piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Wanderer2000 (2026-03-30 08:22:44+00:00): Dag Taurus,

over het gebruik van designated, op een highway=cycleway is bicycle=designated overbodig, uit cycleway blijkt immers al dat het voor fietsers is. foot=designated zou dan ook foot=yes moeten zijn, want het is geen voetpad.

Bij paden zonder G7 of G11 bord kun je m.i. highway=path beter laten staan en de access taggen met foot=yes, bicycle=yes etc.

Kijk je er nog een keer naar?
Taurus3 (2026-03-30 17:50:24+00:00): Ja, heb het aangepast.
highbuilder (2026-04-04 14:29:18+00:00): Super, vielen Dank, ich hab die Öffnungzeiten ergänzt
Warin61 (2026-03-30 22:42:00+00:00): HI,
Way 675830594 (forest) crosses it self. 
See red bits in https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=176.15680&lat=-38.52285&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Make it a multipolygon relation - one outer way and one inner way?
hsc666 (2026-03-30 15:03:24+00:00): Du hast hier eine physische Begrenzung der maximalen Breite von 5m eingetragen. Der Weg ist selbst nur 3m breit. Das macht so wohl keinen Sinn. Was ist da wirklich vor Ort?
N3M3S1Spy (2026-03-30 15:06:18+00:00): Ich konnte nur schwer abschätzen wie breit das wirklich ist. Für mich war es zwischen 3 und 5. Habe mich dann für 5 entschieden.
hsc666 (2026-03-30 15:14:29+00:00): Aber was ist 5 (m)? Die Angabe maxwidth:physical ist im Zusammenhang mit einem Poller für die maximale Breite, mit der die Barriere passiert werden kann. Also mal angenommen der Weg ist 3 m (so sieht es im Luftbild aus) und da steht nur ein Poller (das weiß ich nicht) und der Poller steht in der Mitte des Weges - dann ist die Wahrscheinlichkeit hoch, dass alles, was breiter als 1,5 m den Weg an dieser Stelle nicht benutzen kann. Falls Du die Breite des Weges angeben wolltest, wäre "width" der richtige Schlüssel gewesen.
N3M3S1Spy (2026-03-30 15:42:54+00:00): Änderung wurde rückgängig gemacht und wird in Kürze nochmals genau von mir überprüft, dazu wird Kamera Messung genutzt von der Offiziell unterstützten App StreetMeasure. Ich bitte vielmals um Entschuldigung!
hsc666 (2026-03-30 16:00:46+00:00): 👍
N3M3S1Spy (2026-03-30 16:15:00+00:00): Ich konnte dem Thema auf den Grund gehen. In der App wird gefragt: "Was ist die breiteste Lücke, durch die man hier durch kommt?" Da der Weg breiter anfängt sind dort 3 Poller Platziert. Er verengt sich aber in kurzer Zeit auf die 3 Meter die aktuell eingetragen sind. Jetzt zu meiner Frage: Der Breiteste Punkt sind 4-5 Meter (auch wenn Poller im weg) im laufe des Weges sind es aber die 3 Meter. Was soll nun eingetragenen werden?
hsc666 (2026-03-30 18:11:16+00:00): Es geht darum, wie breit etwas maximal sein darf, um an den Pollern vorbeizukommen/vorbeizufahren. Wenn da, wo die drei Poller stehen, der Weg 5 m breit ist, dürfte die maximale Breite ca. 1,20 m sein, falls die Poller gleichmäßig verteilt sind. Wie breit oder schmal der Weg vor oder hinter den Pollern ist, spielt  für die Angabe maxwidth:physical am Node der Poller keine Rolle. Wenn das drei Poller sind, kannst Du aber z.B. noch die Anzahl hinzufügen, das wäre dann count=3. Ob das mit SC geht, weiß ich nicht. Evtl. wäre es dann besser, einen "richtigen" Editor zu nehmen.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:01:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183960337, 183960380, 183960341, 183960408, 183960275, 183960389, 183960221, 183960319, 183960306, 183960280, 183960292, 183960414, 183960349, 183960228, 183960252, 183960358, 183960240, 183960299, 183960267, 183960399, 183960370, 183960328, 183960364 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
NeisBot (2026-03-30 07:03:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13690509015 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Roofing contractor"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-03-30 10:33:10+00:00): 🕵 The changeset tags appear to reference Google as a data source.

Please note that using Google Maps, Google Street View, or similar Google services as a mapping source is not allowed in OpenStreetMap due to license restrictions.

More information: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google

If the data in this changeset was derived from Google or another incompatible source, the edits may need to be reverted.

