piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Supaplex (2024-12-21 02:53:21+00:00): Hi

Can you explain the two forest areas you are adding? Otherwise, these two areas will be remove
totera (2024-08-08 12:37:33+00:00): Il capolinea di Castel Trosino era già mappato: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9163533949
Per tutte le altre fermate che hai inserito, sei sicuro della loro posizione? E poi perché i nomi tutti in maiuscolo?
TrickyFoxy (2024-05-09 21:55:05+00:00): Может стоит мелочь пофильтровать? Уж слишком она неточная и неактуальная
luiswoo (2024-05-10 00:06:08+00:00): По Бингу оная мелочь выглядит вполне точно. Проще нарисовать вручную, аля 2гис, чем усилить фильтрацию. Но для этого тут кадастр лысоват.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-05-10 12:28:13+00:00): Nous avons discuté de ce sentier avec Martin Hamel cette semaine. Il n'y a plus de pancartes interdisant l'accès aux vélos depuis ce printemps, alors prière de conserver à yes. Merci!
Martin868 (2024-05-10 19:49:51+00:00): tu parles bien de Summit Circile a Westmount ? Leș pancartes y étaient cet automne en tout cas et je me suis fair chicaner par des locaux.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-05-10 19:54:39+00:00): Oui, vérifié par Martin Hamel et moi, sur place, aucune pancarte ce printemps
Martin868 (2024-05-10 19:58:39+00:00): tres bien alors. Si c'est le cas c'est bien, c'était un peu stupide de les interdire a cet endroit, pour autant que les vélos se pansent pas au Tour de France en y passant.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-05-10 20:02:07+00:00): J'ai ajouté une note pour expliquer qu'il a des risques de se faire arrêter par les résidents.
tekim (2024-05-10 14:33:30+00:00): reverting fake edit - not a beach

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151149958
Evegance (2025-07-15 19:07:14+00:00): tekim racist swine. reverting the reverted edit.
tekim (2024-05-10 14:32:21+00:00): reverting fake edit - not a beach

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151149900
Evegance (2025-07-15 19:11:04+00:00): tekim is not even a local. just an idiot that doesn't know there is a beach there now. fuck off and let a local handle this you fat pig.
Taya_S (2025-07-24 18:13:55+00:00): Hello Evegance, thank you for your report. Please seehttps://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18474
sheikchilli (2024-05-09 21:30:59+00:00): batch 9*
clay_c (2025-02-16 23:53:44+00:00): Hi there 👋

I saw that the operator was changed from "Conrail Shared Assets Operations" to "Consolidated Rail Corporation". Conrail has not existed under that name since 1999, and the remainder of its lines that weren't sold off to other companies are now part of CSAO, a joint subsidiary of NS and CSX. Shouldn't CSAO be the operator here?
RailandSea (2025-02-17 00:07:25+00:00): Technically it’s listed as Consolidated Rail Corporation in the books the only change with the reporting mark as CRCX. Shared assets is more of a nickname. It’s still considered a railroad that’s just owned by the two other railroads
clay_c (2025-02-17 00:14:35+00:00): I only noticed this because railmap.gl was picking up on the different name, ignoring operator:wikidata. It doesn't matter to me which one, but IMO we should choose one name or the other and tag everything accordingly.
RailandSea (2025-02-17 02:35:44+00:00): I agree, I would say go with the official name based on books and other issued documents since it be not different than the other railroads. Like CSX or NS.
totera (2024-08-08 15:16:58+00:00): Il capolinea della navetta in questione non è quello da te inserito, ma è un'altra fermata: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6040520211
Potresti per favore mappare soltanto posti che conosci personalmente?
mikimapbuilder (2024-05-13 06:31:03+00:00): Building is oversized
Strubbl (2024-05-10 13:26:52+00:00): Hi, changing the address of this point does not move it to the new address. What is in this shop now? Is it vacant?

