piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab_upload (2026-04-20 00:13:40+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/311846150

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
akghosal (2026-04-17 12:39:00+00:00): Further to my recent edit, I am happy for other users to further correct these changes if there are still remaining errors, especially with the exact satellite location of the connecting interchange roads, many thanks.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-04-20 00:13:39+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13737430031

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
bxl-forever (2026-04-17 12:52:20+00:00): Bonjour et bienvenue sur OSM.
OK pour la modification… mais svp ne pas écrire de noms comme « terrains de pétanque ».
Les tags sur OSM sont suffisants pour décrire les objets.
ilias_ (2026-04-18 00:07:10+00:00): Bonjour, vous avez changé +212 6 10 64 30 13 en +212 610-643013. Le premier était totalement correct et respectait le bon format. Merci pour vos efforts.
MicDK (2026-04-18 09:41:11+00:00): Med hvilken begrundelse slettet du knap 3.000 af mine indtegninger i Nørreskov og Pederskov?

Bemærk i øvrigt, at Nørreskov egentlig hedder Lundby Nørreskov og er skovområdet syd for sognegrænsen. Nord for hedder skoven Pederskov. Længst mod nord op mod Pederskov Huse, kaldes den del skoven for Dyrehave.

Vær venlig at tilbageføre dine ændringer.
ChrissW-R1 (2026-04-17 19:13:21+00:00): Which are these empty multipolygons?

https://osm.org/relation/20460835
https://osm.org/relation/20460836
https://osm.org/relation/20460837
Sammyhawkrad (2026-04-17 20:44:18+00:00): Hello Seemaslimits, 
Welcome to OSM and thanks for your contribution. Kindly note that OSM uses standardised tags to map features, e.g. healthcare=* for health facilities, which you have rightly used. However, metadata like creation_date, edit_date, etc., that you have included in the tags are not necessary. After a survey, you need to clean the data and upload only what is necessary for OSM.
Seemaslimits (2026-04-20 09:11:34+00:00): Thank you for the feedback. Would you help me understand how I should store this kind of metadat then?
Sammyhawkrad (2026-04-20 12:15:37+00:00): You can keep the metadata in your privately stored version. It's not needed or useful in OSM. Each object in OSM has its own metadata, which is not added to the tags. 

creation_date, Creator, Editor,  and surveyor_name all need to go.  

ambulance, electricity_available, level_of_care, and staffing are not standard keys. Check amenity=hospital, amenity=clinic, healthcare=* for tags that may be appropriate.

I think emergency=no is better suited for ambulance=no. Creator can be replaced with source=*.

Please check the links for better tag combinations.
Ltrlg (2026-04-19 12:19:02+00:00): Pour les piscines privées, un access=private est recommandé.
habi (2026-04-17 12:54:35+00:00): "Nur" note/5253785, die andere Notiz war noch im Changesetkommentar erwähnt, hat aber hier nix zu suchen :)
Jakob48 (2026-04-21 10:35:12+00:00): Hallo Seetroll,

warum trägst Du die Packstation am Aldi im Industriegebiet nochmals ein und zudem auch noch an einer falschen Stelle?

Die Packstation 126 gibt es bereits an der richtigen Stelle unter dem Giebeldach vom Aldi.

Gruß
Jakob48
Seetroll (2026-04-22 09:41:20+00:00): Hallo Jakob48,
du hast recht. Ich hab die von mir angelegte Packstation wieder entfernt.
Grüße
     Seetroll
NeisBot (2026-04-17 13:00:41+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 25 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1500236619 v1 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1500236658 v1 | 3 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=181457095
NeisBot (2026-04-17 13:03:43+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/node/7762395939 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

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

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisBot (2026-04-17 13:03:46+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/13737297451 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Ladestation"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deines Textes lauten: "Ladestation"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
Higashimado (2026-04-18 03:32:18+00:00): Please don't change the name tag written in the local language. Add name:en if you want an English name, and don't remove that tag even if the name tag is already written in English (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Localization). Also, the language code for Chinese is 'zh', not 'cn'.
Higashimado (2026-04-18 03:32:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted.
Kuiperonline (2026-04-18 04:24:19+00:00): Very good. I was misinformed. Chatgpt told me the standard language is ENglisch and it is not. Sorry for that and thank you for correcting and explaining me.
L'imaginaire (2026-04-26 17:55:56+00:00): Ook in deze wijzigingenset worden routerelaties verbroken. Ik heb hem niet teruggedraaid. Kan je de routes herstellen of heb je graag dat we hierbij helpen?
NeisBot (2026-04-17 13:15:43+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/13737431955 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Heating and Cooling Company"

