piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisReview (2025-05-21 05:52:00+00:00): Thank you for your private message and for confirming that the deletions were intentional.

However, the fact that a path or way is not public does not necessarily justify its deletion. In OpenStreetMap, we use access tags to indicate whether a road or path is private.

Could you please undo your changes, or would you like assistance with this?

Ideally, an access=private tag should be added to the paths.

Best regards.
MassCartog (2025-05-23 00:27:30+00:00): Neis, RedCedar1 has seemed to ignore your message and continue removing many many trails that seem valid based on aerial imagery.

They have made close to two dozen changesets with the same description based on the same reason "non-permitted motorized routes”.
NeisReview (2025-05-23 05:35:40+00:00): @MassCartog, please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166629768#c1440770
RedCedar1 (2025-05-23 14:45:25+00:00): Non-permitted ie. illegal. These are motorized intrusions into the wilderness- user created routes that are actively being managed on the ground and thus not something that should appear on any maps.
NeisReview (2025-05-23 14:48:14+00:00): @ RedCedar1 - Do you know the following wiki page?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
RedCedar1 (2025-05-23 14:58:33+00:00): The work I do, and the work this is associated with is in partnership with the land management agency and the concerns on the wiki page have already been considered and addressed. These wilderness intrusions are being remediated on the ground by the BLM.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-22 15:06:13+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/63050520 - autor edycji nie odpowiada

nie edytuje od kilku lat

był wielokrotnie blokowany za dodawanie swoich pomysłów jako realne plany - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1694

A https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/63050520 łamała zakaz z https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/1983
vectorial8192 (2025-12-21 03:06:53+00:00): See note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5099138 ;

Now that Route 6 is open (at least for this area), what is the status of those seemingly duplicate sliproads? Probably `was:highway=*` rather than `highway=construction`?
bulkbuyaccst6 (2025-05-20 17:12:15+00:00): Buy Google Cloud Account- 100% Verified Access for Cloud Services
You can Buy Google Cloud Account from here with billing added, The best-selling website for Google Cloud , Our delivery time is very low, you can get your account in a short time after the order. So get Google Cloud account today
https://dealslama.shop/product/buy-google-cloud-accounts/
waterced (2025-05-20 18:39:43+00:00): Attention, tu as mis la même photo panoramax sur la L'art Dit Vin et le Lotus
JLZIMMERMANN (2025-05-21 09:25:02+00:00): Merci de la précision, la méthode de rattachement via ID est source de bizarreries. Il a tendance à conserver l'ancien POI sélectionner et l'associer au suivant.
Rallioz (2025-05-21 06:04:34+00:00): Hi, mit was für Fahrten ist denn hier zu rechnen? Ich gehe davon aus, dass eine Einstufung als Museumsbahn wie im Brexbachtal Sinn macht, mit gelegentlichen Vereinsfahrten? Ist überhaupt eine Fahrt bis nach HG geplant, hier gibt es ja (noch) keinen Haltepunkt?
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-20 22:05:19+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/8928891154
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8928891141
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8928891126
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/449352763
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448763010
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/448763030

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-05-22 19:48:32+00:00): Poprawione
GinaroZ (2025-05-21 14:24:34+00:00): Pretty sure it's not segregated=yes and the access values were correct before?
marc__marc (2025-11-29 21:01:05+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1388293789
la construction semble être terminée
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-20 22:05:27+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/909614272
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/978707316

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-05-22 19:46:31+00:00): Poprawione
MassCartog (2025-05-20 19:09:08+00:00): Hello welcome to OSM. The features you removed in this changeset are valid. If it exist on the ground should not be removed, regardless if its private or public, behind gated or not.

Please read for more info:
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

The correct way to handle this in OSM is to use the tagging system. access=private seems to apply here.

I have restored the roads.

Removing features that are valid is considered Vandalism. Please read more about OSM before making changes.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism
jrqberry (2025-05-20 21:15:03+00:00): Understood, I have marked them as private.  Sorry about that.
Backpfeifenolga (2025-06-11 17:34:43+00:00): Das Detailmapping an der Stelle kommt mir hier ein wenig komisch vor. Ich habe es mal im Forum unter https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/detailmapping-bochumer-hauptfriedhof/131266 zur Diskussion gestellt.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-20 22:05:20+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6697053218

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-05-22 19:44:34+00:00): Poprawione
Backpfeifenolga (2025-06-11 17:02:33+00:00): Hi, du hast hier einige Grabmale zu place_of_worship umgetaggt. 

