piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Tsur Halamish (2025-04-21 19:48:55+00:00): Thank you. The fields in 10005504317 are better. However, note that:
1. The location of 10005504317  is a few meters north of the actual sculptor.  You can see the exact location in several different aerial photos. Currntly its inside a bush and I suggest you move it a bit south.
2. As a sculpture It will not be presented in Israel Hiking map and making it a tourist attraction is also a valid POI type, which will be shown.
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 05:52:01+00:00): (2) is called "tagging for a renderer" - it is bad practice. You shouldn't tag according to what looks good in some map. Please read here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Instead, you can contact the Israel Hiking Map people about presenting sculptures on their map. They're very responsive.
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 05:55:27+00:00): You can open an issue here: https://github.com/IsraelHikingMap/VectorMap/issues

If you don't have a Github account,  you can try contacting Zstadler or HarelM: 

Zstadler: https://www.openstreetmap.org/messages/new/zstadler

HarelM: https://www.openstreetmap.org/messages/new/Harel%20M
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 06:01:02+00:00): (1) it does seem pretty far in this case,

But generally, please be aware that aerial photos have a tendency to be misaligned by a few meters very often. So, you should move things only they're significantly off, or only if you verified by other means too, such as GPS.
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 06:15:00+00:00): I opened an Issue for Israel Hiking Map:

https://github.com/IsraelHikingMap/VectorMap/issues/166
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 08:55:11+00:00): נשמע שהראל מסכים שצריך להתחשב בפסלים ב-IHM, ניתן לעקוב אחרי הדיון בלינק למעלה
SafwatHalaby (2025-04-22 09:48:59+00:00): שמח לבשר שעכשיו IHM גם מציג פסלים
Dindia (2025-04-22 12:18:09+00:00): ואו! זה היה תיקון מהיר!
כל הכבוד!

הזזתי את הפסל, בדקתי הקלטת גפס שלי
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-01-14 02:23:56+00:00): jak tylko planowane to nie powinno to być w OSM
Tim-Boi (2026-03-10 18:53:10+00:00): Je ne comprends pas la délimitation entre les régions Beaujolais et Mâconnais, elle semble être située trop au nord. Peut-on en discuter?
Penegal (2026-03-11 16:55:02+00:00): Bonjour, Tim-Boi.

Là, tout de suite, il faudrait que je reprenne les éléments que j’avais sous les yeux il y a plus d’un an et que je les analyse de nouveau pour répondre à ta question en détail, mais je peux aisément te répondre dans l’ensemble.

La méthode que j’avais suivie est détaillée ici (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Penegal/diary/403620). Fondamentalement, on est ici sur des régions naturelles, donc pas des régions culturelles, historiques et autres ; si tu penses Beaujolais comme une appellation de vin, une ancienne baronnie, ou une communauté de communes, ce n’est pas du tout le sujet : on est sur la région naturelle Beaujolais, c’est-à-dire sur une zone délimitée par des vallées, changements de reliefs, changement de sol et de couches géologiques…

Dans le cas qui nous occupe, une analyse rapide de la limite me fait supposer que j’ai tracé la limite entre les deux régions au point où le relief en crêtes NNE-SSO du Mâconnais disparaît pour le relief plus tourmenté du Beaujolais, qui n’a pas cette structure bien visible sur la topographie du Mâconnais. D’ailleurs, la page WP du Mâconnais mentionne bien son relief en côtes (cuestas, élément topographique linéaire), et l’atlas des paysages de Saône-et-Loire parle bien des côtes mâconnaises (https://www.atlas-paysages.saone-et-loire.developpement-durable.gouv.fr/la-cote-maconnaise-r12.html).

Cela dit, si tu as des éléments indiquant que je me suis fourvoyé, je ne vais pas te manger, mais il faut qu’ils fassent autorité en la matière : si c’est juste un paragraphe sur un site de comcom’ ou un dépliant d’office du tourisme, ça va être un peu léger… ;-)
Tim-Boi (2026-03-12 12:12:03+00:00): Alors merci de la réponse, et de l'explication de la méthode utilisée. Simplement je travaille pour un domaine viticole entre maconnais et beaujolais, et je pense que la délimitation peut être établie plus finement. 
Je n'ai pas pour l'instant de sources faisant autorité, mais surtout des connaissances locales, sur les AOC des vins notamment qui sont étroitement liés à des structures géologiques, des caractéristiques de sols. 
Par exemple il apparaît une vrai frontière géologique entre les sous-sols granitiques et sols sableux du Beaujolais au sud et les roches calcaires du maconnais. La délimitation actuelle englobe dans le Beaujolais les roches calcaires de Solutré et Vergisson, emblématiques du mâconnais.
Penegal (2026-03-12 17:24:38+00:00): Attention : comme je l’ai dit, les appellations viticoles ne sont pas des régions naturelles _stricto sensu_. Les définitions se recoupent en partie, bien sûr, notamment sur les éléments de géologie qui vont provoquer des variations et des changements de région naturelle et d’appellation viticole, mais ce sont tout de même deux choses différentes.

