle que renseignée par le client dans sa fiche). Notre système n'aurait pas dû écraser cette valeur plus précise.

Nous allons faire évoluer notre outil pour :
- détecter ce type de cas (URL existante plus spécifique que celle de notre source),
- ne pas écraser la valeur déjà présente sur OSM,
- et signaler au client qu'une adresse plus précise existe sur OSM, afin qu'il puisse mettre à jour sa fiche s'il le souhaite.

Merci encore pour la vigilance, c'est grâce à ces retours qu'on améliore la qualité de nos contributions.

Bonne soirée,
iandees (2026-04-22 15:15:39+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13409436554 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/181678719, 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!
rempshaener (2026-04-22 18:40:41+00:00): Hallo,
ich habe folgende Anmerkungen zu diesem Änderungssatz:
1. Bitte Changesets künftig etwas kleiner machen. Das Gebiet ist so schwer überschaubar.
2. Die Angaben in water_source=wasserleitung_dnXYZ sind keine zulässigen Werte. Die Nennweite kommt in fire_hydrant:diameter, die Angabe von water_source ist in diesen Fällen „main“.
3. Hydranten sollten nicht mit Straßen, Gebäuden u. ä. verbunden werden. Das lässt sich leicht beheben: im Editor markieren und „E“ drücken – das löst den Hydranten von der Linie.
Viele Grüße
eggie (2026-04-22 14:18:11+00:00): Dag Joris. Svp bijtaggen op de adresnode. Dus niet de gebouwomtrek.
Mvg
eggie
Wildsharky (2026-04-28 10:42:11+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:181744818
hahae (2026-06-08 01:20:24+00:00): 请问您为何要更改公交线路（478路、462路）的名称呢？北京的公交线路是有其社区共识的命名方式，请问是有什么特殊的缘由去删除名称中的“路”字吗
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2026-04-23 21:06:26+00:00): It appears you misplaced this node or placed it without looking closer at the map. For objects like telephone poles, fire hydrants, manhole covers, or in this case, an ALPR camera, you should try to place the node as close as possible to where it physically exists.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181675585
pwbriggs (2026-04-24 05:48:26+00:00): Thank you, we appreciate your work to make OpenStreetMap data more accurate.

However, I'd like to point out that your changeset comment, "Update Tags," is not very helpful—we can see what edits you made, but the changeset comment is more about the intent behind the changes. That way, reviewers can look at what changes you made and compare them to what you said you were trying to do, so that we can spot any mistakes more easily.

Thanks again for your contributions and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
AndyB_66 (2026-04-23 11:00:02+00:00): Komentuj, proszę, swoje zestawy zmian zgodnie z zasadami: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
superduperTNT11 (2026-04-23 13:12:11+00:00): Dobra, sorry. Po prostu nie miałem czasu na dokładniejsze wyjaśnienie
literan (2026-04-22 20:04:08+00:00): эта программа точки угоняет через океан?)
9_tab (2026-04-23 21:41:09+00:00): What's the meaning of this edit?

What's the connection between https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/19630033/history/1 and version 2 of the node ?
Felis Pimeja (2026-04-26 22:44:49+00:00): Да, странная бага. Буду разбираться. 
No special meaning, seems kind of a strange bug. Investigating it...
9_tab (2026-04-27 09:15:11+00:00): What's the connection between node/19630033/history/1 and version 2 of the node ?
9_tab (2026-04-27 13:29:17+00:00): Question is answered in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181729105
mavl (2026-06-07 06:01:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183764451, 183764460, 183764431, 183764453, 183764448, 183764459, 183764455 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20768].
silversurfer83 (2026-04-22 18:15:25+00:00): Hi