#MapWithoutSpam
map per (2026-04-21 08:54:41+00:00): Hi, ich hab 'tourism=alpine_hut' wieder gelöscht, weil man dort nicht übernachten kann
Natfoot (2026-05-26 16:56:14+00:00): Hello could you explain the addition of 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1500240803

Please respond in note https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?note=5308694
MassCartog (2026-05-26 21:35:12+00:00): The person in the note may not think it's a trail, and it may be trespass. But heatmap data shows a lot of people are using it either way. It's a strong bright line, not a mess of trails across a field. The aerial imagery in OSM Is not great there but even in some of the blurry photos you can see the trail visible on the ground.  Its seems to be correctly mapped and tagged.
Natfoot (2026-05-27 05:32:57+00:00): Thank You
Rimrocker (2026-07-16 08:34:45+00:00): Hi OSM Moderators. I could use your help to advise on the most appropriate tagging schema for some of the informal social paths flagged by this Changeset. I linked a few examples below which fall within the Tollgate Property Owners Association (TPOA). I represent the TPOA Board, and we are seeking a tagging schema that accurately represents the physical environment while also avoiding creating confusion to trail users. 

For context, all three map features linked below are accurate in that informal paths do exist in these locations, and they are correctly tagged as "private" in OSM to indicate the presence of HOA property. 

My question for you is what is the best tagging method to distinguish between these unmaintained, social paths and the official, maintained trail network that exists within the HOA? This is especially important for users relying on mapping applications such as Apple Maps, Strava, or AllTrails which often don't expose OSM tags and therefore render these unmaintained, private paths as appearing identical to official, public trails. 

The TPOA board wants to avoid creating confusion for TPAO members whose maps may incorrectly display these social paths as part of the official maintained HOA trail network. Or confusion for members of the public whose maps display these paths as open-use trails.

In your experience, is there any tagging method that would avoid this confusion, especially when translating to the popular downstream mapping platforms? For example, would adding a tag of "informal=yes" better communicate this distinction?

Thanks for all you do! 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1500240803
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1500240807
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1523082175
NeisBot (2026-04-17 13:36:27+00:00): 🌍 Willkommen bei OSM, MrKnatter.
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 Kartenedits: "Baumfeatures hinzugefügt, Referenznummern 1781, 1782, 1783, 1784, 2878, 3003, 3004"
(Auto-translation)
---
🌍 Welcome to OSM, MrKnatter.
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 tree features, reference numbers 1781, 1782, 1783, 1784, 2878, 3003, 3004"
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment
L'imaginaire (2026-04-26 12:16:50+00:00): Ik heb deze wijzigingenset moeten terugdraaien. Je verwijderde o.a. een groot stuk heide, je introduceerde ways zonder tags en verbrak verschillende routerelaties. 

Indien je hulp nodig hebt bij dergelijke grote wijzigingen, dan kan je steeds contact opnemen via een van de kanalen vermeld op https://openstreetmap.be/contact.html
L'imaginaire (2026-04-26 11:56:04+00:00): Er zijn enkele problemen met de wijzigingen die je deed:
- Je verwijderde een bank (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11804562225/history) en plaatste dichtbij een nieuwe bank (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1475927245/history) op het punt waar wegen elkaar kruisen. De bank hoort niet aan deze wegen te hangen.
- Je verwijderde een weg en tekende op dezelfde positie een nieuwe weg, maar je behield niet alle informatie van de oorspronkelijke weg niet
- Een twijfelgeval: je verwijderde wegen, maar het is niet duidelijk of deze op het terrein niet meer bestaan of gewoon ontoegankelijk geworden zijn. In het laatste geval is het beter de weg niet te verwijderen en de juiste access tags toe te voegen.

