piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Wyatt Sibilia (2025-12-04 15:24:14+00:00): I understand that my original comment/reasoning did not make sense, so it was only right for you to correct it.

 I am speaking from personal experience, as someone who tried to deliberately walk the old social trail to see if it was the best route for a new trail, that it is only clear when using an app to track the trail. Therefore, there is no physical markings, and therefore this "path" would not have any merit without the mapping on OSM. 

I have not been able to once successfully walk the trail without using the online map as a GPS reference. The left trail, as well as the main connecting trail. I am not sure if you are in the area, but if you are very adamant about keeping this, I would encourage you to try the "path" for yourself.

Where could I view the heatmap data for this area, and when/what is the data collected from? From my personal experience (local knowledge) the benefits for listing this "path" largely outweigh the negatives (personal safety, environmental degradation). I would like to understand why those things are not prioritized over a half-accurate piece of data. I read the links you sent me, and they I believe my edit is within reason, for OSM and for the general good of people and our natural world.
MassCartog (2025-12-05 02:14:40+00:00): Okay, I took your advice and visited this area. What I found is a trail exactly where it was expected. (I'm talking about osm.org/way/526531575)

The trail was visible enough that I had no problem running the whole thing back and forth, without checking the GPS once in low light just after sunset. My GPS trace matched what is mapped. The trail was not only easily visible, but since it has snowed, I could see others were also using the trail as well. No bushwhacking was needed. 

There was one spot a tree has fallen in the middle of the trail, but it was again clear where other people have been walking around.

I saw no signs indicating the trail was closed or off limits. But I did see pink markers on trees every once in a while along the trail. There are also signs at the north end for Mass Audubon, and New England forestry foundation right where the trail starts. To me, it looked like they are indicating that the trail is part of the same network.

I also checked out the trails to the west, again no access signs, and they all seem to exist just as they were mapped, there were even some paths missing.

The tail is almost exactly where it was mapped 8 years ago. I have done some minor adjustments to bring it closer to the path on the ground. To help with that, I was even able to use MassGIS Lidar imagery, where the trail is also visible. 

So I think if you have been to this area recently you might have missed the trail and been walking through the forest off trail. 

Sorry to contradict you, but from my direct observations these trails exist on the ground, they have no indication of their access, and are mapped correctly. 

They should remain in the OSM database for now. If they are demolished in the future and there is no trace left, then they can be removed.
NeisBot (2025-12-13 22:12:34+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?

For example, a more neutral and factual version of your description could be: "Septic inspection service in Arlington WA"

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-12-13 22:31:32+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/175512425
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-24 12:47:13+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for POI in changeset 184522154

https://osm.org/changeset/184522154
Frans S (2025-12-19 16:48:07+00:00): Welcome to the tasking manager and thanks for mapping buildings in this task. * Buildings should have their corners squared.

Keep on mapping!
eggie (2025-12-03 21:31:45+00:00): Hoi,

Dat paadje naar je voordeur zal geen officieel wandelpad zijn. Je zou het ook weg kunnen laten.
Ook ingangen van woonhuizen voegt m.i. niets toe. Fout is het natuurlijk niet, maar wel ongebruikelijk.
Wel natuurlijk bij bv een  schoolgebouw of een ziekenhuis. Dan heeft het een functie voor het publiek.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-12-03 21:33:56+00:00): Er zijn ook micromappers die echt alles intekenen. Dat mag uiteraard.
Ook voor blindenapps die gebruik maken van OSM is elk detail van belang.
number975312468 (2025-12-03 21:42:04+00:00): My problem is basically that I want walking distance calculation towards stadshart to be calculated appropriately. Number 18 has a different calculation than number 20 now. Number 18 seems to start from Olmenlaan, whereas number 20 seems to start from Lindepark. Will the added pedestrian walk on Olmenlaan already fix this?
eggie (2025-12-03 21:47:50+00:00): Hi..

