piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
noelbov (2024-06-17 14:29:23+00:00): Dag Koen VO,
Ik weet niet wat je bedoelt met "field check" maar het is niet terecht dat je begin deze maand het fietsknooppunt 86 hebt weggedaan daar waar de F24 fietssnelweg en Rijsmoortelstraat bij mekaar komen. Je hebt die node wel nog laten deeluitmaken van het fietsroutenetwerk B Hageland, wat al helemaal niet kan.
Fietsroutes 85-86 en 86-87 bevatten nu door uw ingreep segmenten die niet gebruikt worden (zogezegd).
Ik zal dit herstellen maar wil toch vragen in de toekomst attentiever te zijn om andermans werk niet te beschadigen en geen fouten te introduceren.
OSM bevat al fouten genoeg. De laatste 10000 edits die ik gedaan heb zijn bv niks anders dan foutherstellingen (door anderen geïntroduceered) en dan beperk ik mij hoofdzakelijk tot regionale fietsknooppuntnetwerken in België.
Mijn informatiebron is overwegend
https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/nl/analysis/cycling/be/facts
Vriendelijke groet
noelbov
Koen VO (2024-06-17 16:24:08+00:00): Hey, Ik heb geprobeerd om de splitsing die veel te ver naar het oosten begon te corrigeren. Niet de bedoeling om dingen fout te doen, maar weet dat het niet makkelijk is om zulke edits te doen, zonder dat er andere fouten ontstaan. In de eerste plaats zou het kaartmateriaal juist moeten zijn, eer er routes aan geattribueerd zouden mogen worden.
A67-A67 (2024-10-13 00:46:39+00:00): Hoi wvdp, 
In deze wijziging zet je een aantal buslijnen terug van de huidige concessie Twente (Q115122964) naar de oude (Q108741255). 

Ik zie dat je dit soort fouten vaak maakt bij het klakkeloos overnemen van suggesties van iD. Zou je beter kunnen opletten wat je precies verandert, voordat je een tag aangepast?
wvdp (2024-10-14 18:51:36+00:00): ik heb hier even naar gekeken. ik had al een update naar NSI gestuurd voor alle concessies dus dit moet als ID geüpdatet is weer goed komen.

Ik zal proberen beter op te letten tijdens het editen. Maar er is natuurlijk veel te onthouden over osm en vaak zal mij iets ontglippen.

Een andere afweging die ik vaker maak is tussen kwaliteit en kwantiteit.  
ik kan binnen een dag alle ID problemen in een middelgrote stad opgelost hebben, of ik kan een winkelcentrum updaten.
zeg maar wat belangrijker is.

