piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MSainty (2025-02-25 14:09:11+00:00):  Hi pitscheplatsch,

I am new to adding data to OSM. Could you potentially give me a few pointers please? As part of my job we react to natural events and in some circumstances we create building polygons using imagery from a variety of sources. Obviously this is a very time consuming process and I was wondering what tags as a minimum that need to be added in order to upload to OSM? Thank you for your time
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-03-27 13:31:03+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12606595880/history has shop = personal_service that was added in this edit
shop=personal_service ? What is the meaning of that shop value? What kind of services or products are sold here? Is anything from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_for_key_%22shop%22 fitting? Maybe new value needs to be invented? Maybe this data is wrong and there is no shop here? Maybe it is not a shop but something else?
Rommar (2026-03-27 13:50:04+00:00): It's a shop that offers an intermediary service for vehicle registration certificates. It's a private service.
Rommar (2026-04-01 08:36:44+00:00): So, the shop has just closed, as I've just confirmed on site. I deleted it.
Nick Parker (2025-02-25 10:56:37+00:00): Bonjour. Vos modifications ont cassé le rendu 3D des bâtiments du collège Jacques Callot. C'était quoi l'objectif ?
poivronvertbleu (2025-02-25 13:51:44+00:00): Bonjour, 
Zut je suis vraiment désolé ! je cherchait à améliorer les chemins piétons et voie de service dans l'établissement.
Vous pouvez, si c'est possible, totalement rollbacker ce groupe si ça permet de corriger la 3D.
Je referais ces chemins par la suite, en étant bien plus précautionneux et en soumettant la correction à une approbation.
Nick Parker (2025-02-28 10:57:26+00:00): Pas de problème, je referai le bâtiment. Ça doit être assez rapide.
Nick Parker (2025-03-04 11:03:03+00:00): Voilà le résultat : 
https://demo.f4map.com/#lat=48.6671306&lon=6.1623081&zoom=19&camera.theta=68.778&camera.phi=112.196
Beacoup des attributs 3D sont faits avec les building:part donc il faut faire attenttion à ne pas les supprimer lors des modifications, même si on ne voit pas tout de suite l'intérêt.
flex16 (2025-02-21 14:14:27+00:00): Warum hast du die Breite entfernt, wenn ich fragen darf?
matze089 (2025-02-21 19:39:29+00:00): Irgendwo beim Grabbrunnen gibt es einen Fehler. Und zwei Meter Breite stimmt offensichtlich nicht.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-21 19:54:59+00:00): #SEO #spam
SzymonH (2025-02-21 11:56:15+00:00): Nazwa nie została jeszcze nadana. Wycofałem, a tak naprawdę przeniosłem do proposed: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162776957
mavl (2025-05-13 15:04:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
NeisBot (2025-02-21 17:01:08+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-13 10:36:34+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163563835
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-13 10:32:18+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163563754
NeisBot (2025-02-21 10:38:38+00:00): Hi saljakrikra, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 98% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 158 building(s)

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

Looking forward to your response.

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

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=162774034
LuckyNumberS7evin (2025-02-21 11:17:07+00:00): Looks like some contributors added buildings, while others decided to play 'build and remove' later ...
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-21 10:51:23+00:00): 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.

"Czechy":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12606678320
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/150178852
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/175981178
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/452614995
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979992698
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361667737
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361667738

"Chechy":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/979993136

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Taya_S (2025-02-21 10:48:48+00:00): Reverted SEO vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162774494
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
yelisey90 (2025-02-21 11:20:33+00:00): reverted: these are not official names

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162775703
s777n (2025-02-21 11:51:14+00:00): Вы добавили продуктовый магазин. Исправил на строительный.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-03-13 06:47:01+00:00): Reverted by DWG - poor quality & lack of HOT response

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163556765
CvK024 (2025-02-21 11:18:22+00:00): Graag checken of ik geen rare foute heb gemaakt die niet wenselijk zijn.

Grens van Heumensoord heb ik ter plekke van het bosgebied achter sportpark Brakkenstein aangepast, omdat die hier oa over de Sint Annastraat heen liep.

Sommige bosgebieden samengevoegd om de hoofdstructuur van de paden te verbeteren. Ik loop vaak in dit gebied en ken het hier goed.

Ik heb alle validatiefouten in JOSM weten te herstellen uitgezonderd 2 "Role verification problems" bij node 9484407737. Deze heb ik niet kunnen oplossen. Zou iemand hiernaar kunnen kijken en mij hierbij kunnen helpen hoe dit opgelost kan worden?

