piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
grzegorz75jan (2025-11-16 18:54:17+00:00): Ten unclassified to już mistrzostwo.
Przy okazji możesz patrzeć na ten pokraczny landuse=residentail.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174697436
AndyB_66 (2025-11-16 16:36:09+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
NorthCrab_upload (2025-11-15 20:13:00+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Podana kombinacja addr:city + addr:place jest nieprawidłowa.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12310549656
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1050048943
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1241883122
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1241883123

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13300219185

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
AndyB_66 (2025-11-15 19:16:39+00:00): Stosuj się, proszę, do zasad komentowania zestawów zmian, obowiązujących w społeczności OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
AndyB_66 (2025-11-21 19:29:08+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Uk:%D0%A1%D1%82%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%BD%D1%8F_%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%85_%D0%BE%D0%BF%D0%B8%D1%81%D1%96%D0%B2_%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80%D1%96%D0%B2_%D0%B7%D0%BC%D1%96%D0%BD
AndyB_66 (2025-11-15 18:09:44+00:00): Nadawaj swoim zestawom zmian sensowne komentarze, zgodnie z zasadami, obowiązującymi w społeczności OSM (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian) - miejsce edycji i tak jest widoczne na mapie.
Leszek Czudek (2025-11-15 21:06:12+00:00): Słusznie. W tej zmianie dodałem brakujący fragment chodnika wzdłuż drogi 966.
AndyB_66 (2025-11-16 15:39:34+00:00): Dzięki :)
user_5359 (2025-11-16 11:06:46+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1450920530 (one of one hundred and sixty-six objects). What is the mean of the tags
CLASSREF=CS02_0000022769
CR_EDF_POR=01
SUBREGID=CS02_0000022769
?
rivermont (2025-11-25 16:03:44+00:00): Can I ask why you added horse tagging to the Parkway? Disallowing horse traffic is generally not needed for traffic roads.
Matthew Larkin (2025-11-25 17:12:24+00:00): Mostly because I'm new to Open Street Maps I suppose 😅 I was mostly opening up areas that intersected with trails, especially overlooks (to assist apps that do auto-routing). I just happened to see horses were "allowed" so I figured I'd adjust while I was there (chip-away-at-things-slowly style). Didn't know you could (should) leave it as is. I'll keep that in mind for any future updates. Thank you! 🙏
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-11-19 15:45:10+00:00): 嘿，PinkBluWht，您好

似乎您在试图编辑 关系：上海浦东国际机场 的时候遇到了一点小问题，这个关系 多边形未能成功闭合

已经有其他编辑者在 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174865155 中进行了修复，希望您在之后的编辑中注意

感谢！
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-11-19 15:48:04+00:00): 此外，对于尚未完成的建筑，在OSM中请不要标注为 building=yes
可以尝试使用 building=construction

因为建筑物尚未完工，但在现实中已存在足够可观测到的实体。这是为了与实地求是的基本原则之一相符合。

同样也适用于尚未开通的铁道线路
NeisBot (2025-11-16 13:41:57+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for contributing.

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly.

In total, I detected 189 potential crossings.

Problematic elements (top 3 by category):
- https://osm.org/way/1256703428 , crossings=87
- https://osm.org/way/351555653 , crossings=102

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=174699079
pitscheplatsch (2025-11-16 13:44:59+00:00): Have been corrected by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174715946
AndyB_66 (2025-11-15 19:13:28+00:00): Stosuj się, proszę, do zasad komentowania zestawów zmian, obowiązujących w społeczności OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
Fraxi (2026-01-24 12:08:17+00:00): Hi!
May be you are not a Bulgarian, but please, if you are aware, do not add descriptive names for shops as a main name. For example:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12277225984
"Рамки" in Bulgarian means "frames". You might have seen this on a sign, but most probably this shows that the shop offers frames. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
I removed names and added clarifying tags
Fraxi (2026-01-24 12:09:36+00:00): The tag of the main feature usually is sufficient. If not, we may add additional tags such as clothes=hats
eggie (2025-11-15 20:36:58+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Manuel Retamozo (2025-11-21 23:47:47+00:00): Hola Serock! Esta bajada de la autopista esta cómo proposed, hay anuncions pero aún no comenzaron la construcción. habría que revertir el cambio y pasarla a construction cuando se inicien los trabajos. Saludos!
serock (2025-11-22 22:41:42+00:00): Hola Manuel Retamozo, como vi que el rulo de la autopista estaba como construction=motorway_link + highway=construction, desde el 03/11/2019 pensé que habían iniciado la obra desde Centenario, ahí arreglo ambos problemas, saludos !!!
StC (2025-11-18 21:53:28+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là, en prolongeant un chemin au-delà de son point de connexion avec le chemin suivant dans l'itinéraire. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
Sandonin (2025-11-18 22:22:10+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour la reprise, le point m'avait échappé.
VLD0251 (2026-01-18 09:21:58+00:00): Hi,"مسجد" is a generic term and should not be used as a name
please only enter the official, verifiable name or leave the field blank.
See: OSM Wiki - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice
thank you for your contribution
Roydon Olive (2025-11-16 13:20:27+00:00): what data set are you using at geo.ca?
JiahuiY (2025-11-16 21:56:02+00:00): https://app.geo.ca/en-ca/map-browser/record/c5c249c4-dea6-40a6-8fae-188a42030908
NeisBot (2025-11-15 20:26:45+00:00): Salut Jean-Baptiste Carmeille, bienvenue dans le projet OSM et merci pour ta contribution ! 

