piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
demon_box (2026-01-24 22:21:23+00:00): Ciao Nicola Dallo Benvenuto in OSM! Ti segnalo che in Italia il civico identifica il punto di accesso (entrata) e NON l'intero edificio. Infatti un edificio può avere più entrate e quindi più numeri civici. 
Quindi hai 2 opzioni: 
1. Se conosci esattamente la posizione (entrata) del civico che stai mappando metti tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su un nodo del perimetro dell'edificio (aggiungendo anche il tag entrance sullo stesso nodo);
2. Se invece non hai questa informazione così precisa devi mettere tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su nodo adiacente ma STACCATO dal poligono dell'edificio.
Ho già proceduto con le correzioni del caso. Grazie e BuonMapping!
Horzhiy (2026-01-24 17:02:11+00:00): ок
woodpeck_repair (2026-04-09 09:08:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 181086344 where the changeset comment is: revert implausible edits by Horzhiy
eggie (2026-01-24 17:56:31+00:00): Hoi,
Dat zijn alleen de vakken. 
Hier ontbreekt het vlak
amenity=parking
parking=street_side
orientation=parallel

Ik heb het als voorbeeld aan de linkerzijde toegevoegd.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side

CTRL-F5 een paar keer voor het effect.

Gr eggie
YomanNH (2026-01-27 10:19:19+00:00): Dziękuję za usunięcie mnóstwa szczegółowo dodanych przeze mnie drzew. Już je przywróciłem.
Dziękuję również za psucie infrastruktury pieszej i rowerowej. Już przywróciłem prawidłowe tagowanie.
pyrog (2026-02-23 08:31:26+00:00): Hi,
Sub relations could be "normalized" according this discussion ?
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stage-and-name-in-long-distance-hiking-routes-and-superroutes/141480/70

Roughly : 
remove name (the name is taken from the parent relation (superroute).
add stage=xxx, from, to  for each sub relations.

Best regards,
Yves
AvdK_Hiker (2026-02-24 08:34:55+00:00): Thank you for pointing me to that discussion, very interesting. However, it seems that the discussion is still ongoing. When a conclusion is drawn, yes, this route can be "nomalised".
My focus on this route has been to update the route relation to reflect the new route, but I did not put much energy in the route metadata.
PierZen (2026-02-26 01:12:06+00:00): le barrage https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/226265798 sert à dévier la rivière Laforge.  Il n'y a plus de connection à cet endroit, l'eau étant redirigée vers la déviation. J'ai tracé et la rivière et la déviation à partir de la documentation du projet de la Baie James. Vous avez renversé ces modifications sans en discuter et indiqué comme source Canvec. Lors des discussions, la communauté a clairement indiqué que Canvec est maintenant désuet. Encore plus avec les nouveaux réservoirs.  Vous avec modifié la balise de grands cours d'eau de rivière  à ruisseau.  Notez que je prévois renverser ce changeset et remettre les données telles qu'auparavant.
PierZen (2026-02-26 03:16:49+00:00): Suite à votre réponse par courriel, je poursuis ici pour bien documenter. Lors de recherches sur site Toponymie du Québec, seul un point représente la rivière et je ne connais pas d'autres liens vers cartes sinon via rncan qui publie les infos de toponymie du Qc https://toponymes.rncan.gc.ca/recherche-de-noms-de-lieux/unique?id=EGWTP Sur cette carte, la rivière débute au barrage que j'ai déja mentionné. Les données de la base GRHQ font débuter au même point.
PierZen (2026-02-26 14:36:35+00:00): En ce qui concerne les ruisseaux, le wiki indique clairement que l'on se réfère à des cours d'eau étroits. Cela ne s'applique clairement pas aux cours d'eau majeurs qui alimentent les barrages de ce bassin.  Et non, on ne remplace pas waterway=river par stream sur les grandes surfaces d'eau.  La documentation GRHQ et Geobase indique clairement ces cours d'eau comme étant continus, non interrompus par la traversée d'un lac.
PierZen (2026-03-01 20:32:24+00:00): voir www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179224032
Corrige infos contradictoires bases géospatiales vs CEHQ et convention Baie-James vS Rivière Vincelotte ET Rivière Laforge > début Laforge seuil sortie bassin Fontages et tributaire La Grande rivière, correction waterway=stream pour grandes rivières
PierZen (2026-03-02 03:28:59+00:00): toponymie du Québec indique point arrivée Rivière Vincelotte https://toponymie.gouv.qc.ca/ct/ToposWeb/Fiche.aspx?no_seq=390256
Répertoire CEHQ des digues et barrage Nord du Québec indique 6 digues  sur la Rivière Vincelotte - photos correspondent â observation imagerie aérienne
https://www.cehq.gouv.qc.ca/barrages/listebarrages.asp
YanikB (2026-03-02 10:39:15+00:00): Vous êtes bouché ou quoi ? Je vous dis que les cartes officielles du Québec et du Canada indique "rivière Laforge" sur leur carte pour le tracé que vous avez faussement identifié "rivière Vincelotte". C'est mon dernier commentaire sur le sujet, ne me contactez plus.
PierZen (2026-03-02 15:32:37+00:00): Un peu de respect svp.  Si vous avez de meilleures infos, nous les indiquer. Il y a contradiction entre les cartes et organismes gestionnaires. Le CEHQ répertorie les digues avec photos et y indique rivière Vincelotte. La Convention de la Baie-James y fait aussi référence: « L'Aménagement Laforge 1 comprend également deux barrages, un sur la rivière Laforge et un sur la rivière Vincelotte, ainsi que quatre-vingts digues. Ces ouvrages
permettent de fermer le réservoir »
eggie (2026-01-24 17:52:14+00:00): Je had de node met de info gewoon kunnen schuiven naar die adresnode. editor iD plakt alles aan elkaar. Ik heb het nu zelf even gedaan.

MVG
eggie
MassCartog (2026-01-24 18:02:15+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. Thanks for improving your area but some of the feature you removed in this changeset are valid.

You have a new account and 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/official areas is an invalid reason to remove data from OSM. Please don’t remove 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.

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won't_delete_roads_on_private_property

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
the_annalsofthyme (2026-01-24 18:30:14+00:00): I guess facilitating real-world vandalism by-proxy is okay then, right?
the_annalsofthyme (2026-01-24 18:32:08+00:00): Does this robot, perchance, also interpret the core tenets of personal property laws as well?
MassCartog (2026-01-24 19:29:18+00:00): Hey, your not talking to a robot. OSM is a database of what is, not what ought to be. OpenStreetMap is about ground truth, please read over the wiki links I sent you if you're interested why the OSM community has decided deleting existing trails is not allowed, Even when they are on private land. If you do know the correct access tags for these features, feel free to update them and provide a source, But again just outright removing them is incorrect.
the_annalsofthyme (2026-01-24 19:47:09+00:00): The aforementioned paths were never 'trails' to begin with, but are merely artifacts of past landuse patterns that are of no intrinsic interest to OSM data consumers, whether they be academic, recreational users, or otherwise.

They appear to have been mindlessly traced from outdated aerial imagery by an indolent armchair mapper who had no interest of providing ground-truthing to their edits. 

Every time you edit the basemap, you view graphical representations of OpenStreetMap vector data, so how does that differ in any way from an end user's employ of the data?

Legal information can act as ground truthing for us humans who breathe fresh air and such, so what difference does it make? In my humble, educated opinon, viewing an object with aerial imagery is only *one* such form of ground truthing.
the_annalsofthyme (2026-01-24 19:55:33+00:00): The referential integrity of OSM changesets facilitates reversion anyways. It may not be rendered, but likely still in the database, so what's the point of blindly restricting all forms of deletion?
MassCartog (2026-01-24 21:48:09+00:00): Hello again, You can delete anything that does not exist on the ground any longer, only removing existing features is restricted. These trails do exist, they are visible in the areal imagery from as recently as January 16th 2026. They also have a significant amount of heatmap activity in the last 12 months, they are in fact being used. You may not be using these paths, these paths may be unauthorized/private, but they should not be removed from OSM. 

