piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
fortera_au (2025-08-01 23:47:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 169841222, 169841249, 169841240, 169841260, 169841200, 169841256, 169841237, 169841215, 169841214, 169841228, 169841245, 169841232 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source
Cortix (2025-09-16 12:42:21+00:00): SU IGM 25:000 non è riportata
NeisBot (2025-07-15 08:21:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 06:04:07+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169090503
user_5359 (2025-07-18 10:31:04+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/164436907. What is the mean of the tag nip = 5871711304? Did you mean ref:nip?
Allroads (2025-07-19 00:12:44+00:00): Hoi,

Je hebt nu de weg ingekort.
Binnen OSM tekenen we in tot over het erf, met highway=service service=driveway. 
Kijk je naar de BGT ingetekend door de Gemeente, dan zal dat een openbare weg zijn. Plaats wegnaam in de BGT vastgelegd en als openbare tuimte vermeld in de BAG  https://app.pdok.nl/viewer/#x=225364.62&y=519443.47&z=16.0000&background=Luchtfoto&layers=2891cc29-0a79-46d1-8649-287046d621c7;omtrekgerichtevisualisatie;_;1 

De Veiligheidsegio, de brandweer navigeert over wegen met de data van OSM, die vinden het belangrijk dat wegen over het er en verder zijn ingetekend in geval van calamiteiten.

Kijk je naar perceel van de kadastrale kaart, dan zie je waar het wegperceel op houd daar begint de driveway van het erfperceel. Dat is een belangrijke indicatie. Veelal is de gemeente de eigenaar van het wegperceel, of doet het onderhoud. In de wegenlegger staat tot waar, wegvak, verkeersbesluiten genomen moeten worden om wegen af te sluiten voor openbaar verkeer.

Ik pas het aan.

Hoe dichter de weglijn ook over het erf bij de adres node ligt hoe beter wordt er genavigeert. Zo ook de brandweer.

Als er art. 461, Verboden toegang, borden staan dan horen, wij dat graag, dan zetten we access tags op de wegen.

Bij de NDW zie ik wel een een C1 verkeersbord staan. 
https://wegkenmerken.ndw.nu/verkeersborden?identifier=,6.427174954265341,52.65790785024518 wat overeenkomt met de kadastrale einde wegperceel. Of dit een klein bordje is of van officeel formaat, dat weet ik zo niet. Ik neem aan dat men wel wilt, dat er post en pakketjes worden bezorgd. Dat is dan nog een puntje van aandacht.

Groeten Allroads.
Allroads (2025-07-19 00:37:54+00:00): Aanvullend:

Kadastrale kaart
https://app.pdok.nl/viewer/#x=225365.62&y=519465.89&z=14.7048&background=Luchtfoto&layers=97cf6a64-9cfc-4ce6-9741-2db44fd27fca;Perceel;standaard:perceel;1
Brickblock1 (2025-07-16 09:27:18+00:00): Not light rail you seem to not know the area at all and have just blindly decided that it is light rail despite most things being tagged train.
ieguy2 (2025-07-15 08:36:20+00:00): the sign on the street says its going to be closed for 3 months. but can't find it on the city website though
Brickblock1 (2025-07-16 08:25:44+00:00): This isn't a light rail station
Natsu_ (2025-07-15 08:46:53+00:00): 盐田墟地铁站周边路网更新、公共汽车线路M196、M520等更新。
Alliegaytor (2025-07-16 01:06:03+00:00): Hi, are you going to fix the errors in these route relations?

