piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
woodpeck_repair (2023-10-27 21:58:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 143231680, 143231693, 143231687, 143231676, 143231686, 143231683, 143231691 where the changeset comment is: revert vandalism
eggie (2023-10-28 06:12:42+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Waarom twee dezelfde vermeldingen? De poi kan het beste op het gebouw zelf staan.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-10-28 06:19:32+00:00): Info samengevoegd... spelfout operator aangepast
gr eggie
woodpeck_repair (2023-10-27 21:58:42+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 143231439, 143231440, 143231452, 143231498, 143231517, 143231523, 143231536, 143231543, 143231559.
woodpeck_repair (2023-10-27 21:58:43+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 143231439, 143231440, 143231452, 143231498, 143231517, 143231523, 143231536, 143231543, 143231559.
moje_konto (2023-10-28 00:20:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1211644051/history
Tagowanie pod render, poprzednia wersja area:highway=service była prawidłowa.

Kwestia gustu - ale gruby biały obszar nawet nie wygląda ładnie.
moje_konto (2023-10-28 06:04:29+00:00): I dalej nie poprawiłeś w okolicach Jeziora masy powielonych węzłów. Trzeba je kiedyś ponownie pozłączać w jeden węzeł.

Szkoda, że zamiast to, masz czas na zabawę renderem. Edycję #143195711 usuwającą tagowanie pod render wycofałeś tego samego dnia.

.
Skrypt szukający powielone węzły. Ale przy edycji też powinno być ostrzeżenie, że węzeł się powieliło.
https://overpass-turbo.eu
[bbox:{{bbox}}];
node;
foreach->.a(
node(around.a:0)->.b;
(.b; - .a;);
out;
);
HellMap (2023-10-28 09:00:27+00:00): Sveiki vēlreiz!

`access` tegi (`bicycle`, `foot` utt.) uz satiksmes ceļiem ir galvenokārt domāti legāliem ierobežojumiem, piemēram ceļa zīme, kas aizliedz braukt vai arī tas ir fiziski neiespējams.

Ņemot to vērā, gribēju noskaidrot, kāds avots vai princips izmantots atzīmējot `bicycle=no` uz ceļiem šajā apkārtnē? Piemēram, cik zinu nekas neaizliedz velosipēdus uz tādiem ceļiem kā https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/303613530 vai https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4473052 .

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
epxmap (2023-10-28 15:06:22+00:00): Sveiki!
Izmaiņas veicu maršrutēšanas uzlabošanas nolūkos - ar velosipēdu tiek piedāvātas brauktuves, kaut gan drošāk un ērtāk būtu izmantot ietves, kas uz Akmens tilta un krastmalā būtu loģiskākais variants.
HellMap (2023-10-28 15:38:36+00:00): Skaidrs.

Ja maršrutētājs rāda nepareizi, tad sūdzība jāraksta maršrutētājam par nepareizu maršruta izvēli. Šeit vest pa `primary`/`secondary` ielām ir galīgi šķībi.

Bet OSM datos gan nevar likt nepareizas vērtības. Drošība un ērtums ir tieši tās lietas, kas ir jāizšķir maršrutētājam, jo tās ir subjektīvas un nav dabā pārbaudāmas. Citiem vārdiem, katram ir savs viedoklis par to, kur droši vai nedroši braukt. Citam šāds `bicycle=no` tik pat labi var sabojāt maršrutu braucot pa ielām. 
Jo jebkurā gadījumā, aizliegts šeit nekur nav.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability#Objective_criteria

Tieši tas pats arī ar `bicycle=yes` - tas ar zīmēm nav norādīts un celiņus nepadara vairāk piemērotus. Un ietvju gadījumā tas pēc CSN nemaz nav pareizi. Bet tā kā  `bicycle=yes` neapstādina maršrutēšanu, tad to vēl var likt.
epxmap (2023-10-28 16:12:35+00:00): Paldies, ņemšu vērā.
richlv (2023-11-07 13:45:23+00:00): Velo maršrutēšanas "hintiem" var noderēt šie:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dseparate
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dsidepath
HellMap (2023-11-08 09:10:46+00:00): Jā, bet te gan tādu nav - te visur parastās ietves.
moje_konto (2023-10-28 00:21:51+00:00): www.openstreetmap.org/way/1211644068/history
Tagowanie pod render, poprzednia wersja area:highway=service była prawidłowa.
user_17222985 (2024-06-26 06:10:39+00:00): у даному випадку новостворені вулиці треба мапити як highway=proposed

