piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
TeamDELKO (2025-07-08 13:40:36+00:00): Oui je ne comprenais pas pourquoi certains garages étaient sous forme de point, et donc sans l'attribut building et d'autres avec une surface et donc avec l'attribut building. Quelle est la meilleure reco du coup ? Transformer tous les points en surface (et donc attribut building) ou de mettre sous la forme d'un point. 

J'aimerais avoir la certitude de choisir le bon élément pour tous les garages.
Syl (2025-07-08 13:49:45+00:00): Je dirais ne rien faire en masse et laisser en l'état avec un mélange de points et de surfaces suivant les cas. Ces deux façons différentes de faire coexistent car elles correspondent à deux réalités différentes suivant les endroits.

Et ne modifier au cas par cas que si vous être savez que ce qui est là est faux.
Par exemple si un garage est sur le bâtiment alors que ce n'est pas son unique usage. Dans ce cas un nœud peut-être créé et les attributs du garage copiés dessus, en ne laissant sur le polygone que les attributs concernant le bâtiment.
Ou si à l'inverse le bâtiment n'est utilisé que par le garage, dans ce cas le nœud peut-être supprimé et tous les attributs copiés sur le bâtiment.
TeamDELKO (2025-07-08 13:55:58+00:00): D'accord merci, c'est très clair. Je regarderai plus tard au cas par cas pour décider du meilleur statut à mettre pour chaque garage. En attendant peut être qu'on peut supprimer les modifications que j'ai fait ce matin...hmm désolé
Syl (2025-07-09 08:05:09+00:00): Je n'avais pas répondu à vos autres demandes d'aides car je ne souhaite pas faire les choses à votre place mais si il s'agit juste d'enlever les attributs building des nœuds avec la marque Delko je peux m'en occuper. Confirmez-moi que c'est ce que vous voulez et je peux voir pour m'en occuper dans la journée.
TeamDELKO (2025-07-09 08:13:37+00:00): Oui je comprends tout à fait. Si cela peut me permettre de repartir d'une base saine, je veux bien que vous supprimiez le tout.

Après analyse des concurrents (notamment Feu Vert). J'ai vu qu'ils optez pour la solution suivante : surface du bâtiment avec l'attribut building=retail, donc pas de points.

Est-ce que ce serait facile pour vous de faire ça pour tous les garages brand=Delko ?
Syl (2025-07-09 08:55:00+00:00): Je vous ai déjà répondu sur ce point : "Je dirais ne rien faire en masse et laisser en l'état avec un mélange de points et de surfaces suivant les cas. Ces deux façons différentes de faire coexistent car elles correspondent à deux réalités différentes suivant les endroits."

Un passage systématique en surface de bâtiment n'est pas correct à plusieurs endroits, par exemple : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/521440534 ou https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11187842391
Si vous tenez à utiliser des surfaces partout il est possible pour ces cas de tracer une nouvelle surface qui représenterait l'emprise exacte du garage à l'intérieur du bâtiment, mais qui n'aurait pas l'attribut building comme ça ne représente pas le bâtiment. Et ce serait du cas par cas, ce n'est possible en masse ni sans connaître l'emprise à chaque fois.

Je vais voir pour enlever les attributs building des nœuds Delko.
Bonne journée.
TeamDELKO (2025-07-09 09:17:40+00:00): Ok merci pour les exemples, ça va m'aider.

Merci pour votre aide, je découvre vraiment l'outil et l'univers de la cartographie, d'où mes interrogations un peu redondantes...
NeisBot (2025-07-08 10:31:08+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 05:19:33+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169089450
olsols (2025-08-24 20:35:44+00:00): Nie jestem pewien czy "construction" dobrze oddaje to co się tam dzieje. W terenie jakichś istotnych aktywności (przynajmniej w tym zaznaczonym miejscu) jeszcze nie widać.
charl3s (2025-08-24 21:44:50+00:00): własnie zaczynają działać w terenie. Ale faktycznie złapali coś opóźnienie i z miesiąc w OSM bez potrzeby był costruction.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-08 11:20:57+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/12987503318