It is already mapped at the new location: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/185543052
Darquise (2024-05-11 21:06:07+00:00): I am very sorry for the inconvenience I was using gnome maps and didn't know how to exactly handle this situation. I would delete the old store since its new location is already present in the DB.
Strubbl (2024-05-12 06:36:47+00:00): Hi, no problem. I would not want to delete that node, because the history is of that store is gone then (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history). Usually, when the story is empty now and no new shop is in there, the lifecycle prefix disused:*=* could be used. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
Then, this node can easily be reused, when a new shop uses this location. Also, apps like StreetComplete regularly ask for vacant shops, if there is already something new in.

I have done this setting to disused with changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151210953
Strubbl (2024-05-10 13:23:38+00:00): Hi, i removed your bus station as it was already mapped with https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/472502174
Minh Nguyen (2024-05-21 17:34:49+00:00): Hi, did you intend to mark NW 31st Ave. as being closed to all traffic between the Chevron and water treatment facility? I’m a bit puzzled as to how StreetComplete’s lane count quest wound up making that change.
ivanbranco (2024-05-10 19:50:13+00:00): Hi cridoure,

why did you delete the service road? Seems visibile from aerial imagery.
cridoure (2024-05-27 18:39:34+00:00): Because I used the "reverter_plugin" because of vandalism done on purpose by another user (that user makes some good edits and some bad edits so it is very difficult to undone only the bad edits). I am going to map them.
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-10 00:02:11+00:00): When adding buildings or other objects that have 90 degree/right angle corners, press "Q" to square and right the corners.
Hufkratzer (2024-05-10 21:16:38+00:00): Hi,
You have removed the building tag from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/273996583, Now it is no longer rendered as a building. Isn't it a building? The tag leisure=horse_riding should be used for the whole facility and not for some building, compare
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhorse_riding
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/442937025
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8755586716
Dalfsenaartje (2024-05-13 07:03:54+00:00): Yes correct, building is back!
BCNorwich (2024-05-10 05:33:02+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

OSM maps what can be verified. These deleted features can be clearly verified from available imagery. Thus I've reinstated them.

Because a property is private does not necessitate it's removal from OSM. Most property in the UK is private and is mapped.

Regards Bernard.
rskedgell (2024-05-10 05:35:12+00:00): Reverted. The features also exist on numerous sources of aerial imagery and other maps, from which you have no prospect whatsoever of having them removed.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
VLD549 (2024-05-16 07:20:55+00:00): Hi, could you explain something, I am confused.
This is the task for me, the one I see:
Validate whether the name tag change from Kerkplein to Diesegem is appropriate.
Your comment is Straatnaam gecorrigeerd: Dijsegem en niet Diesegem

Could you help me out? I'd appreciate it.
Thank you!
bxl-forever (2024-05-16 11:18:29+00:00): @VLD549: Information in the OSM database is public, this is something you can easily figure out by yourself.

You can click on any object edited here and then look at the "View History" link at the bottom.  Take a look at this road, for insatnce: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/30103572/history

As you can see, it was called Kerkplein until version 6 on May 2, when user "Robin On Wheels" changed its name into Diesegem.

The changeset you are commenting created version 7, where ValidDistress changed Diesegem into Dijsegem on May 9.  Even if GRB mentions Diesegem, at least ValidDistress wrote a changeset title that perfectly reflect the changes he made.

To discuss why the name was changed from Kerkplein into something else, you’d better write to the user who did it, i.e. Robin on Wheels.

Even better, if you think the name should not have been changed at all, explain the source you are using so that we can decide which source is the most useful to get the correct name on the map.
VLD549 (2024-05-24 08:25:29+00:00): Thank you.
H4N5-antw (2024-05-10 07:06:23+00:00): Hoe gaat iemand nu bijhouden wanneer dit brugje gereed is?
Zou daarvoor ofwel note open houden of fixme - kan geen van beiden vinden.
Thierry1030 (2024-05-10 07:39:23+00:00): de osm-community in België is nogal fietsgeoriënteerd ... ik twijfel er geen seconde aan dat deze fietsbrug pico bello gemapt zal zijn tegen het moment dat ze klaar zal zijn ... en ik vermoed dat uw bijdrage daarin niet miniem zal zijn ... ;-) akkoord? ps: ik heb trouwens al een fixme toegevoegd om de geometrie aan te passen
H4N5-antw (2024-05-10 09:06:17+00:00): Dank voor de opvolging, met de kasseitjes https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1180021339333199 in 't achterhoofd zal ik daar niet rap weer komen, zie sinds 1 feb'22 geen andere fietsers in die buurt, wel enkele wagens op Autostrade; ligt buiten gebied waar lokale TV aandacht heeft, dan is voor mij nootje betere reminder dan fixme om daar toch eens langs te springen - zij het mogelijk aan de andere zijde van de Autostrade.
miluethi (2024-05-11 13:01:55+00:00): Hi Paola, 

Please square out buildings by pressing the "Q" key.

Thank you for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
Xvtn (2024-05-10 17:27:47+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Your edits here look great to me. Thanks for your contribution!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-09 23:40:36+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5569965347

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-07-03 23:18:29+00:00): Naprawione
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 09:37:38+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Thank you for using the latest imagery. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151123023
NeisBot (2024-05-10 10:39:29+00:00): Hi gcfava, welcome to OpenStreetMap!

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's:
https://osm.org/way/809390765
https://osm.org/way/620774863

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 (2024-05-11 14:35:49+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151189408
tekim (2024-05-10 14:26:36+00:00): reverting fake edit - not a park

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151149586
tekim (2024-05-10 14:25:43+00:00): reverting fake edit - not a park

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151149535
NeisBot (2024-05-10 10:39:30+00:00): Hi gcfava, welcome to OpenStreetMap!

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/1281320951

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
tekim (2024-05-11 14:09:28+00:00): reverting fake beach

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151188210
Fizzie-DWG (2024-07-02 00:16:34+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153433416
Supaplex (2024-05-10 02:08:05+00:00): 可以修正既有的範圍即可，編輯器都能新增點，移動點功能
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151124036
Polilogas (2024-05-10 01:19:43+00:00): My gf lives there, I've been there many times.
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 09:35:13+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/151124089
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 09:33:41+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. But could you connect those paths. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151124222
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-10 02:05:09+00:00): Do not partially overlap areas.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151124246
ZLima12 (2024-06-17 19:21:39+00:00): Hi,

It looks like you're marking roads as trunk simply because they're divided. Can you confirm that this is the case? 

Physical characteristics should have no impact on the classification of a road, except for motorways. If a road is not quite a motorway, but is still very upgraded, it might deserve expressway=yes, but not necessarily highway=trunk. If the road is divided but still has a lot of access (e.g. driveways into shopping areas), it probably doesn't deserve expressway=yes either. You may however tag these as dual_carriageway=yes to mark this feature.

For more information on road classification tagging, please consult these pages:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/TMP-Proposal:_New_York/Highway_Classification

Please let me know if you have any questions, and I'll be happy to help as best I can.

Best,
John
FlowerHillPerson (2024-06-17 19:37:44+00:00): Hi John,

Yes, I can confirm this is the case. Personally I am of the opinion "trunk" is more appropriate after having previously viewed those pages and having traveled this tretch of road many times over the years, but you make very good points and support that argument. Perhaps those would be better for this stretch of NY 24 than "trunk". I may not get to it today, but I will make the changes to this stretch of NY 24 ASAP (you are welcome to, as well if you'd prefer).

Best,
FHP
ZLima12 (2024-06-17 21:40:10+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for getting back so quickly. Just by looking at the map (I don't drive around here very often), I could see an argument for the road being trunk between the Meadowbrook and the Bethpage, since it potentially could offer a good connecting route between a number of motorways.

What I'm really trying to go after is roads that break this rule of the classification guidance:

The set of roads tagged highway=motorway or highway=trunk should collectively form a coherent network of interconnected roads, without dangling spurs or "islands" of disconnected roads.

So in this case, the western end of any potential trunk section should be the Meadowbrook, rather than the point where the road becomes divided. Generally speaking though, the "islands" (a trunk segment that never connects to a trunk or motorway) should basically always be avoided. A spur (a segment that begins at a trunk/motorway and never connects to another one) is sometimes justified (e.g. Nicolls Road, William Floyd Parkway), but they should be chosen carefully. In those two cases, there isn't really much farther to go before you hit the shore, so it makes sense.

I appreciate your work and your insights on the map, and I invite you to join the OSMUS Slack, so your voice can be heard in the community. We want to reach a consensus, rather than have people reverting each other's edits. If you decide to join, come join #local-newyorkstate and #highway-classification, where these topics are often discussed.

Thanks,
John
citrula (2024-05-10 05:31:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM, thanks for your contribution
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151124701
felipeeugenio (2024-05-10 12:29:54+00:00): Hola Andrés No sé qué trataste de hacer en la plaza, pero te pido por favor entender los conceptos antes de aplicarlos.

La plaza es solo una. No hay para quú hacer relaciones.

Otra cosa totalmente distinta es si hay una plataforma peatonal con pedazos de pasto dentro.

pero al mazclarlo todo, lo que estás diciendo es que hay partes de pasto que no forman parte de la plaza. (inner)

Voy a ver en la tarde para arreglarlo. saludos
Rakkka (2025-12-28 22:27:06+00:00): 　日本橋にある細い道路の ウェイ: 219908750 などですが、highway=service は「特定施設へのアクセス道路」なので、通り抜けできる道路には使わないと思われます。residential が適切だと思いますがいかがでしょうか。
　道路の細さを書き込みたい場合は、width や lanes で指定するようです。
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-10 03:03:40+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Profesora Maksymiliana Hubera":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892675884
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892675885

"Profesora Doktora Mieczysława Michałowicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676046

"Papieża Jana Pawła II":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676153
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676154
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676155
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676156

"Eichendorffa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676174

"Księdza Biskupa Franciszka Musiela":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676535
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676536

"Sosnowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676572

"Plac Rynek":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676632
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676633

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
yelisey90 (2024-05-10 12:22:07+00:00): *Tower?
tuan_gsm (2024-10-11 10:53:59+00:00): Cho mình hỏi là đoạn này có quay đầu được không? ::))
Taya_S (2024-05-10 04:40:12+00:00): Reverted. This is not the sort of information that can or should be mapped in OSM

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151126406
jtracey (2024-05-10 04:16:12+00:00): Resloves https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4238133
gormur (2024-08-04 11:41:59+00:00): Hi
Seems like you attempted to name a few streams (Quebrada?) but unfortunatley you put the name in the "natural" tag instead. 
Have a look here f.ex: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/natural#values
Would you mind fixing it? Thanks! :)
JLOSM (2024-08-04 15:15:17+00:00): Hola,
Gracias por avisar. Ya quedaron corregidos.
Supaplex (2024-06-09 08:43:54+00:00): 能否解釋建國快有四個道路片段被加上lit=no，應該都有充足照明才對
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151126848
habi (2025-12-02 09:07:37+00:00): Ciao Mathias
Du hast hier deinen Betrieb von der Bleichenmattstrasse in den Park zwischen Graben und Kasinostrasse verschoben.
Das erscheint wie in https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5075946 bemerkt wenig sinnvoll.
Zusätzlich stimmt die TLD des Namens und der Mailadresse nicht mit der Webseite überein.
Was stimmt nun genau?
Gruss aus Bern,
habi
woodpeck (2025-12-02 22:50:35+00:00): Ich habe den POI gelöscht. OSM ist kein Dienstleister-Verzeichnis, und schon gar nicht eines für Dienstleister ohne konkrete und korrekte Adresse.
logus2 (2024-07-20 20:46:12+00:00): Low quality AI data is banned from Hanoi and are not welcomed by the Vietnamese mapping community. Please refrain from importing AI data without due diligence, if you do so again you will be reported to the Data Working Group by the community.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/154195464
Madi-Red (2024-07-23 08:52:42+00:00): Hi Logus2, 