Mvg, CvK024.
eggie (2025-02-21 11:36:11+00:00): Hoi.....  
Ahh  Overgestapt naar josm! 
Deze foutmeldingen gewoon negeren. Dat is zo'n 'dingetje' van JOSM.
Veel is gewoon niet fout. 
Zag nog wel een track de bebouwing ingaan met tracktype grade2  en surface=dirt... Een van de twee kan maar waar zijn.
Oost van de Heyendaalseweg. 
Geen edit van jou overigens. 
Groet
eggie
CvK024 (2025-02-21 11:49:38+00:00): Hallo Eggie,

Klopt ja dat ik ben overgestapt naar JOSM. Wel wennen met hoe het hier werkt, maar als GIS specialist biedt het inderdaad meer voordelen. 

Ik heb ook contact gehad met ESRI om gebruik te kunnen maken van de DTM/Hillshade bestanden van AHN. Heb toestemming van hen gekregen. Erg handig en fijn om de bospaden hiermee in te kunnen tekenen. Fijn dat je ze in JOSM zo kunt inlezen en gebruiken.

Dank voor je reactie op mijn vraag over de foutmeldingen. Fijn dat ik die kan negeren en mooi dat ik dit hele bosgebied, waar ik vaak wandel heb kunnen verbetere.

Mvg, CvK024.
eggie (2025-02-21 12:41:38+00:00): Ahh... mooi.. het hoogtebestand.
 Og wel iets als je bospercelen samenvoegd.
Dat was ooit import vanuit de 3dshapes.
Het waren percelen.
Je kunt aan percelen ook een tag toevoegen of het naald- of loofbos is.
Als het verschilt dan is het wel handig om niet samen te voegen.
Mapse..
eggie
CvK024 (2025-02-21 13:28:08+00:00): Dank voor de tip van de bospercelen. Ik ga er nog naar kijken of ik er nog wat aan moet/kan doen.

Ik had ook al het idee dat ze landsdekkend waren ingebracht. Herkende de vorm van andere gis-kaarten. Zag ook dat een voormalige collega van mij dat waarschijnlijk gedaan had. Zag hem als creator ervan staan.

Mvg, CvK024.
AnnaCatarina (2025-08-19 19:02:00+00:00): Hello Claudius,
I am really a little bit shocked about this: "Opened 2021" and "Check 2023" for a subway line, which is now (August 2025) completed by little over 50 %!
I am going to update this in a few moments.
Regards,
Anna Catarina
Fizzie-DWG (2025-03-13 06:35:14+00:00): Reverted by DWG - poor quality & lack of HOT response

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163556513
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-21 19:50:42+00:00): Revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162724652

Thanks.
Marek-M (2025-02-21 12:23:49+00:00): Cofnąłem Twoją zmianę - dodałeś błędnie nazwę opisową. Pozostałe tagi wystarczająco opisują zawartość tej tablicy.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162778241
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-07 06:13:40+00:00): DWG revert - poor quality mapping

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164617601
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-13 09:13:59+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/548523188/history has shop = beer that was added in this edit
shop=beer ? Maybe shop=alcohol alcohol=beer would work well, indicating that shop sells primarily this alcohol? Having separate shop types for sake, whisky, cider, beer, wine, red wine etc etc seems a poor idea while cascading tagging still provides full info for anyone interested while providing also top-level basic info for someone wanting 100 shop types rather than 10 000.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=alcohol
PoliticalCorrectnessGoneMad (2026-01-13 13:10:13+00:00): In the U.S. state of New York, a store may sell beer OR wine and liquor, but not both. I know this because I live in Middletown.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-05-30 03:03:11+00:00): is this weird legislation changing anything in this context?
PoliticalCorrectnessGoneMad (2026-05-30 11:32:34+00:00): There are no "alcohol shops" in New York. You may serve beer, wine, and spirits at a bar. You may not sell beer, wine, and spirits for home consumption all from the same store, so the tag shop=alcohol does not apply.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-01 12:34:13+00:00): OSM classification is not intended to 100% match legislation in each jurisdiction, and shop selling subtype of alcohol is still an alcohol shop, I think
unodecrespos (2025-02-25 20:27:54+00:00): Hola, Pacomanosanta, he visto que has duplicado el nodo de tu negocio, pero técnicamente debería ir todo en el mismo nodo si está en el mismo sitio. Los diferentes teléfonos y nombres se ponen con diferentes atributos dentro del mismo nodo. Un amigo mío tiene un tatu tuyo, por cierto :-)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162776062
Pacomanosanta (2025-03-02 15:27:56+00:00): Buenas tardes, la idea de ponerlo asi es para que se pueda localizar rapidamente tanto una cosa como otra.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
felipeeugenio (2025-02-21 11:41:29+00:00): Nota resuelta #4635211
Taya_S (2025-02-21 11:49:17+00:00): Reverted SEO vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162776792
mweper (2025-02-21 14:10:35+00:00): Hello. This change in the street address is false, since there is no street in that section. I live in that neighborhood and I pass by there almost every day. 
This needs to be reversed to avoid navigation problems, as it does not represent reality.
If you have any questions regarding this, I am willing to answer them. Best regards.
mweper (2025-02-22 14:56:07+00:00): Sorry, dismisses the above. I just stopped by and they have indeed added the connecting bridge. Excellent for the recent update which I didn't see.

Regards.
KwandoRiver (2025-02-24 16:57:13+00:00): Thank you, have a nice day!
Thorsten De Souza_ReLUT (2025-02-21 11:52:46+00:00): private parking only! not public, private.
Papryczka (2025-02-22 10:59:49+00:00): Cześć,
Dzięki za udział w projekcie. Mam kilka uwag dotyczących twoich zmian, umieszczę je tutaj zamiast pod konkretnymi changesetami. W tym zestawie zmian dodałeś budynek, który już istnieje obok (wg ortofotomapy) oraz nie otagowałeś go jako budynek w trakcie budowy, podobnie z "Revita 21", do którego wpisałeś numer domu jako część nazwy ulicy.
grzegorz75jan (2025-07-01 16:56:57+00:00): Nie odpowiada to wycofuję. W innym zestawie pokiereszował trochę twojej roboty ale wycofałem.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162776644
grzegorz75jan (2025-07-01 16:57:39+00:00): Brak odpowiedzi oraz potwierdzenia.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168363196
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-07 23:58:52+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164656191
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-02-21 23:40:17+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history
NeisBot (2025-02-21 11:54:38+00:00): Hi 9bc638d, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
No primary map features!?

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

Looking forward to your response.

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

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=162776847
9bc638d (2025-02-21 12:43:53+00:00): This changeset is automatically split by JOSM from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162776808 .
silversurfer83 (2025-02-21 16:56:10+00:00): Hi Nuria :)

two little things:

- as a courtesy to other mappers, please write your comment either in the local language of the region you edit or in English (which is OSM's mother tongue). Thank you

- in this edit you connected one of your new paths to a power line. I disconnected them. Please watch out when clicking so you don't connect things that don't belong together like highways (any kind) and powelines or landuse. 

happy mapping and safe travels
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162776866
BR_pebble (2025-04-24 11:07:28+00:00): Hello fondolucy! Thank You for your contribution. Make sure to use imagery sources mentioned in a project - while quality checking I found incorrectly created buildings, for example ways: 1361682472, 1361447248, 1361965848. Happy Mapping!
totera (2025-02-22 23:20:52+00:00): Ciao f_gonella,
sono stati modificati i cartelli lungo la strada, ad esempio quelli di progressiva chilometrica? L'ultima volta che sono passato in zona c'erano ancora le indicazioni SP239.
Se la situazione è ancora questa, poiché sulle ex SP235 e SP236 la stessa Anas (a differenza di quanto riportato sul suo sito) ha installato cartelli con le indicazioni SR235 e SR236 anziché ripristinare i vecchi numeri di SS, prima di modificare tutti i tratti credo sia opportuno aspettare di vedere che cosa succederà nella realtà. Avevo comunque creato una relazione con le diciture Anas: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18264409
Inoltre, i tratti urbani di Fermo e Porto San Giorgio (i "buchi" nella relazione) sono stati ceduti ai comuni da decenni, non facevano più parte della SS210, non sono stati mai SP239 e non sono rientrati all'Anas.
Peraltro, il tracciato storico della SS210 a Fermo era quello a sud del centro città (Crollalanza-Carriera-Nunzi-25 Aprile) e lì è inserito old_ref=SS210. L'itinerario a nord (Bellesi-D'Acquisto-Mori), anche se è ora il percorso indicato per Porto San Giorgio/Amandola, non ha mai fatto parte né della SS210 né della SP239.
totera (2025-03-02 23:20:21+00:00): Non avendo avuto risposta, ho ripristinato la situazione precedente questo changeset e il 162785341
f_gonella (2025-06-18 09:52:11+00:00): Grazie
apm-wa (2025-05-22 00:15:32+00:00): Ashgabat is not a province. It has the legal rights of a province, but by law is categorized as a city. This relation at admin_level=4 is incorrect and should be deleted. Turkmenistan has five provinces and Ashgabat is not one of them.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-05-22 07:29:49+00:00): I agree that Ashgabat is not a province, that is why I stated that it is "equivalent to a province". By administrative division of Turkmenistan amendments from 2018 and 2022 city of Arkadag become an administrative center of Ahal velayat instead of Ashgabat. Ashgabat is excluded from Ahal velayat and now has its own administrative boundary.
apm-wa (2025-05-22 14:25:45+00:00): Ashgabat has had its own administrative boundary and has been separate from Ahal welaýat since 1992. The capital of Ahal prior to Arkadag was Änew. But that is irrelevant. The relevant fact is that Ashgabat is "equivalent to" a province (i.e., has legal status equal to the legal status of a province) but is not a province and thus should not have a boundary line tagged "admin_level=4". I can say that ibuprofen is equivalent to acetaminophen in terms of pain reduction, but that does not make ibuprofen into acetaminophen. By the same token, saying Ashgabat has legal status equivalent to that of a province does not make Ashgabat a province. Please correct this error.
apm-wa (2025-05-22 14:30:29+00:00): I refer you to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan_Geoname_Changes, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Districts_in_Turkmenistan, and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Subdivisions. These articles are based on information I collected during my tour of duty as a diplomat in Turkmenistan.
Koreller (2025-05-23 17:04:02+00:00): In my opinion because Ashgabat is a "City (şäher) with the status of a province (welaýat)" (as apm-wa write here : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Turkmenistan#Administrative_Subdivisions) it's relevant to tag it at the same level as a province.