Dus net als iedereen probeer ik altijd het best mogelijke werk te leveren.
kartler175 (2024-06-03 12:07:45+00:00): Da liegt offensichtlich einiges im Argen: https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=9.43304&lat=48.94902&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.95&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
ticki_52 (2024-06-04 11:59:51+00:00): Guten Tag Herr Kollege, vielen Dank für Deinen Hinweis. Das hast Du richtig erkannt. Grenzen sind für mich Neuland. Hab' einfach zu kompliziert gedacht. OSM-Wiki ist da auch nicht wirklich hilfreich. Heute Abend ist der Spuk HOFFENTLICH vorbei. Gruß ticki_52
MarinoBM (2024-06-12 19:08:21+00:00): Hola simlio: estás haciendo un gran trabajo con esta importación de catastro. Hay algunas diferencias entre el nombre que figura en algunas calles y las direcciones. Seguro que puedes determinar cuales son los correctos.
Un saludo.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=addresses&lon=-4.69789&lat=41.75714&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=1.00&overlays=buildings%2Cbuildings_with_addresses%2Cpostal_code%2Centrances_deprecated%2Centrances%2Cno_addr_street%2Cstreet_not_found%2Cplace_not_found%2Cmisformatted_housenumber_lenient%2Cnodes_with_addresses_defined%2Cnodes_with_addresses_interpolated%2Cinterpolation%2Cinterpolation_errors%2Cconnection_lines%2Cnearest_points%2Cnearest_roads%2Cnearest_areas%2Caddrx_on_nonclosed_way%2Cbuildings%2Cbuildings_with_addresses%2Cpostal_code%2Centrances_deprecated%2Centrances%2Cno_addr_street%2Cstreet_not_found%2Cplace_not_found%2Cmisformatted_housenumber_lenient%2Cnodes_with_addresses_defined%2Cnodes_with_addresses_interpolated%2Cinterpolation%2Cinterpolation_errors%2Cconnection_lines%2Cnearest_points%2Cnearest_roads%2Cnearest_areas%2Caddrx_on_nonclosed_way
simlio_import (2024-06-14 13:25:17+00:00): Hola Marino: gracias por el informe, yo me encargaré de ello y cambiaré el nombre de las carreteras. Con la urbanización, los caminos se convirtieron en calles. Tengo un problema con el fixme="Las partes de edificio no cubren todo el contorno", con la vista aérea del PNOA, no veo nada. Me detuve en Cigales en la zona de autocaravanas y por el vino clarete….
Atentamente
MarinoBM (2024-06-16 20:31:02+00:00): Las dudas las puedes plantear en el grupo de Telegram OSM ES Catastro.
Un saludo.
https://t.me/OSMes_Catastro
Rodrigo Rega (2024-06-19 14:05:32+00:00): Buenas, "Las partes de edificio no cubren todo el contorno" quiere decir lo siguiente: Cuando algún edificio tiene algún "building:part" todo el área del edificio ha de estar cubierta por completo con dos o más áreas "building:part". Si sigues sin verlo claro, indícanos el caso concreto y tratamos de esclarecerlo. Un saludo.
Fraxi (2024-06-02 21:08:00+00:00): Използвани кадри и от https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Elv1hD4MAc (Drone Reporter)
Thibtib51 (2024-06-15 08:52:38+00:00): Merci Mevesscarto, tu es du coin ?
cuzi (2024-06-03 15:43:18+00:00): Hi, você adicionou vários edifícios com o nome "Edificio". Você só precisa adicionar building=yes. O name é apenas para nomes reais, não para descrições
Zaida Nkhole (2024-06-03 19:16:12+00:00): Olá! Muito obrigada pela correção, hei de melhorar.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-04 00:03:29+00:00): Too many ways https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.79573/12.88495
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152177142
Hidoo00 (2024-12-22 20:35:48+00:00): Hej! Du har taggat payment:cash=yes på biljettkiosken vid ingången. Enligt Lisebergshemsida är parken kontantfri. Stämmer inte detta eller hur fick du fram den informationen?
/Hidoo
YraFyra (2024-12-22 22:14:22+00:00): Hej
Tyvärr var det nog bara antaganden från min sida, kanske i kombination med föreslagna värden i editorn. Ändra som du tycker.
Hidoo00 (2024-12-23 12:29:02+00:00): Okej, har ändrat alla matställen och biljettkiosker enligt vad som står på hemsidan. Vore dock trevligt om kontroll på plats kunde motbevisa de nuvarande värdena :)
Dindia (2024-06-02 21:45:19+00:00): השם הוא "גן לאומי ירקון" כפי שאפשר לראות באתר הרשמי של רשות הטבע והגנים

https://www.parks.org.il/reserve-park/yarkon-2/
hatul (2024-06-03 07:58:20+00:00): הגן הלאומי מורכב מכמה מתחמים ובקבוץ שממנו יובאו הגבולות הם מופיעים עם השם שלהם. האתר חיבר בין כולם.
kartograph (2025-07-18 07:34:18+00:00): Hi klnkengi,

ich glaube die Turn-Restriction ist hier zu restriktiv, weil es die Auffahrt auf die Autobahn verhindert.

Vielleicht reicht das Geradeaus-Verbot hier aus?

Viele Grüße!
kartograph (2025-07-18 07:45:23+00:00): Habe mal versucht das mit https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169094496 zu fixen.
klnkengi (2025-07-18 17:07:41+00:00): Ja, danke für die Korrektur!
felipeeugenio (2024-06-03 13:22:36+00:00): Ya estaba agregado
Flamen_Sru (2024-07-29 11:23:36+00:00): Hello Marcos Medeiros
I have removed the spiky node.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
kidneyspr (2024-06-09 04:01:21+00:00): ¿De dónde sacaste este nombre?

Tu fuente parece ser cuestionable, ya que este es otro nombre que añades y que no va con lo que encuentro en persona.
TrickyFoxy (2024-06-04 10:32:56+00:00): Он чем-то выделяется?
Metzor (2024-06-03 05:38:08+00:00): Hey Chris,

Ist das wirklich oneway?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1278809037#map=19/47.78198/9.61734&layers=N

Viele Grüße
Metzor
ChrisFromRV (2024-06-03 11:58:30+00:00): Hi Metzor. Nein ,ist es nicht, Hab es Korrigiert. Gruß Chris
Metzor (2024-06-03 12:51:51+00:00): Danke!
Dimitar155 (2024-06-03 06:45:29+00:00): Благодаря!
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-02 23:50:23+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/1067153848

