piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-17 03:04:37+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165051935
aTarom (2024-10-25 16:51:48+00:00): Hola, los datos que estás actualizando provienen de alguna base de datos o es conocimiento propio? si estás importando datos hay que seguir una serie de requerimientos
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
por ejemplo este hotel tenía una ref:bic
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref:bic
que has eliminado
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/199834150/history
seguro que es correcto?
cuando algún elemento no tiene número de portal hay que usar
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nohousenumber
los teléfonos no hay que encerrar entre paréntesis el código de país
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone
todo esto y más, se puede evitar preguntando a la comunidad
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/es/51
antes de editar en caso de que queden dudas tras leer la wiki
Nos dices, saludos
Frans S (2024-10-25 11:49:48+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------


A: Inaccurate mapping.

E: Buildings not squared.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158333432
umbraosmbr (2024-11-04 15:22:20+00:00): Olá.
existem varias imagens de satelite para ser usado no openstreetmap, a licença do google maps não permite que use em edições aqui no Openstreetmap
santamariense (2024-11-05 22:21:13+00:00): Olá Adriane,

Antes de mais nada, bem vinda ao OSM.

Notei que você renomeou estas ruas  para o nome antigo baseados no Google. Primeiramente, o Google tem direitos autorais sobre os mapas deles, limitando o seu uso bem como proibindo a reprodução de seus dados de mapa. Até foi por esse motivo que o projeto OSM surgiu, para dar mais liberdade de reuso dos dados que são mapeados colaborativamente.  

Além disso, não é porque está no Google que está correto ou está mais atualizado do que no OSM. A comunidade costuma atualizar os nomes de ruas tão logo quanto são aprovados pela câmara municipal, em muitas cidades pelo Brasil. Como você pode obervar por esta notícia ( https://www.boavista.rr.leg.br/institucional/noticias/aprovada-mudanca-dos-nomes-de-tres-ruas-do-residencial-nova-esperanca ), os novos nomes eram esses mesmo que estavam no OSM. Veja o histórico: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/476316220/history

Só para reforçar, não utilize mapas comerciais para mapear no OSM pois será necessário apagar as informações inseridas devido a copyright.

Bons mapeamentos,
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-12-29 21:47:59+00:00): What is the actual source of for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12287965029/history ?

Also, why mapping whether girl(s) live at specific home would be within scope of OSM?
ODULANA OLUWATOYIN (2025-01-30 14:16:31+00:00): This data is a recent field mapping activity , the attributes of the collated data which informs who uses the  facilities mapped , hope that helps?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-02-03 20:30:53+00:00): not really

why mapping whether girl(s) live at specific home would be within scope of OSM?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-02-03 20:32:33+00:00): also, is there really a separate house there?

it looks like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12287965029 was created despite https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/947509694 and other building geometries being mapped

are there additional buildings there, not mapped as areas?
ODULANA OLUWATOYIN (2025-02-04 10:45:08+00:00): Thanks for the feedback, 

The field data collated are point data, and the section that depicts who uses the facilities whether boy, girl, man, woman is part of the data information collected to understand indivduals that utilize the facilities.

for the enquiry on if there are additional buildings in the area that was not mapped- Yes , there are .


for this, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12287965029 , if it was replicated that means the data can go if it refers to the same feature and name of feature mapped.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-02-04 14:40:12+00:00): I started thread at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/someone-mapped-whether-girls-boys-elderly-live-at-a-specific-house-should-we-remove-redact-this-data/125263 about potential removal of such data - I think that recording what kind of people live at specific private house goes too far

you may wish to comment there
Map_HeRo (2025-02-05 20:56:09+00:00): Hi Odulana Oluwatoyin, you put a lot of effort into the mapping of this community but the way you are working has arisen some questions in the international OSM forum. The participants are wondering why you add user data to various separate nodes placed here and there instead of adding data to the buildings concerned. We would be happy if you could pop into the forum to explain. Just click the link Mateusz has posted above. You are highly welcome!
Cheers Mikke ... former Lagos inhabitant ;)
okainov (2025-02-06 08:38:06+00:00): Hi Odulana Oluwatoyin,

>The field data collated are point data, and the section that depicts who uses the facilities whether boy, girl, man, woman is part of the data information collected to understand indivduals that utilize the facilities.

Could you please clarify more details, what exactly are you trying to collect and research here, what is the purpose? Maybe a few examples (apart of what was mapped) would be helpful. Seems there is a huge misunderstanding and confusion whether you're mapping *residents* and *users*, would be appreciated if you could clarify this in depth. See also linked discussion in the forum, would be appreciated if you could answer there.