Um mal das Wiki zu zitieren: "amenity=place_of_worship gekennzeichnet einen Ort, dem eine Anbetung stattfindet, unabhängig von Religion oder Glaubensgemeinschaft."

Orte zur Anbetung sind das meiner Meinung nach eher nicht.

Halte ich an der Stelle nicht für das passende Tagging-Schema. historic=memorial würde meiner Meinung nach den meisten Sinn ergeben.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-20 22:05:28+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1071950417

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2025-05-22 19:49:38+00:00): Poprawione
Michaall99 (2025-05-20 18:01:49+00:00): siódmego w powiecie* 😅
Walther Vogelweide (2025-05-20 18:12:06+00:00): Die Straßennamen habe ich aus der besethenden Straße fortgesetzt. Ob dies dann wirklich so wird, kann ich nicht sagen. Es waren keine Beschilderung vorhanden. Auch sind die Straßen noch nirgends zu finden, außer im Bayernkatalog --> Satellitenbild.
Pavel_Š (2025-05-21 13:15:38+00:00): Ulice Kounicova není mezi ulicemi Klusáčkova a Šumavská uzavřená pro veškerou dopravu. V tomto kousku jezdí noční linky N93 a N99. V Geofabric OSM inspector teď vidím porušení vedení trati. Co s tím? Takto to není dobře... Prosím nezasahujte do MHD, ta je zcela korektní.
xpisar (2025-05-22 19:44:06+00:00): Dik za opravu. Z jedne strany jsem videl zakaz vjezdu a z druhe strany vypnuty semafor, tak jsem chybne usoudil, ze jsou oba smery uzavreny.
silversurfer83 (2025-05-21 14:39:33+00:00): Hi there :)

would you mind explaining this footway? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1388306534

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166537561
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-26 07:52:20+00:00): reverted edits that added suspect data, it is from a suspect account, as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166617410  and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164649036 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163053969  remain not answered

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173782255
3Brews (2025-05-21 05:56:16+00:00): Can someone tell me if my mentioned address is updated or not? I would appreciate your help.
Tomas Straupis (2025-05-23 07:00:43+00:00): Veikia ten tas restoranas, atstačiau.
maraf24 (2025-06-06 10:23:15+00:00): Cześć
Numery te należało umieśić w tagu unsigned_ref, a nie ref.
Xavier Deguillard (2025-05-20 18:58:28+00:00): Heu Alexander, this bus stop no longer exists, we can probably just remove it entirely?
Alexander Avtanski (2025-05-20 19:06:06+00:00): Go for it. All I know is that there is no bus shelter at this place...
eggie (2025-05-20 20:30:18+00:00): Hi Joris,

This is not a school without a name?

Gr eggie
Frans S (2025-05-25 13:29:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map each building individually without connecting the  nodes.
(see the instructions)
Best regards
eggie (2025-05-20 20:27:34+00:00): Dag joris.. Wat bedoel je met je commentaar nommern?
literan (2025-05-20 20:25:17+00:00): плохо нарисовано. По снимку видно, что дом гораздо меньше размером. А вы весь двор покрыли полигоном здания

Исправлю
eggie (2025-05-20 20:25:41+00:00): reverted by changeset #166541514
eggie (2025-05-20 20:23:33+00:00): reverted by changeset #166541457

Wat is je bedoeling?  Je brengt schade toe aan de kaart.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=166539229
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-05-20 20:35:50+00:00): Je verandert zomaar objecten in wat anders? Waarom?
Helaas reageerde je ook niet op de voorgaande bewerking.
Waarom layer=-1 ?
Ligt dat plein onder de grond? 
Waarom lantaarnpalen veranderen in shrub?
Dat zijn edits van medemappers. Graag een beetje respect daarvoor.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-05-20 20:39:03+00:00): Scapino teruggeplaatst na revert
eggie (2025-05-20 20:50:42+00:00): Fietsenstalling teruggezet
kartler175 (2025-05-21 15:35:49+00:00): Changeset reverted with https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166574426 - restored 3 deleted member ways of boundary relations.
flex16 (2026-03-15 21:51:33+00:00): Warum tagst du denn bitte seats=0 lol
m_fuhrmann (2026-03-17 08:09:08+00:00): OMFG! :joy:

Vermutlich, bei einem vertippt und dann copy+paste. Ich nehme das wieder raus.