J’entends ce que tu dis sur les variations géologiques, mais elles ne fondent pas seules les régions naturelles. Par exemple, la limite entre la Woëvre et le plateau de Haye est une transformation progressive du sol de calcisols calcosols à un sol issu d’argiles de décarbonatation, qui, avec l’aplanissement progressif vers l’ouest, donne des sols forestiers et marécageux. Ici, seul le changement de topographie compte, et les sources citées m’indiquent que le changement de topographie fonde la différence entre les deux, et pas forcément le changement de géologie, même s’il peut jouer.

Par ailleurs, la notice de la carte géologique du coin (http://ficheinfoterre.brgm.fr/Notices/0602N.pdf) mentionne, en page 12, les cuestas typiques du Mâconnais, ainsi que la présence de couches de granite et de grès triasiques, qui forment typiquement des terrains sableux. La présence ou l’absence de tel ou tel type de roche n’est donc, là encore, pas un facteur déterminant, bien que, comme tu le soulignes, et comme le confirme la notice, le calcaire domine ; en revanche, la morphologie de cuestas est encore soulignée dans la notice.

Après, si tu as l’habitude de la viticulture, tout ça peut être déroutant ; c’est un peu comme si tu avais l’habitude de parler en régions forestières ou régions agricoles : ça donne l’impression d’un découpage géographique en régions naturelles… uniquement dans le cadre considéré (forestier, viticole, agricole) qui n’est pas le même que celui d’une région naturelle au sens géographique pur du terme.
Tim-Boi (2026-03-12 21:43:10+00:00): Je découvre les fiches du BRGM, qui sont passionnantes, merci de m'avoir permis de découvrir. 
J'ai lu la fiche de Mâcon (http://ficheinfoterre.brgm.fr/Notices/0625N.pdf) et en pages 12-13 le Mont Sard, les Roches de Solutré et Vergisson sont bien citées comme éléments de la cuesta des Monts du Mâconnais. 
Je persiste donc à dire que la limite entre ces deux régions naturelles est plutôt quelques kilomètres plus au sud, et précisément au niveau de la vallée de l'Arlois.
Penegal (2026-03-14 16:25:26+00:00): Hum… Effectivement, et avec la carte géologique sous les yeux, une limite qui partirait de Chânes à Ouroux aurait plus de sens. Corrigé : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179865224
mcliquid (2024-12-07 07:56:56+00:00): Deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340609416
because duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/322551672
FajrAl (2024-12-10 13:02:43+00:00): Tag is_in dihilangkan?
adiatmad (2024-12-11 06:44:47+00:00): Iya jadinya hilang semua. Sepertinya itu otomatis dari JOSM kalo diklik Fix, ini contohnya

(https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/1308687144)
eggie (2024-12-06 21:04:52+00:00): Oke...
Groet
eggie
silversurfer83 (2024-12-06 21:30:29+00:00): Hi :)

ein paar Hinweise für deine Raststätten:

- hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/4740910 ist schon eine Raststätte erfasst. Ich habe deine daher wieder entfernt.

- sei bitte so gut und halte deine Änderungen allgemein möglichst kompakt und springe nicht quer übers Land. Das hilft bei der Qualitätssicherung. Danke
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

bei Fragen immer raus damit und allzeit gute Fahrt
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160005442
mkreuz (2024-12-09 12:29:07+00:00): Hi,

Danke für die schnelle Rückmeldung. Ich hatte schon versucht nicht zu viel auf einmal zu ändern, eventuell ist hier beim Upload etwas schief gegangen.

Die vorhandene Raststätte umfasst leider nicht den gesamten Bereich inklusive der Tankstelle. Für ein Projekt benötige ich die konvexe Hülle. Aber dann schaue ich einmal, wie es sich mit damit erreich lässt.
silversurfer83 (2024-12-09 12:38:47+00:00): Hi :)

In der Datenbank sollte nur nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen gearbeitet werden. Bitte keine unwahren Daten eintragen um ein bestimmtes Ergebnis zu erzeugen.