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=pubtrans_routes&lon=145.08072&lat=-37.99143&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.50&overlays=ptv2_routes_invalid%2Cptv2_error_ways%2Cptv2_error_nodes
ieguy2 (2025-07-15 08:49:48+00:00): it follows the outline of the image. but there is also benches.
Brickblock1 (2025-07-16 09:13:22+00:00): This is not light rail
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-09-09 12:14:37+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13001219511/history has maxspeed = 0 that was added in this edit
what maxspeed=0 is supposed to mean? If moving for vehicles (or some of them) is not allowed, then maybe one of access tags should be used and maxspeed=0 is not needed?
VictorIE (2025-11-19 01:20:09+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2429261170/

There is a 50-metre gap in the R368. I suspect it isn't deliberate. :)
Ispeum (2025-07-22 09:23:34+00:00): This might need revert since it breaks buss routes and position of roads is not correct. The changeset also removes foot and bicycle path due to temporary closure which is not correct.
timlu (2025-07-22 09:38:16+00:00): Please fix the bus routes, I think they were wrong anyway because the routes have changed recently. The roads reflect the current situation due to construction work in the area that will continue for a long time (until fall 2026). The bicycle path is removed permanently. Some of the bicycle path will have new routes and some will be permanenly removed, so this is not a temporary closure.  Here is a link to the plan for the area: https://www.nykoping.se/bo-bygga--miljo/vi-utvecklar-nykoping/brandkarr/projektering-ostra-infarten/
Ispeum (2025-07-22 15:31:38+00:00): Yes, I can agree that the buss routes are tearably outdated and can probably be left broken until nyköping gets new buss station. The foot and bicycle path can probably be left deleted until new road is constructed. I can try fix the roundabout to the correct position and size based on newer maps then bing. Will not revert this changeset.
timlu (2025-07-22 15:43:20+00:00): I agree. The foot and bicyclepath along Lennings Väg will be moved about 30 m eastward and will have a slightly different streach and a weird spiral up next to E4. It will probably be ready late 2026. Please change the size of the roundabout. I didn't have any reference material so I draw it free hand. There should also be an edit of the carpark south of the gas station and the heat plant substation (both sides of Gustavsbergsstigen). I think we will have to edit this area a lot in the future since road layout and foot and bike paths change a lot during construction. Please edit is you have better reference material than I have.
Ispeum (2025-07-22 16:39:55+00:00): I have made the fixes: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169303031

(tip: hold shift and click reload to see the newest map in the browser)
Gleb_Artyomenko (2025-07-15 09:02:29+00:00): clarification:road geometry was fixed based on Esri World Imagery
#mapbox_linters
bartgron (2025-07-15 19:25:41+00:00): Witaj, jeśli jest ustalony rodzaj budynku, nie ma potrzeby dodawania go również w formie nazwy
Sylabowy Kot (2025-07-15 20:11:09+00:00): W różnych przypadkach można jak najbardziej dodać przeznaczenie terenu do nazwy, ale to, co tutaj było, to nie jest tego przykładem.

Tutaj można skasować alt_name (na jakiej podstawie jest alternatywna?), by dać name="Spot Name" do landuse=commercial (o ile obejmuje jedynie ten park biurowy), a nazwy A i B wstawić w tagi ref odpowiednich brył.
kadiwa (2025-07-15 15:06:30+00:00): „Mitglieder Toilette“ ist sowieso kein Name. Das ist eine Beschreibung und kann als solche eingetragen werden, falls erwünscht. Als Name aber nicht. (Der Tag dazu wäre "description".)
Reiherhop 2 (2025-07-15 15:21:47+00:00): Mir ist nur wichtig das man auf der Karte erkennt das das keine öffentliche Toilette ist. Nur Mitglieder haben Zugang.

Am Spielplatz fehlt eine öffentliche Toilette und wir möchten keine falsche Hoffnung erzeugen.