The updates from the routing-engines will take several days.
Most of the time GrashHopper will do the miracle in less than a week. Other routingapps will take longer.
Your path is in the data of osm.. but routing will take some time.. so be patient 😀
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2025-12-03 21:52:16+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=52.294944%2C4.850444%3B52.302475%2C4.859994#map=15/52.29877/4.85518&layers=N

Check end of the week
trial (2025-12-03 22:29:56+00:00): salut, le wikidata est pour l'objet, j'avais dit subject:wikidata car c'est le sujet représenté par le buste. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:subject:wikidata
trial (2025-12-08 16:05:07+00:00): impec 👍
Sylabowy Kot (2025-12-05 13:23:05+00:00): Wartości są już podane w tagu unsigned_ref. Na forum omawiano, że do tego tagu dodajemy tego typu informację. Tag name stosujemy w większości przypadków do nazw tekstowych, nie kodowych.
Ltrlg (2025-12-03 21:35:41+00:00): source += Cadastre

(pour les garages)
NorthCrab_upload (2025-12-04 00:46:59+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13352145069
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13352145068
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/706480263
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/706480264

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-12-04 00:56:34+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13352145069
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13352145068
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/706480263
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/706480264

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Ayışığı Saat (2026-05-24 10:51:03+00:00): it is correct.
Coel312 (2025-12-04 00:38:41+00:00): Your comment should not be “PUNK!”, but instead should describe what you did.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-12-09 03:52:19+00:00): DWG revert - invalid name changes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175694677
Fizzie-DWG (2025-12-09 03:52:20+00:00): DWG revert - invalid name changes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175694677
Fen <3 (2025-12-04 16:30:30+00:00): I have changed the way to a drive way rather than a residential road, thank you for improving the map!
eggie (2025-12-04 05:59:37+00:00): Hi,

No need adding foot=yes to a cycleway in the Netherlands.
That's default.

Greetz,
eggie
Minh Nguyen (2025-12-03 22:12:37+00:00): Also fixed some gaps in boundary relations along the river.
eggie (2025-12-04 06:08:08+00:00): Hi,

We call that duplicated ways..   I removed the duplicated way.
Gr eggie
Bexhill-OSM (2025-12-03 23:05:15+00:00): These updates are great, thanks!  The 'on' shouldn't be capitalised though :)
"Bexhill-on-Sea".
philipcullen (2025-12-03 23:57:28+00:00): Good spot, the PROPPER() function in Excel isn't quite cleaver enough to that. I'll update my database to correctly case prepositions, and separately, update the existing ones.
philipcullen (2025-12-04 00:08:33+00:00): I've now updated the casing in Bexhill and the database for any other updates.
NeisBot (2025-12-13 22:12:36+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?

For example, a more neutral and factual version of your description could be: "Auto repair shop in Elkader IA"

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-12-16 17:15:28+00:00): 🔴 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the original contributor or remaining promotional text in description tags by https://osm.org/changeset/176015924
Baloo Uriza (2025-12-04 03:14:32+00:00): Is the camera located on the telephone pole on the northwest corner of the intersection?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175466788
MassCartog (2025-12-04 16:55:22+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. The features you removed in this changeset are valid. Please don’t remove valid OSM data.

You might not be aware, on OSM, we do not remove features if they exist on the ground. If it exists on the ground, it is valid data regardless of a feature being public or private, designated or informal/illegal/unauthorized. Removing features that exist is actually considered vandalism.

It's clear that these features still exist on the ground. Not being public access areas is an invalid reason to remove data from OSM. So this edit is incorrect and damaging to valid OSM data.

The correct way to handle this is to use OSM's tagging system. access=private, or access=no would be appropriate if they are closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

This feature is tagged correctly. Feel free to reach out to the Data Working Group if you would like to discuss this with them. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Data_Working_Group

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won't_delete_roads_on_private_property
PeterK2003 (2025-12-04 18:09:53+00:00): Please send me your contact information so that my lawyer can serve you.

Thanks
marczoutendijk (2025-12-04 19:20:11+00:00): Dear PeterK2003,
OSM is based on the principle of "Ground Truth". If something is visible on the ground (by local inspection or from aerial imagery), than that "something" can be mapped. Even if that road is on your property. We can set the access to such roads as "private" to prevent others from using that road.
You can contact the OpenStreetmapFoundation here:
https://osmfoundation.org/

Best regards  
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
PeterK2003 (2025-12-04 19:29:14+00:00): There is no valid reason for this to be on a public map.  No one can legally access this area.  The solution is for it not to be mapped so people are not tempted.  Please provide the address to send the cease and desist letter.
marczoutendijk (2025-12-04 20:25:02+00:00): See this:
https://blog.openstreetmap.org/about/
woodpeck (2025-12-04 23:12:49+00:00): PeterK2003, there is no legal basis for you to request the deletion of accurate data from our database. You might just as well request your driveway be deleted from Google imagery or from your county's GIS database. The fact that your driveway is private doesn't impact our right to record it (as a private driveway). Please stop trying to intimidate us with your cease-and-desist antics. I have reverted your latest deletions because they violate our terms of use which you accepted when signing up, and I have blocked your account to prevent you from further breaches of our terms. If you would like to know more about our mapping of private property, see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Luzandro (2026-02-04 07:13:48+00:00):   Hallo,

"addr:block" ist in manchen Ländern für benannte City-Blocks gedacht, aber nicht für die Unterscheidung Hausnummer / Stiegennummer (oder andere Unteradressen). Der passende Key hier ist dagegen "addr:unit", siehe: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Key:addr:*#Detailed_subkeys
Tris_1220 (2026-02-04 11:59:26+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, werde es in Zukunft berücksichtigen.
tastrax (2025-12-15 04:02:37+00:00): Just a heads up - the preferred format for state in address is abbreviated and uppercase ie SA. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Addresses

I am in the process of updating your recent additions Cheers
oba510 (2026-03-23 05:09:15+00:00): Hi, why did you delete https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/81376605/history ?
VLD299 (2026-03-23 16:55:03+00:00): Hi oba510,

Thanks for catching that! It was an accidental deletion while I was editing the area. I’ve just restored the way and cleaned up the geometry. Appreciate the check! 

VLD299

(Fixed in changeset #180315218)
DENelson83 (2026-01-13 00:52:32+00:00): 488 West 41st Avenue appears to be duplicated here.  Are you sure that is its address?
joel56dt (2026-01-13 18:01:47+00:00): I didn't determine the addresses, I just corrected the street part. These were added in CS#173864809.

Given the pattern, the building to the east is likely incorrectly numbered.

I am interested, what tool are you using to find duplicates?

Thanks,
Joel
DENelson83 (2026-01-13 20:46:00+00:00): I simply stumbled upon this duplicate accidentally.
joel56dt (2026-01-13 21:12:08+00:00): Ah ok. Good find. 

Occasionally I use https://nominatim.org/qa/ to find address errors (like the one I had fixed here) but unfortunately duplicates are not something that gets flagged.
notmyproblem1 (2025-12-05 17:20:54+00:00): l'indirizzo mettilo su dove è visibile dalla strada, ad esempio, se l'indirizzo si trova davanti al municipio, mapparlo la
KennyDap (2025-12-04 04:59:18+00:00): Fix Vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175472450
Yukiro (2025-12-07 19:15:39+00:00): O dzięki, przegapiłem jakoś
Roydon Olive (2025-12-04 02:13:48+00:00): why do you do this?
Viajero Perdido (2025-12-04 02:51:18+00:00): The opposite is better.  Merging identical street segments allows renderers to draw the name if it requires more length than a single block, eg medium zooms.  When split, you see the name much less often.
Roydon Olive (2025-12-04 02:59:42+00:00): And if you need to make changes to the street it's more work if they are split for no reason.
Roydon Olive (2025-12-04 03:05:19+00:00): This changeset also split ways that are administrative boundaries and sidewalks, what is even the point of doing that?
BCNorwich (2025-12-04 06:14:05+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Isn't there a short section of Shooters Hill east and west of the junction to Academy Road that is also a 20mph limit? Perhaps you could check this and amend OSM please?

Regards Barnard.
DinoDoesMapping (2025-12-04 12:59:33+00:00): You're right. I'm new to mapping here so thought I'd just edit a small section at once but I can get on that as soon as I can :)
Yog Sot (2025-12-04 15:58:18+00:00): tak na amen? sprawdziłeś, byłes tam na spacer?
Feskil (2025-12-04 20:55:01+00:00): Trwa rozbiórka, do końca roku wszystkie budynki mają być rozebrane, będę w weekend,to jeszcze sprawdzę dokładnie
Yog Sot (2025-12-06 14:49:53+00:00): ciekawe jak ostatecznie  to się skonczy z tym łakomym dewelopersko kąskiem
Feskil (2025-12-07 06:33:46+00:00): Urząd Wojewódzki przekazał to miastu pod warunkiem, że będzie to teren udostępniony ogólnie z przeznaczeniem na tereny sportu i rekreacji. Należy do POSiR który nic z tym nie robił i teraz przeszedł w budżecie obywatelskim projekt rady osiedla.
Feskil (2025-12-07 06:34:40+00:00): Jeszcze stoją, ale są w trakcie rozbiórki tj. połowa budynku jest rozebrana do szkieletu
Reclus (2025-12-04 10:57:39+00:00): Ein weiteres Mal: Bitte keine Beschreibungen als Namen eintragen. Bitte auch keine völlig unsinnigen Geschwindigkeitsbeschränkungen eintragen, die so mit Sicherheit aus nicht ausgeschildert sind.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-12-05 02:52:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19103
Gregory Peony (2025-12-04 01:47:37+00:00): Hi, just to follow up on some of my previous comments, thank you for considering the scope of features you uploaded in this changeset and submitting a comment relevant to the features you mapped.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175468939
Glassman (2025-12-04 20:20:46+00:00): That appears to be just a service (driveway) than a track. I made the change, let me know if you disagree.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175468967
Glassman (2025-12-04 20:22:09+00:00): The best way is to just put a barrier= node on the way to prevent routers from use it as a thoughfare.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175469051
ilias_ (2025-12-04 01:40:48+00:00): What are you basing your changes on? Was there a consensus reached by the Algerian community to change all names in Algeria to Arabic? Moreover your changeset comments say "Changed to official language", but you're also removing the Berber names. Berber and Arabic are both the official languages of Algeria.
ilias_ (2025-12-04 01:44:39+00:00): Please join this discussion to explain your changes

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/names-in-algeria/127362
Glassman (2025-12-04 20:23:29+00:00): driveways should be tagged as highway=service +service=driveway. Can you correct?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175469289
felipeeugenio (2025-12-04 11:31:55+00:00): Hola. Nuevamente fue eliminada la información sobre la familia que vive ahí. También fueron corregidos los tags usados (incluyendo la categoría) del camino interior.
Por favor tomar nota de los comentarios. Estamos para ayudarlo, pero por favor no insistir con información que no corresponde agregar.
saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175469494
Sylabowy Kot (2025-12-05 13:19:03+00:00): Why is this road maped across a building? Please stop adding selfadviresment as a large part of you changesets description or moderators will stop your job.
FajrAl (2026-05-22 11:19:37+00:00): Citra apa yang dipakai? Baik Esri, Bing, dan Mapbox itu belum diperbarui hingga sekarang. Belum lagi mengenai panjang runway Bandara Rembele.
Farras (2026-06-03 23:39:56+00:00): Tidak ada citra. Saya memang tahu lokasi video jalan amblas di Takengon. Tinggal mencocokkan sampai mana kerusakannya sesuai yang ada di video. Sekarang sudah bisa dilewati karena dibuatkan jembatan.
Farras (2026-06-04 00:08:54+00:00): Runway bandara itu diperpanjang tahun 2016. Citra Sentinel-2 tinggal dijadikan acuan meskipun resolusi rendah. Citra Esri di sini juga sudah diperbarui baru-baru ini (kira-kira tertanggal akhir 2025 sebelum banjir Desember).
FajrAl (2026-06-04 01:59:51+00:00): Terima kasih infonya. Sebenarnya per tanggal 22 Mei lalu itu Esri, Bing, dan Mapbox itu belum diperbarui, oleh sebab itu saya mengomentari changeset ini. Per tanggal 4 Juni ini, citra Esri sudah diperbarui di wilayah ini.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-08 02:16:06+00:00): Fix node drag, POI/building conflation, malformed values and missing top-level tagging for SEO POI in changeset 183805458

https://osm.org/changeset/183805458
TX-K (2026-02-24 01:59:43+00:00): Could not locate a camera here or anywhere within 250ft of it.  I believe this camera may have been removed, or perhaps incorrectly marked.
KennyDap (2025-12-04 05:00:23+00:00): Fix Vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175472475
Udarian (2025-12-04 19:10:21+00:00): does the address for this building have Southwest 26th Street or Southwest 25th Court as the road (addr:street) of the address, aka what is the addr:street of the address?
Just adding addr:housenumber is not enough as it is not a full address.
Dafo43 (2025-12-14 20:50:34+00:00): Not sure if it was you or someone else, but the surface is not asphalt for most of the Hazelhatch Greenway.
CRCulver (2025-12-07 17:11:28+00:00): Why are you adding highway=crossing nodes at intersections of sidewalks and driveways or other minor service ways? For example:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6907099584#map=19/34.135201/-118.009412

This is not standard on OSM, and this is the second time that I have seen your team do this recently. If your team cannot use standard tagging approaches, I would have to escalate this to the Data Working Group.
PedestrianMapping_MapObscura (2025-12-08 16:58:07+00:00): Thanks CRCulver for the feedback,I have corrected it, Going forward we will not add highway=crossing nodes at intersections of sidewalks and driveways. We appreciate the feedback. Thank you!
FajrAl (2026-03-22 13:27:36+00:00): Perlu dibedakan antara tag desa (place=village) dengan tag kampung (place=hamlet).

It is necessary to differentiate between the village-administration tag (place=village) and the kampung tag (place=hamlet).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175471670
DFW-Backyard7 (2025-12-04 20:06:04+00:00): Hello! Thank you for adding sidewalks around richardson! I see you requested review of these edits. When you add sidewalks in the future, if the sidewalk continues on the other side of any streets or parking entrances, try to continue the way across rather than breaking it into discontinuous segments. Also, try to connect sidewalks and footpaths to other sidewalks and footpaths. In the iD editor, if you draw the way across a road, it will prompt you to add a crossing at that point. If you can't fill in the exact details of the crossing, that's perfectly fine as someone who comes around with StreetComplete can do that later, so long as one exists on the map. Of course, this is texas so there are cases where isolated paths and randomly terminating sidewalks exist, but generally speaking any `highway=` should be routable to from another `highway=` on the map. Basically think of it as a tree hierarchy. I've fixed these ones at sherman street so just keep it in mind in the future.

Thanks again for editing and thank you for adding trails!
Marcus Batson (2025-12-05 02:00:43+00:00): Thank you! I wasn't sure how to resolve the crossing warning but your information is helpful.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-12-04 04:31:16+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nieprawidłowa wartość addr:postcode.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/257107515

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
czebureks (2025-12-04 13:53:37+00:00): Poprawione
Baloo Uriza (2025-12-04 14:15:35+00:00): Your spelling could use some work, as you misspelled "left|through|through;right".
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175472078
tkotnala_lyft (2025-12-10 04:08:16+00:00): Hi Baloo Uriza,

My name is Tanya, and I'm a mapper on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you so much for your insight! It was not a misspelling.
There are different approaches on the OSM for adding turn:lanes. Our general approach is to add lanes & turn:lanes tag only when there are visible turn markings on the roads or signs showing possible turns. 
In this changeset: I only saw a marking for a left turn maneuver, so I added it as left|none|none. Your approach also makes sense that from the rightmost lane vehicles can go straight & right as well. Since I don’t have any signs/markings,I didn't capture it as through;right.
I hope this clarifies my edits.

Thank you for your comment & your contribution to the OSM!


Best Regards,
Tanya