If this is a misunderstanding and the data was collected from permitted sources (e.g. local survey, Bing imagery, local knowledge, etc.), please clarify in a reply.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-17 01:43:39+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with advertising/malformed tags and explicit source=* of Google Maps, which is not allowed by both OSM and Google policies (see https://osm.wiki/Google ), in changeset 184205145

https://osm.org/changeset/184205145
habi (2026-03-30 07:06:39+00:00): No, https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5225252
intillama (2026-04-01 16:14:10+00:00): Es ist auch kein Baumstumpf mehr dort, der wurde weggefräst.
habi (2026-03-30 07:19:46+00:00): Nein, https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5225155 erledigt...
VictorIE (2026-04-01 10:26:28+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/350933651/history

highway=residential is normally used for roads that are public and serve multiple properties.

highway=service and service=driveway is normally used for single properties or small groups of related properties.
DaveF (2026-03-31 12:20:25+00:00): Why did you delete the name & operator:website tags?
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 12:47:26+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180712275
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:08:54+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
StC (2026-05-23 11:20:22+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
Dezza (2026-03-30 12:09:51+00:00): Are you sure?

The Lancaster area code is +44 1524. +44 151 is a Liverpool area code.
Dezza (2026-03-30 12:14:25+00:00): Looks like the original was missing a digit, but that is from a source that we can't use on OSM. I've added a note to resurvey the phone number in person.
confusedbuffalo (2026-03-30 17:36:01+00:00): Ah apologies, I slipped up there. I've removed the incorrect number in the meantime
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-05-17 14:41:58+00:00): Olá, carlosassuncao92

Tudo bem?

Gostaria de entender a inclusão de etiquetas que não existem na Wiki OSM, como "smoking:conditional=*" e outras. Poderia explicar, por gentileza?
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-05-17 14:50:37+00:00): Também o valor para população está defasado, somos desde o último Censo 2022, 203.080.756 pessoas, fonte: https://censo2022.ibge.gov.br/panorama/?localidade=BR
Data seria 2022 e a fonte é IBGE. O valor de 2018 que está na feição é do Banco Mundial. Poderia me ajudar a atualizar a população? Grata desde já.
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-05-17 14:54:05+00:00): Vi agora que a Wikidata tem um valor para 2025, mas é uma estimativa: 213.421.037. Fonte: UOL (https://noticias.uol.com.br/cotidiano/ultimas-noticias/2025/08/28/ibge-brasil-tem-2134-milhoes-de-habitantes-em-2025.htm), mas não encontrei esta informação no portal do IBGE (olhei rapidamente).
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-06-13 03:49:54+00:00): Desculpe a demora, só via sua mensagem hoje, por conta de muitas informações na caixa de emails.
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-06-13 03:53:15+00:00): É um verdadeiro inferno por aqui, pois no site do IBGE está com os dados do Censo de 2022, mas este valor foi revisto, o orgão oficial publicou um valor retificado, mas ele não está na página oficial... Oh, boy...  Esta estimativa é do próprio IBGE, mas não está claro no portal institucional e é baseada em amostragem (ou seja, não foi recalculado, a aprtir dos resultados do universo do Censo 2022...). 
Talvez tenha sido o pior Censo de todos os tempos.
Raquel Dezidério Souto (2026-06-13 03:55:00+00:00): Na verdade, estou mais curiosa sobre a etiqueta sobre fumantes ( "smoking:conditional=*") pois as iodiossincrasias do IBGE, já conheço....
vectorial8192 (2026-04-02 08:45:01+00:00): passing by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/853595683 looks like should be `oneway=yes`
Kovoschiz (2026-04-02 12:38:49+00:00): See this is why `oneway=yes` can always be added to `junction=roundabout`
vectorial8192 (2026-04-02 13:51:05+00:00): Sounds like a good rule to e.g. add to iD editor.
joost schouppe (2026-04-27 13:57:49+00:00): Voor de ingang van de spoed is er https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Demergency_ward_entrance, da's beter dan "ambulance garage" neem ik aan. Je kan er nog entrance=yes aan toevoegen. Eventueel ook onderscheid tussen toegang voor voetgangers en voertuigen aanduiden
rhhs (2026-04-05 17:24:29+00:00): See https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5235749 and nearby notes: please, when you want to map individual trees, make sure you map all of them, correctly (some green blobs on an image are shrubs, some are dead trees), or not at all. Better not to map something than to map it wrong... I deleted the trees in the areas where they were incompletely mapped.
felipeeugenio (2026-03-30 12:04:46+00:00): Hola. Los cambios de categorías de caminos por favor discutirlos con la comunidad. Estos no corresponden a unclassified.
saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180616593
felipeeugenio (2026-03-30 11:59:14+00:00): Hola. Buenvenido a la comunidad OSM Chile. gracias por sus ediciones.

