piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
iandees (2026-04-10 17:45:48+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1341120068, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13720876379, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13720876380, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13721183354, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4868856057, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918196, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918197, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918198, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918199, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918200, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918201, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918202, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918203, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918204, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918205, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918206, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918207, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918208, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918209, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918210, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918211, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918212, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918213, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918214, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918215, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918216, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918217, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918218, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918219, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918220, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918821, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918822, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918823, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918824, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918825, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918826, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4872918833 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/181160880, 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!
marczoutendijk (2026-04-10 17:36:46+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 180772774, 181027892, 181028637, 181037611, 181040337, 181056642, 181084034, 181092054, 181104258.
NeisBot (2026-04-13 13:02:32+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for contributing!

I noticed that one node was moved quite a long distance. This can happen when a node is accidentally snapped to the wrong geometry or unintentionally moved during editing.

⚠️️ Problematic element:
https://osm.org/node/10034452472 v2

Would you mind taking another look?

#LongDistanceMove
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181160699
Guenni1963 (2026-06-15 09:00:53+00:00): 
Ich habe den Knoten https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10034452472 wieder an seinen richtigen Ort nach Rammersberg verschoben. Bin ortskundig, siehe auch Mapillary 987502500652058
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-15 09:03:20+00:00): Vielen Dank @Guenni1963
gurglypipe (2026-04-10 22:18:49+00:00): Hiya, are you sure this road is publicly accessible by foot/bike/horse? It’s inside the security fence of Sellafield. Has something changed locally compared to aerial imagery? Ta
RossA (2026-04-11 07:59:28+00:00): No - it’s still private - my mistake. I cycled it this morning but it was the path below which I intended to alter. I’ve pit it back to private now. Thanks for the spot. 👍
gurglypipe (2026-04-11 08:21:45+00:00): Super, thanks for checking and fixing it!

As a bit of a friendly hint, ‘survey’ is not a particularly descriptive changeset comment for others to work out what you changed and why. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments for some guidance on good changeset comments. :)

(Track fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181178097 for anyone reading this in future)
NeisBot (2026-04-10 17:52:31+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 73 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1371338149 v2 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1371338150 v2 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1371338276 v2 | 3 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181161024
NeisBot (2026-04-10 17:56:25+00:00): 🌍 Willkommen bei OSM, TimeoR.
Danke für deine Beiträge!

Um die Zusammenarbeit zu erleichtern und anderen zu helfen, deine Änderungen zu verstehen, ist es am besten, wenn du eine kurze Beschreibung der von dir vorgenommenen Änderungen hinzufügst. Klar formulierte Kommentare helfen der Community, deiner Arbeit zu folgen und bessere Rückmeldungen zu geben. Du findest Tipps zum Schreiben guter Kommentare hier[1].

✅ Hier ist ein Beispielkommentar basierend auf deinen Karteneditierungen: "Straße mit 2 Fahrspuren aktualisiert"
(Auto-translation)
---
🌍 Welcome to OSM, TimeoR.
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: "Updated road with 2 lanes"
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment
Ltrlg (2026-04-17 12:18:54+00:00): Quel est l’objectif ici ? Le multipolygone est invalide et way/1498259793 semble suffisant ?
Sébastien Chopin (2026-04-18 16:29:03+00:00): L’idée était d’englober le parking dans la même appellation que la rue qui passe devant les commerces pour donner à ses derniers une adresse plus évidente.
Mais je m’aperçois que j’ai créé deux fois la même chose … ¡ oups !
DodoGTA (2026-04-10 18:36:20+00:00): Also iD shouldn't be warning about this anymore: https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/1955
Cotep4 (2026-04-10 18:46:55+00:00): Interesting, thanks for sharing! Indeed I didn't get a warning about it in iD. The issue was that I usually map in regions where water=basin is used and I was confused by this landuse=basin that appears in gray in iD, I thought it was a mistake. I realised too late that it's an alternative way of tagging basins, and it's used on all the other ones around.
stillhart (2026-04-10 20:58:11+00:00): 🙏 thank you, ever parking update is valueable :-)
kingkingHK (2026-04-11 03:31:05+00:00): Hi there, why did you remove `maxspeed=` from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65250016 ? I understand that you might disagree with adding them, in which case you may simply choose not to. But please don't remove correct info that others have added.
vectorial8192 (2026-04-11 07:35:17+00:00): How to say it, I just don't think minor roads should have maxspeed. My previous comments were more on giving maxspeed to major roads (e.g. at least tertiary).

Again, the concern is scope creep and "we therefore need to modify every road", in which case using a country-rule library is much more efficient usage of efforts.
kingkingHK (2026-04-11 08:56:07+00:00): We can't reasonably expect all data consumers to implement country-specific rules e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5213189 . You are essentially outsourcing the computation to the country-rule library and to the developers of every osm-based application that involves speed limit in some way.

As I said, you can choose to not do it if you don't want to; no one is forcing you to do anything. But I want to do it so I will do it. Is removing all my work an efficient usage of efforts? If you want dispute my methods, then please discuss it with me elsewhere and reach a consensus, not removing my work "just because".