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
jcnl44 (2025-07-08 18:26:35+00:00): Bonjour,
Pourquoi avoir remplacé le shop=chocolate par shop=grocery, qui est moins précis, alors que le commerce est bien un commerce de vente de chocolats ?
votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (2025-07-09 06:43:08+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour votre alerte.
Effectivement, c'est une erreur de notre part, nous avons fait la correction nécessaire

Cordialement,
L'Equipe DB
NeisBot (2025-07-08 11:24:56+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
Smileworks Aesthetic Training HUB (2025-07-08 12:18:05+00:00): I will remove it.
ras52 (2025-07-10 09:36:06+00:00): You've removed the boundary=administrative tag.  Please can you reinstate this?
NeisReview (2025-07-10 18:47:04+00:00): Thank you for removing the mentioned description @ https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168647338

The removed boundary-tag has been reverted @ https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168734135
rskedgell (2025-07-08 13:00:48+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

If your business is only on the 3rd floor of Nena House, it would be better to add it as either a node (point), with the additional tags level=3 and addr:floor=3rd Floor.

As it stands, you have overwritten tags which apply to the building as a whole.

If you need any help with this, please feel free to ask.
Yog Sot (2025-07-08 19:08:10+00:00): tak na prawdę, to tam tak winno być niby... ale MIR nigdy nie umiał w oznakowanie i jest miszmasz ;]
Trochę zmianiłem i dodałem niewidome wypustki na wypadek gdyby wpadła jednokreskowa siła uderzeniowa ;]
dadavid (2025-07-08 12:08:32+00:00): Hi, 

thank you for your edits and welcome to osm :) 

i dont think foot=no is appropriate here, people can walk to the houses there no problem, especially delivery services or emergency services. But you're right, its not appropriate for the general public to take a leisurly walk there. You could mark them as foot=destination, but only if thats signed there. 

I would suggest adding highway=service service=driveway where appropriate. 

The same applies to many of your other edits :) 

Greetings

David
Mbg79 (2025-07-09 09:25:29+00:00): Hi. 
I agree with your input. I found this tip on a reddit forum. We have now tried changing it to driveways, but couldnt figure out the whole procedure you refered to, with highway=service, then service=driveway. Will look into that. 
Thank you for your comment!

Best, Marte
kubahahaha (2025-11-15 11:46:52+00:00): Te tagi operatora to tak miały być?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5053811
Anas masuris (2025-11-15 11:49:04+00:00): To dodawałem przed standaryzacją, więc zaraz poprawię xd
aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa (2025-07-08 12:23:51+00:00): a
BarryMyles (2025-07-08 23:51:55+00:00): "a" ?!?
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-07-09 06:52:23+00:00): các loại đường thuộc khu công nghiệp nên để service bạn nhé. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice
yelisey90 (2026-01-13 17:10:37+00:00): reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177188720
Pan (2025-07-10 01:29:51+00:00): Y a-t-il vraiment un "arrêt de bus" sur les rails ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12987650201

Par ailleurs, le "nom" ne devrait pas décrire l'objet.
Leo Slager (2025-07-09 11:37:06+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Kovoschiz (2025-07-08 17:26:33+00:00): This is obviously not the same. Light vehicles still use it. Heavy vehicles can use it downhill.
Kovoschiz (2025-07-08 17:50:59+00:00): Cf Kam Tin. Bypassed Rd only demoted 1 tier.
vectorial8192 (2025-07-09 08:54:38+00:00): Re Kam Tin, at least the replaced road is mostly flat, so it makes sense to see `highway=secondary`.

Looking back here, the Old Road is very steep and has many traffic lights. It's way too difficult to maneuver through the Old Road. I don't see how the Old Road is worth a `=secondary` classification.