Bei uns intern lauten die Namen "Rote Mitglieder Toilette" und "Grüne Mitglieder Toilette" aber die Farbe bringt keinen wirklichen Mehrwert.
pavvv (2025-07-15 14:30:06+00:00): więc jest też podtag do wywalenia
maraf24 (2025-07-15 20:42:41+00:00): Możliwe. Nie pamiętam skąd wziąłem ten poprzedni tag, może był ok?
pavvv (2025-07-15 21:08:51+00:00): Zmieniłeś natural=shrubbery na =grassland, więc shrubbery:density=* też powinno się usunąć.
maro21 (2025-08-06 17:15:53+00:00): To ja dodałem wcześniej [natural=shrubbery]. Ale wtedy rośliny były dopiero sadzonkami i wyglądało to dla mnie na krzewy. Obecnie wyrosły i okazuje się, że to nie są krzewy. Ale trawy też nie. Są tu różne rośliny, także kwiaty, dlatego najbardziej pasuje tutaj ogród.
maraf24 (2025-08-06 18:05:52+00:00): village_green można też dać
fortera_au (2025-08-01 23:47:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 169841222, 169841249, 169841240, 169841260, 169841200, 169841256, 169841237, 169841215, 169841214, 169841228, 169841245, 169841232 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source
literan (2025-07-15 19:13:49+00:00): не слишком ли лихо дворовые проезд пересекает несколько раз контуры стилобата зданий?
dingoy29 (2025-07-16 07:00:06+00:00): Добрый день! По снимкам и панораме видно что есть дорога
literan (2025-07-16 19:15:26+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=55.681358&mlon=37.690398#map=19/55.681358/37.690398&layers=N 

вот здесь дорога в воздухе висит? вылетая за пределы стилобата?
literan (2025-07-16 19:16:05+00:00): пардон, вот здесь: https://osm.org/go/0t2lonc1~?layers=N&m=
dingoy29 (2025-07-17 07:31:01+00:00): Исправила
MarcoR (2025-07-15 12:21:16+00:00): Ciao e benvenuto!

In passato era una pista per modellini radiocomandati ma nel 2024 è stata convertita in pista per biciclette; dovrebbe chiamarsi “Pista ciclopark” oppure “Bike labronica Gymnasium”: https://www.federciclismo.it/scuole/bike-labronica-gymnasium/

Buon mapping,
Marco
citrula (2025-07-15 21:23:41+00:00): Please add the ALPR at the physical location of the camera and not attached to the highway= way.
APneunzehn74 (2025-09-30 20:14:14+00:00): Hello, you've listed a bicycle repair station here. Is the location correct?
CudnovatiKljunas (2025-11-25 11:11:41+00:00): Yes, sorry for the late comment
joost schouppe (2025-07-28 14:32:47+00:00): Has the church here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/113616544 really been completely razed?
user_18023081 (2025-07-31 17:23:41+00:00): No - I'll restore it
user_18023081 (2025-07-31 17:28:14+00:00): osm-revert couldn't restore it so I'll redraw it manually
BPTT (2025-08-17 22:03:11+00:00): Hi there. I don't think this edit worked the way you hoped it would. The direction of the road should match the way it was drawn. You can reverse it using the right click menu or the "v" key. The way it's currently tagged with oneway:bicycle=no means that the map now says riders can salmon this one-way bike lane. Let me know if any of this doesn't make sense or if you want some help!
yelisey90 (2025-07-15 13:18:05+00:00): 👍
gendy54 (2025-08-09 21:21:11+00:00): Bonjour,

Les codes postaux et les noms de commune ne sont pas à rajouter dans OSM. Ils sont déjà déduits de la position de l'objet. En plus ca créée des données doublons, sans parler du risque d'erreur.
Aledu87VisitLimousin (2025-08-09 23:55:56+00:00): Bonjour, alors là je suis embêté parce que ce sont des attributs que j'ai renseigné sur quasiment tous les points que j'ai modifié ces 3 derniers mois, et il y en a un paquet
gendy54 (2025-08-10 09:36:34+00:00): Bonjour,
Y a rien de grave, mais c'est juste qu'il ne faut pas continuer ;)
dknelson9876 (2025-07-22 03:21:58+00:00): Hi dsm, please do not use TIGER as a source for road names in Utah, it is very inconsistent about how it handles them. For more information about our unusual road names and how the local community has settled on handling them check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Utah/Naming_Conventions . If you have any group resources at Mapbox, please make sure this is part of it as this is not the first time I've had to point this out to your team.
_dsm (2025-07-22 10:03:46+00:00): Hello, dknelson9876! Thank you for your feedback. I will take this information into account for future edits in Utah.
Have a great day!
NeisBot (2025-07-15 11:15:47+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 06:03:47+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168994431
Leo Slager (2025-07-15 22:37:28+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Chris Evest (2025-07-17 08:25:45+00:00): If this is the Ridgeway path, I thing that it is called the Highview Track.
TheSwavu (2025-07-18 02:25:02+00:00): Wrong changeset. You may have more luck asking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166964739
user_5359 (2025-07-18 10:44:06+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1414875604. What is the mean of the tag yes=no?
fmc_Mlvln (2025-07-19 11:13:00+00:00): Thank you user_5359 for noticing my mistake and writing me. The correct tag-value combination should be access=no.