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mozzie19 (2024-06-03 00:05:06+00:00): The correct address is 45-53 Kembla St, Wollongong NSW 2500
nevw (2024-06-03 00:53:30+00:00): Hi Mozzie 19
I fixed the address.
Is the phone correct? Only 13xxxxxxxx numbers are listed on their website.
Mozzie19 (2024-06-03 06:22:35+00:00): Yepp, that's correct, they only list a central number
nevw (2024-06-03 06:33:33+00:00): I view of that, which number should we list for this site?
nevw (2024-06-03 06:43:59+00:00): I just phone the number and it is incorrect for the Red Cross Blood Donation Centre so I will change it to the 13….number
Lumikeiju (2024-06-03 02:36:24+00:00): Why have you deleted information from POIs mapped as buildings and blindly copied the tags onto new nodes? For example:
Node: Ace Hardware Maple Leaf (11952744012)
CurlingMan13 (2024-06-03 12:55:51+00:00): This is actually common practice.  In thos case, the business may not occupy the entire building (building has multiple addresses), so it is better to map ad nodes within a building area.

All the info is there, it was just extracted to nodes.  This is common practice, and for some is even the preferred method of mapping!

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/amenity-shop-better-use-node-or-area/81992/4
Lumikeiju (2024-06-03 20:41:10+00:00): The business in question does occupy the entire building, which does not actually have multiple addresses.

A forum thread from six years ago in which there is no clear consensus and which is in conflict with the most recent tagging guidance on the wiki is not an authoritative source.

I've fixed this specific instance in Changeset: 152216484; please do not reduce more-detailed mapping of features as areas into nodes in the future.

Thanks for making the other good contributions in this changeset and closing their related notes - happy mapping.
CurlingMan13 (2024-06-03 21:07:39+00:00): There is no consensus - simply that.  Some cases are best for the entire building, some are best as node within a building.  And even then, there is no "right" way for single businesses within a building.  Realistically, I don't care how it is mapped, as long as the "one feature, one element" rule is followed.

For example, look at the State Farm just to the north:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11882064588

It isn't a reduction in quality or what not, it just an alternate way.  To be clear, I didn't extract the data to a node to exert it as the "correct" or "superior" way.  I just chose that as the easier method, especially since there was a duplicate address node on the building that I merged into the ACE node to resolve a duplicate tagging.  I often find myself editing suburbs or urban areas where there are multiple businesses present within the same building and the node is a better fit than randomly splicing the building into random pieces that don't necessarily conform to real life.

But either way, thanks for changing it back and adding all the extra details like parking, building colors, trees, etc.  Feel free to map or edit however you see fit - OSM's a community, and I'm proud to contribute regardless.

Happy mapping!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-12 04:57:48+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164840287
KiloThree (2024-06-03 03:48:22+00:00): Given that this is signed specifically as private property, would it still be considered permissive?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152180292
StreetSurveyor (2024-06-03 09:49:50+00:00): I typically only use private when there is a gate physically restricting access.
KiloThree (2024-06-03 13:06:12+00:00): I think in this case, the signage would make this private based on the wiki description https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:access
StreetSurveyor (2024-06-03 13:35:17+00:00): A street sign saying ‘private way’ does not mean it’s private. “Note that it notes access, not ownership. Many privately owned roads are freely accessible for the general public without prior permission- in such case access=private would be wrong and it may be access=permissive if the owner can revoke this permission at their own discretion.”
StreetSurveyor (2024-06-03 13:39:34+00:00): I personally ran (surveyed) this street and there were absolutely no restrictions to access to make it where it should be marked private.
KiloThree (2024-06-03 18:53:15+00:00): I walked passed it today. There's a prominent `PRIVATE PROPERTY` sign. This segment also does not serve as a residential rode, it's purely access to parking for the private club. It's behind a driveway curb slope, rather than integrated into the road network.

I struggle to conceptualise this as "permissive", given the clear access signage. I could see an argument that most of the signage is related to parking being by authorisation only, but I think the larger "PRIVATE PROPERTY" sign is a clear signal. I also think that the role that it serves is that of a driveway, or perhaps a parking aisle, given that it's purely for parking access and behind a driveway curb slope.