But I'm not debating, I'm just letting you know how OSM works. The community consensus on this matter is contained in those wiki articles. Removing existing features from the OSM database incorrect. Feel free to create a post on the community forum if you want a wider discussion.
SafwatHalaby (2026-01-28 13:46:38+00:00): Hello. It looks like you tried adding a path connected to stairs around here. There are a few issues with it:

First, the proper tagging for stairs is "steps".

Second, the path looks like a dead end on the south. Usually paths should be connected to something and not be an "island"

Does it connect to the street or to the existing path in the park?

Third, you left a small "stairs" object which should be deleted: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1470075718
dima monsky (2026-01-28 18:23:44+00:00): Hi SafwatHalaby, thank You are helping me newbie i am as of now like a info blind kitten with linear tool, this is my first try this steps. I am trying to convert fit them to walkway line but steps disappearing. Or You are can make order, or i will try now somehow)
SafwatHalaby (2026-02-10 09:46:56+00:00): Glad to help!

I see you've mostly fixed it since then. I made a small adjustment in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/178349642
dima monsky (2026-02-10 11:07:28+00:00): O, Wonder! You helped me with the concept of aerial common sense! Huge Thank You)
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-24 18:33:52+00:00): 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/node/13482230516

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Rainero (2026-03-18 14:04:16+00:00): Revert mit changeset/180060933
(unzulässige Quelle)
0xb7767000 (2026-04-20 19:18:34+00:00): Moin,
du wolltest dem Changesetkommentar nach irgendwas an der Kletterhalle anpassen, hast diese aber einfach nur in einen Kreis umgewandelt. Da du sonst nicht anderes geändert hast gehe ich mal von einem Versehen deinerseits aus. Schau bitte nochmal nach, was du da eigentlich anpassen wolltest.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181598471
Winzigweich (2026-04-20 19:27:00+00:00): Huch. Wasn da passiert. Das war definitiv ein Versehen. Sorry
HugoApus (2026-04-20 09:39:55+00:00): Pourquoi avoir mis yes pour l'accès à vélo ? La partie nord est interdite d'accès depuis 2016 !
Utagawa (2026-04-20 09:57:42+00:00): Car nous avons des parcours qui passent par ces sentiers sur UtagawaVTT. Oui il faut revenir en arrière vs la réglementation mais les sentiers sont toujours praticable à VTT.
gscholz (2026-01-26 08:51:21+00:00): Hi ManNerve,
your recent edits have left behind errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=16.58182&lat=41.19038&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

This kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Glassman (2026-01-24 22:09:17+00:00): #TIP: typically we separate roads when there is a barrier between lanes. The previous was not correct since there are two separate barriers.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177657767
Dendros (2026-01-24 22:33:34+00:00): I am confused.  Which previous was correct?  There used to be a divided island (two islands) on this road.  The division used to line up with the back of the circle shaped building (for mer pet hospital).   It has been recently removed a and is now only divided at the entrance to Burlington Blvd.
Glassman (2026-01-24 23:07:16+00:00): I went ahead and split the way. Check out openstreetmap.org/changeset/177664272#map=19/48.450248/

Let me know if that doesn't make sense.
Dendros (2026-01-25 00:41:40+00:00): Unfortunately it doesn’t make sense. The barrier islands have been removed.At the its intersection with Burlington Boulevard there is a small island with a fire plug on it, but that is the only thing there is a separation on that road now.
Glassman (2026-01-25 01:54:17+00:00): Got it and corrected.
NeisBot (2026-01-25 07:25:23+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/254504744 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Car rental office"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-02-02 07:01:50+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/177992931
(Restore previous tags)
George Sears (2026-01-24 21:21:59+00:00): Ciao ManNerve,

Grazie per il tuo contributo a OpenStreetMap!

Ti diamo un caloroso benvenuto nella comunità di appassionati che da diversi anni integrano e migliorano la mappa e speriamo tu possa appassionarti e continuare a contribuire ancora a lungo.

Se invece il tuo è un contributo sporadico, non importa! Forse conosci qualcuno intorno a te a cui piace fare escursioni, andare in bicicletta o è semplicemente appassionata/o di mappe. Saremmo felici se tu le/gli parlassi di OpenStreetMap. 