Danke fürs checken!
m_fuhrmann (2026-03-17 08:13:30+00:00): Habe es gefixt.
eggie (2025-05-20 20:01:53+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Tip Probeer het gebied van je aanpassingen kleiner te houden. Svp geen adressen toevoegen aan OSM. Er zijn adresnodes.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Bart2020 (2025-05-21 14:18:19+00:00): Helder, veel dank! Ik ga het vanavond met veel interesse lezen.
whb (2025-05-21 07:48:45+00:00): Guten Tag,

von „Mast“ auf „Antenne“ geändert.
Das sollte besser passen:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:man_made=antenna

Viele Grüße
whb
cuzi (2025-05-21 18:29:49+00:00): Ja das ist besser, danke!
bartgron (2025-05-20 20:24:40+00:00): Czy na pewno w dobrym miejscu dodałeś to miejsce? W tym miejscu jest przecież pole a w okolicy nie ma ulicy Batorego (taką ulicę dałeś w adresie)
Friendly_Ghost (2025-05-20 20:42:20+00:00): This changeset had some conflicts, so I hope I haven't broken any relations. Let me know if you find anything that I broke and I'll happily repair it.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-20 21:53:39+00:00): https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/24xM has some similar cases (shop= with opening_hours=closed)
Jan Olieslagers (2025-06-14 19:37:50+00:00): Where does that code ES0213 for the aerodrome come from? I can find no reference. And anyway, it should be associated with the "aerodrome" rather than with the runway.
davidbgr (2025-06-14 22:17:40+00:00): The code was introduced by a previous changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166429716
The aerodrome does not appear to have had any activity
Jan Olieslagers (2025-06-15 07:29:07+00:00): ¡Gracias!
cdevers (2025-06-05 18:32:26+00:00): I retract this! There’s a gate next to Christ Church along the northwest side of the cemetery, and it’s unlocked and open to the public during daylight hours. The gates on Mass Ave and next to First Parish Church always seem to be locked, but the one on the other side is open to the public.
cdevers (2025-06-05 18:33:54+00:00): (SO I guess now the question is to annotate that there’s a gate along the northwest edge of the cemetery, accessible from Garden St & Christ Church…)
rigilk3nt (2025-05-26 03:00:15+00:00): Ich möchte zu bedenken geben, dass die Änderunug von trunk_link zu trunk dazu führt, dass Router die Ausfahrt nicht mehr von der Hauptstrecke unterscheiden können. Die sagen dann, wenn man geradeaus will "An der Gabelung links halten" o.ä.
Metzor (2025-05-26 05:10:58+00:00): Hallo rigilk3nt,

Hmja, auch doof. Mir ist aufgefallen, dass ich bei der Änderung vergessen hatte, trunk in primary zu ändern. Kapiert der Router es nun wieder?
Insgesamt wollte ich mich an diesen Faden halten:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/klassifizierung-von-link-an-kreuzungen-auffahrten-rechtsabbieger/126579/64

Viele Grüße
Metzor
Lachgast (2025-09-04 15:21:01+00:00): Hi Navazor,

Great that you're working on details around Uitgeest, much needed!
I wondered about a playground north of the Onze-Lieve-Vrouwe-Geboortekerk. I can't see anything on satellite imagery. I think the playground has been removed because of the renovation works in the building next to it. 
Do you live in the area and could you check if they rebuild the playground?

Cheers, and happy mapping!
Lachgast
GPYes (2025-05-21 00:48:55+00:00): Correction: Comment is "Added street name Estrada do Miriti based on Maps user feedback east of Purupuru. #adt"
Frans S (2025-08-15 08:20:53+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
I noticed that you map multistory buildings in correct.
Please check this footage how to map them
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13RTwH7sChRWrG5bIjysF2ripBgh3F5l4/view?usp=drive_link
Check here how high buildings ought to be mapped.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1z7uDwYm4oNmlexHIhJxGCjPpNhCQAgRia5aEJr_4MwM/edit?usp=sharing

Best regards
bdentremont (2025-05-20 21:31:42+00:00): added

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166543323
NorthCrab_upload (2025-05-20 22:06:04+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/2183453593
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2183485446
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/433993192
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/434006638

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Harvesterify (2025-05-23 14:59:54+00:00): Sorry about that, I opened a PR to fix the suggestion in iD: https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/10980
Yunan973 (2026-07-23 15:08:46+00:00): Bonjour,
sur la carte à droite plus aucun bâtiment n'est visible, plus aucune voirie n'est visible, ce qui veut dire que le terrain est un landfill, tout ayant été démoli. En es-tu sûr ? Sur les images satellite Ortho Express 2025 qui datent de avril-août 2025 (tes modifications datant de mai), tout est encore visible.
N'as tu pas confondu l'entreprise, qui a quitté les lieux, avec les bâtiments et voiries, qui sont toujours là et qu'il conviendrait peut-être de remettre ?
Sébastien Pi (2026-07-23 15:24:12+00:00): Salut, tu t’es un peu trompé de changeset :).

Si tu regardes les données, tu verras que c’est passé en disused (pas demolished). Ça ne veut pas dire qu’il n’y a pas de bâtiment, juste que c’est désaffecté.
Toute la partie droite sera démolie. La partie château (gauche, partie basse), pas sûr.
Ceci étant dit, j’aurais dû mettre plutôt disused=yes sur le bâti. C’est un peu plus adapté. Ça le ferait réapparaître.
CENTSOARER (2025-06-05 01:08:28+00:00): Who reported these changesets? I don't see vandalism in them, moreover, some of the cited changesets are not even in San Luis Potosí.
Lauxsin (2025-06-06 17:07:02+00:00): Hi CENTSOARER, thanks for reaching out!

Due to the size of certain large features such as cable lines and admin features, the boundary box of this reversion spans a much greater length than the majority of the edits made in the reverted changesets in San Luis Potosí. There were quite a few issues created in the data in these changesets which I can provide a few examples of.

The changesets included the removal of existing administrative boundaries (Ex: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163078254 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/376223042). I also noticed that some existing features, such as administrative boundaries, were repurposed into highways (Ex: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363961568 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086536092). This practice can lead to the loss of valuable history that are tied to those features (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history). Another issue the changesets introduced were many overlapping or duplicate ways, which can create issues with data validation and routing (Ex: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086537971 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086537529). There were also other features types such as railways and cables that were modified inaccurately (Ex: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1211031679 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1145445516).

It might help to visualize the data issues if you run an attic query or take a look at the OSMCha changesets and zoom into the areas where the bulk of the edits were made. I hope that explains the reasoning behind these reversions a bit better, but please reach out if you would like anything clarified better.

Have a nice day!
CENTSOARER (2025-06-08 19:56:36+00:00): Thank you, Lauxsin. That explains a lot. The reverted changesets were just out of my scope, I guess. Have a nice day.
OddlyAngled (2025-05-21 13:41:21+00:00): there is also the JMT Conservancy https://jmtwilderness.org/. aside from the portions of the PCT that coincide with the JMT I don’t know if the PCTA is the most specific organization in charge, if one is at all
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166544887
jake-low (2025-05-22 05:35:57+00:00): Thanks for the info.

I added these tags after some discussion on the OSM US Slack about how to distinguish official long-distance trails like the PCT, JMT, TRT, etc from unofficial "word-of-mouth" routes like the Lowest to Highest trail or Big SEKI Loop which may also have relations in OSM. I suggested adding operator tags to official routes and/or adding informal=yes to unofficial ones.

I was under the impression that the PCTA issued permits for the JMT, and therefore "operated" it in the sense of controlling access. But looking at this page I realize I was wrong. https://www.pcta.org/discover-the-trail/john-muir-trail/jmt-permits/

So this may not be the most accurate tagging. Feel free to change it or suggest something else and I can do so.
OddlyAngled (2025-05-22 19:39:25+00:00): I updated it to the JMT Conservancy since it seems more accurate, but there is no single authority. originally the trail was sighted north to south, starting in Sequoia. more traditionally it is hiked starting in Yosemite. four different organizations can issue permits for travel along the JMT, five if you include the portion that overlaps with the PCT. but no permits are JMT specific - they set entry trailheads, with few exceptions on which trails can be hiked or where you can camp.
OddlyAngled (2025-05-24 13:50:48+00:00): I updated the operator tags
jake-low (2025-05-27 22:49:35+00:00): Cool, seems good to me. Thanks for improving the tagging.
無限の刃 (2025-05-23 07:00:08+00:00): You do not know how to use "leisure=pitch" tag. Read osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpitch
wille (2025-05-21 12:50:08+00:00): Olá,