I don't currrently have a place to post photos, but I will add them here if I do find hosting.
hackthemap (2024-06-13 18:37:33+00:00): Hi! Thanks  a lot for the note tag and splitting the way to add more surface details. Could we add the surface:forward and surface:backward in addition to surface because they seem clearly defined with the general forward/backward suffix, just not used very much? The normal surface tag could still stay as a tag wtih the same  common/worst value, in order to only add correct information in addition for consumers who understand it without making it worse for existing consumers? Could that make sense, what are your thoughts?
bxl-forever (2024-06-17 15:29:47+00:00): So, you want to keep the surface tag and adding surface:forward=asphalt and surface:backward=sett on top of them?
Feel free to do if you want, it would probably not do much harm.
hackthemap (2024-06-18 14:34:07+00:00): Yes, to just keep the surface tag for now to keep compatibility with current data consumers. Changed it now. I think it's better to have the information in structured data (proper tags) compared to a note and if nobody is using the suffixes, then data consumers will understandably not care to implement them, so one has to start somewhere.
mrpulley (2025-12-13 12:13:44+00:00): 770720282 - northern limit of 60 zone a little to south - fixed at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170905509
28895338, 574568588 correct
tyfi (2024-06-03 02:13:12+00:00): This changeset also added some surface and lanes tags to affected roads which inflated the bounding box
yurinchi (2024-06-03 13:40:01+00:00): 大萱地区の土地利用の一部は地番がタグ付けされているため、将来的な事も考慮して土地利用として住宅地を設定。
gpserror (2024-08-17 18:02:27+00:00): Was the JoDean's building demolished?

For shops that aren't actively open and selling, they shouldn't be added or at least a construction:amenity should be used.  Also if the name of a shop is unknown, it's better to leave them blank.  These are both suggestions as they make searching easier.
Facalderonm (2024-06-06 23:38:26+00:00): Hola. Por favor no convertir la Caracas en un "edition war". Aunque hayan anuncios de cierres, no es posible determinar si son permanentes o temporales. Sé que en los diseños del Metro se planea dar otro propósito a la vía, pero no se edita OSM para el futuro, sino para el presente. Saludos.
Barto920203 (2024-06-07 00:05:15+00:00): Efectivamente, en el presente ya no existen los carriles mixtos, estos pasaron a ser carriles exclusivos de TransMilenio, los carriles mixtos se empiezan a deshabilitar con el inicio de las obras en cada uno de los tramos de la Caracas. La edición corresponde a lo que existe hoy en día con la publicación del Plan de Manejo de Tráfico que puede consultar aquí: https://bogota.gov.co/mi-ciudad/movilidad/movilidad-en-bogota-desvios-en-avenida-caracas-entre-calles-26-y-32
En el separador se construye la nueva estación de TM, por eso es una zona en obras, porque es lo que hay hoy, obras en el separador. Los carriles exclusivos se trasladan a los laterales porque es lo que ocurre hoy, TransMilenio circula por los extremos de la vía. Ya no existen carriles de tráfico mixto porque la vía se ha cerrado por completo para convertir los carriles en exclusivos, y precisamente eso es lo que se ha mapeado.
SomeoneElse (2024-06-03 09:06:05+00:00): I don't think that "Black Park" is a national park, is it?
tastrax (2024-06-03 08:40:19+00:00): horse=permit rather than yes?
tastrax (2024-06-03 08:38:47+00:00): Hi Ben - Horse should probably be permit if its not open access without some contact with Rangers.
rangerben (2024-06-04 01:00:30+00:00): Thanks Phil, I'll go through this and other affected fire trails and update.
cheers
Ben
Jbell4588 (2024-06-05 19:19:21+00:00): Thanks for the correction!
tyfi (2024-06-03 03:46:21+00:00): There was a gap in 86. Signage is clearly visible on Bing Streetside indicating 86 occupies the same road as do U.S. 60 and MO 59.
ricco2712 (2024-06-03 03:51:03+00:00): accidentally resolved one in maine too, aghhhhhhh
mikimapbuilder (2024-06-03 09:51:28+00:00): Hi! You draw a building over several others instead try to follow one building footprint. Thanks!
fortera_au (2024-06-04 02:10:41+00:00): Hey, pretty sure these crossings aren't uncontrolled since there'd be signals there at the traffic lights.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152183270
Davileci (2024-07-10 17:40:03+00:00): "la Sorollera" no figura en la ley.
yopaseopor (2024-07-10 18:53:30+00:00): La Sorollera tiene su señal bilingüe oficial, como otros municipios. Además ese topónimo consta en el Nomenclátor Geográfico de Aragón. Se la incluyó en el conjunto de cambios por estar en la misma situación que las poblaciones aledañas.
d_berger (2024-06-03 06:01:22+00:00): Ohje, sorry... unclosed changeset.
aTarom (2024-06-03 07:21:46+00:00): Bienvenido, por qué cambias el valor de wikidata
de
Q144331
a
Q9097420
?
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-03 05:40:24+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1289046156
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1289046157