you just deleted the properties but the "line" is still there
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181676213
wcohen (2026-04-22 16:08:11+00:00): Antilles change was a mistake from mobile editing, reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181679151
Jeffry Mardyo (2026-04-23 09:00:39+00:00): Jln Sg Buloh / Ensengei Q2014-2 should be secondary, your source was from 2020 which is too outdated.
LakePoopó (2026-04-24 18:48:18+00:00): In order to keep discussion in one thread, I have replied to you on this changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181674299), and also responded to your DM regarding your concerns. Thanks!
mavl (2026-06-07 06:01:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183764451, 183764460, 183764431, 183764453, 183764448, 183764459, 183764455 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20768].
iandees (2026-04-22 15:15:46+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3326833249 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/181678724, 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!
okadatsuneo (2026-04-22 23:22:43+00:00): Thank you for the comment and for putting the node back in its appropriate position.
It seems I had moved a node unintentionally.
AndyB_66 (2026-04-22 14:44:15+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181656675
LordGarySugar (2026-04-25 15:58:19+00:00): Hi, is the reason for these tag changes that you're trying to get these former stations to render on OpenRailwayMap? If that's the case, it would be better to map these in OpenHistoricalMap instead (which the new version of ORM uses as a source). OSM is only intended for mapping current features, with an exception for recently demolished features.
Xeroctic (2026-04-27 08:33:08+00:00): historic:railway=station is marked as deprecated, so I changed some to abandoned:railway=station, although some completely demolished stations were still tagged as the former. The vector OpenRailwayMap also has a setting to choose between this or OpenHistoricalMap to show former features.
LordGarySugar (2026-05-17 23:42:59+00:00): although it says it's deprecated, it's commonly used in the UK and shouldn't be changed without good reason. Personally, I would use historic=railway_station for historic stations that still have visible buildings or platforms. I would only use abandoned:railway=station where tracks still run through the station and the buildings haven't been repurposed to something else.
Xeroctic (2026-05-18 09:00:27+00:00): historic=railway_station and historic:railway=station are separate tags (the former is used for major in-use London terminals and a couple of former stations near St. Albans). Currently, neither of those tags appear on OpenRailwayMap vector with the OSM setting for historic railway infrastructure. Even though you mentioned it is still in use, the OSM wiki discourages the usage of historic:* tags due to inconsistent usage.
Xeroctic (2026-05-18 09:07:03+00:00): (in several edits I have made, I used abandoned:railway=station to mark stations where track infrastructure is abandoned but the station building is preserved; it may be useful to distinguish disused-quality or repurposed station buildings from abandoned tracks)
AndyB_66 (2026-04-23 10:59:25+00:00): Komentuj swoje zestawy zmian zgodnie z zasadami: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
superduperTNT11 (2026-04-23 13:12:55+00:00): Nie miałem czasu na dokładniejszy opis...
eggie (2026-04-22 16:05:06+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 (2026-04-22 15:12:55+00:00): Yep... Dat is'm.
Benoît C MdP (2026-05-20 17:02:50+00:00): Bonjour Lurikbolding,

Quelle est ta source de donnée pour ces contributions OSM car il y a plusieurs endroits où  tu as supprimé des éléments pourtant présents sur le terrain et d'autre où tu as ajouté des éléments inexistants depuis toujours comme le couloir bus du bas de la rue Lafayette ?
Je corrige au passage

Bonne continuation

Benoît
Lurikbolding (2026-05-25 11:01:12+00:00): Bonjour.

J'ai ces corrections en me baladant dans la rue (entre le peletier et chaussée d'antin).

Mais parfois j'ai eu des hésitations sur "faut il garder un bout de piste cyclable dessiné" alors que sur tout un carrefour (lafayette x faubourg montmarte) le dessin de la piste n'existe pas sur toute la portée du carrefour.