Thanks!
ODULANA OLUWATOYIN (2025-02-06 21:51:24+00:00): Okay, Thank you for the feedback, the mapped data which included categories mapped on field involve community asset mapping which is typically to put communities on the map- that is, mapping assets that are deemed important to community residents.

The Categories of features mapped varied which included commercial facilities (e.g shops ), health care facilities (e.g clinics, pharmacies, hospitals ), sustenance facilities (e.g bars, restaurants) etc.. and several others. Accompanying the mapped features are questions about features  mapped such as : 
-what is this facility used for?
- who uses the facility? (men, women, boys, girls, elderly, PWD) 
-What is the current state/condition of the facility? (functional/ non-functional, needs repair, beyond repair , others ) 
- who owns it? (private/individual, community, local government, etc..)  who manages it?  ..................and few other questions . 

These questions are to get better understanding about the features mapped in these communities.
ODULANA OLUWATOYIN (2025-02-06 21:53:10+00:00): Thank you for the feedback, 

the mapped features which included categories mapped on field involve community asset mapping which is typically to put communities on the map- that is, mapping assets that are deemed important to community residents.

The Categories of features mapped varied which included commercial facilities (e.g shops ), health care facilities (e.g clinics, pharmacies, hospitals ), sustenance facilities (e.g bars, restaurants) etc.. and several others. Accompanying the mapped features are questions about features  mapped such as : 
-what is this facility used for?
- who uses the facility? (men, women, boys, girls, elderly, PWD) 
-What is the current state/condition of the facility? (functional/ non-functional, needs repair, beyond repair , others ) 
- who owns it? (private/individual, community, local government, etc..)  who manages it?  ..................and few other questions . 

These questions are to get better understanding about the features mapped in these communities.
Frans S (2024-10-25 14:19:47+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

A: Inaccurate mapping.

E: Buildings not squared.
F: Buildings partly hidden under trees.
G: Included the shadow of the building.
H: Included a yard of clearing.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158333910
o_andras (2024-10-25 14:55:30+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3432366
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-25 12:11:03+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/12287998613

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
BCNorwich (2024-10-25 14:32:33+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Actually, the path is layer=0 as it is at ground level and neither over nor under any other feature. In the absence of any layer tag the layer is implied to be layer=0, so in this case there's no need for a layer tag. I've removed the layer tag, I tweaked the path line so it doesn't cross a building.

Regards Bernard.
eggie (2024-11-12 14:28:32+00:00): Dag Bram,
hgv=designated betekent juist is bestemd voor hgv.
Ik heb er hgv=destination van gemaakt.
Overigens waren er nog wel problemen om met de vuilniswagen de Rechthuislaan in te komen. 
Geen idee waarom. 
Zie deze discussie
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/159044107#map=19/51.901277/4.482296

MVG
eggie
literan (2024-10-26 11:49:44+00:00): и зачем вы здесь отделили въезд в дачи от дороги? это вандализм
Frans S (2024-10-25 13:58:39+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158336180
Brummelwuff (2024-10-25 22:54:24+00:00): Moin, die Pleistermühlenweg-Brücke ist noch nicht gespert und die Behelfsbrücke noch nicht freigegeben. Habe die änderungen Rückgänig gemacht.
ilias_ (2024-10-25 16:22:24+00:00): Hi! Please check https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Morocco#Administrative_divisions. Urban Communes are level 8.
DavidKarlas (2024-10-27 04:38:52+00:00): Hi ilias,
problem that I have is that this is only part of Morocco where admin_level=6 does not cover Morocco, is there something special about Casablanca or why that is? See https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Tfg
ilias_ (2024-10-27 11:36:34+00:00): Hi David,
The country's administrative divisions on OSM were completely wrong, we're currently in the process of changing them. Feel free to help! https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Morocco#Administrative_divisions
Frans S (2024-10-25 13:56:10+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158337825
NieWnen (2024-10-25 16:26:37+00:00): Cześć, możesz proszę podać źródło?

Oraz również dodawać je do zestawów zmian? Bo raczej nie jest to odczytane z ortofotomapy, przez co zmiana może być uznana jako wątpliwa.