Thank you for reverting the changesets. I referred to the Esri World Imagery in Hanoi. I would like to inform you that there is no AI intervention and all my changes uploaded manually by digitizing the building using JOSM Editor.
sheldonelectric (2025-04-13 19:52:54+00:00): @ika-chan! here you have a concrete example where transliteration was a bad idea. Your transliteration was IVI but the official int_name is HBH according to their website https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2786684222 if somebody was looking for HBH (with latin characters) the search would give no results. I corrected the entire A8 according to the official data.
ika-chan! (2025-04-14 07:15:58+00:00): I think OASA telematics is wrong on that one, because neither the sign or ISO 843 transliterates "ΗΒΗ" to "HBH". ISO 843 transliterates to "IVI" while the sign on the ground says "IBI", which I think is a proofreading error.
sheldonelectric (2025-04-14 19:50:08+00:00): I'm not sure what you mean "on the ground" because the bus stop signs only have hellenic alphabet.... I'm using OASA telematics because you prompted me to!
ika-chan! (2025-04-14 20:08:17+00:00): The bus stop in question has the new telematics sign with a transliteration under the display: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=155682059852880&lat=38.047122179108&lng=23.807580644422&z=17&focus=photo&x=0.9192711115323823&y=0.4626969546625346&zoom=2.9381096328510843
sheldonelectric (2025-04-15 10:46:12+00:00): I see. So we're supposed to make a survey for each and every bus stop? There's still a lot of bus routes which have changed after they were put on osm. I cannot ride all these buses and survey the spelling of the stops. For now I'd rather just copy telematics, and copy them again later, when they fix their typos...
nikospag (2025-04-15 15:11:07+00:00): No you dont need a survey.
We ALWAYS follow ISO 843 for transliteration.
sheldonelectric (2025-04-17 12:08:35+00:00): Then feel free to correct what I copy/pasted from the official website.
mikimapbuilder (2024-05-13 06:38:36+00:00): Removed descriptive name
VG391KZH0W (2024-05-15 08:07:42+00:00): done
Marek-M (2024-05-31 19:31:45+00:00): Bałdowska z Nowowiejską została nieprawidłowo podzielona na oddzielne linie. Brak fizycznego podziału jezdni to w OSM jest jedna linia. Poprawiłem tutaj: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=152095915

PS: Edytując to skrzyżowanie popsułeś kilka relacji autobusowych przebiegających tymi drogami. Będę je teraz naprawiał.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-10 06:20:27+00:00): 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/11892873400

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Metzor (2024-05-12 11:46:11+00:00): Hallo Marc!

Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap und schön, dass du hilfst, die Daten zu verbessern!

Hier können wir uns über Änderungen austauschen und uns gegenseitig Tipps geben.

Bei dieser Änderung hast du einige Wege zerteilt. Das ist richtig, wenn die Abschnitte unterschiedliche Attribute kriegen, z.B. unterschiedliche Geschwindigkeitsbehrenzungen. Stichprobenmäßig sieht es gut aus, was du gemacht hast. Danke :-)

Bei zwei Abschnitten hast du aber über das bestehende Straßenstück noch ein zweites gemalt - oder der iD-Editor hat etwas komische gemacht.

Z.B. hier:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1281360401/history#map=19/48.05144/7.72300
ist das gleiche Stück wie hier:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1281360825/history#map=19/48.05147/7.72293

Optisch sieht es auf der Karte genau gleich aus, die Nummern für den Pfad sind aber unterschiedlich.

Man müsste den überflüssigen Weg wieder löschen - am besten den, der zu keiner Relation gehört.
Mehr zu Relationen findest du im wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Einf%C3%BChrung_Relationen

Zwei Pfade übereinander bringen das Wegerouting durcheinander. BrouterSuspects, eines der Qualitätssicherungstools, hat mich daher auf deine Änderung aufmerksam gemacht.

Wenn dir das zu kompliziert ist, kann ich es reparieren. Gib mir einfach Bescheid!

Viele Grüße
Metzor
Metzor (2024-05-19 07:49:29+00:00): Ich habe es repariert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151522200