This is why the quoted precedent is Castle Peak Road Tsuen Wan.
vectorial8192 (2025-07-09 08:56:45+00:00): Also, with the New Road allowing and supporting 70kph traffic through a not-so-steep path, I do not see the importance of the Old Road other than "it is shorter".
Kovoschiz (2025-07-10 04:38:05+00:00): 1. That's a relative perspective. This corridor is not flat, therefore the roads will not be flat. As I said, I was talking about mostly light vehicles, and heavy vehicles downhill. 
2. The junction spacing between Fung Shing St and Jat's Incline is not bad for a more urban region. Good Hope School is only a mid-block crosswalk.  Fei Ngo Shan Rd might be seen as constrained by terrain only, and actually related to Clear Water Bay Rd. Junction spacing itself isn't decisive, as they could be coordinated, so the intersecting roads need to be compared as well. 
3. Still need to consider in context, and compare with the surroundings. It's quite different from eg Lee On Rd — Shun On Rd, and  Choi Hing Rd — Choi Ha Rd. It's not very highly localized traffic only. 
4. This only justifies NCWBR being `=primary` and more important than CWBR. It doesn't explain why the latter should be `=tertiary` rather than `=secondary` , demoting 1 more tier. 
Cf Pok Fu Lam Rd?
vectorial8192 (2025-07-11 16:13:43+00:00): Re Pok Fu Lam Road, I see the `=secondary` section is essentially the only path towards the `=primary` section, so it makes sense for them to be `=secondary`, though it makes that area full of `=secondary` roads, which is unavoidable.

Still, again, looking at Castle Peak Road Tsuen Wan, Belvedere Garden section, does it make sense to promote it to `=secondary`? Eastbound vehicles can take the turn into the Old Road, which I think is similar to the situation here at Clear Water Bay Road. It's shorter too, just like the situation here, with possibly coordinated traffic lights. But no one would do that; they would just continue on towards Hoi On Road.

Re Fei Ngo Shan Road, while one may argue it wants to connect with Clear Water Bay Road and so the relevant section should be at least `=secondary`, one may also consider that the vehicle essentially still stays inside some local roads until the turn to the New Road near Good Hope School, at which point it promotes to `=primary`. It is then a pure coincidence the vehicle is passing through the Old Road, and then the Old Road does not have obvious importance.

Also consider KMB 91/91M, sometimes when they are sending trips from UST to Kowloon, depending on the vehicle running the trip, they just have to take the New Road and omit stops because the Old Road is just too difficult to maneuver (I think is vehicle length restriction). Further argument for why the Old Road is just not as important as `=secondary`. 

It's just like CPR-TsuenWan, except this time the local road is longer, and may by coincidence also support cross-district traffic.

Thus, I think the Clear Water Bay Road (old section) should be `=tertiary` instead of the inaccurate `=secondary`.
Kovoschiz (2025-07-13 03:06:18+00:00): 1. I'm talking about northbound which is bypassed by `=primary` Hill Rd Flyover. Seems a close comparison.  
2. You keep discussing CPBR only, but is it really comparable? For reference only, the bypassed CWBR is officially a District Distributor, and actually has an AADT of a similar magnitude with NCWBR between Lee On Rd and Shun Lee Tsuen Rd, higher than the latter and Sau Mau Ping Rd. https://atc.td.gov.hk/aadt/3019 https://atc.td.gov.hk/pdf/2018/S3019.pdf
3. I'm only saying they should be considered a set of related junctions, only split up into different intersections and traffic lights from the terrain constraint. So this shouldn't be penalized. 
4. As I said, I'm mostly asking about light vehicles, and only downhill for heavy vehicles.  
5. If it does "support cross-district traffic", why shouldn't it be `=secondary` ? 
6. It's significant and important on a district level. I don't see how it's absolutely "inaccurate".
vectorial8192 (2025-07-15 17:08:22+00:00): To be fair, this is my first time knowing about AADT, so I don't know how to respond to this.

It seems strange heavy vehicles are disallowed to go uphill but are allowed downhill.

From the many available bus videos passing by at the lower end, I can repeatedly see the signage to be something like this:
"Go forward for Sai Kung"
"Go left for Fei Ngo Shan"
No "alternative routes" specified for Sai Kung, which would otherwise justify `=secondary`. (I think Kam Tin Bypass has a "alternative route to Kam Tin" somewhere...)