Falls du Hilfe benötigst kannst du beispielsweise im Forum unter c.osm.org fragen. Da ist eigentlich immer jemand aktiv

Cheers
mkreuz (2024-12-09 12:43:07+00:00): Hi,

Danke für den Link zum Forum. Unwahr sind meine Angaben nie! Ich trage auch alles nach bestem Wissen und Gewissen ein.
Es erschließt sich mir nur nicht, warum die Tankstelle ausgelassen wurde.
silversurfer83 (2024-12-09 12:52:25+00:00): Tut mir leid. Ich hab mich etwas unsauber ausgedrückt. Ich wollte dich nicht beschuldigen vorsätzlich Mist einzutragen.

Deine Änderungen bzw. hinzugefügten Flächen waren etwas unsauber und ragten teils weit in die Fläche der Autobahn. Wir sollten, dank der mittlerweile halbwegs gescheiten Luftbilder, etwas mehr Sorgfalt bei unseren Linien walten lassen.

Was meinst du mit der ausgelassenen Tanke? Die, die entfernt hab war schon als Multipolygon (relation) erfasst.
Joseph R P (2024-12-08 21:52:17+00:00): Assuming that you are edops a.k.a. miela404 a.k.a. edemes a.k.a. frillwed a.k.a. cm81447, I am in the process of reverting some of your more-recent edits and I am positive that you are aware of why they're being reverted since you keep deleting your previous accounts and creating new ones each time you're blocked or confronted.

Assuming that this a new user suddenly making large undiscussed highway/place node edits just like edops, with the same changeset comments as edops, and editing in the same exact region as edops, I am going to, for the time being at least, revert your edits, and I apologize that you have to be caught in the crossfire due to the edit warrer/sockpuppeteer in the region. If you would like to make mass highway/place edits, it is highly appreciated that these be discussed with other editors first, especially in a contentious area like this and/or if you do not 100% understand what changes you are making.
Glassman (2024-12-07 21:41:29+00:00): I added the city and unit number to the address
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160005762
gurglypipe (2024-12-08 20:36:24+00:00): Hiya, this edit doesn’t appear to have anything to do with graveyards, it appears to be adding a culvert to Boundary Stream. Please make sure your changeset descriptions are accurate — see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments, thanks :)
Simon Hobeck (2024-12-08 20:44:42+00:00): Sorry, i've just realised how bad I have been at that.  Often I complete the MapRoulette task and sometimes do some other tweaks whilst there (Usually if the system highlights something that needs resolving).
From now on I will ensure that my comments reflect any additional changes I make.
gurglypipe (2024-12-08 20:51:51+00:00): Thanks! :D
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-10 15:20:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 160133779 where the changeset comment is: revert edits from blocked account, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16967 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16954
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-10 15:20:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 160133779 where the changeset comment is: revert edits from blocked account, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16967 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16954
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-10 15:20:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 160133779 where the changeset comment is: revert edits from blocked account, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16967 https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16954
DUGA (2025-01-01 04:34:31+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/12009122/history#map=15/41.19198/-76.40326

Where is the marking?
blocal186 (2025-01-01 16:38:11+00:00): There are no lane markings on that road.
DUGA (2025-01-01 17:43:24+00:00): You are right.

So “lanes” should not be added then.
blocal186 (2025-01-01 18:02:30+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lanes#Examples

Example #4 shows this exact situation of a two lane road with no lane markings as being tagged this way. 

You are stating this example is incorrect and should be removed?
DUGA (2025-01-06 18:10:07+00:00): Wiki can be edited by anyone, I don’t agree with it.

Having two lanes != road is not one way, so technically speaking if I want to say it is one lane and not one way, that’s also correct.
bdentremont (2025-06-11 00:19:00+00:00): You've cited "knowledge" for many edits in this area.  Can you elaborate on how your knowledge of trail names was acquired?  Are they signposted?  Has someone published a trail guide or map?

For these names to be is scope for OSM, they need to be verifiable.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability
tp@he (2025-06-11 18:12:31+00:00): We worked with the City of Farmington's Outdoor Recreation Coordinator, Evan Pilling, and recreation stakeholder groups (Chokecherry Crawlers (OHV), Farmington Area Singletrack (mtn biking), San Juan College (trail managers), BLM, and the Outdoor Recreation Industry Initiative) to identify priority trails across the greater Farmington, NM area.
bdentremont (2025-06-12 21:24:54+00:00): OK.  If the land users and managers have names for the trails, I appreciate your efforts to get that information.  I myself got into this project to map a local forest in my town. For future edits, I'd recommend a more specific source comment such as "discussions with land users and managers" to make this clear.
gscscnd (2024-12-07 10:17:26+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340620663
IMHO lepiej by było wydzielić kawałek toru (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/249102605) i na nim dodać highway=path.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4481759450
Słup energetyczny i hydrant to jeden obiekt w rzeczywistości?
iandees (2024-12-07 14:24:01+00:00): If people go through the effort of mapping the loop as a more precise way than a single node with a `turning_loop` tag, why not keep it?
Hypsometric (2024-12-08 13:22:16+00:00): Most of the time they are not very accurate because they are auto generated and imported. If a turning circle is small enough that it will not have anything meaningful tagged (e.g. a statue in the middle) then it is better to tag it as a single node.
Bienson (2024-12-07 03:46:25+00:00): Hallo,