I can fix it on monday.

Best regards
fmc_3
user_5359 (2025-07-19 11:25:47+00:00): Done!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-05-28 02:27:49+00:00): Reverted SEO spammer adding many duplicate SEO POIs with many SEO spam/nonsense tags

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183281893
Timmy_Tesseract (2025-09-17 03:55:27+00:00): Hello Alvouch and thank you for your awesome map edits. 

Currently this street has a name and an address tag (usually not needed for streets) with conflicting spelling. Which variant is correct, "S. Clapanao Street" or "S. Calapano Street"?

Have a good day!
Gregory Peony (2025-07-16 22:14:30+00:00): It seems that most footprints you mapped here are valid (visible in imagery) and have been appropriately squared but a significant proportion represent yards. I see no evidence that you used a secondary imagery source; this would I think significantly improve the quality of your mapping especially in this project. Sometimes it is difficult to tell what is a building in this project becasue some have dark roofs and look very similar to yards but cross referencing another imagery source can help A LOT. I wrote a proejct comment detailing how to do this. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168960717
Gregory Peony (2025-07-16 22:20:06+00:00): You correctly replaced some buildings you previously mapped as round with square ones. The shape is more accurate but what you are looking at there is the skeleton/walls of a building under construction. Since it has no roof yet the internal walls may make it seem like multiple buildings but it should be mapped with a single footprint. again cross referencing (older) Bing may help as you migh spot some buildings which were under construction there and have been completed by the capture date of ESRI. Seeing some confirmed examples will help you better interpret the imagery.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168960717
rskedgell (2026-03-10 12:55:07+00:00): Please don't use copyrighted sources for OSM. The End User Licence for FindMyStreet expressly forbids redistribution:
"3.3 This End User Licence does not give the End User the right to sub-license, distribute, sell or otherwise make available the Streets Data to third parties in any form save where expressly permitted in writing by the Licensor, OS and GeoPlace."
https://www.findmystreet.co.uk/terms-of-use#
NeisBot (2025-07-15 12:04:35+00:00): Hi wolf991, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 81% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 5 highway(s)
- 1 natural(s)
- 1 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

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

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168961905
wolf991 (2025-07-15 12:42:05+00:00): They were unintentional for sure and i am ready to fix it, but i don't know how to do it, i wanted to fix a huge area labeled as farmland by deleting some nodes, but as i see i deleted some common nodes to highways... (it's my second day here.... sorry)
pitscheplatsch (2025-07-16 06:26:14+00:00): 👍 Thank you for your map updates.

Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168968961
Frank Peng (2025-12-12 04:10:01+00:00): What is the source for changing this service road to an unclassified road? Does this road seem overclassified?
Frank Peng (2026-01-05 01:39:27+00:00): Changeset reverted because it unnecessarily changed valid service roads and driveways around schools to unclassified roads.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176842322
NeisBot (2025-07-15 12:07:11+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 06:03:07+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169090471
GOwin (2025-07-21 06:02:24+00:00): Thank you! You're doing a good job improve the neighborhood map! 

And welcome to OpenStreetMap. If you're curious to know fellow mappers, check out the channels the local communities maintain: https://osm.org/wiki/PH
Leo Slager (2025-07-15 22:39:13+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Frank Peng (2025-12-12 04:14:13+00:00): I don't think this service road should be tagged as an unclassified road since this road just provides access to a school. Any comments or input on that? Thanks.
Frank Peng (2025-12-16 03:24:07+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175944892
Frank Peng (2025-12-12 04:15:37+00:00): I don't think those service roads should be tagged as unclassified roads since they just provide access to schools. Any comments or input on that? Thanks.
Frank Peng (2025-12-16 03:24:18+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175944892
Leo Slager (2025-07-15 23:01:51+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2025-07-15 23:04:39+00:00): Hallo CityHub,

alle begin is moeilijk.
Door motorvehicle=no op de weg toe te voegen kunnen auto's de weg niet meer gebruiken.