Pour faciliter la collaboration et aider les autres à comprendre tes modifications, il est préférable d'ajouter une courte description des changements que tu as effectués. Des commentaires clairs aident la communauté à suivre ton travail et à fournir de meilleurs retours. Tu peux trouver des conseils pour écrire de bons commentaires ici[1].
(Auto-translation)
---
Hi Jean-Baptiste Carmeille, welcome to the OSM projekt and thanks for your contribution!

To make collaboration easier and help others understand your edits, it’s best to add a short description of the changes you made. Clear comments help the community follow your work and provide better feedback. You can find tips on writing good comments here[1].
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish
NeisBot (2025-11-15 20:26:48+00:00): Voici un exemple de commentaire basé sur tes modifications de carte : "Mises à jour des attributs de sens unique sur les routes"
(Auto-translation)
---
Here is a sample comment based on your map edits: "Updated oneway attributes on roads"
MassCartog (2025-11-16 01:50:45+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. Features you removed in this changeset are valid. Please don’t remove valid OSM data.

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. Even decommissioned trails should not be removed until they no longer exist. 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.

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
user_5359 (2025-11-17 10:14:40+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1450949699. What is the mean of the tag kaplica = Collegium Maius?
WieKo68 (2025-11-17 13:06:04+00:00): Hi. Please read the link in "nid:website" for the object https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1450949699
user_5359 (2025-11-17 13:15:02+00:00): But you know that we try to use only British English, right?
wandelzot (2025-11-15 22:58:54+00:00): 'Elsstraat'
CAI Stabia (2025-11-18 09:03:02+00:00): Ciao, perchè hai cancellato un sentierino dalla strada cresta che è esistente?
baprischka (2025-11-18 10:50:00+00:00): Ciao, parli di https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/601628029? L’ho seguito ma arrivato alla strada non c’è un collegamento, praticamente devi saltare un muretto per ritrovarti sulla strada principale. Secondo me si tratta di un errore, in questo punto è facile tracciare sentieri in ogni direzione perché la vegetazione è poco densa. Gli unici collegamenti veri che ho trovato sono https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1450959765 che ho aggiunto e https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/601628028 che già esisteva.
literan (2025-11-16 10:38:05+00:00): криво указан адрес, неверный формат улицы