It really seems like the Old Road is not supposed to handle cross-district traffic. It actually being physically capable of doing so seems like a coincidence, so it really cannot be `=secondary`.

Again, this feels like a local road that is extra long and open on both ends.

How do you think about these?
Kovoschiz (2025-07-16 08:31:01+00:00): 2. Not disallowed, only the functionality  
3. Signage would be an additional criteria, but not required/necessary. You have to consider the simplicity of signage, and encouraging you to use NCWBR, but that only means NCWBR should be `=primary` , not bypassed CWBR can't be `=secondary` . Eg airport is signposted via Tsing Sha Hwy in Shatin, but majority or at least significant minority would use Shing Mun Tunnels, and I would argue this should be considered in classifying Tsing Yi N Coastal Rd — Tsing Tsuen Rd (besides how it connects with Route 5).
vectorial8192 (2025-07-18 15:41:48+00:00): Re Shing Mun Tunnel & Airport, other than it being the Old Road, I see this is only because SMT is only $5 and TSH is $8, and this usage pattern will most likely go away when $5 -> $8. (They say both side mileage is similar but TSH is friendlier on engine wear.)

Back to here, when I really think about it, I think you are right. If I am not mistaken from the AADT stats, it seems about 33% of relevant traffic actually goes through the Old Road.

To reiterate, I have no idea why the ratio is this high, and I really feel this should be `=tertiary`, but looking back at OSM principles, I should just take this as "the locals do be like that" and restore the Old Road to be `=secondary`.
vectorial8192 (2025-07-18 15:57:00+00:00): Reverted via https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169116643
joost schouppe (2025-07-25 08:29:51+00:00): Hoi Jos,
Waarom heb je hier de brandweerkazerne gewist? (way 1211338594)
Ik zie niet direct een reden om ze te wissen (en deze data is nogal belangrijk voor ons), dus ik heb ze voorlopig teruggehaald.
Terzijde: het is in Vlaanderen niet nodig om postcode en gemeente op adressen te zetten, geocoders kunnen dit zelf automatisch aanvullen
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-25 11:18:47+00:00): reverted edits that added suspect data, it is from a suspect account, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166617410  and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164649036 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163053969  remain not answered

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173751545
AurélienQ (2025-07-14 09:52:12+00:00): Light-rail n'a rien à voir avec un métro léger. Cela signifie que c'est une voie ferrée spécialement aménagée pour pouvoir accueillir des trains à une certaine vitesse, tout en étant une infra plus légère que les voies ferrées classiques. 

Ici ne passent que des tram-trains, tandis que la voie Nantes-Chateaubriant (utilisée par le tram-train de Nantes) est une infra lourde répondant aux même normes que le reste du réseau ferrée européen. On ne peut donc pas appliquer la même logique. Par contre on est sur le même modèle que le tram train de l'est lyonnais, ou le T13 parisien. Je révoque donc tes modifs.
Glassman (2025-07-09 16:33:23+00:00): It appears you dragged some nodes on landuse polygons when adding the flock device. I have reverted this and two subsequent changesets because of the damage done. The rest of your edits look ok.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168649762
Leo Slager (2025-07-09 22:14:27+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
JvS-68 (2025-07-11 09:11:01+00:00): Dank voor je welkom en mail met tops Leo.

M vr gr, Johan
user_5359 (2025-07-09 17:04:55+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1413264300. What is the mean of the tag addr:sпереулок = переулок Цементного завода ?
addr: (2025-07-10 09:21:16+00:00): Thank you for noticing the error. Fixed.
nleanba (2025-07-16 11:53:50+00:00): Scheint mir fragwürdig, die für Strassenfahrzeuge gedachten parking tags zu brauchen hier. Warum parking=mooring erfinden statt https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:mooring zu benutzen?
stillhart (2025-07-17 21:16:25+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/boat-parking-area-and-boat-parking-spaces/131144

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Any_tags_you_like

What would actually be better?
habi (2025-11-03 08:13:26+00:00): Ciao stillhart
Ich lande wegen https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5035512 hier.
Wenn du die Parkplätze mit `amenity=parking` erfasst, dann werden deren Details in StreetComplete angefragt, und jede App, die das verarbeitet (https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/amenity=parking#projects) führt User:innen, die einen *Auto*-Parkplatz suchen evtl. hier hin.