мапити новостворені вулиці як highway=construction є бред і дічь повна 
Читай правила і розвивайся як картограф бо ти стільки років у проекті а розвитку навичок і вмінь нема ніякого
VLD549 (2024-04-27 09:02:59+00:00): Hi, could you maybe provide a link that displays the name change from Hollebeekstraat to Cardoenlaan?
I'm asking because I can't verify it.
Plus, it looks like there will be two times Cardoenlaan number 10,12,14 when this street is indeed Cardoenlaan. It is not really possible.

Thank you! :)
GR-menneke (2024-04-28 21:23:17+00:00): Hello,
I verified the streetname again in LARA (Official Register of Adresses in the Dutch speaking part of Belgium). The streetname is Hollebeekstraat (not Cardoenlaan). I'll make a new changeset
Thanks for your remark!
Nice GReetings,
GR-menneke
VLD549 (2024-05-24 08:22:38+00:00): Thank you for the response, happy mapping!
NorthCrab_upload (2023-10-27 22:50:21+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3675989527

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Kai Johnson (2023-11-01 13:31:02+00:00): Hi! What happened to Tahanea Atoll which was previously tagged on this way? Did the information in the tags on this way get moved somewhere else or did we lose this information?
ftrebien (2024-06-13 14:43:22+00:00): Recuperei a Esplanada Vaticano excluída neste changeset, acho que por engano. Por favor, tenha cuidado.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:51:09+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234408
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:51:06+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234405
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:51:01+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234402
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:56+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234401
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:50+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234400
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:45+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234397
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:40+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234394
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:31+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234391
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:26+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234390
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:21+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234388
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:50:10+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234384
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:33+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234355
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:28+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234352
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:23+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234346
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:19+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234344
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:12+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234340
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:07+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234337
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-27 23:48:02+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143234333
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-28 00:57:21+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143235819
Taya_S (2025-08-19 08:44:05+00:00): Hello Andrew,

I'm a bit confused by the messy protected area situation here and I want to make sure I understand the situation here.

I can see that there are two almost overlapping protected aeas. One which excludes the islands and one which doesn't
e.g 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1218905794 includes the islands from the LWM and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/600526191 excludes the islands from the HWM

You're saying these two almost overlapping procted areas are deliberate due to one using HWM and the other the LWM?

Best regards,
Taya Snijder
TheSwavu (2025-08-19 11:13:43+00:00): It crazy complicated. There is https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8383494 (Montebello Islands Conservation Park). Which has been gazetted in 2 parts. I have not put them in separately because it's getting busy enough as it is. They have the same name and IUCN category. There is https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16229842 Montebello Islands Marine Park which has four different IUCN category areas that are mapped as sub-areas of this relation.
Taya_S (2025-08-19 13:46:44+00:00): I think I'm starting to understand it now. What a convoluted mess. Thanks for explaining
citrula (2023-10-28 23:43:59+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I have corrected the location of the POI as well as the street name in the address (changed FM 18825 -> FM 1825)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143235133
AngryKoconut (2023-10-28 01:02:22+00:00): I totally fubbed this, any way to delete?
ConsEbt (2023-10-30 22:00:43+00:00): Hello fellow mapper. great to see that you worked on this area.
I noticed that you moved the nodes from the trunk road leading onto Wakehurst Parkway. 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/171031928

Please have another look since the tag "placement=right_of:1"
is now not really needed any more.
ConsEbt (2023-10-30 22:02:24+00:00): same applies for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4334877
where 
"placement=left_of:1" is now contradicting the node locations.
AngryKoconut (2023-10-28 01:02:49+00:00): I think I fixed my mistake here, sorry anyone.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-30 19:01:20+00:00): What kind of remains are present where https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1218914265/history existed?