Dat moet dus anders.
Ik heb de weg opgeknipt in 2 delen zodat auto' niet meer kunnen doorrijden.
Frank Peng (2025-12-12 04:18:15+00:00): Maybe those unclassified roads within the parking areas should be tagged as parking aisles? What do you think?
Frank Peng (2025-12-18 00:55:37+00:00): I downgraded those unclassified roads around this school to service roads and parking aisles in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176071866. Please elaborate on why you changed valid service roads and driveways around schools to unclassified roads.
GOwin (2025-07-21 06:29:22+00:00): Thanks! It would be nice to add  a name here.

If you enjoy going out to map things, and you happen to be in Android, you might find this app helpful: https://streetcomplete.app
Frank Peng (2025-12-12 04:21:39+00:00): What is the source for changing those service roads to unclassified roads? Those roads just serve a school. Maybe those roads seem too important to be unclassified roads?
Leo Slager (2025-07-15 22:52:45+00:00): Dag Thom,

Het zit m vaak in de details.

De landuse=construction heb ik verwijderd van de kaart.

Voor de huizen geldt dan
building=construction wijzigen in
building=house
en dus
construction=house verwijderen.

ik pas het even aan.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:26:34+00:00): Maybe those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:24:38+00:00): Maybe those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads.
user_5359 (2025-08-12 15:58:39+00:00): Willkommen bei OSM! Danke für die Ergänzung der Adressen. Aber Adressen haben keinen Namen der aus Straße und HAusnummer besteht.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:27:37+00:00): Maybe those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads!
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:28:28+00:00): Seems like those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads.
Frank Peng (2025-12-18 01:59:26+00:00): Those overclassified roads around this school have been downgraded in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176072651. Those roads don't need to be tagged as unclassified roads.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:32:00+00:00): Seems like those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads. The roads within the parking lots would also be better tagged as highway=service + service=parking_aisle.
Frank Peng (2025-12-18 01:43:10+00:00): Partially reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176072478
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:34:28+00:00): Seems like those roads around this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads!
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:36:28+00:00): Seems like this road serving this school would be better tagged as highway=service rather than an unclassified road.
Frank Peng (2025-12-16 03:39:58+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175986542
amizadealegre (2025-07-20 09:29:01+00:00): Reativar estrada.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:40:33+00:00): Seems like those roads around those schools would be better tagged as highway=service rather than unclassified roads!
Frank Peng (2026-01-05 01:40:10+00:00): Changeset reverted because it unnecessarily changed valid service roads and driveways around schools to unclassified roads.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176842322
fortera_au (2025-07-15 12:31:18+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 167636785, 167640945, 167647408, 167649913, 167650289, 167652602, 167653368, 167654262, 167660246, 167661012, 167661051, 167661130, 167677392, 167678071, 167678731, 167680221, 167680249, 167685613, 167707889, 167708369, 167714760, 167776918, 167899666, 167900243, 167907563, 167915660, 167916053, 167919256, 167920326, 167921751, 167922086, 167923309, 167925083, 167925891, 167927025, 167928951, 167928959.
user_5359 (2025-07-16 12:48:51+00:00): Hello! Did you know the wiki pages https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:bicycle_road%3Dyes, https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key:cyclestreet#United_States? 

Each country probably understands something different by this term, but a further variation is not useful.
rjhale1971 (2025-07-16 16:27:35+00:00): Oh I didn't mean to create a new tag - I meant to do bicycle_road=yes.  I will fix it. Thank you for catching that mistake.
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:42:13+00:00): I don't think this road serving this school is an unclassified road. It would be more suitable to tag this road as highway=service.
Frank Peng (2025-12-16 03:35:58+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175986481
Frank Peng (2025-12-14 06:43:05+00:00): Seems like this road would be better tagged as highway=service rather than an unclassified road.