piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2024-05-27 18:40:25+00:00): Hi... changing the residential into a cycleway is jolly good.
I did some additional upgrades.
Source the sat image.
Just for info..
The sat foto is more up to date.

Greetz..
eggie
eggie (2024-05-27 18:41:03+00:00): Ctrl-f5 for the effect.
Spinnerok (2024-05-27 18:54:07+00:00): Thank you!
limes11 (2024-05-28 12:38:43+00:00): Moin

Der Weg ist nach Wegeplan gesperrt. Es sei denn, hier gab es vor kurzem Neuerungen.

VG
bernward1 (2024-05-28 16:03:25+00:00): Nach welchem Wegeplan ?
Ich bin vor kurzem den Weg gegangen, habe keinerlei Hinweisschild gesehen.
Habe auf dem Weg einen Einheimischen getroffen. Der wusste auch nichts von einer Sperrung.
Der Weg ist auch die logische Wegführung von der Breiberghütte über den großen Breiberg nach  Röhndorf. - Nur Komoot leitet einen wieder zurück zur Breiberghütte.
limes11 (2024-05-28 16:37:47+00:00): Im 7Gebirge sind alle Wege gesperrt, die nicht explizit freigegeben sind. Dafür gibt es die roten Dreiecke. Ist auf den Hinweistafeln, die dort stehen, erläutert.

https://extra.bezreg-koeln.nrw.de/brk_media/_amtsblatt/pub_2012/21_2012_03.pdf

Nicht nur Komoot, sondern alle Router, die osm-Daten nutzen, routen hier nicht entlang.

Entweder der Einheimische wusste das nicht oder er ignoriert den Wegeplan.

Generell bitten die Herren der unteren Naturschutzbehörde aber auch nur Radfahrer und Hundehalter zur Kasse. Fußgängern lauern sie nicht auf.
Gsgeorge (2024-05-27 19:11:24+00:00): Did you mean to remove the park?
emersonveenstra (2024-05-28 11:31:27+00:00): I did, I assumed the landuse=recreation_ground was tagging for the renderer and a duplicate of the slipway since i didn't see any features listed in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=recreation%20ground?uselang=en, it seemed to be just covering the boat launch and parking. If I'm wrong, then I'll add it back
Gsgeorge (2024-05-28 13:24:02+00:00): The site has a Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) boat launch as well as a small picnic area. https://www.mcgi.state.mi.us/mrbis/BASDetail.aspx?basid=A-63-001
It is administered as part of Dodge #4 State Park which is at the north end of Cass Lake. I am not certain how the land use should be shown and whether it should be shown as an area or pin. It is known locally as the Orchard Lake DNR boat launch, and the pin or rec area should probably reflect that in some way and have the address (4060 Orchard Lake Road, Orchard Lake MI 48323) for wayfinding. Let me know what you think
emersonveenstra (2024-06-07 11:52:22+00:00): Ah, I see, so probably best to add that rec ground area back and put the address on that instead of the slipway
julcnx (2024-05-28 18:28:17+00:00): Hi CleverCamel, thanks for your contributions! I have downgraded temporarily your road name addition to a note tag while waiting for further clarification. what source did you use for this name? "Moo 2" is typically the alternative English name of a village. Also any official english name would need to be stored in "name:en" tag instead. Could you please clarify? thanks!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151908657
CleverCamel (2024-05-28 18:36:48+00:00): From this monastery on that road

https://imonastery.com/
julcnx (2024-05-28 18:51:35+00:00): Thanks for the quick reply!

Thailand address numbers, as shown on the monastery webpage you provided, are typically attached to the village number, and not the adjacent street name.

You can get more info here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Thailand#Addresses
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/correct-way-to-tag-a-thai-address-with-example/113105/11

If not done yet, I would suggest instead to add the corresponding addr tags to the monastery node or area object.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151908657
Greg91 (2024-08-26 11:56:43+00:00): Hi! Thanks for your effors in mapping the area.

For this changeset, have you inspected the area from the ground or from aerial imagery?

We spotted a conceptual error that you changed the basin to retaining walls. However, it is still a basin, albeit disused.

If you changes were from the imagery, can you, please, scrutinize them? Is there some edit that I should check from the ground?
yelisey90 (2024-08-26 13:34:12+00:00): Hi! As stated in the changeset "source" key, it was based on inspection from the ground.
Which basin are you referring to? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1145130593 ? If yes, then first of all, I separated the outer line & the area: this should always be done when different properties can relate either to the line or to the area. In this case, the line is the wall; and the area (which is best mapped as a multipolygon relation, even though it has only one member) is a brownfield with was:natural=water : https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17643073 . You can add disused:basin to it, if you wish; I haven't done that just because I didn't think of it.
Greg91 (2024-08-26 14:44:54+00:00): Oh, sorry! I have not looked at "source" of the changeset (not too experienced it that yet).

I meant the biggest basin.

I already did as you said: big basin is now disused:basin and small one is disused:pond.

Thank you for your prompt reply!

*Join our OSM Armenia group in Telegram if you wish=))
yelisey90 (2024-08-26 18:15:27+00:00): WRT changes, I'll answer at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155785497 .
WRT to invitation: thanks! I visit Armenia only occasionally, and for now it's enough for me to get all the  flood from Georgia OSM chat... But I'll definitely bookmark it!
RedGreenBlue09 (2024-05-27 16:40:30+00:00): Source: skhdt.binhthuan.gov.vn/ke-hoach-quy-hoach/hoan-chinh-quy-hoach-tinh-binh-thuan-thoi-ky-2021-2030-tam-nhin-den-nam-2050-627040
McKulkin (2026-04-03 00:15:12+00:00): riverbed of 1287126818 near node 11937551947 was dry in Sept '25. It's been dry for a long time it from what I can gather. Please, clarify.
McKulkin (2026-04-03 00:16:03+00:00): It's extremely convenient for me to use the Changeset discussions via JOSM where I'm editing. If you prefer another way, let me know.
McKulkin (2026-04-03 01:16:14+00:00): stream 1287126810 is dry but 1287126807 seems legit. Did you source the data from cadastre? A big mistake, from what I've seen.
nikyk (2026-04-06 11:08:33+00:00): If you know this stream is dry sometimes, split the stream and set tag intermittent=yes to proper segment. Sometimes, I draw hundreds if streams in day based on cadastral map, I have no chance to check those streams. Do you have an idea how to fix it?
McKulkin (2026-04-06 20:41:16+00:00): How many cadastral edits like these are on the map? I'm against incorporating NAPR (maps.gov.ge) cadastral data without understanding the legal implications for OSM project. You could use it as a hint or a reference point, but definitely shouldn't be copycat'ing. There isn't a clear license or ToS on their site and the FAQ states that the data can be accessed upon a signed agreement. "Publicly available" doesn't mean it's free of copyright or database restrictions.

Second point is that so far I encountered at least 3 cases when your edits sourced from cadastre were wrong. Highly likely it's severely outdated, at least in mountainous scarcely populated regions. I wouldn't be surprised if they're still using data from 30 years ago. You can't know how long ago the survey was done and, as far as I know, they only update it when there's a necessity (construction, land repurposing, major projects).
nikyk (2026-04-08 07:04:59+00:00): As for NAPR cadastral map (layer BaseLayer at maps.gov.ge. You wrote:
"I wouldn't be surprised if they're still using data from 30 years ago."
It is not based on Genshtab maps. Relief is created using 3d radar scanning. Map is enriched with cadastral data and multichannel scanning. Map provides waterways, vegetation, roads and so on. It may be become obsolete in some places, but usually no more than 2-4 years.
There are no analogues to this map in Russia.
nikyk (2026-04-08 07:16:05+00:00): You wrote:
"How many cadastral edits like these are on the map?"
Personally for me, it is the main source of mapping data. The second if NAPR satellite mosaic, and the 3rd is gps tracks from me or from trusted sources.
Almost all waterways were laid out on the basis of cadastral data.
This map has the best GPS binding 
among available mosaics.
This map contains the most comprehensive information about highways in the residential-type area.
nikyk (2026-04-08 07:34:35+00:00): You wrote: "I'm against incorporating NAPR (maps.gov.ge) cadastral data without understanding the legal implications for OSM project."
Formally, you are right. 
Using this map to edit the location of objects on the OSM map is in a "gray area."
We have a choice:
1) Put on a white coat, climb to the top of an ivory tower, and not use NAPR at all, not satellite, not cadastral, not settlement boundaries (the "administrative boundaries" layer), not house numbers and street names (the "address data" layer). Then the map will be practically pristine, with ten times fewer trails and forest roads, and no streams at all. Find the worst-rendered areas of Georgia; that's the situation there right now. You can't criticize "bad" trails and streams because they simply aren't on the map.
2) Use NAPR, do the work, hike through the mountains, and refine the map.
McKulkin (2026-05-23 00:29:05+00:00): small update-

After some back-and-forth, it seems like NAPR is completely unenthusiastic about clarifying the license and the age of the data they're providing via the "base" layer. The work's actually been sponsored by the EU members and was completed in 2022. It's pretty safe to assume nothing's got updated since then (and the EU stopped the allocations), which practically sets the age of that data to at least 5 years old.

I understand that the map would be empty without the cadastral data, but given the circumstances, I'd suggest relying more on personal experience when populating the map. Thanks.
miluethi (2024-06-13 22:52:30+00:00): Hi Len,

I'm going to delete some of your additions. These buidings are far bigger than the aerial imagery.
hauke-stieler (2024-06-06 15:07:22+00:00): Hi,

ein Hinweis zu den Gebäuden hier: Wenn man "building:part=*" nutzt, braucht man auch immer ein separates Polygon mit "building=*" in dem sich der "building:part" befindet. Ist hier aber nicht nötig, da es nur einen Teil gibt, also kann man das auch direkt als "building=*" taggen. Hab das mal angepasst.

Grüße
Hauke
SpaceCafe (2024-06-07 06:06:03+00:00): Ohh, danke dir :-)
Vivek Dumre (2024-05-28 06:25:28+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909346
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:55:32+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909395
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:55:04+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909417
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:54:57+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909448
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:54:34+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909467
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:53:45+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909484
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:53:10+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909521
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:53:00+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909538
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-28 00:52:19+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909563
NeisBot (2024-05-27 17:00:25+00:00): Hi MorganRib, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature's:
https://osm.org/way/1287133217
https://osm.org/way/1287133218
https://osm.org/way/1287133219

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
Lordgenome (2024-05-27 17:12:45+00:00): Live in the area and can see it's sand. Feel free to remove if this is wrong.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-28 05:14:28+00:00): Thanks for your answer!

Are they really beaches or just areas covered with sand?
Lordgenome (2024-05-28 07:22:51+00:00): I based it of this. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/beach/ and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beach which says lakes can have beaches.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-28 08:34:58+00:00): Did you read the following?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dbeach
Lordgenome (2024-05-28 16:23:04+00:00): Ah okay, well yes I still believe it counts as a beach based on what you linked.

But i was mistaken, it would also have Gravel and some pebbles in it.

Still not sure why this has been alerted.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-30 07:34:55+00:00): Thanks for your answer.

IMHO your mapped features should be tagged as natural=sand 

What do you think?
Frans S (2024-06-08 08:31:36+00:00): Here you did not tag the buildings as well.
Tags building=yes, added by another mapper.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151909875
rskedgell (2024-05-27 18:48:58+00:00): Thanks!
ZeLonewolf (2024-05-29 09:42:23+00:00): Hello, can you explain why you made this short dead-end road a trunk road?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/601312224

Have you reviewed this wiki page?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
mikko_tamura (2024-06-13 12:56:15+00:00): maybe you can  use amenity=research_institute instead of amenity=school
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151910176
Al-mahruf (2024-06-13 23:25:03+00:00): 
Noted
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
mikko_tamura (2024-06-13 12:57:30+00:00): please follow osm format in opening hours 9 AM to 12PM is not the convention it should be 09:00-12:00
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151910314
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
Chieux-59273 (2025-05-21 14:52:54+00:00): Pas de chemin 1225537834..
propriété privée
A retirer de la carte
Chieux-59273 (2025-05-22 06:33:51+00:00): ACCESS=PRIVATE
MxxCon (2024-05-31 03:12:08+00:00): If there's construction here, then shouldn't this be tagged as such?
Routers can't read fixme tags and they would send people here...
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151910823
IraGersh (2024-05-31 12:09:55+00:00): Its complicated. You can still use the crosswalk to cross the street, yet fencing blocks the long way along playground and the shorter way between playground and dog run.  I will mark both of them as under construction too.  I've got emails going back and forth with parks claiming the subcontractor is out of scope in blocking them.  I'm considering suing them.
mikko_tamura (2024-06-13 13:02:13+00:00): Please add the proper name
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151910855
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
MxxCon (2024-05-31 03:23:04+00:00): If it's under construction then it should be tagged as such.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151911102
IraGersh (2024-05-31 12:04:08+00:00): I used landuse=construction.  Also changed the description to say that it was a dog park before construction and will continue to be one after.
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-28 05:07:00+00:00): Hi leander37, welcome to OSM.

I guess something went wrong with your name, correct?

https://osm.org/node/3779802777/history/2
leander37 (2024-05-28 10:19:49+00:00): Yes. How do I delete that name?
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-28 15:00:37+00:00): Thanks for your answer.

You already removed the name here: https://osm.org/changeset/151913723
NadineEvaGrabowski (2024-09-03 13:55:55+00:00): Die Schurl's Weingalerie hat geschlossen und nun ist dort die BuxxBar.
MichaelFS (2024-09-03 16:52:19+00:00): Danke für die Info und für die Aktualisierung!. Ich hatte damals den Aushang "wir schließen" gesehen, aber im Juli dann vergessen, "disused" zu setzen ...
MichaelFS (2024-09-03 17:41:45+00:00): Oops, ganz übersehen: Herzlich willkommen auf OpenStreetMap und viel Spaß hier!
Falls Du Fragen hast oder ich helfen kann, melde Dich gerne bei mir ...
NadineEvaGrabowski (2024-09-04 06:00:35+00:00): @MichaelFS: Dankeschön!
silversurfer83 (2024-05-27 20:56:27+00:00): Hi :)

EIne Frage: ist die Toilettenanlage da jetzt eine Fläche oder ein Gebäude. Sollte das, was du da eingezeichnet hast, wirklich ein Gebäude sein, dann kann die Eigenschaft "area=yes" wieder entfernt werden. Die wird durch "building=*" impliziert. 

Außerdem möchte ich dir diesen Artikel zur Entsorgungstation empfehlen, damit du diese vielleicht besser erfassen kannst:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Dsanitary_dump_station

happy mapping
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151911524
Frans S (2024-05-28 11:52:03+00:00): Hallo Jan.
Bedankt voor het mappen.
Check de WIKI Highways voor het benoemen van wegen hier.
Tracks, die alleen toegang geven tot agrarisch/bos gebieden zijn geen unclassified of residential roads.
Vriendelijke groeten
Frans S (2024-05-28 11:54:50+00:00): Hallo. Nog een kleinigheidje.
Tracks zijn by default unpaved. Niet nodig dit alsnog bij de te zetten
Groeten
map per (2024-06-01 18:36:16+00:00): Hello PendergastMuc,

because of review requested:
That the path is open at the moment is interesting. Do you know whether passing under the Föhringer Ring / Herzog-Heinrich-Brücke is possible here (1) and here (2)?

It would be best if you could answer in this note (3) to keep the discussion about the construction site in one place.

Thanks and best regards
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1080982527
(2) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1256531447
(3) https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4196608
VictorIE (2024-08-10 21:38:47+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11937883572

highway=street_lamp and natural=tree :)

Should the roads there be highway=residential ?
craghead (2024-09-07 23:44:26+00:00): Hi there,
Well spotted (the deliberate error!). Removed the offending tag.
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
canfe (2024-06-02 15:57:20+00:00): Su JOSM se usi la Q dopo aver disegnato un edificio, questo lo renderà squadrato.
Alcuni sono un po' storti, potresti ripassarli?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151912418
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-31 23:35:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152101664 where the changeset comment is: reverted road and place reclassifications by cm81447 that were made without explanation or discussion
rohieb (2024-05-29 11:27:08+00:00): Hmpf, hier hat mein SCEE alte Daten hochgeladen, weil es damals mein Login noch nicht hatte… Die Shops am Altewiekring könnten mehrere Monate veraltet sein, ich entferne mal die opening_hours, damit es erneut in StreetComplete aufploppt.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-27 18:45:15+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006617484
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006639400
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006639373
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006648316
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006641904
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006654060
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3829810577
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3829810559
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3829810420
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006630861
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3829811523
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006621997
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006619763
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006634093
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3006621722
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396738698
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396738745
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396738815
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/813670201
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415328605
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/415328654
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396739930
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396740095
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/886263354
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/762705526
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/589461125
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/418113180
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/418113237
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396740382
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/396740440

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