Ich finde ganz fest, dass `amenity=parking` hier bei https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413264660 und denen nebendran weg sollte, und wie @RichardF im Communit-Forum und @nleanba hier, dass *nur* der `mooring`-Key hierhin gehört.
habi (2025-11-03 08:16:39+00:00): Im Schweizer OSM-Chat [1] kam der Vorschlag für `amenity=mooring_space` bei den einzelnen Plätzen.

[1]: https://osm.ch/hilfe.html
habi (2025-11-03 08:31:41+00:00): Da der Vorschlag auch bei https://c.osm.org/t/131144/7 kam, habe ich dies so in Riesbach (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174135571) und so in der Enge umgesetzt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174135733)
pyrog (2026-03-10 08:27:25+00:00): Bonjour,

La prolongation du way à cassé l'itinéraire de randonnée pédestre PR 2 - Sentier des berges :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1218642481 

Je corrige.

Cordialement,
Yves - Groupe OSM Plein Air
doggosmile (2025-07-09 08:05:00+00:00): the more i look at this, the more errors i notice, please just use the road nodes and trace the boundaries accordingly in major cities.
eerib (2025-07-08 17:29:31+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-07-09 06:55:11+00:00): Note rất chi tiết. Rất cám ơn bạn. Hi vọng có dịp gặp bạn ỏ Hà Nội giao lưu OpenStreetMap và Mapillary.
eerib (2025-07-08 17:29:26+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
yelisey90 (2026-01-13 17:04:03+00:00): reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177188514
yelisey90 (2026-01-13 17:04:04+00:00): reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177188514
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-25 11:18:36+00:00): reverted edits that added suspect data, it is from a suspect account, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166617410  and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164649036 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163053969  remain not answered

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173751532
habi (2025-07-10 12:15:56+00:00): Mersi für die Aktualisierung!
eerib (2025-07-08 17:29:17+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
eerib (2025-07-08 17:29:10+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
eerib (2025-07-08 17:28:49+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
eerib (2025-07-08 17:28:43+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
disc24 (2025-07-14 07:41:46+00:00): Hallo,
bitte bei Firmeneinträgen nicht einfach dem Gebäude einen Namen geben, sondern stattdessen entsprechende "shop" oder "amenity" Tags verwenden.
Danke und viele Grüße

Dirk
12071942 (2025-07-14 13:15:34+00:00): Hallo Dirk,
ich hoffe, dass ich es jetzt richtig gemacht habe. Habe den Eigennamen rausgenommen und stattdessen "amenity" benutzt.
Herzliche Grüße
Stephanie
12071942 (2025-07-14 13:26:14+00:00): PS: Für Yogapraxis, Wellnessmassage, Praxis für Persönlichkeitsentwicklung habe ich auf   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:amenity   keine Kategorie, keinen Begriff gefunden.
disc24 (2025-07-14 13:42:40+00:00): Hallo Stephanie,
shop=massage käme evtl. in Frage?!
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop%3Dmassage
Ich fürchte, was ganz genau passendes wird man nicht finden. ;-)
Evtl. noch mit massage=... verfeinern.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:massage
eerib (2025-07-08 17:28:37+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
eerib (2025-07-08 17:28:20+00:00): Vandalism Account.

All changesets have been fully reverted.

(168652838, 168652750, 168652635, 168652537, 168652410, 168652361, 168651875, 168651735, 168621866, 168621607)
jgon6 (2025-07-11 18:22:08+00:00): Isn't this a single building? I have seen it go up, and I'm pretty sure it's a single structure.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168652885
A67-A67 (2025-08-13 19:30:22+00:00): In deze wijziging wordt de residential van Vlissingen verwijderd. Ik heb deze hersteld.
simer_lkpg (2025-07-09 20:29:22+00:00): Går det att lägga till namnet på mataffären du lade till? Svårt att bedöma annars om det är en faktisk unik butik eller bara en dubblett av ICA annars.