Have you checked at all whether such remains exist?
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-24 12:27:46+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150444714
gscholz (2023-10-29 10:22:34+00:00): Hi hundenvonPenang,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=100.19415&lat=5.30608&zoom=17&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=143236753

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
griffonboi (2023-11-12 09:23:22+00:00): While it is a "rapid-transit" route, it is still connected to the suburban rail network and should be tagged as such. It is not an entirely self-contained system
SHB2000 (2023-11-12 10:01:39+00:00): There was a long discussion on Wikipedia on this issue, before finally coming to the conclusion that it was a rapid-transit route. Ultimately, OSM isn't Wikipedia, OSM's policy on this per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging is "Underground railway in larger cities, powered mostly by third rail. It has its own vehicles and signal system. Sometimes it also comes to the surface or is on an aerial causeway for a segment. Do not map ordinary railway, which goes partially underground, with this tag! (Instead, use layer=-1 or a "deeper" negative value and tunnel=yes). Subway/Metro is usually considered 'heavy rail' and is always distinct from 'light rail.'"

Seems to fulfill all the points listed on that page.
griffonboi (2023-11-12 10:12:10+00:00): You would have to tag the entire Sunbury - Pakenham/Cranboune line as rail=subway then, which is impossible since there are sections with V/Lines running on it. If you have to mix and match sections, then it is not a true subway.
user_5359 (2023-10-28 06:16:09+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys). Please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org!
431c57 (2025-01-11 19:47:30+00:00): Überweg ist ein Zebrastreifen. DOP sind nicht aktuell.
ivanbranco (2023-10-28 11:33:08+00:00): Ciao totera,

il ref:mise che hai aggiunto qui: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5028043510
in realtà appartiene a questo benzinaio: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5851831950

essendo lontani dubito entrambi abbiano il civico 80 ecc. riusciresti a controllare?

buon mapping
ivanbranco (2023-10-28 11:40:45+00:00): Stessa cosa qui: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/760001246/history (questo e quello giusto)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1364270429 (questo ha il ref:mise duplicato)

non possono avere lo stesso civico
totera (2023-10-28 12:19:19+00:00): Ho corretto entrambe le situazioni (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143258228 e https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143258557).  
Grazie della pronta segnalazione (hai uno script?)
ivanbranco (2023-10-28 12:25:59+00:00): No, ogni tanto faccio un giro su taginfo e guardo quali valori di ref:mise e ref:msal sono presenti due volte (cosa non possibile in quanto sono valori univoci)
totera (2023-10-30 09:40:53+00:00): Ah, semplice ma efficace, non ci avevo mai pensato.  
Controllo sempre i suggerimenti di integrazione di Osmose prima di inserirli, ma la prudenza non è mai troppa!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-02 13:25:40+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11294696744/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
GOwin (2023-10-30 10:32:11+00:00): Hi @edwarderos! We appreciate your effort in contributing edits to OSM, which are published publicly. However, the notations you made to the feature are also public, and is not relevant for other users. We hope that you'll continue your participation, but try to keep your private noteabto yourself.
rene78 (2023-11-01 17:37:24+00:00): Hi Zh9567, great work! Just some minor comment: "building=terrace" seems to be the right tag if you have one polygon for all the terraced houses. Since you have drawn each house separately the correct tagging for each house would be "building=house, house=terraced". https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dterrace
user_5359 (2023-10-28 06:17:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys). Please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org!
Hufkratzer (2023-10-28 20:09:14+00:00): Hola,
Has mapeado 3 áreas con la etiqueta leisure_horse_riding para Centro Ecuestre San Andrés. Pero en realidad sólo hay un Centro Ecuestre San Andrés, por lo que la wiki recomienda: "Usa esta etiqueta sólo una vez para toda la instalación, no la uses varias veces para diferentes objetos que pertenecen a ella (regla "Una característica, un elemento OSM" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:leisure=horse_riding).