Muito obrigado por suas contribuições ao OpenStreetMap! Revisei essa edição. O padrão do número de telefone é começar com o código do país (+55).
Caso tenha alguma dúvida, pode entrar em contato comigo.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166545048
nevw (2025-05-20 23:37:32+00:00): Looks good to me.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-20 23:32:32+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/140794397/history 

this wikidata was wrong, it should be added on hotel object if any

(BTW, you may be interested in https://matkoniecz.github.io/OSM-wikipedia-tag-validator-reports/Australia.html - let me know if you checked it and it has any bogus complaints)
Tech Dec (2025-08-21 22:58:32+00:00): Thanks Mateusz. Not sure how or why I added that, when there was an existing wikidata tag (https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q5445742) on it already.
lunar_jaws812 (2025-05-20 23:51:01+00:00): I saw this in person and...I'm not sure what it is. But I don't think it's a surveillance camera.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-09 15:58:23+00:00): Hello!

You used
sport=futsal;w
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/118461114/history

Have you maybe meant
sport=futsal
?

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?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
ryunezm (2025-12-17 18:48:12+00:00): Yes, that was a mistake. I just fixed. Thanks for noticing 🤙
citrula (2025-05-21 18:03:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contribution.

You deleted building=yes + leisure=fitness_centre tags - these indicate the type of feature this is. I went ahead and fixed that for you. Otherwise this edit looks good!

Happy mapping!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-05-21 06:22:30+00:00): Hi Jake. In this CS (which incidentally, you have called "dirt road"?) you have removed valid taxiway tagging & just tagged it as =yes, which is basically meaningless, & means that the taxiway n longer appears on the map. You've also mapped quite a few other taxiways but haven't added any tags to them at all, just left them drawn as a line. Could you please go back & check them all? Thanks, Graeme Fitzpatrick, Moderator, OSMF Data Working Group
Kinsio (2025-05-22 02:55:16+00:00): Discussion on this automated edit proposal is now ongoing at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/steak-n-shake-bitcoin-tags/130380
ramthelinefeed (2025-08-30 15:37:38+00:00): Hmm, well what is the correct way to tag a disused railway station building, then? 
For instance your changeset has left the former Ardglass Railway Station building ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/983112658 ) just as a building incongruously tagged 'name=Ardglass', which makes no sense.
LordGarySugar (2025-08-30 15:58:08+00:00): Hi, I was trying to deduplicate the tags that were also on the nearby Ardglass station node (11009056412), but maybe it could do with building=train_station + abandoned=yes. (and perhaps a clearer name). A lot of this historical info in my opinion is better placed in OHM, for example the branch line here is tagged as 'abandoned' despite being closed in 1950 and there is likely no physical remains of the track/trackbed etc. It would be nice to have some kind of tagging standardisation for (extant) historic railway infrastructure, because there is a lot of overlap in the use of disused: abandoned: razed: and historic: currently
ramthelinefeed (2025-09-01 08:42:55+00:00): Well fair enough if there was another nearby node with similar tagging.  I agree the razed/abandoned/disused tagging is a bit woolly at times - although often with those old rural rail lines in NI, although the track itself is gone, it is still crystal clear on the ground that it's an abandoned railway, cos the corridor is still there with field boundaries and hedges untouched.
LordGarySugar (2025-09-12 01:16:13+00:00): I have a very strong opinion that a clear corridor or embankment isn't grounds for a closed railway to be present in OSM, but that's a discussion for another time :)

I went ahead and added building=train_station and abandoned=yes to the former train station building, so that should be much clearer now what it is.
Supaplex (2025-05-21 05:24:24+00:00): 如果是偏移，請修正跑道位置與形狀即可，不必整個刪除重劃
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166547058
Kenral (2025-05-22 09:57:48+00:00): 這個是因為地下停車場的關係，整個跑道重劃了