P.S. my changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181045513 which added maxspeed to 363 roads only took around 4 minutes to make. It really isn't that much effort imo.
vectorial8192 (2026-04-11 17:09:43+00:00): I believe I am (heavily) biased towards "let them have the library". My initial kneejerk reaction was "it doesn't seem like this should be here" so I removed it.

I will just take it as "this is part of the local standard" and add it back, though I would suspect adding speed limits to minor roads may cause parser confusion; should the road be slow (low highway class), or should the road be fast (explicit speed limit), but I will just leave it to the many implementations out there to figure it out.
vectorial8192 (2026-04-11 17:11:51+00:00): Fixed with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181199862
kingkingHK (2026-04-12 03:31:08+00:00): Thanks for restoring the maxspeed.

Speed limit and actual speed might not align; imo any major data consumer should ideally understand this. E.g. Chun Yeung Street and Lung Fu Road are both `maxspeed=50`. The UK has these things called "country lanes" which are single-lane unpaved curvy roads (Nim Wan Road vibes) with 60 mph (96 km/h) speed limit which is obviously unattainable. And, using highway class to deduce speed limit is a poor practice anyway, as shown by Lin Cheung Road etc.

Also, it seems like you are still missing my point. I am less of complaining about speed limit implementation, and more of complaining about reverting other's correct work without consensus. As I said, you should have discussed this on e.g. Discord beforehand instead of removing it yourself for "I don't think it should be here". In fact, the points we are raising here is the same as our previous discussions there in December.
Matt McCutchen (2026-04-10 18:04:51+00:00): Should have "survey:date=2025-11-30 through 2026-04-03".
Matt McCutchen (2026-04-10 18:10:03+00:00): Re my change to the Ritchie Center boundary to include the eastern building: I couldn't figure out why it was excluded before on OSM.  I didn't find unequivocal evidence either way, so I'm presuming it's included based on the parking lot layout with signs for Ritchie Center parking restrictions at all the entrances and no signs for different parking restrictions around this one building.
NeisBot (2026-04-10 18:08:19+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/13721396631 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
iandees (2026-04-10 19:45:10+00:00): Hi Adam,

Thanks for editing the map, especially while you're out and about with CoMaps. I'm noticing a bug in CoMaps, though. It seems like the app is making modifications to 12 existing points every time you make a change to an unrelated object in OSM. Can you try clearing the app's cache or logging out and back in on CoMaps?
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-04-11 18:17:22+00:00): Rather than deleting all picnic tables, why not delimitate a picnic area? While the picnic tables are movable, it does not mean they are not there and it is very useful to know if picnic tables are available in a park or not for visitors. Thanks!
ablevi202 (2026-04-11 18:25:02+00:00): I removed them because they move around way too much and figured it was too much detail. Should there be a picnic area around the whole grassy/wooded area?
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-04-11 18:39:27+00:00): Yes please. This thread in particular is relevant: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/opinions-on-mapping-unanchored-picnic-tables-and-benchs/128686/7
ablevi202 (2026-04-11 18:53:13+00:00): Alright I added in a picnic site in this changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181203840#map=18/45.493422/-73.576926
Thanks for the feedback, let me know if there's anything else that should be changed.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-04-12 23:27:51+00:00): Perfect thanks!
iandees (2026-04-10 18:51:19+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6416615464 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181164157, 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!
bphennessy (2026-04-10 18:54:46+00:00): Oops! Thank you so much for catching that!
TrickyFoxy (2026-05-25 09:40:44+00:00): Нет, слово «улица» не нужно убирать
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-11 04:49:03+00:00): Hi jhonnyMMkt, welcome to OSM.

Could you provide a source for this change? "Rua Bartolomeu Rodrigues, 241" appears to be a specific address, while this feature seems to represent the road itself. A reference would help verify whether the road name should really include a house number.

Thanks.
NeisBot (2026-04-13 13:00:32+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for contributing!

I noticed that one node was moved quite a long distance. This can happen when a node is accidentally snapped to the wrong geometry or unintentionally moved during editing.

⚠️️ Problematic element:
https://osm.org/node/6223225524 v7

Would you mind taking another look?

#LongDistanceMove
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181164189
NeisBot (2026-04-10 18:59:14+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/13719121236 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
Frans S (2026-04-22 10:49:22+00:00): Hallo. 
Je hebt deze weg "geretagged" naar 'Path' terwijl deze bijna 5 mtr breed is.
Ik heb er weer 'unclassified' van gemaakt.
groeten.
Frans S (2026-04-22 10:49:48+00:00): Ik bedoel deze weg
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1494298335/history#map=17/-18.356294/49.278530
martien-176 (2026-04-28 09:58:31+00:00): I assessed this highway as an edge case: afaics it is at both ends enclosed by paths (see also my similar comment in the HOT tasking manager). Therefore i tagged it as such.