I agree with "The relevant fact is that Ashgabat is "equivalent to" a province" and that why I think it's consistent to rank it has the same level (even if it's not the same administrative structure, it's equivalent). So to put it a an equivalent level make sense for me.
apm-wa (2025-05-23 23:59:37+00:00): Koreller, "equivalent to" does not mean "the same as". Ashgabat is a city, not a province.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-05-26 13:41:58+00:00): apm-wa, as Koreller stated "City with the status of a province" qualifies it to be tagged with the same admin_level tag on OSM. It does not promote it to be a province, just levels its administrative power. All provinces have welaýaty in their name tag. Ashgabat is a city and no one claims it is a province. There are lot of examples similar to this one accross the OSM where the same tagging has been applied, usually with capital city of the country, which has 2 administrative relations, one that showed its level of power, and another one with the same members which describes it as a city. 

Also, Ashgabat is further divided into districts, as provinces.

Will adding place=city and place=province on these admin_level=4 relations in order to distinguish differences be good enough solution?
Koreller (2025-05-27 17:40:17+00:00): @Aleksandar Matejevic Above all, whatever apm-wa's opinion, I think we should adopt what apm-wa proposes as a solution.
His knowledge from Turkmenistan is indisputable, he has been in the field (and at what level!) and still updates the wiki pages (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Turkmenistan_topics) so despite my arguments the choice of classification must go to apm-wa
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-05-27 20:25:40+00:00): Hi Koreller, thanks for the reply, I do respect the knowledge of apm-wa and I am fully aware of what he did in Turkmenistan and OSM. Hats off for that. And to be clear, I am not arguing, I am just debating the way of tagging in order to make it precise and functional. I agree with apm-wa fully about Ashgabat not being the province, however, there are lot of similar examples around the OSM world where these "equivalent" things are taken into consideration and mapped with same administrative level because function on the ground is the same. 

This is why I have sugested adding one more tag, place=city and place=province to make clear what is the type of the place but per my opinion and as I understood your comment Ashgabat has same administrative power as provinces, therefore I suggest keeping admin_level tag unchanged.

Sorry if my comments were understood as arguing or disrispecfull towards Mr Allan Mustard. I admire his enthusiasm and what he did for Turkmenistan OSM
apm-wa (2025-05-27 23:12:58+00:00): I can live with adding the place=city tag if that will settle the matter. I still argue that this leaves some confusion (admin_level=4 implies that Ashgabat is a province even though it is not) and would be happier if the admin_level=4 relation were deleted, but suspect that would eventually lead to someone else adding it back anyway. So please add place=city and let's leave it at that.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-05-28 07:27:59+00:00): Thanks!!! I have added place tags to relations.
NeisBot (2025-02-21 17:01:10+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-13 10:16:05+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163563122
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-05-31 00:08:35+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam tags and use consistent tagging with other Clean Recovery Centers in changeset 183422286

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183422286
Taya_S (2025-02-21 12:25:21+00:00): Reverted SEO vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162778325
Fizzie-DWG (2025-03-13 06:35:15+00:00): Reverted by DWG - poor quality & lack of HOT response

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163556513
nevw (2026-03-01 06:52:49+00:00): Hi, all the waterway seem to be drawn in the wrong direction through this area, Waterway are to be drawn in the direction of the waterflow....that is downhill.
mos_next_door (2025-02-21 18:22:42+00:00): You've misaligned the road using Bing without offset and deleted the restriction actually in place. This is hardly an improvement. Reverted: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162791920
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-08 01:53:44+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164657651