Lamentablemente, básicamente cada elemento que agregó lo hizo con errores. Acabamos de terminar de corregirlos. No es grave, pero por favor ingresar al chat de la comunidad en el link en mi perfil o instruirse con la wiki del proyecto. Es normal esto en quienes empiezan y no es grave, pero hay que dedicarle tiempo.

gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180616698
Santi2222 (2026-03-30 09:17:26+00:00): Please make sure that the names you add are spelled correctly (it's Peña María, not Peña Maria)
Huldega (2026-03-30 09:43:23+00:00): I just copied what was there before. Feel free to make it better.
Kovoschiz (2026-03-30 12:18:29+00:00): You made conflicting layers. Slip roads passing below `layer=2` IEC is `layer=1`
Kovoschiz (2026-03-30 12:23:04+00:00): Slip roads `=bridge` should not be drawn parallel. It should follow joints, with perpendicular ends. Except perhaps eastbound expansion, but it's stitched together already, and jointless above. 
It's exactly difficult to define what's a `=bridge` for an elevated road with many slip roads. The `layer=` is worse enough. (They shouldn't suddenly end at the `=coastline` either)
felipeeugenio (2026-03-31 15:00:59+00:00): That is a private service road. regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180617377
MountChorolque (2026-04-01 15:56:42+00:00): Hi felipeeugenio,
Thank you for reaching out, I will keep that in mind and use the proper highway and access tags next time. I will defer to the edits you made.
felipeeugenio (2026-04-01 18:07:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for the attitude. I you need something, please contact me.
regards
Yog Sot (2026-03-30 10:58:13+00:00): było by łatwiej jak bys zaczynał i konczył w JOSM jak już zrobiłes iles takich edycji, bo akualnie pozostawiłeś tą geometrie bez jej dostosowania i robi troche smietnik
literan (2026-03-30 19:00:35+00:00): там нет таких гигантских парковок с двух сторон дороги https://yandex.com/maps/-/CPbynOK7

тяп-ляп отрисовка не нужна, мы никуда не спешим. Повторите еще раз, аккуратно, или не беритесь
literan (2026-03-30 19:01:28+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/52456628 здесь зачем тег buiding удалили? здание никуда не девалось
zima360 (2026-03-31 06:54:10+00:00): С парковками буду скромнее. Пройдусь на днях для проверки текущих реалий. Зачем удалили то, что было правильно? Например тут https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/55.803687/37.453471 .
Building превратился disused:building=school
literan (2026-03-31 07:14:56+00:00): удалил потому что нет здесь https://yandex.com/maps/-/CPbJQOpn такой гигантской парковки, есть ряд вдоль дворового проезда. 

> Building превратился disused:building=school

не знаю, что там у вас куда превратилось, вы удалили со здания тег building, так делать нельзя

Еще раз: тяп-ляп рисовать не надо, мы никуда не спешим. Я сейчас перерисую так, как это должно быть, посмотрите
Negreheb (2026-03-30 23:20:38+00:00): Servus, kann es sein, dass dir hier ein Fehler passiert ist? Erstens ist das - soweit ich das kontrollieren kann "Liebtetig" und nicht "Leinig" und das sollte addr:place sein, nicht addr:street :)
eggie (2026-03-30 09:11:35+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
gs3§zba (2026-04-30 13:54:31+00:00): Warum genau hast du https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1462882410 gelöscht?
gs3§zba (2026-05-01 05:03:02+00:00): Jetzt haben wir da eine krasse Lücke im Straßennetz. War wohl ein Kollateralschaden. Grundsätzlich finde ich es ja gut, wenn du unzulässige Changesets revertierst. Weitere Löschungen von ganzen Straßen sehe ich nicht an deinem Changeset. Ich werde die Straße mal wiederherstellen.
Rainero (2026-05-01 05:58:47+00:00): Danke fürs Wiederherstellen! Der User hatte das Wegstück in dem Änderungssatz neu angelegt, daher hat der Revert es gelöscht. Wenn er den einen Weg aufgeteilt hätte, müsste ein angrenzender Weg den User in der Historie haben, was aber nicht der Fall ist. Was auch immer da vorher war, danke für deine Reparatur.
eggie (2026-03-30 09:12:35+00:00): Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de al bestaande adresnode.
MVG
eggie
Sergei Amuzinski (2026-03-30 08:44:17+00:00): *PNOA Spain
NeisBot (2026-03-30 08:51:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13690725212 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Septic tank facility"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-07 10:33:09+00:00): 🚫 Text removed by https://osm.org/changeset/180652954
woodpeck (2026-03-31 12:10:47+00:00): Dear Municipality_of_Tuzi_Official, this undiscussed and buggy import has been reverted. You must discuss any data imports with the community in advance. Had you done this, the community would have alerted you to many problems with your plan, such as duplicating existing roads, or that we don't want a "FID" attribute in OSM, or a source attribute on every object, or a "name_en" that simply duplicates the local name. Please follow our rules on imports https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import if you want to import data into OSM.
ajmat (2026-03-31 06:14:31+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 180656680
NeisBot (2026-03-30 09:09:39+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 18 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/157117182 v4 | 17 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/417567400 v5

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=180618991
iandees (2026-03-30 13:40:39+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2608203897, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/417567400 were 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/180630920, 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!
Ltrlg (2026-04-04 07:05:49+00:00): Il ne faut pas supprimer le bâtiment quand on ajoute un tunnel=building_passage. Par contre il faut attacher les extrémités aux points d’entrée/sortie sur le contour du bâtiment.
mw014 (2026-04-04 07:26:19+00:00): Ah ok je prends note
ManuelB701 (2026-03-31 05:08:13+00:00): amenity=parking inside amenity=parking areas? This is redundant and using them for only highlighting is a type of tagging for the render because it serves no purpose other then to make the rendering prettier while also implying there's more to it than there is in reality.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:06:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
Udarian (2026-03-30 19:16:36+00:00): Within several aerial imagery available in iD this surveillance node is within the road area, this makes its current position highly unlikely, please double check its position and fix it.

Happy mapping,
Udar.
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 12:46:31+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180665598
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:10:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
NeisBot (2026-03-30 10:03:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/681891258 v4

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Gaming platform office"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-04-07 10:33:11+00:00): 🚫 Text removed by https://osm.org/changeset/180718300
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 12:45:37+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180658831
007Transformer (2026-04-01 04:18:02+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:180700334
AAA8111 (2026-04-01 07:44:57+00:00): Detta finns ej kvar, varför ändrar du tillbaka? Jag bor i Kiruna.
007Transformer (2026-05-28 12:07:33+00:00): Hi AAA8111,
Thank you for reaching out. I understand your concern. I will be more careful while editing onwards.
NeisBot (2026-03-30 10:16:16+00:00): 🌍 Welcome to OSM, Jim_Gk.
Thanks for contributing!

To make collaboration easier and help others understand your edits, it’s best to add a short description of the changes you made. Clear comments help the community follow your work and provide better feedback. You can find tips on writing good comments here[1].

✅ Here is a sample comment based on your map edits: "Added buildings"
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment
nuitsfauves (2026-04-29 18:12:36+00:00): Bonjour Stéphanie ! C'est cool de voir que l'office du tourisme cartographie ses pistes cyclables :) 
J'ai juste une question : cette piste cyclable sur la rue de l'abbaye ne rejoint pas celle de la route de la vieille église ? Elles ont l'air très proches. 
Et par ailleurs, si cette même piste traverse la rue, il faudrait ajouter un point pour les relier (un "nœud"). 
Bonne journée !
ivanbranco (2026-04-01 14:05:49+00:00): Ciao, hai modificato un minimarket in un arco cerimoniale giapponese. Presumo un errore.

Hai poi aggiunto un kebab, senza indicare il tipo di negozio e senza nome, ma aggiungendo il nome locale "pizzeria e Kebab.mister OMAR TORINO VIA PAOLO VERONESE 340", che mi sembra improbabile.
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:02:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183960337, 183960380, 183960341, 183960408, 183960275, 183960389, 183960221, 183960319, 183960306, 183960280, 183960292, 183960414, 183960349, 183960228, 183960252, 183960358, 183960240, 183960299, 183960267, 183960399, 183960370, 183960328, 183960364 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
yelisey90 (2026-04-24 13:27:48+00:00): And what prevents access on foot, bicycle & horses, I wonder?
yelisey90 (2026-05-12 20:20:47+00:00): reverted - no reason stated for private access

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182572893
mueschel (2026-04-04 13:14:56+00:00): Hallo,
dieser Weg hat ein seltsames Tag, schaust du mal nach?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1494239768
user_3716049 (2026-04-04 17:29:45+00:00): HHi mueschel,
danke für deinen Hinweis, hab's soeben gefixt.
NeisBot (2026-03-30 10:36:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13690970521 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Plumbing company"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-04-07 16:33:07+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/181009616
(Clean up leftovers from previous edits)
Kauna (2026-03-30 12:35:59+00:00): Danke, muss mich noch ein wenig reinfuchsen in den Editor
silversurfer83 (2026-03-30 19:37:58+00:00): Hi

in das Feld website=* soll *nur* eine Adresse eingetragen werden, die auch genau für das Objekt ist. Bitte *keine* Startseite eines Wandervereins für einen Parkplatz nutzen. Habe ich wieder entfernt.

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180623248
Niederpruem (2026-04-02 15:24:03+00:00): Dieser Wanderverein ist speziell für diesen Parkplatz zuständig, da er hier für die Wanderwege A3 und A4 zuständig ist. Zur Verdeutlichung habe ich nun eine genauere Webseite von diesem Wanderverein eingefügt.