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
infeeeee (2024-06-03 15:08:26+00:00): Van ilyen is, hogy amenity=traffic_park, felújítás előtt ez volt a címkéje. Ez nem illene rá jobban? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dtraffic_park
George Sears (2024-09-02 16:55:38+00:00): Ciao Domenico, stavo vedendo la wiki e ho letto che il tag foot=no è indicato per mappare strade dove è illegale l'accesso ai pedoni, quindi non penso sia corretto utilizzarlo in questi casi
DomKor (2024-09-02 18:01:04+00:00): però a tutti gli effetti è illegale pr un pedone usare la strada in presenza di marciapiede, dato che il marciapiede è pienamente mappato in queste zone credo non sia un problema
https://www.aci.it/i-servizi/normative/codice-della-strada/titolo-v-norme-di-comportamento/art-190-comportamento-dei-pedoni.html
George Sears (2024-09-02 19:06:29+00:00): Mi sembra giusto allora, comunque il fatto che i router ignorino i marciapiedi è una cagata pazzesca da parte dei router...

A proposito volevo dire anche che in Via Mozart dove ci sono i porticati ho trovato questo tag che potrebbe andar meglio
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:covered#covered=colonnade
ivanbranco (2024-09-02 20:42:33+00:00): A me sembra "taggare per il router": https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

In Italia si é deciso che highway=residential ha come valore implicito foot=yes: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#Italy
se cominciamo ad aggiungere foot=no a tutte le residential che hanno i marciapiedi mappati separatamente si rischia di fare un casino secondo me. Hai provato piuttosto ad aggiungere sidewalk:[side]=separate come attributo della strada piuttosto?
DomKor (2024-09-03 08:58:05+00:00):  per George sears ok sembra corretto ora lo aggiorno
DomKor (2024-09-03 09:03:57+00:00): per ivanbranco, non mi sembra un caso di tagging for the renderer, ma anzi secondo me migliora l'effettivo routing, tendenzialmente il routing di OsmAnd tende a preferire la strada perchè è più corta del percorso del marciapiede, se sidewalk:[side]=separate funziona ugualmente bene, altrimenti non vedo quale problema dia foot=no
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-03 07:51:33+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152188018
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-03 07:52:05+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!
adiatmad (2024-06-03 07:50:21+00:00): Dear Amal Ameen,
Please avoid adding only hashtags comments. Kindly include human-readable changeset comments along with the required hashtags. For clearer guidance, refer to this page.
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments)
(https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/rfc-deprecate-hashtag-only-changeset-comments/105770)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152185439
mikko_tamura (2024-06-06 04:18:26+00:00): please do not remove the ssuperarket tag
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152185439
Jordi MF (2024-06-03 19:13:12+00:00): Las áreas residenciales no deben de llevar nombre según la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential#Named_residential_areas.
Jordi MF (2024-06-03 19:11:35+00:00): ¿Por qué añades nombres a las áreas residenciales?
Las áreas residenciales no deben de llevar nombre según la wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dresidential#Named_residential_areas.
ivanbranco (2024-07-13 08:56:38+00:00): Hi,

please notice that the correct syntax for the wikidata tag is "brand:wikidata=Q19903229", not "brand:wikidata=https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q19903229"

also brand:wikipedia should be "=en:Curio (brand)", not "=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curio_(brand)"

thanks
Hilton Hotels (2024-07-16 06:00:44+00:00): Hello ivanbranco,

Thank you for bringing this to my attention and for correcting the tags. We'll make sure the correct syntax is used in future edits.

Regards
Supaplex (2024-06-03 07:12:45+00:00): name:nan 還是要留的，大部分 OpenStreetMap 服務只認 name:xxx 語言代碼
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152185951
Winston Sung (2024-06-03 07:50:12+00:00): 應該是改的時候不小心蓋掉了。
mikimapbuilder (2024-06-03 07:43:45+00:00): Hi! You draw a building over the whole residential block, instead try to follow the building's footprint. Thanks!
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-03 07:51:43+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152188024
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-03 07:52:10+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!
Jordi MF (2024-06-03 19:01:28+00:00): Es mentira lo que dices. He estado en Monroyo y por supuesto que hay gente que denomina a su pueblo con el nombre de Montroig.
felipeeugenio (2024-06-03 13:25:27+00:00): Hola. Reserva Altos de Lircay es el barrio?

saludos