откачу, сделайте еще раз
Ozon OSM15 (2025-11-16 20:29:45+00:00): Здравствуйте, исправила
CAI Stabia (2025-11-18 08:59:56+00:00): Ciao, come mai hai eliminato il toponimo Molare dalla vetta? Se il toponimo ufficiale IGM è m.S.Michele, l'altro è quello attualmente più coniosciuto. Per questo nella carta dei sentieri e su OSM li abbiamo riportato entrambi.
baprischka (2025-11-18 10:41:07+00:00): Ciao, non l’ho eliminato, ho solo sistemato i dati nelle chiavi corrette: il nome ufficiale va in `name` e il nome alternativo in `alt_name`. Se vuoi possiamo cambiare per `official_name` e `name`, ma in ogni caso mettere un nome alternativo tra parentesi non è corretto semanticamente.
baprischka (2025-11-18 10:42:44+00:00): Fatto: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174811573
pantufla (2025-12-04 07:34:33+00:00): Hello, thank you for the fixes. As a guest I tried to fix the whole Kuta region and just notices there's now an accidental duplicate in Kuta, please see:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13307172038#map=15/-8.88696/116.28397
w_djatmiko (2025-12-08 00:33:50+00:00): Please fix it
pantufla (2025-12-11 10:07:09+00:00): As a local, could you please tell me what do you find correct? IMO it should be Kuta tagged as town with alternative name of "Kute"
w_djatmiko (2025-12-17 04:24:41+00:00): I dont't exactly what the name, but Kuta (read "Kute") is name from government map
w_djatmiko (2025-12-19 03:57:13+00:00): Geotiff government this area on mu profile btw
pantufla (2026-01-05 15:36:44+00:00): Please do the change yourself as you're the expert on the area. This is not an area I live or frequently map.
raccoss (2025-11-16 14:01:39+00:00): Ciao. Hai duplicato, credo per errore la panetteria "Farina & Club Backery", che avevo già introdotto la scorsa settimana. Probabilmente stai usando un layer non aggiornato.
StreetSurveyor (2025-11-30 18:19:24+00:00): Coolman Commons Condominiums is not the name of a road in Boston. Please avoid adding invented street names unless they’re supported by signage or official sources. For clarity, the buildings in that complex are numbered 239, 241, 245, and 251, which aligns with the existing numbering on Norfolk Street.
Andrea Del Sarto (2025-11-20 16:56:25+00:00): ciao,
la convenzione per l'inserimento dei nomi è quella di usare per la prima parola l'iniziale maiuscola, e la minuscola per le altre.

anche sulla fonte da te riportata è indicato come <Via delle città Etrusche>

salurti e buona mappatura
literan (2025-11-16 10:36:20+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16472934

название школы уже стоит на территории. Не надо дублировать его на зданиях школы
Mornast_16 (2025-11-16 11:12:55+00:00): Принято, буду внимательнее следить за этим.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-11-15 22:10:50+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13307217346

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Robomatic (2025-11-15 22:32:56+00:00): Poprawione pola zgodnie z dokumentacją.
BCNorwich (2025-11-16 07:32:21+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
I've reverted the building tags to their former state, they pertain to the building not the businesses inside it. I've placed your business info on a POI within the building outline, it's here:- https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13307641264

Regards Bernard.
Supaplex (2025-11-16 00:17:46+00:00): 已經有標示了，不必重複添加
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/253004977
BCNorwich (2025-11-16 07:40:31+00:00): Hi, You placed a new building on top of an existing building. I's OSM practice to amend existing features if possible, this to maintain feature history. So I've removed you new duplicate building and amended/corrected the tags on the existing building.

Regards Benard.
Herwescheluc (2025-11-17 21:15:20+00:00): Hallo, GeoMH,

ich werf mich weg! 😂

Super lustig, aber sicher ein Versehen:

check_date=2025-11-0815

Grüße

Andreas
GeoMH (2025-11-18 19:35:12+00:00): Hallo Andreas,

ja, da stand ein 0815-Container, so wie alle anderen 400 Stück im LDK. :)

Aber ja, es war natürlich ein Versehen.

Grüße GeoMH
Herwescheluc (2025-11-18 21:01:22+00:00): Schon klar, bei der Zahl muss mer aber lachen! (Hab's auf 15. gesetzt). Bis die Tage!
Andreas
kamilbogacki (2025-11-15 22:36:47+00:00): źródła dodane przypadkowo :)
m2fc (2025-11-24 04:56:18+00:00): Olá. Bem vindo ao OSM.

Atenção que usou tags que não se aplicam aqui e criou uma highway fictícia por cima de outra. No OSM só se deve adicionar objetos e vias observáveis no terreno. Para o efeito que pretende deverá usar serviços como o umap -> https://umap.openstreetmap.fr/pt-pt/
NeatNit (2025-11-18 21:57:50+00:00): Hey,
The same thing as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172229023 happened again, you added the tag with :IL-MOT. Can you think of any idea how to improve your workflow so this doesn't happen in the future?
NeatNit (2025-11-18 22:02:18+00:00): ( Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174835223 )
donmac703 (2025-11-21 07:31:59+00:00): As there are thousands of bus stops and hundreds of bus routes that I am examining, I would like to have a better workflow, but automation is not currently possible. I am hoping that automation *might* be possible once the missing stops and bus routes are added (so that existing stops are members of a route relation), but there are a lot of existing stops that also need updating.  Manual effort won't achieve 100.0 percent accuracy, and the few errors (out of the thousands of edits) should not be a cause for alarm (particularly as you have a process to identify and remedy the situation). Yes, perfection would be nice, but is it a realistic goal?
NeatNit (2025-11-21 13:25:25+00:00): Yeah, you're right. Carry on then! My only question is, do you want me to let you know when this happens or just fix it silently?

By the way, I'm more worried about mistakes that no one will catch, not the ones that I can fix. But I hear you loud and clear, perfect is the enemy of good. I should remind myself of that every now and then...
SomeoneElse (2026-01-11 15:14:01+00:00): Erm, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10804350642 has "no;yes" for crossing markings - I suspect that it should be one or the other!
VictorIE (2026-05-17 11:03:16+00:00): Hi,

UPS Rathcoole https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13191681437/

Might this be better mapped as:
amenity=parcel_locker or amenity=post_office or amenity=post_depot ?
user_5359 (2025-11-16 10:36:27+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please move the address node to the building.
dknelson9876 (2025-11-23 04:59:45+00:00): This is A LOT of different changes across the entire state. Please break up your changes by what the change is and/or into smaller geographical areas.

 I see changes consisting of: moving name_1 to alt_name, moving numerical names from alt_name=* to name=*, moving highway numbers out of name=*, splitting a dual carriageway, adjusting lane numbers, moving name_1=* to name_2=*, and that's not even scrolling a quarter of the way down the list of changed ways. This is so many changes that I find it doubtful that you actually investigated how many of these name changes are actually correct (and I can't be bothered to scroll all the way down the list to see what else you changed, because it is so long).

I think it would also be a lot more helpful to the completeness of the map if instead of doing a piecemeal edit of (for example) just moving name_1=* to alt_name=*, to actually fully correct the naming scheme of the way, and, for example, not leave "Street" on the end of a numbered street or not leave a full street name in the name=* tag instead of moving it to the name:full=* tag.

Please also note that sometimes a highway number belongs in the name=* tag, as when they are signed with that for addressing, it is unreasonable to expect a parser to understate that an address with addr:street="North Highway 161" is supposed to match the way with ref="SR 161" (for one route example)
ion_chi (2025-11-17 04:31:03+00:00): Hi asdfghasdsad, Did you mean to delete this entire building?
asdfghasdsad (2025-11-17 06:09:44+00:00): no, i just put up another edit to add the other addresses
SamosaMunch (2025-11-16 01:12:49+00:00): I'm pretty sure I messed up here! There is also a nail salon at the location now but I don't know the name.
MxxCon (2025-12-07 04:05:17+00:00): Changeset reverted to restore this POI.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175608699
Pink Duck (2025-11-18 11:38:06+00:00): The southern bypass is already part of a dual_carriageway type relation, with GB:nsl_dual maxspeed, so is it really necessary to explicitly add way tags too?
Mr Walrus (2025-11-18 19:04:37+00:00): rel[type=carriageway] does not seem to be widely adopted and I haven't heard of any software taking that into account. I'd rather put the tag explicitly to avoid any confusion. 

Also, if marking the entire relation rather than individual ways is the preferred way of mapping dual carriageways, it should be reflected on the relevant wiki page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:dual_carriageway%3Dyes
Pink Duck (2025-11-19 09:37:31+00:00): Think about the 'dual' bit. They come in pairs. Individual way tagging can be done of course, but then which is the paired carriageway? Fetch all dual_carriageway ways then correlate by name/ref/geography? What if those aren’t consistent/cross boundaries? Did you know that carriageways in the UK typically have ref A and B? For Away from London, Back to London, usually. Can be seen from the emergency layby phone refs. Just because something is more frequently used, doesn't mean it is best. Plus mappers are free to tag as they see fit. My point about inferring from maxspeed=GB:nsl_dual remains. Are you thinking about urban dual carrigeways too with limit under national?
MxxCon (2025-12-07 03:54:52+00:00): Hello.
Rather than using shop=vacant, it's better to use "disused:" lifecycle prefix as documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
While  your change is not outright wrong, there are some that consider shop=vacant as a bit misleading.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174708996
Udarian (2025-11-16 01:12:47+00:00): to me this seems like a duplicate
FTP123 (2025-11-29 21:10:33+00:00): It is not a duplicate. I have driven by this location multiple times and can confim that the google street view from (NOV/2025) is up to date and macthes the cameras I saw as of this message, 11.29.2025. There is one FLOCK camera strapped on an older concrete pole and another brand camera strapped on a newer concrete pole. Both are solar powered.
Baloo Uriza (2025-11-18 16:12:12+00:00): This looks like it's between the two eastbound lanes of the street, what's the correct location?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174709398
Nicholas_II (2025-11-18 16:35:20+00:00): It’s on the south side of the street facing east towards Santa Fe.
Baloo Uriza (2025-11-18 21:22:36+00:00): Got it, moved the camera to the pole location visible on Esri imagery.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174709398
Taksine (2025-11-16 07:28:04+00:00): 先生您好，村字的通称一般不以“village”或“hamlet”来区分，您需要考虑到行政村和自然村都存在“村”字通称的叫法，因此除非有实地的路牌可以证明没有“村”字，否则请不要删除。此外，单字村名我个人认为最好不要加上两个“村”字。谢谢。
Higashimado (2025-11-17 01:50:58+00:00): 您好，有关这个意见，群里有过简短的讨论，后面我也有部分新的补充和思考，在此回复比较容易记录和引用，算作参考：


