piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
GA_Kevin (2025-02-25 03:21:23+00:00): Thank you for catching that!
citrula (2025-02-24 22:59:38+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You added a very large building which covers the entire property. Since it was already mapped at this node,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5182259138
I changed the way you drew to landuse=religious as described on the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dreligious

Let me know if you have any questions
Kovoschiz (2025-02-25 09:01:51+00:00): You changed some to `=motorway`
aliensuperstar (2025-04-08 01:16:56+00:00): la solución no es eliminar, sino añadir la etiqueta access=private.
aliensuperstar (2025-04-08 01:18:19+00:00): Y si se trata de un terreno de uso agrícola, se pone un área con landuse=farmland
felipeeugenio (2025-02-26 12:42:49+00:00): The cycleway is not even on that side of the street..... what is this?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162908032
domiden (2025-02-24 20:51:14+00:00): Should be: “… "Elfbuchenstraße" 3 and 5 …”
PierZen (2025-02-25 21:52:26+00:00): Merci de contribuer à OpenStreetMap. Dans ce premier changeset (session d'édition OSM). je vois que vous avez divisé en plusieurs parcelles les champs agricoles (landuse=farmland) ce qui est ok. Je suppose que c'est parce que vous connaissez bien le terrain. Sinon un contributeur qui ne connait pas ces fermes, aurait tracé un grand polygone qui comprend toutes les parcelles. C'est ok aussi pour les boisés. La clé landuse=farmyard est utilisée pour décrire la portion de la ferme accueillant les bâtiments (maison, étable, grange, fenil, poulailler, bergerie, écurie, silo à grain, etc.).  Il vous reste aussi à maitriser comment dessiner les bâtiments. Ceux-ci sont généralement de forme rectangulaire et pour les formes plus complexes avec encore des angles droits.  On essaie de respecter cela le plus possible. Et ensuite les outils d'édition nous aide à obtenir ces angles droits. 
le tutoriel https://learnosm.org/en/hot-tips/tracing-rectangular-buildings/ indique comment obtenir des formes rectangulaires avec l'éditeur iD - on clique sur le batiment, clique sur la touche de clavier Q pour corriger la forme.  Avec l'éditeur JOSM dont je suis plus familier, il est plus facile de tracer les différentes formes mais cet éditeur demande un apprentissage au départ.  Pour ce qui est des silos, le tutoriel https://learnosm.org/en/hot-tips/tracing-round-buildings/ indique comment tracer des formes rondes. Sinon, on peut simplement les représenter avec un point.
PierZen (2025-02-25 23:15:27+00:00): chemin https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1362681769 la première section pourrait être classifiée highway=track, chemin qui permet d'accéder aux champs.  La portion en zigzag qui représente des sillons dans les champs ne devrait pas être tracée.
macronom (2025-02-26 09:58:19+00:00): Ich habe den Namen der Relation zu „[…] Hiesfelder Wald“ korrigiert. Bitte auch das Feld "contact:website" korrigieren, das eine kaputte URL enthält. Danke.
limes11 (2025-02-26 10:21:22+00:00): Vielen Dank macronom,

"Hilsfelder" hing bereits an way 350462239 und ist leider auch auf der LANUV-Seite so angegeben:

https://nsg.naturschutzinformationen.nrw.de/nsg/de/fachinfo/gebiete/gesamt/BOT_001

Generell gibt es auf der LANUV-Seite leider einige NSGs, deren Schreibweise sich nicht mit der in der Verordnung deckt. 

Ich ersetze die url. Ich befürchte, dass es noch weitere alte http://www. - Referenzen gibt, ggf. müsste man die per Skript in einem Rutsch korrigieren.

Schöne Grüße
macronom (2025-02-26 12:07:22+00:00): Danke,  limes11.

Ich habe die auf der Seite genannte Kontaktperson angeschrieben und um Korrektur gebeten.

Gruß
macronom
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-10 16:30:30+00:00): Hello!

You used
access=permissive2
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12616242683/history

Have you maybe meant
access=permissive
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?
NeisBot (2025-02-27 09:36:02+00:00): Hi kamen1, thank you for your contribution to the OSM project.

Over your latest stretch of time, you've made at least 102 changesets with minimal or no meaningful comments.