Da ist einiges schiefgelaufen, daher Revert in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160014882
scruss (2025-04-12 02:03:38+00:00): Hey, there's some complete fiction going on here:

1) the Uxbridge line is still mostly single track, especially near kennedy station. I live about 200 m from this, I'd know if there was a new line

2) there are no public electrification plans. If they manage to electrify this line in the next 20 years, I'd be amazed.
AMillsy (2025-04-12 15:51:50+00:00): 1) I don't believe this changeset added any lines but I do see that there are some non existent that have been added. Feel free to verify and fix

2) Electrification of the Stouffville Line has been proposed since about 2010, and the contract has been signed with the co-development partner. This Metrolinx page here has Stouffville line marked for electrification to Old Elm. https://www.metrolinx.com/en/projects-and-programs/stouffville-line-go-expansion The contract with the development partner has been signed and the final delivery contract is set to be signed shortly.
AMillsy (2025-04-12 16:52:46+00:00): I think I've fixed most of the non-existent and currently under-construction track now
scruss (2025-04-14 02:22:41+00:00): thanks for fixing the broken track but OSM is for THINGS YOU CAN SEE THAT EXIST. These proposed tags should not be here
felipeeugenio (2024-12-07 12:06:17+00:00): Hola. No son asfaltadas esas veredas.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160008050
pmurbina (2024-12-07 12:44:45+00:00): Hola! Me equivoqué,  pensé que la aplicación se refería a la calle, no vereda.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160008050
habi (2024-12-07 13:39:32+00:00): Ciao Rollr
Una autoscuola (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12400936972) non e un `shop=convenience`, e un https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity%3Ddriving_school
Saluti della Svizzera,
habi
habi (2024-12-07 13:40:43+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12400936973 sembra di essere di piu un https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=computer, non un shop=convenience...
habi (2024-12-07 13:41:39+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12400936974 sembra di essere un https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:office%3Dlogistics
b-holdet (2025-09-08 05:28:54+00:00): Kan du huske hvor du fik navnet til "Vårmose Sø" fra
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1017564385/history/2

Stednavneregistret kalder søen for "Vårmose"
cyclist789 (2025-09-09 09:03:35+00:00): Det må enten være fra SDFI Screenmap eller fra skiltene rundt omkring Kulsbjerg.

Måske er Vårmose Sø midten af Vårmose? Jeg ved det ikke. Du må gerne rette det tilbage.
dgitto (2024-12-18 18:33:55+00:00): Ciao, per favore dai una occhiata al wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Nomi_delle_strade
Non usare i numeri romani nei nomi.
Inoltre tieni presenti che se modifichi il nome di una strada dovresti controllare che non rimangano nodi addr:street (i civici) col vecchio nome
pootriarch (2024-12-06 21:44:11+00:00): this signal configuration suggests they may have added a traffic signal on grove, but hadn't paid attention to that
Xvtn (2024-12-11 00:16:34+00:00): Thanks for your contributions!! :)
tastrax (2024-12-06 22:01:59+00:00): Hi fwonp - you dont need to save after adding just one object. You could do multiple houses in the same area and then save them all at once. This is a much more efficient way to add data and will save you heaps of time.

Cheers - Phil
Strubbl (2024-12-07 19:07:11+00:00): I reverted your changeset because you edited a boundary and not the way in this CS. Please take better care what you change and fix the warning you introduce with the iD Editor

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160036971
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-08 03:08:55+00:00): This changeset added relations instead of changing the way tags.
Please use changeset comments.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160011314
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-01-27 06:52:46+00:00): Can you take a look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4603408 ? I am wondering about possible further tagging improvements
Negreheb (2024-12-10 11:44:04+00:00): Servus, vielleicht schaust du besser mal in https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mir-pfuscht-jemand-ins-handwerk-hilfe-gesucht/122763 rein :) allws gute
funwhilelost (2025-01-30 19:32:50+00:00): Where'd you get this data?  I have a copy of "Ski the Great Potato" but I can't find this info anywhere.  Thanks!
DD1GJ (2025-02-18 20:01:17+00:00): Hallo welzheimerwald,

Du hast Dir da zwar viel Mühe gegeben mit den Stadtteilgrenzen, aber wenn ich mir z.B. Lichtental anschaue, dann sieht das für mich aus wie die Gemarkungsgenze. In ganz Baden-Baden sind die Stadtteilgrenzen nicht identisch mit den Gemarkungsgrenzen! Was hast Du als Quelle verwendet?