Oltre a contribuire alla mappa, puoi aiutarci, ad esempio, caricando tracciati GPS, segnalando errori o promuovendo OpenStreetMap.

Se vuoi chiedere qualcosa, o semplicemente condividere la tua esperienza o idee per migliorare, saremo felici di incontrarti nel gruppo ufficiale 
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/it/60,
in quello Telegram
https://telegram.me/OpenStreetMapItalia
oppure  nella mailing list dei mappatori italiani, talk-it
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it. Per altri canali consulta la Wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Contact.

Scopri maggiori informazioni sulla comunità italiana
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Italy.

Buona mappatura!
Natfoot (2026-03-09 06:47:00+00:00): Hello,
you did not have to delete it you could have moved the end to the correct location. other wise it looks good. thanks for making the correction.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177658631
Dendros (2026-03-09 23:33:10+00:00): I did that before I was shown how to disconnect nodes.  Sorry, about that. I know better now. Too much time in Google Mapmaker a decade back.
tux67 (2026-01-25 13:56:01+00:00): Hi,

schau mal - zumindest hier hast du 2 Kontakt Schemata gemischt (und doppelt gemoppelt):
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/972875665
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:contact:*
Bei facebook, insta und Co. brauchst du zudem nur den "Handle" zu mappen und nicht den ganzen link.
Fixt du das für die Fälle auf die es zutrifft selbst?

Gruß
tux67
The Invisible Freak (2026-01-26 16:59:13+00:00): Oh, Danke. Da habe ich nicht aufgepasst. Ich werde mal großräumig nach weiteren Doppeleinträgen suchen und diese gleich korrigieren.

Sollte man eigentlich besser nur noch die contact-Tags verwenden oder die alten Einträge auf die neuen umstellen?
tux67 (2026-01-26 17:23:09+00:00): Danke - Sobald mindestens ein contact: tag Sinn macht, würde ich komplett auf dieses schema umstellen - aber nicht zwingend generell.
The Invisible Freak (2026-01-26 17:27:32+00:00): Wobei es alleine schon für phone- und fax-Tags entsprechende contact:-Pendants gibt.
tux67 (2026-01-26 17:33:33+00:00): Klar, aber Einträge nur um der Umstellung auf ein anderes (ebenso gültiges ) Schema willen  anzupassen macht man eigentlich nicht.
The Invisible Freak (2026-01-26 17:37:23+00:00): OK, verstanden.
Also tatsächlich nur bei neuen Einträgen gleich contact: verwenden.
tux67 (2026-01-26 19:33:28+00:00): So oder wenn du zu den alten tags ein contact: hinzufügen willst .. Dann am besten alles auf contact:
NeisBot (2026-01-25 07:25:25+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13482390515 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Heating and air conditioning systems installation"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-02-02 07:01:51+00:00): ❌ Text fixed by https://osm.org/changeset/177683501
eggie (2026-01-24 21:10:47+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-24 19:31:07+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zamień addr:place na addr:city. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/170137871

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
VLD0251 (2026-01-25 20:36:16+00:00): Hi, "Ancienne Mosquée Bargoug" is a duplicate (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11047496979 and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448274508). could you merge the info into the building and delete the node? 
Thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177658970
user_16642036 (2026-01-30 02:59:48+00:00): it was created by user Petr Jenč. however I corrected it for you
ReyDerayos24_imports (2026-01-24 19:43:38+00:00): Hago prueba de importación de catastro. Creo que ha quedado un poco grande, la verdad.
NeisBot (2026-01-24 19:49:22+00:00): Hi ReyDerayos24_imports, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 83 building(s)
- 6 leisure(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177659358
ReyDerayos24_imports (2026-01-25 11:40:50+00:00): Esta es una cuenta de importaciones del catastro. Se deben eliminar los edificios repetidos para evitar duplicados, además de que cuadran más los nuevos que esos.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-09 09:59:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13482431681/history has flag:type = commercial that was added in this edit
what was meant by flag:type=commercial ? How it differs from flag:type=advertising ?
ereiland (2026-03-06 22:52:35+00:00): Agh good catch, this was just unfamiliarity on my part. type=advertising seems like it covers the intent of the flag (company logo). I will make another change for this.
finn-hound (2026-01-24 19:53:34+00:00): indoor corridor* (whatever)
Jasper de Vries (2026-01-24 20:09:29+00:00): https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1526004608324070&focus=photo&lat=51.1113995&lng=4.1401018&z=17&x=0.4787965172195873&y=0.5331690641375558&zoom=0
Brummelwuff (2026-01-24 20:26:32+00:00): Die Hausnummer hat sich nicht geändert.
Brummelwuff (2026-01-24 20:26:37+00:00): https://www.stadt-muenster.de/aktuelles/newsdetail/lvm-preussenstadion-fiffi-gerritzen-weg
ChrissW-R1 (2026-03-14 12:44:24+00:00): Wurde von https://osm.org/user/Brummelwuff direkt geändert in https://osm.org/changeset/178396064