Mais je peux y refaire un tour pour voir/comprendre tes corrections pour éviter que l'on refasse 2 fois un travail.
I-76 (2026-04-22 15:59:50+00:00): Again, Deer Hangout is a personal interpretation of a place, not an official name. leisure=park is also not the right tagging here. I changed it to natural=scrub based on streetside and aerial imagery. It looks like badly maintained grassland with scattered shrubs, so I think tagging as a shrub is correct.
anticyclonic (2026-04-23 19:01:21+00:00): yea my neighbors are terrible with it also thx for that cus im new to osm
iandees (2026-04-22 15:48:45+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5508955343 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/181680116, 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!
ilias_ (2026-04-22 15:54:09+00:00): Hi, you created that restaurant twice
Mohamed mkm (2026-04-22 20:48:36+00:00): The first one was in the wrong location, the second one is the correct one.
ilias_ (2026-04-23 00:27:57+00:00): Then please, remove the first one when that happens... I removed it.
Mohamed mkm (2026-04-23 04:26:35+00:00): Thank you for the note. I realized the mistake, but I couldn't delete it myself. Next time, I will make sure to set the coordinates in the correct location from the start. Thanks again!
eggie (2026-04-22 16:06:51+00:00): Dag SpeedMap.. Op een industrieterrein kennen we geen highway=residential
Wel bv unclassified.
MVG
eggie
A67-A67 (2026-04-24 07:55:28+00:00): Ik heb de wegtypes verbeterd: 
- highway=unclassified (lokale weg) voor de wegen naar de voorkant van bedrijven.
- highway=service voor de wegen op parkeerplaatsen.
MassCartog (2026-04-22 23:46:24+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. Features you removed in this changeset are valid. Please don’t remove valid OSM data.

You have a new account and might not be aware, on OSM, we do not remove features if they exist on the ground. If it exists on the ground, it is valid data regardless of a feature being public or private, designated or informal/illegal/unauthorized. Removing features that exist is actually considered vandalism.

It's clear that these features still exist on the ground. Not being public access areas is an invalid reason to remove data from OSM. So this edit is incorrect and damaging to valid OSM data.

The correct way to handle this is to use OSM's tagging system. access=private, or access=no would be appropriate if they are closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won't_delete_roads_on_private_property

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Manuel H (2026-05-23 09:14:01+00:00): Hallo,
das Tagging der Stempelstelle ist so falsch. Es ist keine 'amenity' und das Leerzeichen darf beim Wert da auch nicht so stehen.
Siehe das korrekt Tagging hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:checkpoint

MFG,
Manuel
Borsdi (2026-05-23 10:43:24+00:00): Hi Manuel,
danke für den Tipp! Ich habs jetzt korrigiert.
Anscheinend ist bei jeder Stempelstelle der Harzer Wandernadel das Tagging mit „amenity“…
Manuel H (2026-05-24 14:45:57+00:00): Danke.
Ja, deswegen hatte ich erst deine Einträge gefunden, weil ich wissen wollte, was es sonst so an Einträgen für amenity gibt mit 'hike'.  
Die Kennzeichnung der anderen Stempelstellen kommt auch sehr unerwartet. Der Changeset wurde schon dokumentiert. s. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182849154#map=10/51.7624/10.8019&layers=P
MassCartog (2026-04-22 23:54:47+00:00): Hello again, for this and many of your other changset, "Unauthorized User Created Trails" is not a valid reason to remove data from OSM. If it exists on the ground it should not be removed. Instead, use OSM tagging system to set the Access. 

Changes that removed valid OSM data have been restored.

Please read for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
ad47 (2026-04-25 06:33:30+00:00): Может оно и заросло, но плиты то остались, особенно на восточном переезде ЛЭП
adamos (2026-06-16 08:53:16+00:00): is this really one-way road?
Lejun (2026-06-16 17:44:50+00:00): Affirmative. It's a one way road until mid to end summer during roadworks. Should you need to come from Switzerland you'd have to go west and follow along the Lac StPoint borders.
adamos (2026-06-17 14:26:56+00:00): thank you!
P_kawa (2026-04-22 16:43:58+00:00): Nie jestem pewien co do przebiegu ogrodzenia.
b-holdet (2026-04-29 10:56:57+00:00): Vedr. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13753016534

Jeg vil regne med at du mener natural=stone da vi ikke lige har fri klippegrund i DK.

Wikien skriver: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=rock?uselang=da

"On the contrary, single boulders not attached to the bedrock are better tagged as natural=stone."