Viele Grüße aus Baden-Baden, Joachim
welzheimerwald (2025-05-03 21:23:39+00:00): Hallo Joachim,

ich habe nur die Gemarkungsgrenzen gefunden. Wenn es Abweichungen zu den amtlichen Stadtteil-Abgrenzungen (z.B. Weststadt) gibt, dürfen das die Locals gerne ergänzen/verbessern.
Die Grenzen sind aus einem alten Backup eines Open-Data-Projektes baden-württembergischer Gemarkungsgrenzen https://www.drhzbg.de/openlayers/bw/#8/48.757/8.237 und dürften weitestgehend mit den amtlichen Angaben,
etwa im Flächennutzungsplan der Stadt https://www.baden-baden.de/mam/files/stadt/planung/flaechennutzung/blattschnitt-uebersichtsplan_fnp_2025.pdf, übereinstimmen.

Gruß
welzheimerwald
Udarian (2024-12-07 01:31:03+00:00): does this mean that the construction there is complete in that area.
eb_maps (2024-12-07 04:32:09+00:00): Correct - reference MIA website: https://www.miami-airport.com/map-where-to-park.asp
eb_maps (2024-12-07 04:32:44+00:00): Or at least they’re referencing the lot there
Udarian (2024-12-07 06:31:50+00:00): If it is done then it is a parking garage (the imagery isn’t up to date) and it is likely called Parking Garage 6 because that is what the signs on the fences surrounding the construction said when it was under construction. I can attest to it being a parking garage as I flew out and into MIA in July and saw them building it from the other parking garages and the departures road at that point.
Udarian (2024-12-09 05:08:10+00:00): did you add this purely based on the aerial imagery (armchair mapping) or have you recently been through here (since late July of this year which is when I last was at MIA) recently because otherwise this parking lot no longer exists. the construction isn't on any of the latest imagery but it was clear that they were building a multistory parking garage (it was labeled as such) and that isn't what you mapped. so either this needs tagging and geometry fixes or no longer exists.
Udarian (2024-12-28 06:30:10+00:00): please respond
Hugoren Martinako (2024-12-17 15:42:45+00:00): Buenas, ¿por qué vuelves a cambiar el tipo de place de la urbanización Valle del Sol (no es la única) a suburb, cuando no reúne los habitantes necesarios como para ser considerada como tal?
Saludos
Hugoren Martinako (2024-12-24 10:55:52+00:00): Corregido el etiquetado de aquellos con población: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160550624
4004 (2024-12-08 23:34:11+00:00): здравствуйте, спасибо за правку,
если задание было без проверок, то не стоило увлекаться, но если планируете править дальше - пожалуйста, пройдите обучение в редакторе до конца, и обращайте внимание на ошибки.
например Домик - это не название здания, то что это дом описывается тегами
Udarian (2024-12-07 03:44:49+00:00): this seems to have added a duplicate object
eb_maps (2024-12-07 04:33:57+00:00): Can you share the way/relation id? Query in this area was not returning anything.
Udarian (2024-12-07 06:42:02+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/786346226

Before you add something please check that someone hasn’t already mapped the building, you may need to change a few tags but adding a new building one top of the existing building is incorrect unless your using building:part=* , this is the kind you of thing we (the OSM community) have tools like osmose and osmi to find along with many others since we don’t want overlapping buildings.
eb_maps (2024-12-07 08:55:54+00:00): Thanks, agree don’t want to create a duplicate. I started with overpass api but didn’t see this entity returned, but looks like my filter criteria omitted. 

We can revert this change and propose adding a name update to existing. Appreciate the feedback here
4004 (2024-12-08 23:40:10+00:00): уже отмечена на карте
Yog Sot (2024-12-07 12:49:44+00:00): a jakie masz źródła, że taka jak propozycja? Bo tramwaj był i nie ma informacji by miasto planowało powrót
eteb3 (2026-05-30 22:53:56+00:00): another query here, if you have time:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5318325
ibsh00 (2026-05-30 23:19:54+00:00): These are both separate mosques/buildings. However, I’m not sure if they’re purpose built. But they are both mosques and used for prayer.