To enhance collaboration, please consider using the comment field to describe your map changes. This helps others understand and follow your adjustments more easily. You can find guidance on good changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

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

#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Vinber-Pro (2025-05-09 14:16:16+00:00): Bonjour,
petite question sur l'actualité de cette limite, j'ai l'impression que ce n'est plus vraiment d'actualité.

Est-ce ok pour faire évoluer, voire retirer cette limite ?

bonne carto
m-ezd (2025-07-11 00:17:28+00:00): Hello, j'ai retiré, l'occupation n'est plus d'actualité et je ne pense pas que les occupations successives durent assez longtemps pour être cartographiées.
eggie (2025-02-24 21:20:07+00:00): De building tag van de parking heb ik terug gezet. Die is nodig voor de rendering.

MVG
eggie
ray_men_ (2025-02-24 22:02:21+00:00): hopelijk geef ik je niet te veel werk :(
eggie (2025-02-25 08:09:34+00:00): Neuuu... Screenen is wel leuk 'werk'. 
Hier zie je wat validators doen.
Ook leerzaam..
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussions?c=Netherlands#9/52.1672/5.0249
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:20:41+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
DressyPear4 (2025-02-25 11:17:22+00:00): Olá, a numeração não deve ser colocada no campo "nome"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162908735
felipeeugenio (2025-02-26 13:01:28+00:00): Does this connection with Alfonso Suarez even exist?
the picture is pretty recent. Is there a link with this new construction?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162908757
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:23:14+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:24:37+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:24:48+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:24:55+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
Pinstall (2025-03-01 19:25:07+00:00): squared the hand drawn rectangles
citrula (2025-02-24 22:53:46+00:00): Looks good to me
felipeeugenio (2025-02-26 13:36:38+00:00): This is a painfully schematic and low-standard drawing of the real cycleway. Please refrain from making these editions if you are unwilling to spend the proper amount of time doing the correct drawings.
One thing is to correct mistakes, but this is just laziness and even vandalism at some level.

regards
citrula (2025-02-24 22:52:58+00:00): This edit looks good to me - welcome to OSM!
GavinL2001 (2025-02-25 02:12:59+00:00): Thanks! Glad I can help contribute to a great FOSS project!
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 09:29:22+00:00): Hi ACOW20, welcome to OSM!

It seems that the changeset you created includes nodes and ways without any tags. Could there have been an issue during the mapping process?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
KarlaIbrahić (2025-02-25 10:04:47+00:00): Reverted because node was created. #OptimoRoute

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162924921
ryivhnn (2025-02-25 03:49:21+00:00): The noexit is a door (or should have been tagged as a door) into the building and is connected by internal corridor to a door on the other side.  I did note it's an isolated route (didn't get the warning probably because it's an internal corridor) and connected the doors to the surrounding footpaths if that helps, or does it need something else done to fix it?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162909777
TheSwavu (2025-02-25 10:20:54+00:00): Indoor stuff should be connected to the outdoor network for routing. In hind sight I should have been able to guess where this one went, but you can't always tell from aerial imagery.
eggie (2025-02-25 08:00:22+00:00): Dag ray men, Je vraagt feedback.
Ik denk dat je adresnode Casablancastraat 24 per abuis hebt verplaatst naar de 
Rivieradreef.
Zie
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=162910205

Dat komt meestal door schuiven met de kaart. Je selecteert dan iets onbewust met de linkermuisknop en gaat dan schuiven. Dan verschuift de node ipv de kaart.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2025-02-25 08:06:39+00:00): Adres hersteld... fitness van gebouw gehaald. Er is al een node. ..sportcity
Californiëplein construction losgemaakt van vlak. 
Plakken kun je voorkomen door de linker alttoets te gebruiken tijdens bewerken. 

Groet
eggie
cascadianstarlight (2025-02-24 21:57:14+00:00): added it in my last change because they do to-go orders, but i don't think that's what the key is actually for according to the wiki
andygol (2025-04-03 08:36:25+00:00): 1. Чи дійсно цей магазин має назву "Господарський магазин"?  Див https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Uk:Назви#Name_—_тільки_для_назв
2. Зазначена адреса для цього магазину містить номер будинку – 5 по вулиці Мирослава Скорика (у вас ще стара "Казакевича"), який знаходиться поруч? Будинок в якому ви розмістили точку магазину має іншу адресу (Квартальна вулиця, 22). Уточніть, будь ласка, розташування магазину: вилучіть адресні теґи та перетягніть точку магазину у відповідну будівлю, туди де знаходиться магазин.

Наперед дякую за те що робите ОСМ кращим.
felipeeugenio (2025-02-26 15:44:51+00:00): This is just fiction
Nthh2 (2025-02-24 22:14:03+00:00): Review request accidentally marked yes, feel free to check though
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-17 00:02:17+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12616606834/history has building:name = Cedro Negro that was added in this edit
Is building:name for building name? In such case it would be much better to put it into name tag. If this object merges builing and POI inside such as museum or shop, then having separate objects for point of interest and building would be better idea, museum may have own area or node (see also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element ).

If it is an inscription then it should use https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:inscription

If that is not a building name - what was expressed by this tagging?
YomanNH (2025-02-25 10:55:34+00:00): Cześć,

nie dubluj oznaczeń przystanków. Jak jest już punkt, to nie twórz obszaru, który opisuje dokładnie to samo.
Bartek444 (2025-02-25 17:15:40+00:00): obszary były już stworzone wcześniej, ja tylko dodawałem relacje 4 łączącą te obiekty. Nic więcej.
YomanNH (2025-02-25 19:46:21+00:00): Rzeczywiście, sorry, coś niedokładnie popatrzyłem...
Widzę, że zajmujesz się teraz przystankami, to jakbyś zobaczył, że jakiś jest zmapowany dwukrotnie, to możesz jeden z nich usunąć.
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 09:36:51+00:00): Hi JMP08, welcome to OSM.

I think your changeset should should be reviewed by the local community. 

Thanks.
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 10:02:46+00:00): Revert of https://osm.org/changeset/162904180
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 10:07:11+00:00): Thanks for reverting the test changeset. It would be really helpful if next time you could leave a comment on the reverted CS. That way, we can all stay in the loop about the changes you're making.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-02-25 10:48:59+00:00): Related DWG block https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17317 - see ticket details there.
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 09:32:56+00:00): Hello Wanielly Cristini, welcome to OSM.

In this changeset, some types of highway are being modified by you. Could we learn something about the sources used? Thank you.

More information about the changeset: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=162912421
DressyPear4 (2025-02-25 11:14:24+00:00): Revertido!
Entre em contato com a comunidade antes de alterar a classificação de vias.
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 11:20:59+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/162927648
b-jazz (2025-02-25 18:32:33+00:00): Thanks for responding to the feedback. Overlapping is bad, but so is "almost touching". What you should be doing is sharing the nodes between the green and the fairway. Take a look at the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls) for examples. I've gone ahead and fixed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361164081 if you want to look at that for an example.

Can you show me where you were advised to do the overlapping? We're trying to catch bad instructions going out at the source so we can get things done correctly from the start. When someone says to do something because it "shows better", that is called "mapping for the renderer" and not necessarily mapping correctly. We want to make sure the map is correct, not just that it "looks good".

Thanks.
Kovoschiz (2025-03-05 18:01:46+00:00): Please don't blindly follow suggestions, as they may be incorrect. "Matsukiyo" is used in HK. https://www.matsukiyo.hk/rwd1509/Store/OwnImage/logo-20220711.png  https://www.matsukiyo.hk
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:HK_KTD_觀塘_Kwun_Tong_APM_mall_shop_Matsukiyo_Store_October_2022_Px3_01.jpg
b-jazz (2025-04-07 17:55:24+00:00): Please make changes over smaller areas. You destroyed the area around PNC Park and made it difficult to revert those changes.
Supaplex (2025-02-28 02:36:30+00:00): I revert it due to the source file from the government included 號

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163034533
nevw (2025-02-25 04:11:31+00:00): Is this a proposed road construction?
No changes visible on imagery.
fortera_au (2025-02-25 22:16:42+00:00): Considering it's not visible on Bing imagery, and there's not any signs of construction along here on ESRI imagery, I highly doubt this road has been constructed yet, if it exists at all. Can't find any information on it online.

The highway=residential/maxspeed=80 combination seems suspicious too, if this road did exist, I'd expect it to be more heavily used from first appearances.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162913197
nevw (2025-02-25 22:33:39+00:00): Nothing seen on latest Copernicus Browser image either.
InfernoOSM (2025-02-27 10:55:01+00:00): This is incorrect - The masterplan for the Werribee Township Regional Park (the area where the road goes through) is not yet complete, and even then it is unlikely that the road will be extended in this way.
PierZen (2025-02-25 22:51:59+00:00): Chemin : 1362739772 l'imagerie esri montre ce qui pourrait être un simple stationnement, par exemple un entrepreneur qui stationne des camions et l'imagerie du gouvernement du Québec n'indique aucune rue à cet endroit. Avez-vous d'autre informations vous permettant de dire que c'est bien une rue ?
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-25 09:30:46+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

May we know the source of all mapped addresseses? Thanks.
andyman1 (2025-02-26 00:28:53+00:00): Hello,
The addresses are from JOSM application, using the MapWithAI plugin, the "United States Addresses" data source. From the wiki that appears to be public domain.

I used the "automatically obtain source from current layers" option when uploading so apologies if that didn't cite correctly.
Joseph R P (2025-02-25 01:33:23+00:00): Hello. Motorway was the correct classification here, since this is a multi-lane highway and not just a ramp or slipway, and per the Clark County OpenWeb, the correct name for this road is 'Airport Connector'.
Joseph R P (2025-02-25 01:42:01+00:00): Further note, the NV 171 designation officially ends just before the tunnel at Sunset Road, and does not extend along the I 215 ramps.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-02-25 01:06:33+00:00): Admin boundaries need to use seperate ways to avoid incorrect connections between bridges and roads they cross.
Honza 😎 (2025-02-25 01:46:32+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking_space

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:capacity:disabled#Possible_tagging_issues
nevw (2025-02-25 04:14:41+00:00): Is the renaming correct. All residential and businesses still use Old Geelong Road as their address in the part you have renamed.
fortera_au (2025-02-25 22:49:24+00:00): What's the source for this? There's also the service roads that haven't been renamed.
InfernoOSM (2025-02-27 10:56:02+00:00): Official sources say the name is 'Old Geelong Road' until the intersection with Rowland Road. This is incorrect.
fortera_au (2025-02-28 00:11:51+00:00): Without a source backing it up, agree with reverting it.
InfernoOSM (2025-02-28 00:58:27+00:00): I have already done so. The vicroads database supports the name being Old Geelong Road.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-17 00:49:40+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165050253
zstadler (2025-02-26 08:19:09+00:00): Welcome back!
SafwatHalaby (2025-02-26 16:19:03+00:00): :)
janesk (2025-02-25 02:17:55+00:00): Hello, I have removed the hundred or so shrub nodes that you added for the hedges and replaced them with a way. Hedges shouldn't be mapped as discrete nodes but as ways (barrier=hedge). While technically a hedge is made up of discrete shrubs, it isn't reasonable (or often possible) to verify the existence of the individual shrubs even on the ground, let alone from aerial imagery. It's also just more functionally useful to map it as a way.
fortera_au (2025-02-25 02:47:07+00:00): You've commented that on your own changeset, not the original one, btw.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/162914132
janesk (2025-02-25 04:01:02+00:00): Oh dear. Silly me! Too many tabs open. Ta
Yog Sot (2025-02-25 17:39:22+00:00): skasowałeś zarośla, ale powinieneś zmapowac jako drzewa, bo teraz po 5 latach raczej urosło
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-02-25 02:33:09+00:00): reverted.
Please see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/gulf-of-america-gulf-of-mexico/124571 and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Gulf_of_Mexico
nevw (2025-02-25 03:25:42+00:00): The Landsborough Channel was not named correctly on the GA Surface Hydrology Lines dataset. 
I inquired and subsequently the Qld Spacial Help Centre determined ...

The Thompson River confluence begins approximately 12 km north of Muttaburra (see survey plan PL44).

At this point, it meets Landsborough Creek, Dotswood Creek, and Cornish Creek.

The watercourse identified as the Landsborough Channel, situated east of Muttaburra and flowing north to south, has been traced northward to its confluence with Landsborough Creek. To the south, it extends 16 km, where it joins Bangall Creek before reconnecting with the Thompson River.

I have taken these changes into account with mapping of the Landsborough Channel.
nevw (2025-02-25 04:00:57+00:00): These changes will be reflected on the Qld Globe soon and I guess eventually find their way into national datasets.
habib_amir (2025-03-02 10:54:16+00:00): Не трогайте аллею. Как вы вообще её нашли?
PierZen (2025-02-25 23:45:32+00:00): chemin 1362698231, on indique plutôt highway=service. Le chemin 1362698232 qui s'y connecte, cela n'a pas de sens.  Si c'est pour représenter un espace de stationnement, on trace un polygone et ajoute amenity=parking.
polygone landuse=farmyard ne désigne que la zone des bâtiments de la ferme. Les noms sont en français au Québec et on n'ajoute pas noms génériques tels que Farmland 1 (exemple Ferme Beaudoin Bégin, Ferme Despics ). Les chemins entre 9e et 10e avenues ouest, j'indiquerais plutôt highway=service. highway=track est plutôt pour des chemins qui a partir des routes, sont des cul-de-sac pour aller vers des champs agricoles ou dans la forêt.  Les chemins dans les zones résidentielles, nous utilisons highway=residential, cela même si non pavés. Dans ce cas-ci, on peut simplement ajouter surface=unpaved (exemple avenue entre  1ere et 2e rues est).
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-26 13:10:02+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162915347
nevw (2025-02-25 04:18:09+00:00): You have missed renaming a section of the offramp as part remains as Fitzgeralds Road Offramp.
Alliegaytor (2025-02-25 11:06:16+00:00): Hi Geo_Gunzel

I can see that you have made 13 changesets here attempting to fix a "routing error". I'm curious what the issue is and I'd be happy to have a look at it and help if needed! I just don't see what the problem is after glancing at your changesets, and am unsure why you're deleting a bunch of nodes to fix it. It might make the issue worse if you delete too many nodes, especially if deleting nodes didn't fix it the first few times.

Appreciate the work you're doing on public transit here.

Happy mapping!
Geo_Gunzel (2025-02-25 20:06:51+00:00): Hi Allegaytor -- working with a developer to try to fix an issue with a routing application. The strange thing is that deleting the nodes has actually worked in some segments but not others, and similar configurations elsewhere on the tram network have not presented problems. The developer has escalated the issue and I am waiting to hear back today (Australian time) to see if they have an idea as to why. I am very conscious of not making the situation worse and plan to restore to the status quo where possible once the situation has been resolved.

FYI I have done a manual on-tram audit of every single tram route in both directions to verify and correct stop positions where needed. There is still some work to do at termini.

I'll definitely get in touch after I have heard from the developers.
Alliegaytor (2025-02-26 01:39:45+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for your reply. I had a quick look at the tram route in question and saw that the route relation had ways not ordered properly as well as some ways missing. I've fixed those issues in this changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/162954477 , but I'm unsure whether the routing application you mention uses those relations or not, so it might not fix this specific issue. Nonetheless, it's good practice to make sure the route relations are done properly as it can cause routing issues on routers relying on them.

Hopefully you can find a solution to the problem. You haven't broken anything from what I can tell barring some minor issues with the route relations.
Geo_Gunzel (2025-02-26 02:38:14+00:00): Hi Alliegaytor,

We found the solution! For the developer's routing application, bidirectional track need the terminal node to be a buffer stop. Once we instituted that, the application worked as intended.

Thanks for your help and pointers. We have restated the nodes we deleted at points where the tram tracks crossed roads.

If you don't mind I am sure I will be in touch in the future as this is a long-term project that still has many km's to go!

Again, thanks!
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-06-13 05:01:49+00:00): Trương Định 1 chiều oto từ chỗ Ngõ 286 Giáp Bát đi Giải Phóng đã để oneway=yes, oneway:motorcycle=no là xe máy đi 2 chiều rồi. Sao lại chỉnh oneway=no?
tuan_gsm (2025-06-16 07:38:57+00:00): chắc là quên edit chỗ đó
mavl (2025-05-13 15:07:52+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].
gscholz (2025-03-10 06:37:12+00:00): Hi joanramorais,
this changeset has created a wrong bus route which must be implemented as a relation:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=162915668

May be you like to educate yourself about how to implement this kind of data properly:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buses

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
NeisBot (2025-02-25 05:01:07+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 12:35:07+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/162985001