¿Podrías mapear sólo un área para este centro ecuestre que contenga todo lo que le pertenece? Los edificios dentro de esta área deben tener una etiqueta building=* (por ejemplo building=stable), de lo contrario no se mostrarán como edificios en el mapa.

Aquí un buen ejemplo:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934817669 (Rancho La Joya)
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-17 06:20:56+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144123621
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-17 06:20:57+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144123621
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-28 05:59:44+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15286
InsertUser (2023-10-28 17:57:05+00:00): The undocumented #geostar2023 is not an explanation of what was changed.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
michttch (2024-08-14 20:41:08+00:00): Hallo Supt_of_Printing,
ich bin gerade auf deine Änderungen hier gestoßen. Kann es sein, dass Du die Änderungen größtenteils auf den Bing Bildern aufgebaut hast? Die sind nämlich immer noch veraltet, da die Haltestelle und drumherum ja einiges umgebaut wurde. Jetzt sind teilweise veraltete Fußwege drin, etc. (bspw. der Way 1218938075) oder GPS angenäherte Wege verschoben (bspw. der Way 1166243598). Vielleicht hast Du ja Zeit und Lust, Dir das demnächst anzuschauen und ggfs. zu korrigieren. Achja, wieso hast Du die Fußwege bei den Zebrastreifen bis auf den tatsächlichen Fußweg gemappt, obwohl dieser nicht separat eingetragen wurde? Meines Wissens sollen die dann nur bis zur Kreuzung laufen, da sie sonst im "Nichts" enden.
VG michttch

Translated with DeepL.com (free version):
Hello Supt_of_Printing,
I just came across your CS here. Could it be that you have based most of the changes on the Bing images? They are still outdated, as the station and the surrounding area have been rebuilt. Some of the footpaths are now outdated (e.g. the way 1218938075) or GPS-approximated paths have been moved (e.g. the way 1166243598). Perhaps you have the time and inclination to take a look at this soon and correct it if necessary. By the way, why have you mapped the footpaths at the crosswalks to the actual footpath, even though these were not mapped separately? As far as I know, they should only run as far as the crossing, otherwise they end in “nothing”.
VG michttch
Langlaeufer (2023-10-29 10:33:22+00:00): oops, 30 + maxspeed:type:urban ist  natürlich falsch
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143243170
NorthCrab_upload (2023-10-28 06:20:25+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/492680229

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_5359 (2023-11-01 10:28:53+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please stick to one notation of The newly introduced key air_quality%.  (See https://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=Air_quality#keys) If a key can only have one value, the value should be in the value and not in parenthesis with the key. 

We record air quality monitoring stations (see key monitoring), but rarely the measured values or classifications. Why? Because these can change relatively frequently and are hardly controllable without specifying the time of measurement (e.g. source:air_quality).

Is there any documentation on the project?
AndersAndersson (2023-10-29 00:07:33+00:00): You deleted information about what kind of trees it is. I readded it.

Deleting information you don't understand is not a way to improve the map.
user_5359 (2023-10-29 04:09:41+00:00): If _OBJECTNAME_ describe the type of the tree, please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree for better description.
AndersAndersson (2023-10-29 10:09:56+00:00): I think you miss something important here. It is not me who should look things up.
It is you that obviously should look things up so you don't delete information added by other users.
The database can always be improved, but this cleaning you (and other Microsoft people) are doing is close to vandalism since you dont give a fuck about what your'e deleting.
YPGGUUY (2023-12-15 23:20:02+00:00): 您好, 感谢您的贡献.
我们注意到, 您将围安大道/高要大道(X438)标记为主要公路(primary). 但是, 按照共识, 县道的公路等级应为次要公路(secondary). 抑或您有其他充分理由?
参考: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E6%A0%87%E6%B3%A8%E6%8C%87%E5%8D%97#%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E7%A7%8D%E7%B1%BB
mavl (2026-05-03 05:38:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 182142872 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20224].
Warin61 (2023-12-18 23:56:18+00:00): Hi,
I find it better to map the fields more individually. The fields don't conform to north to south nor east west lines. 
The relation 16607085 should include all the water ways as inners. Some of the landuse=farmyard are actually alnduse=residential.
Ydgfb (2023-12-19 02:21:41+00:00): Hi there.
Could you please elaborate on the difference between the residential landuse and the farmyard landuse? I haven't been able to find this sort of nuance elsewhere so I would appreciate it if you would help me understand. Thanks.
Warin61 (2023-12-19 09:45:51+00:00): From https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Farmyard
Landuse=farmyard: Area of land with farm buildings (farmstead, sheeds, stables) / barnyard