For at gøre det enkelt:
stone er en løs del af rock, som er en del af grundfjeldet.
peanuthole (2026-04-29 11:05:46+00:00): Godt set, du har ret :) Det er faktisk bare en løs sten. Jeg har ændret det
HellMap (2026-04-26 19:06:35+00:00): Hello, 

Please do not change seasonal speed limits for the main maxspeed value. These were already correctly mapped in maxspeed:conditional tags for approximate time periods.
felipeeugenio (2026-04-26 13:30:46+00:00): Esto no clasifica como camino primario. Es un tertiary como mucho.

Por favor no realizar estos cambios sin consultar a la comunidad.

Saludos
Supaplex (2026-04-23 07:22:04+00:00): Hi

It seems you edit a bus stop, and change it to become a restaurant. We ususally don't do it, because a high chance the bus stop still exist so we add a new node as restaurant. 
We already fix your edit and add a new node as a restaurant. Please keep in mind the best practice.

Thank you 
A reply by the local OpenStreetMap member
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181683253
assanges (2026-04-23 07:59:21+00:00): 안녕하십니까,

이번 편집에서는 버스 정류장이 레스토랑으로 변경된 것 같습니다. 일반적으로 이것은 권장되는 방법이 아닙니다. 그 버스 정류장은 여전히 존재할 가능성이 높기 때문에 레스토랑을 위해 새로운 노드를 추가하는 것이 좋습니다. 이미 편집 내용을 되돌렸고 레스토랑을 위한 새로운 노드를 추가했습니다. 향후 편집에는 모범 사례를 참고해 주시기 바랍니다. 고맙습니다.

이해해 주시면 감사하겠습니다.
지역 OpenStreetMap 회원의 답변
---

OSMCha에서 변경 세트 시각화 검사:
https://osmcha.org/changesets/181683253
DeepL 및 Claude 을 사용한 번역 메시지
(Translated via DeepL and Claude)
mueschel (2026-04-28 13:36:48+00:00): Could you check this way, it got a strange tag:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1502549257
iandees (2026-04-22 20:01:39+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4362303682 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/181689407, 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!
jcarlson (2026-04-23 12:30:21+00:00): Oh, well hello there, stranger!

Just a heads up: street names in OSM get spelled out in full, like "South Adams Street".
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181684184
rajdhani (2026-04-23 11:19:05+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:181712780
NorthCrab_upload (2026-04-23 03:42:38+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zamień addr:place na addr:city. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1502558018

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Grass-snake (2026-05-18 20:30:47+00:00): Здравствуйте, подскажите, этот мост имеет собственный адрес? Если да, я бы хотел перенести в addr:* теги, если нет, то стереть как дубль (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4105147).
Yuri Matias (2026-04-22 19:54:31+00:00): Pq você insiste em fazer essa mudança? Tem radar de 30, 40 e 50 nesse trecho!

https://www.gov.br/prf/pt-br/assuntos/fiscalizacao-de-velocidade/radares-fixos
Xvtn (2026-04-27 12:48:37+00:00): Hi Josh, with this changeset you've added a lot of duplicate data. Most of these crags are already mapped as ways with natural=cliff. Is there a data consumer you're using that doesn't handle that well? I'm happy to help deduplicate, but won't touch any of these yet in case. Please let me know!
Xvtn (2026-05-07 12:44:43+00:00): Hi, any update on this?
silversurfer83 (2026-04-22 19:45:29+00:00): Moin :)

du hast um Feedback gebeten.

Die Telefonnummer ist vielleicht besser unter contact:phone=* und im Muster +49 651 ... zu erfassen.

Die description=* ist etwas ausführlich geraten. Bitte kompakt und auf den Punkt. 

Sonst passts :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181687527
mcliquid (2026-04-23 08:19:30+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!
Please note for the future: changesets should be local. To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area
Why? Have a look at the section "Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
wegavision (2026-04-23 09:27:28+00:00): I get that, but when you're working on several projects at the same time, it can happen that you accidentally upload a few items from the old project along with the new description. But it should really only be a very small number of incorrect items.