No problem that your mile varies.
(but let's have the discussion in English, so that non Dutch mappers can follow it too).
werbuli (2026-04-24 06:22:23+00:00): Hast du die Straße für den öffentl. Verkehr aufgrund von Aufnahmen aus 2014 !!!! gesperrt. Als ich da letzte Woche gefahren bin, waren da keine Beschränkungen.
TornadoFang (2026-04-24 06:49:52+00:00): Also bei Mapillary aus 2024 ist zu sehen, das durchfahrt verbot besteht für Gefahrgut und Lkw. Nur frei für Anlieger und Linienverkehr.
werbuli (2026-04-24 07:08:34+00:00): Der link von mapillary zeigt 2014. Egal, auch 2024 ist überholt - aktuell gibt es dort keine Einschränkungen mehr. Jetzt  freuen sich die Anlieger und die Messebesucher fluchen weil sie falsch geroutet werden.
Bitte deine Änderungen revertieren.
TornadoFang (2026-04-24 07:12:15+00:00): Also nur noch beschränkung für lkw und gefahrgut?
TornadoFang (2026-04-24 07:16:54+00:00): Habs zur Überprüfung freigeben. Danke für den Hinweis. Schaue es mir auch an.
werbuli (2026-04-24 07:19:48+00:00): Das mappen was aktuell (also jetzt) vor Ort zu sehen ist = OTG. Hatte ich aber auch schon mehrfach geschrieben. Ich schaue mir heute die aktuelle Beschilderung an und werden das korrigieren.
Bist
TornadoFang (2026-04-24 07:23:20+00:00): War keine Absicht. Danke nochmal für deinen Hinweis.
werbuli (2026-04-24 07:36:15+00:00): das wäre auch schlimm .......

Wem hast du das zur Überprüfung gegeben, nicht das hier jetzt doppelt dran gearbeitet wird.
silversurfer83 (2026-04-12 14:38:25+00:00): Hi :)

kleiner Hinweis: Ich bin mir sehr sicher, dass deine highway=service + service=parking_aisle alle eigentlich service=driveway sein sollten.

cheers

silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181164653
NeisBot (2026-04-10 19:12:59+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/13721709721 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Salão de beleza"
---
Por exemplo, uma versão mais neutra e factual do seu texto poderia ser: "Salão de beleza"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-07-13 19:15:36+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/143824248

turning loop on footway?

is it also a track? or not turning loop?
gregcrago (2026-07-17 19:25:44+00:00): This looks like an old subdivision development. This 'was' suppose to be a Turnaround, but it has fallen apart. I usually change these to highway=track, but I think someone downgraded it further to path. The 'turning loop' is only there to show that there IS A TURNAROUND, you can see it on satellite imagery. If you want to remove it, go ahead
qstep (2026-04-10 20:43:40+00:00): Üdv az OSM-en! Volt néhány hiba a szerkesztésben, ezeket itt javítottam: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181167707

További kérdésekért lásd a https://wiki.openstreetmap.org oldalt.
NeisBot (2026-04-10 19:27:53+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/13577557895 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Permanent makeup clinic"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-04-10 22:33:27+00:00): 🕵 It looks like you reintroduced text that was previously flagged as promotional and removed after a review. Could you please explain why it was added again?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 11:50:46+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184909611
silversurfer83 (2026-04-12 15:01:07+00:00): Hi Pablo,

is GR11 the name of the hiking route? If so, the name=* does not belong on the highway=* itself. It should only be added to the already existing relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/10605305

If you wish to detour the route you need to make sure the markings are also not present on the ground and you need to change the members of the relation. That's the only way to make the detour.

cheers

(so, if I'm right, please remove the name from the objects you touched in this changeset)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181165498
Pablo Strubell (2026-04-13 17:34:57+00:00): Thanks for your review and comments. 
I modified as you indicated. Thanks for keeping an eye on me.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181165498
rempshaener (2026-04-11 17:55:57+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap.
Ich habe Anmerkungen zu deinen Bearbeitungen:
- Du hast Farben angegeben, obwohl Unterflurhydraten in der Regel keine Farbe haben. Nur zur Klarstellung: Das ist die Farbe, die der Hydrant vor Ort hat. Das hat nichts mit der Darstellung in Karten oder Apps zu tun. 
- Hydranten sollten nicht mit Straßen, Gebäuden u. ä. verbunden werden. Das lässt sich leicht beheben: im Editor markieren und „E“ drücken – das löst den Hydranten von der Linie. 
Vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag und weiterhin viel Spaß beim Mappen.
Viele Grüße
DCools (2026-04-14 07:16:43+00:00): Het Jan Ypermanpark is nog niet aangelegd, de voorziene paden bestaan (nog) niet.
NeisBot (2026-04-10 19:48:53+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/13643553733 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Weight Loss Clinic"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-04-10 22:33:28+00:00): 🕵 It looks like you reintroduced text that was previously flagged as promotional and removed after a review. Could you please explain why it was added again?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 11:50:13+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184909577
NeisBot (2026-04-10 19:54:53+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/378223334 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
tho-mas (2026-04-10 19:58:11+00:00): thanks!
NeisBot (2026-04-10 19:54:55+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/13683432474 v5

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisAgent (2026-04-10 22:33:29+00:00): 🕵 It looks like you reintroduced text that was previously flagged as promotional and removed after a review. Could you please explain why it was added again?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-01 11:49:40+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags/values

https://osm.org/changeset/184909550