Danke.
BCNorwich (2026-01-25 08:21:17+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
You inadvertently dragged a stream node, joining it to Westward Drive and the footpath. Also, the name of the building would not be 'resident'. I've amended/corrected these problems keeping your new data, I've also corrected the tags to the residential area.

If I can help in any way please just ask. Regards Bernard.
eggie (2026-01-24 21:17:31+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Woonstraten zijn inderdaad residential.
Dat 'voetpad' zal eerder een highway=path zijn als je er mag fietsen. 
Een footway heeft meestal een G7 bord.
Vreemd dat een pad waar je mag/kan fietsen op een footway uitkomt. Dat routeert dan niet verder.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
rarad74 (2026-01-25 08:49:54+00:00): Salut. Te rog sa folosesti imaginile Mapbox deoarece sunt cele mai recente. Bing au peste 8 ani.
Mannivu (2026-01-31 13:33:54+00:00): Ciao, in questo gruppo di modifiche hai modificato il nodo della regione Lazio da stato a Cassetta per le lettere. Probabilmente volevi aggiungerne una, ma invece hai modificato un altro elemento. Ho ripristinato io la situazione, ma fai attenzione la prossima volta, mi raccomando ;)
Hypsometric (2026-01-24 20:36:07+00:00): The note should have been "Fixes runway number format."
eggie (2026-01-24 21:23:00+00:00): Tip Die parkeerstroken kun je beter als vlak intekenen.
Op deze manier.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side

Op reguliere wegen niet aangeven dat je er mag fietsen e/of lopen. Ook geen motor_vehicle =yes gaan taggen op wegen.
oneway=no ook niet. Dat is default.
Geef alleen de uitzonderingen aan.
Is hier een ruiterverbod. Je tagt horse=no?
Staat dat aangegeven?
Ik heb de accesstags weer verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
Alinda__ (2026-01-24 21:35:11+00:00): Heel erg bedankt! Er staat idd een bord met verboden voor ruiters. Moet ik verder zelf nog iets veranderen? De parkeerplaatsen bvb?
eggie (2026-01-24 21:40:01+00:00): .. horse=no heb ik teruggezet. dat is dus de uitzondering op de default.
Je zou die parkeerplaatsen kunnen doen. Een vlak zie je duidelijker dan een punt, maar het is niet echt fout .. alleen ongebruikelijk.

Veel plezier met mappen,
eggie
iamdavid (2026-02-01 12:05:39+00:00): horse=designated da ist was schief gelaufen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177661050
literan (2026-01-25 10:12:42+00:00): они же вроде в Старс Кофе перебрендировались
empty_child (2026-01-25 12:49:28+00:00): Они далеко не все точки сохранили. Ну и, увы, маперы не сильно заворачиваются на проверку disused объектов, создают новые. Поэтому и решил прибить больную скотину
empty_child (2026-01-25 12:51:23+00:00): Можно ультануть, собрать абсолютный справочник сетевых точек через скрепинг с сайтов и потом проверить через аудитор. Но это будет театр одного вахтера, сомневаюсь, что кто-то подключится к инициативе