Graag een reactie zodat we eventueel nog enkele zaken kunnen rechtzetten.
L'imaginaire (2026-04-26 12:06:23+00:00): De wijzigingenset verbreekt ook bestaande relaties, onder andere die van het wandelnetwerk. Omdat hier geen gemakkelijke fix voor is, heb ik de wijzigingenset teruggedraaid. Na overleg kunnen opnieuw de nodige aanpassingen gedaan worden.
EW_NT (2026-04-27 07:01:31+00:00): Beste,
Ik ben momenteel nog bezig met deze datasets af te werken.
Klopt, niet alle dreven die verwijderd zijn, zijn niet meer zichtbaar op terrein. Maar: deze dreven mogen niet meer beschouwd worden als wandelpad, vandaar de verwijdering paden. 
Ik neem contact op met osm belgië om samen met hun de rest te wijzigen. Groeten
iandees (2026-04-17 14:30:58+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1266016336 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/181461927, 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!
augxcgrwxo (2026-05-13 07:01:09+00:00): добрый день! Подскажите, что имелось в виду под созданием этого квадрата?
iandees (2026-04-17 14:31:05+00:00): Hi! It looks like the website URL on node/10919390705 may have been copied from Google Maps (it contained Google tracking parameters). Please be careful not to copy information from Google into OpenStreetMap, as Google's data is copyrighted.
Digitaleo (2026-04-17 14:42:09+00:00): Hi,

Sorry for the mistake! You're absolutely right.

I've added a check on my side to detect this won't happen again.
tomhukins (2026-04-20 16:20:21+00:00): Thank you for improving the map.

I notice you edited https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4134208704, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/708996075, and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/708996079 that were already mapped.

This means there are three different things here named "Bear Pit" which seems against the spirit of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element - how might we resolve this?
jem_Krokieta (2026-05-11 11:51:17+00:00): Zmiana nazwy rzeźby przedstawiającej powóz jest błędną edycją, ponieważ ta rzeźba z technicznego punktu widzenia nie jest pojazdem konnym (ogólnie mówiąc powozem) zdolnym do przemieszczania się. Jest to rzeźba po pierwsze, po drugie ta rzeźba przedstawia jakiś mniej określony rodzaj powozu. Nie jest to powóz, nie jeździ, nie da się w niego zaprzęgnąć koni.
Rogoyski (2026-05-11 16:31:43+00:00): Przepraszam, ale absolutnie nie mogę się zgodzić. To, że jest to rzeźba, wynika wystarczająco z tagu artwork_type=sculpture i nie ma żadnego uzasadnienia, aby tę informację powtarzać w nazwie. Jedną z podstawowych zasad kartografii jest przekazywanie maksymalnie dużej części informacji za pomocą symboli, a nie napisów. Trzeba założyć, że jeśli mapa będzie prezentować ten obiekt, jego symbol zostanie w legendzie zaopatrzony w odpowiedni opis, i że będzie to symbol inny niż symbol rzeczywistego powozu (nie widziałem, aby takie ktokolwiek umieszczał na mapie, ale załóżmy...).
Kamil Kalata (2026-04-17 19:15:57+00:00): Witaj!
Rozumiem, że chciałeś poprawić mapę zgodnie z uwagą (https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5253539). Niestety, ale zrobiłeś to nieudolnie: zmieniłeś nie obszar, ale tylko odcinek; ponadto, ten odcinek jest granicą dwóch miejscowości, dla których określiłeś, że ten odcinek jest fragmentem "od środka" ("inner"). Będę więc zmuszony Twoją zmianę wycofać.
Chciałbym zwrócić uwagę, że kwestia ta została wyjaśniona tutaj (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181450882) i rozwiązana tutaj (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181468344).
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-19 01:18:18+00:00): DWG revert - improper mapping & deletion of valid features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184294100
Yunan973 (2026-04-19 13:32:39+00:00): Bonjour,

c'est bien de rajouter les portes d'entrée des maisons, c'est mieux de les positionner à l'endroit où elles sont.

J'ai corrigé ta porte 13737588330.

Cordialement
eggie (2026-04-17 15:21:35+00:00): Hoi..
Tip..
 Voeg service=driveway toe.
Mvg,
eggie
isotopicemoting (2026-06-27 12:19:43+00:00): Moin, ich glaube bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/327322529 ist in dem Changeset was schiefgegangen. Das Signal sollte keine Adresse haben, oder? Laut Niedersachsen ALKIS gehört die Hausnummer 20 zu dem Toilettenhäuschen nebenan (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/156579298), wo sie auch korrekt eingetragen ist.
arjunaraoc (2026-05-09 14:06:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181461095
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-17 19:25:47+00:00): Thanks @zstadler

Revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181444948
zstadler (2026-04-18 07:11:25+00:00): Also a revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181444831
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-18 09:37:47+00:00): And again thanks @zstadler 👍
IsraelLoves (2026-04-19 06:12:46+00:00): thanks @zstadler
Frans S (2026-04-18 10:30:04+00:00): Thanks for mapping.
I think that you did not read or understand the requirements of what to map on this project.
This project aims to update the map with pre-disaster building footprints and identify damaged or partially damaged buildings using post-event drone imagery in areas affected by Cyclone Gezani and tag the buildings accordingly
And. You did not read these instructions as well, did you?

Do not move existing OSM data to match the drone imagery. Instead, adjust the drone imagery offset so that it aligns with existing OSM features before mapping. Given drone imagery can be fairly warped, you may need to adjust the imagery offset a number of times while working on a single-task square to align with existing data: this is normal for drone imagery

I moved the whole task to get it aligned with the Bing imagery
Tagged all buildings with the Gezani tagging and marked the damage as unsure. The only thing you have to do is check the kind of damage and tag it accordingly.

I had to invalidate this task.
Best regards and keep mapping
Dannyoung (2026-04-18 10:37:36+00:00): Thank for the overview and correction given, all suggest and correction are noted. Literally I didn't read through the project description properly before mapping. 

Regards.
iandees (2026-04-17 14:43:31+00:00): Hi! Thanks for improving the map. One thing I noticed: please try to improve the existing features rather than delete and redraw. This makes it easier to follow the history of the area over time.
9_tab (2026-04-17 14:34:26+00:00): Please provide a short summary about your edit.
MapperrZPolski (2026-04-17 14:38:02+00:00): http://dk77mostsandomierz.pl/?page_id=63#iLightbox[070ce6c69c48cd588ee]/0
StC (2026-04-17 16:02:18+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset (qui est bien situé à Nemours, ainsi que l'indique très à propos le commentaire) a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre, en déplaçant des chemins depuis une section vers la super-relation parente. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
Esperanza36 (2026-04-17 17:37:39+00:00): Merci et désolé !
OSM_RogerWilco (2026-04-18 05:50:40+00:00): Moin Jacob Rosendal Kristensen,
bitte gebe sinnvolle Änderungskommentare und Deine Quelle an. OSM ist ein Gemeinschaftsprojekt.  "." ist kein sinnvoller Kommentar. und hilft anderen nicht zu verstehen, was Du warum geändert hast.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments

Viele Grüße und happy Mapping!
Roger Wilco
OSM_RogerWilco (2026-04-18 05:52:33+00:00): Ich sehe gerade, dass Du schon mehrmals darauf angesprochen wurdest.

Bitte ignoriere diese Bitte nicht!
thobrist (2026-04-19 04:13:31+00:00): Servus wies1,

ich habe einige Probleme mit deinen changesets, nicht nur mit diesem, sondern mit Allen seit 13.03.2026 (https://osm.org/changeset/179432456), die Du im südlichen Oberbayern vorgenommen hast:
- Du schreibst als Quelle survey für die Hausnummern und Straßen ( ca. 3.000)
- Du schreibst als Quelle mapbox, welches Daten verwendet die in Bayern nicht genutzt werden können (Bayernatlas)
- Du verwendest bei mindestens der Hälfte Deiner Eintragungen Straßen die es nicht gibt, als Beispiel (https://osm.org/way/110562579) nicht addr:street sondern addr:place wäre korrekt; siehe https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=11.88586&lat=47.76139&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=street_not_found wobei sicherlich nicht alle ausnahmslos von Dir verursacht wurden
- Du löschst Adressen, obwohl nur die Hausnummer fehlt als Beispiel (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1095644688)
- Du löschst Adressen, obwohl nur der Ort falsch ist als Beispiel (https://osm.org/way/206433698) Bad Aibling statt Bruckmühl
- Du löschst Adressen, obwohl nur die Hausnummer fehlt, lässt aber die falsche Bezeichnung stehen als Beispiel (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/327475939) Nissan Huber statt KFZ-Hamberger

Aufgrund der Beispiele habe ich Zweifel an einer Besichtigung vor Ort (survey), eine Berichtigung der von mir besichtigten Beispiele habe ich nicht vorgenommen, da für mich ein revert Deiner changesets wegen Deiner angegebenen Quellen angebracht wäre.

Solltest Du bei einem Urlaub im südlichen Oberbayern all diese Adressen besichtigt haben ist ein revert übertrieben und man kann die Fehler sicherlich einzeln beheben.

Servus