1. 关于保留/删除“村”字的做法：

目前社区对于行政村/自然村的“村”字用法存在争议，尚无共识。以我了解到的本地知识来说，当地人不常在描述地名时使用“村”字，尤其是在末尾已有“屋”“寨”等通名时，因此个人理解此地区多字地名的“村”字同“镇/区/县”字类似具有行政属性。


2. 关于保留/删除“村”字的判定：

根据您的提议，粤西地区的路牌上对自然村通常会以“村”字标注，但标准地图上会删去“村”字，并建议以路牌为准。

个人对此持保留态度：首先，粤北山区诸多自然村规模较小、基建较差，难以找到路牌作为参考；其次，实地考察本地路牌，以目前的社区条件也不现实（当然，我支持按照 on-the-ground 原则，考察结果优先）；再次，即便是路牌，不同市/县/镇对待“村”字的方法也无统一标准。

同样无统一标准的还有广东省的标准地图，既有同时为行政村/自然村添加“村”字的，也有同时删去“村”字的。您提到的关于单字村名后加两个“村”字的用法，如“盘村村”等，在标准地图中同样能找到。


综合来看，个人倾向于没有合适的标准来判定是否需要为自然村添加/删去“村”字，以及是否需要删去单字村名后的重复“村”字的合理性。我认为可以先搁置相关的争议，待形成合适的标准后再统一处理。个人目前的主要兴趣是按照标准地图增补行政边界和行政村，对于自然村的处理并没有一定要坚持的意见。感谢有机会和您参与讨论！
DanhengOSM (2025-11-17 02:49:05+00:00): 感谢你的指正！
之前仅探索到北侧“登山路”小径下段。穿过消防水库和茶园，进山不久就没了道路踪迹，或许冬季草木较少时能进一步探索。
南侧“游步道”仅在靠近石虎山路一侧有一人宽的水泥路接口，灵峰山端则毫无痕迹。其余路段由于时间原因未能查证。
無限の刃 (2025-12-20 06:49:54+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpitch
nevw (2025-11-16 21:50:56+00:00): Hi, osmi has noticed an error needs attention here.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=130.85824&lat=-12.44547&zoom=14
RollTideRoll_asdfjkll (2025-11-16 02:38:05+00:00): 2025* not 2015, just noticed it today
AntMadeira (2025-11-16 10:39:34+00:00): Olá, Mgpaisagismo.
O nome deste bar é "Casa de swing"?

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
c0nsumer (2025-12-01 23:22:30+00:00): Please appropriately comment your changes and limit their scope. This change came to my attention because you have mis-mapped things adjacent to Bloomer.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174712131
Trail_Caretaker (2025-12-05 15:22:11+00:00): Sure, I can do that.  If you find something that you believe to be mismapped, would you mind sharing it with me?  Thank you.
c0nsumer (2025-12-05 15:29:04+00:00): Thank you. In this case the issues beyond the size of the changeset (it's HUGE) are:

- Your description. It needs to be much more specific.
- You mapped a trail (way ID 1451006980) wrong. What you mapped does not exist in reality. Please confirm that new trails actually exist, and are not just present as lines in Strava data, before you map them. I fixed this in changeset 175383923.
- You mapped a path as connecting the Clinton River Trail into Pfeizer's private property, mapped paths in their compound, and then added access details to those paths. I fixed this, because that path does NOT connect and would mislead people in thinking here is access from the CRT to Parkdale at that point. (There's a large fence in the way.)
Fizzie-DWG (2025-11-16 05:34:01+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18958
dypa (2025-11-16 12:31:04+00:00): Спасибо за добавление новой точки на карту!
Glassman (2025-11-16 21:30:55+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174713244