Landuse=residential: An area of land having predominantly residential buildings such as houses or apartment buildings.
gscholz (2023-11-11 10:05:06+00:00): Hi OSM18WVL,
you recent edits in this region have created a lot of errors regarding overlapping buildings:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=143245467

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
habi (2023-10-30 20:08:31+00:00): Ciao ach90
Du hast die Bauumfahrung mit `highway=construction` und `construction=motorway` erfasst.
Wenn du https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Switzerland/Map_Features#Highway anschaust, ist das eine "Autobahn im Bau".
Nüt gegen die Entwicklungspläne von Laupen, aber das dünkt mich jetzt schon etwas übertrieben, nicht?
Gruss aus Bern,
habi
ach90 (2023-11-02 12:25:37+00:00): Hallo habi
Danke für den Hinweis. Habe nun das Attribut auf tertiary geändert.
Gruss aus Bern/Laupen, ach90
habi (2023-11-04 13:57:38+00:00): 👌
mweper (2023-10-28 18:00:44+00:00): Hola Pepe. ¿Porque has quitado el nombre de la autopista, si corresponde con el nombre oficial en las normativas/ordenanzas?
También, fijate que se han roto varias relaciones de la zona. 

Para no generar más errores o problemas en el mapa, me temo que debo revertir por ahora estos cambios. 

Por favor, antes de realizar algún cambio tan grande e importante, comparte tus intenciones y háblalo con la comunidad y así no generar una "guerra de cambios".
JezCrow (2023-11-03 21:48:53+00:00): Hi CjMalone,
Not sure what was the intention of your edit here, but that postcode is over 250 miles away from here!
CjMalone (2023-11-04 08:03:51+00:00): Thank you, it look like my clip board let me down!

Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143602201
CjMalone (2023-11-04 08:04:08+00:00): (Or user error, your choice)
vonrockos (2023-10-28 18:43:49+00:00): не удаляйте пожалуйста полигоны растительности, они нужны для мелких масштабов
user_20455538 (2023-10-29 02:33:58+00:00): Нафига? Я каждое отдельное дерево отметил, которых там не так уж и много. А до этого всё пространство было сада было напофиг покрыто полигонами леса, даже там где деревьев нет. Если уж хочешь использовать полигоны, для того чтобы было видно на мелких масштабах, то делай точнее, по контуру крон деревьев, а не тупо всё пространство сада этим покрывай.
vonrockos (2023-10-29 11:53:57+00:00): Стоило бы претегировать ошибочные полигоны древесной растительности в газоны. А деревья вы не все отметили, если уж на то пошло, явно не на местности смотрели, а на довольно старом снимке.
TrickyFoxy (2023-11-01 17:56:57+00:00): Вы дублируете реки. Остановитесь
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143248168
Vladimir_Geroev (2023-11-02 14:03:02+00:00): Виноват, исправлю. А есть ли механизм, позволяющий автоматом выявить такие грехи? Это у меня последствия после массового удаления моих данных пользователем mavl (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/mavl) по надуманной причине. Он и в Вашем случае дублирует Вашку Пакет правок: 137597823
TrickyFoxy (2023-11-02 14:12:22+00:00): Я отловил это по подозрительным обрывам на https://frexosm.ru/basin/#3/62/100

Вообще валидатор в JOSM должен ругаться на дубликаты точек и линий. (при условии, что в нужной области данные из осма загружены)
mavl (2023-12-14 15:34:15+00:00): @Vladimir_Geroev  
  
Нарушение авторских прав не является надуманной причиной. Это и нарушение законодательства многих стран (в том числе России) и правила проекта.  
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms