piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
yelisey90 (2026-01-13 18:05:10+00:00): reverted: mass changes using not on-the-ground checking, but some undetermined sources, possibly simply aerial imagery; including incorrect surface tagging (asphalt instead of unpaved or sett), incorrect addresses to buildings etc.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177190653
NorthCrab_upload (2025-06-29 06:00:45+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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

Podana kombinacja addr:city + addr:place jest nieprawidłowa. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, usuń addr:place i zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, pozostaw tylko addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4731789807

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
tntchn (2025-06-29 06:13:20+00:00): 《國防部軍備局舉辦陸軍砲兵訓練指揮部「關廟湯山營區」聯絡訓場道路用地取得第2次公聽會紀錄（詳后附件），公告周知。》備南工營字第1060001208號，2017/03/13。

https://www.mnd.gov.tw/NewUpload/201703/1060313%E5%B7%A5%E7%87%9F%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%83%E5%8D%97%E5%B7%A5%E8%99%95%E5%85%AC%E5%91%8A%E9%99%84%E4%BB%B6(%E9%97%9C%E5%BB%9F%E6%B9%AF%E5%B1%B1%E7%87%9F%E5%8D%80%E9%81%93%E8%B7%AF%E5%8F%96%E5%BE%97%E7%AC%AC2%E6%AC%A1%E5%85%AC%E8%81%BD%E6%9C%83%E6%9C%83%E8%AD%B0%E7%B4%80%E9%8C%84).pdf

這個檔案可以看出湯山營區北界是東西向的一條橫線，並畫出現在已開工的聯絡道路。
tntchn (2025-06-29 06:15:34+00:00): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vz_q07834AY
這個新聞有寫2026年1月底完工，（預計）年底可以完成搬遷
tntchn (2025-06-29 06:19:11+00:00): 新光大道工程另外可見《陸軍砲兵訓練指揮部關廟湯山營區新光大道 擴、整建工程——施工階段生態檢核 第一次生態監測報告書》，前幾天去看目前 A 段已經在工程中
https://w3fs.tainan.gov.tw/Download.ashx?u=LzAwMS9VcGxvYWQvMTU4L2NrZmlsZS9lODg0NDY2NC05ZTgwLTRmNTItODM5NC0zMTI2ZTQ0OTE4YTYucGRm&n=5paw5YWJ5aSn6YGT55uj5ris5aCx5ZGK5pa95bel5Lit56ys5LiA5qyhMjAyNDA0MDkucGRm&icon=.pdf
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-07 19:36:18+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12960570334/history has power = 22 that was added in this edit
What this tag means? Numeric value is unexpected here and it is unclear what it means
Jordan Mann (2025-06-29 06:33:14+00:00): I did this because this is not how building:part should be used, it should always be contained within a building and used to describe said building part. This was the opposite.

Saying that, I am not sure if this is the best way to add the BAG reference that encompasses multiple buildings - so please let me know if there is a more common way of doing this.
aharvey (2025-06-30 00:10:14+00:00): looks good, but just a minor note that instead of deleting https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12119421701 and creating a new one next to it, you could just move the existing one to improve the location and update any tags you need. This is based on good practice documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history
Tomas Straupis (2025-06-29 08:42:42+00:00): Ne, šita gatvė yra Helsinkio g. Tilto pavadinimas ne į žymą „name“.
Joseph R P (2025-07-02 00:04:36+00:00): Hello—it looks like a few things were broken or made more complicated in the changeset:

- The sand polygon surrounding northwestern Vegas (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19087109) appears to have been broken, as it no longer renders. This could be an issue as simple as an 'inner' member added to the relation as 'outer' or vice versa, or perhaps two disconnected ways.

- I've noticed that you have snapped a bunch of boundaries and multipolygons to Moccasin Road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/14311102), and this is problematic for a couple reasons. Generally, you should avoid snapping things to roads that don't physically intersect with the roads (same goes for footpaths and waterways), especially large relations multipolygons and administrative boundaries, because you want to make an edit to such a way, you also have to edit all the relations attached to it and risk breaking them in the process. I've seen cases where a straight road serving as a boundary between two entities is added two each respective relation, but once a city boundary, a Native American reservation, and two or three natural area multipolygons are linked two a single unrelated routable way like Moccasin Road, it makes editing things more difficult and makes the objects more fragile, such as if an editor adjusted, split, or retraced the road in such a way that neglects the relations attached to it. Furthermore, it creates a massive bounding box (those red/blue squares that appear in the changeset history that show where edits were made), thus making it more difficult to see what simple edit was made because so many other things were also accidentally editied.

- Additionally, Moccasin Road here is not a straight line, whereas the Paiute reservation and the Las Vegas boundaries are relatively straight. In reality, the boundaries don't arbitrarily wiggle across the desert along an informal track road, but follow markers and fences on the ground that follow the same section line that Moccasin is located along.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-07-02 02:03:01+00:00): Okay, I will fix them once I regain access to JOSM. If an entity's boundaries (say, a suburb) is defined with bi-directional roads (such as The Lakes), would it then be appropriate to tag the road as an outer part of the relation? Because the alternative—draw a new way such that it perfectly overlaps with the road—is, in my opinion, more of a pain when I, for example, hide landuse features and boundaries because I only want to edit traffic roads. iD will prevent you from editing the road because it's connected to a hidden feature.
Joseph R P (2025-07-02 21:41:29+00:00): I think it should be fine to use a bi-directional roadway (i.e. the undivided sections of roads) as a way in a boundary relation, but in a case where the roadway splits into two one-way lines (i.e. divided by a median), I'd roughly trace a new boundary in the middle—not the median exactly, but just between the two ways—and avoid snapping that boundary to any intersecting roads or median breaks. I would also avoid snapping any landuse or natural feature multipolygons to these roads because it's convoluted enough having a way serve as both a routable highway and a boundary of an entity, not accounting for any transit or a road route relations the way is a member of.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-07-03 01:11:24+00:00): Okay, I will keep this in mind next time. Thank you!
user_8655426 (2025-07-29 11:12:06+00:00): こんにちは。
この変更セットで「葵広場」を brownfield に変更されましたが、この広場は大河ドラマ館閉館後も、イベントなどの会場として使用されていました。
現在、何らかの開発計画があり、更地になるなどして使用されていない。ということでしょうか？
また、広場内にあった建物もすべて削除されていますが、それらも解体されたということでしょうか？

リレーション: 15699197
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15699197

JA:Tag:landuse=brownfield
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Tag:landuse%3Dbrownfield

浜松市公式ホームページ：旧元城小学校跡地（葵広場）
https://www.city.hamamatsu.shizuoka.jp/maps/c-aoihiroba.html
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168253314
しげ坊 (2025-08-02 09:28:16+00:00): 日数が経ってしまいすみません。
提示下さった浜松市の公式サイトを確認するまで、現在に至るまで広場や建物が存置していたり、屋外が自由利用可能とは全く思っていませんでした。
恥ずかしいですが、可能であれば差し戻しをお願いしたいところです。
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168253314
user_8655426 (2025-08-02 12:23:32+00:00): もとに戻しました。
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169860396

---

・Learn OSM
https://learnosm.org/ja/beginner/

・データの情報源
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Beginners_Guide_1.1

・利用可能なデータソース
https://openstreetmap.jp/node/764

・JA:画像の利用
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:画像の利用
↑浜松は現時点で  Esri World Imagery が最新ですが、ズレがありますのでご注意ください。(調整が必要。)

Happy Mapping!
しげ坊 (2025-08-03 14:03:42+00:00): 対応ありがとうございます。
こちらも訪問して、現況を確認しました。

改めてご提示下さった資料を熟読したり、レビューも求めながら編集していくようにします。
DanhengOSM (2025-06-29 11:52:24+00:00): 不建议一次性修改从长江上游到下游的极其大量内容
meongseolin (2025-06-29 13:54:35+00:00): 我就修改了洞庭湖相关流域关系
Samwel Kyando (2025-11-19 08:16:47+00:00): Thanks for your mapping unfortunately you  alot of empty spaces and tag them as building = yes i deleted them
pippo6 (2025-06-29 19:22:03+00:00): I know the road personally, as I live here, this is a stalled construction (due to money and politics) but not "serious disrepair" as in a fallen bridge or something. Sadly it seems you're serially doing this kind of edits across the world without the required personal knowledge?
catgirl mapper (2025-06-29 20:22:28+00:00): Would it be better to update the checked date to the latest imagery and then add a fix me tag for if someone knows if its abandoned? I am trying to check on construction tags with the oldest last check dates.
ivanbranco (2025-06-30 06:15:13+00:00): > I am trying to check on construction tags with the oldest last check dates.

I would leave this to locals with a real knowledge of the on the ground situation. It doesn't look like easy armchair mapping material to me.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-01 20:15:46+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12960703221/history has amenity = playground that was added in this edit
Maybe leisure=playground was supposed to be here? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dplayground

If yes, then it would be likely beneficial to retag it to that standard value. If using amenity= is intentional - what was meant here?
marpeter2 (2026-04-01 20:42:22+00:00): Dear Mateusz, thank you very much for your hint. You are fully right, it should be leisure=playground. I corrected it a few minutes ago - hopefully in the right way. With very kind regards, Martin
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-04-01 21:59:05+00:00): Thanks!
DD1GJ (2025-07-08 06:19:39+00:00): Revert nach Rücksprache mit Komet wg. unpassender Lizenz CC BY-ND
pippo6 (2025-06-29 19:13:48+00:00): You made the road routable for any apps who do not implement support for abandoned=*. Use abandoned:highway instead.

Also you should add the note ID in the changeset comment.
woodpeck (2025-06-29 19:47:44+00:00): As pippo6 says, you can use either "abandoned:highway=..." or you can use "highway=abandoned" but you should NEVER use "highway=secondary, abandoned=yes" - this is so-called "troll tragging" that will mislead applications unaware of the "abandoned" tag.
catgirl mapper (2025-06-29 20:06:12+00:00): Fixed. @pippo6 how do  I add the note ID?
trigpoint (2025-10-30 16:59:26+00:00): Hello
Phil from the Data Working Group here.
We have received from some mappers who are concerned by the use of the Nerf Map Editor.
For the avoidance of doubt an editor which providing links to disallowed sources, in this case streetview, is prohibited and any edits made using such an editor will need to be reverted.

WE understand you are possibly the developer?

If so please could you comment on the purpose of the edit and the decision to include such functionallity?

Also displaying the speed limit from other sources is not allowed in an OSM editor.
aharvey (2025-06-30 00:22:10+00:00): could you provide any further documentation for this change?
aharvey (2025-06-30 00:21:46+00:00): could you provide any further documentation for this change?
fortera_au (2025-06-30 06:07:26+00:00): And can you please use changeset comments that describe what you're doing: https://osm.wiki/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168254975
StC (2025-07-12 12:55:53+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a brisé en plusieurs endroits la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre qui passe par là. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
VictorIE (2025-07-09 09:41:07+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/871364068

How come you have deleted the section of the N69 completely?
Barry Carmody (2025-07-09 09:54:38+00:00): Apologies Victor, inadvertently deleted with a no longer existing by-road. Now fixed.
Uralla (2025-06-30 07:55:40+00:00): Зачем ломаешь мультиполигон?
Gregory Peony (2025-07-25 00:05:30+00:00): You identified and mapped buildings in the imagery here. Consider how people on the ground will travel. The footprint I flagged is clearly oversized, because it overlaps a highway visible in the imagery meaning they would overlap. You're looking at the roofs but mapping the footprints of buildings. Hope this helps. Thank you for your contribution.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168256303
LateNightTone (2025-07-05 14:12:11+00:00): Thanks for the edit ChezFrogLegs. Could I suggest though, rather than deletion, to mark the bridge as collapsed via its tags, as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge#Bridge%20lifecycle ?

Just swapping the highway tag for abandoned:highway would do this and mean that the way is still mapped and can be reinstated at a later date if/when rebuilt (or altered to ruins:highway or removed:highway etc as appropriate). This also has the added benefit that any unwitting mapper who comes along and sees the old aerial imagery doesn't inadvertently reinstate the footway.
LateNightTone (2025-07-05 14:13:22+00:00): Apols, incorrect reference link - the correct one is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bridge#Bridge_lifecycle
yrtimiD (2025-06-29 11:10:24+00:00): hi, just to ensure, usually it's not allowed to use/copy external gis sites (like Pardes Hana municipality ). if you want to map new roads which are not yet on allowed satellite images (bing, esri, mapbox, etc) - it's easier to just drive/walk and record GPX. Also you can check (and contribute) with Mapillary and Kartaview sites
Electos (2025-06-29 12:10:25+00:00): The new roads are on Esri. Are external GIS sites copyrighted.
yrtimiD (2025-07-05 15:27:29+00:00): I don't see them on Esri World Imagery included in iD editor.  Most external sources are copyrighted and better not be used until you explicitly saw them approved in osm wiki.
literan (2025-06-29 16:22:04+00:00): здравствуйте. Не надо, пожалуйста, в поле "Название" писать текст с вывесок нвроде "Smoking shop, табак аксессуары", "Трусы дешево", "Цветы 24" и т.д.

Если вы не хотите выяснять реальное название магазина, оставьте это поле пустым
user_8655426 (2025-06-29 12:38:30+00:00): こんにちは。
iDエディタの「改善提案」をもとにした自動的(機械的)な編集をされているようですが、浜松市内のもともと正しかったデータが、いくつか壊れてしまっています。
また、現時点でサークルKや昭和シェルが存在するとは思えません。

むやみに既存データを変更するのではなく、Wikiでタグの定義を確認する、現地調査をする、などして本当に誤っているものを修正してください。
・JA:Automated Edits code of conduct
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
・データの集め方
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Beginners_Guide_1.1

問題のあるデータは元に戻させていただきますので、ご了承ください。

地物のタグについては、以下のページが参考になるかと思います。
・JA:How to map a
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:How_to_map_a
・JA:Map Features
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Map_Features
・JA:Naming sample
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JA:Naming_sample

Happy Mapping!
NeisBot (2025-06-29 09:58:36+00:00): Hi adresse_repair, 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:
No primary map features!?

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

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168257895
adresse_repair (2025-06-29 10:40:22+00:00): I confirm the deletions.
They are supposed to be deleted.
mikini (2025-06-29 22:52:32+00:00): Hi adresse_repair,

Could you please elaborate a bit about what happened here? Did you duplicate a lot of address nodes manually on another account and deleted them on this account?

The autoAWS bot saw 11071 nodes with duplicated osak:identifier from at least 2025-06-29 08:50:01 UTC (earliest log entry present because the existence of these caused extensive logging rotating logs very fast) until around the time of this changeset + overpass roundtrip (autoAWS queries overpass with filter for osak:identifier & postcode);

[29-Jun-2025 08:50:21 UTC] INFO: 11071 addresses will be deleted from OSM

[29-Jun-2025 10:10:13 UTC] INFO: 0 addresses will be deleted from OSM

autoAWS was supposed to delete duplicates automatically but there seems to be an error in the bot, so that deletions did not happen in this scenario, see fx. this empty changeset; https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168257489. This might be due to the large number of nodes which triggered a "split changeset" feature which I have never observed being activated before.

For non-Danish people reading along, please find more info in the wiki pages detailing how Danish addresses are updated automatically from authoritative sources by the autoAWS bot;

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Da:Adresser
* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AutoAWS

-- 
Regards,
Mikkel
autoAWS operator
mikini (2025-06-29 23:12:17+00:00): Hmm, just took a quick look at a few of the offending nodes, and they seem to all have been created by autoAWS 4-5 days ago even though the existing node was never touched. So somehow autoAWS concluded that nodes with those osak:identifier values didn't exist. 

Sorry for this mess. But please ping me/autoAWS account directly next time autoAWS causes troubles.

I have disabled autoAWS for now until we have a better understanding of what happened.

Examples:
* Glostervej 9, Valby: existing node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4960384498, new node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12950070726
* Granvænget 2, Karlslunde: existing node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/340792644, new node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12953241205
adresse_repair (2025-06-30 09:48:45+00:00): Hej mikini

autoAWS kan godt køre igen.

Der har været et problem som nu er løst:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/is-osm-partially-down-new-data-isnt-able-to-be-queried-on-the-map-and-new-data-isnt-being-rendered/131884/13

autoAWS mangler et tjek for hvor gamle de data der hentes via Overpass API er.
Når der er for stor forsinkelse prøver autoAWS at tilføje data igen.
Dette er et kendt problem:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/AutoAWS#Reverting_changes

For at undgå dette kunne autoAWS f.eks. tjekke hvor stor forsinkelse der aktuelt er.
Dette kan gøres ved at kigge på "timestamp_osm_base"

Link:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22osak%3Aidentifier%22%3D%220057f500-b699-4de3-a26d-5ba141b24b22%22+in+Denmark&R

[out:json][timeout:25];
// fetch area “Denmark” to search in
{{geocodeArea:Denmark}}->.searchArea;
// gather results
nwr["osak:identifier"="0057f500-b699-4de3-a26d-5ba141b24b22"](area.searchArea);
// print results
out geom;

Det andet problem blev løst ved jeg slettede dobbelt noder. Der var nogle der var der 3 gange. Den 3. kunne autoAWS slette. At autoAWS også har et problem med store changeset skyldes sikkert der er en grænse på 10000. Så skal de deles i flere changeset.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12953236038/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12950071221/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4313482911/history
mikini (2025-07-02 23:39:13+00:00): Hej,

Jeg afventer lige at have tid til en gennemgang af koden omkring Overpass, der må være nogle fejlscenarier der ikke detekteres som forårsagede dette.

Kan ikke se at Overpass værende bagude skulle kunne give så mange dubletter. Der ville først begynde at opstå dubletter ved genkørsel af et postnummer efter ca. 20 timer (1089 postnumre processoret med ca. et i minuttet i det normale flow), og det vil kun være de senest tilføjede der mangler og dermed dubleres.
Denne situation vil rigtigt nok kunne fanges af et tjek af "timestamp_osm_base", som jeg også tidligere har tilføjet til [autoAWS' todo-liste][1], men har ikke prioriteret dette ret højt da dublettjekket burde fange det.

OSM sysadmin-teamet har også bedt om at der sættes en User-Agent-header, det sad jeg faktisk og arbejdede på da jeg opdagede ovenstående i loggen.

Jeg har ikke meget tid i overskud, så jeg har ikke endnu studeret hverken replikeringsproblemet eller hvordan autoAWS reagerede i detaljer (og mangler desværre også logs fra starten af hændelsen), men vil gøre en indsats for at få autoAWS kørende igen snarest.
-- 
Mikkel

[1]: https://gitlab.com/OSM-DK/autoAWS/-/blob/master/todo.md#taggingdata
NeisBot (2025-06-29 09:58:35+00:00): Hi adresse_repair, 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:
No primary map features!?

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

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168257907
adresse_repair (2025-06-29 10:40:42+00:00): I confirm the deletions.
They are supposed to be deleted.
rarad74 (2025-06-29 10:01:28+00:00): Actualizari Sibiu. Din greseala am trecut Bucuresti.
NeisBot (2025-06-29 10:16:43+00:00): Hi Mariam     Bambera, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added new building outline and supporting nodes."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #NoComment #AIgenerated
NeisBot (2025-06-29 10:24:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-05 19:32:19+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168283734
NeisBot (2025-06-29 10:30:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-02 12:23:38+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168345371
DD1GJ (2025-07-08 06:18:53+00:00): Revert nach Rücksprache mit Komet wg. unpassender Lizenz CC BY-ND
DodoGTA (2025-06-29 18:18:50+00:00): The place has actually been closed for a while (according to the local community) but all of the signs on the location strangely still exist (that's why I added them per the "on the ground" rule)
Vaidotas (2025-06-29 18:34:48+00:00): Apologies for incorrect update. Seeing all data about payments added and facebook page still up I assumed place was still open.
silversurfer83 (2025-06-29 15:27:02+00:00): fixed it ;)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/441309229
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168259434
patadune (2025-06-30 09:03:43+00:00): Bonjour kinderpingloo, le chemin n'existe plus sur le terrain ?
S'il existe toujours, il serait plus judicieux d'indiquer qu'il est privé avec les tags appropriés, et de mapper les barrières ou grillages empêchant son accès, le cas échéant. Sinon il est possible qu'un contributeur OSM l'ajoute à nouveau

cf. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F