Inna kwestia jeśli posiadasz wiedzę odnośnie ograniczenia to warto dodać przy okazji source:maxspeed

W przypadku stref prędkości (te kwadratowe na białym tle) będzie wtedy np. "PL:zone30", dla obszarów zabudowanych "PL:urban", zwykłego ograniczenia bez strefy zwykłe "sign".
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-10-26 21:32:41+00:00): Please use access tags instead of disconnecting and provide sources since its not on imagery.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158338614
DuhC0mmunity (2024-10-26 21:50:40+00:00): Not sure how to add access tags also Source: https://www.maine.gov/mdot/projects/augusta/westernave/
Forgot to add it in changes comment
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158338614
felipeeugenio (2024-10-26 15:42:16+00:00): Hola. Por favor cuidar la ortografía en el mapa. gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158338698
Vinber-Pro (2025-05-20 16:54:50+00:00): salut, 
j'ai remis le building https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/754993167/history que tu avais sorti :)

tu as un truc avec la clé building :)

à plus
Frans S (2024-10-25 15:07:41+00:00): Hello again. See my comment on previous changeset. 
Except for 1 correct small building, the round objects don't need to be mapped.
Best regards and keep mapping
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158339215
Kurosawa06 (2024-10-27 17:43:36+00:00): Attention, le point existait déjà...
votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (2024-10-28 13:12:55+00:00): Bonjour, merci à vous, et désolé, nous ne l'avions pas vu.
Bonne journée
alain
JeroenvanderGun (2024-10-25 14:00:47+00:00): N.B. Overlay beheergebied provinciale wegen van provincie Utrecht gaf precieze beheergrens aan tussen Noord-Holland en Utrecht.
felipeeugenio (2024-10-26 15:41:35+00:00): Hola. Por favor cuidar la ortografía en el mapa. gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158339262
map per (2024-10-25 18:18:49+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Die Änderung sieht gut aus. Die alte Kombination aus 'building' und gleichzeitig 'demolished:building' hat keinen Sinn ergeben
VictorIE (2025-04-06 22:00:22+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1328129246
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1328161249

What do these lines represent?

I've seen them elsewhere as well.
VictorIE (2025-04-06 22:03:14+00:00): Also: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1328129245
aceman444 (2024-12-13 21:07:23+00:00): Hi, please do not write the object accepts BTC, but write what object you add.

Also on all the objects you add, you write fictional names describing the object, not just its proper name. Then you add a long 'description' containing advertising description of the company. This does not belong into OSM. Please remove all this advertising from 'name' and 'description' tag quickly.
aceman444 (2024-12-13 21:08:13+00:00): Also do not add incomplete addresses with only street and city. There is proper full address on the containing building already.
AndersAndersson (2024-10-25 20:52:32+00:00): Hello
The node for the football pitch was removed but you forgot to add an area with the pitch.
ujinevich (2024-10-28 06:02:46+00:00): Sorry, didn't see the football pitch itself. Mapped area again
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158440549
AndersAndersson (2024-10-28 22:11:41+00:00): Thanks!
Frans S (2024-10-25 15:05:37+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping
What you see here is crops standing on riders drying. Don't need to be mapped. Are not buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340076
JamesInSuffolk (2024-10-25 15:10:17+00:00): Thank you for letting me know! I will not mark those as buildings going forward, and apologies for the mistake.
leofra31 (2024-11-03 13:54:56+00:00): Bonjour Cyril,
Les bâtiments ajoutés dans ce changeset ont été détruits et remplacés il y a plus d'un an, je crois que vous vous êtes basés sur des sources obsolètes pour vos moduifications. 
J'ai récemment effectué des prises de vues au niveau de la rue qui sont disponibles sur panoramax et mapillary.
Je vais donc annuler les modifications apportées.
Bonne continuation sur Openstreetmap
leofra31 (2024-11-03 14:10:35+00:00): Ps : pour voir si des batiments étaient présents avant, vous pouvez utiliser les versions précédentes de l'imagerie pour voir comment les choses étaient, la couche BDOrtho est la plupart du temps la plus récente, mais a souvent 1 ou 2 ans.
cyril31 (2024-11-03 22:54:02+00:00): ok désolé, merci Léo.
BCNorwich (2024-10-27 08:02:14+00:00): Hi, Duplicate highways placed atop of Way: 1328162355 are removed.

Regards Bernard.
Frans S (2024-10-25 15:00:08+00:00): Hello, I reviewed this changeset as well.
Summarized, you need to pay attention on
mapping of high buildings and squaring the buildings. 
The Imagery is not the most clear. You can add the Bing imagery as well and after correcting the offset you have a better view.
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340390
Frans S (2024-10-25 15:02:08+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 
However,   High building(s) are incorrect mapped. See par 20 chapter About Buildings
Best regards
Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340483
Frans S (2024-10-25 14:53:44+00:00): Hello. See my comments on another changeset.
High building(s) are incorrect mapped. See par 20 chapter About Buildings

Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340568
BCNorwich (2024-10-27 07:58:57+00:00): Hi, I've removed duplicated sections of highway on the A920 roundabout, adjusting the bus routes to suit.

Regards Bernard.
Vas111 (2024-10-27 13:54:30+00:00): Hi, thank you, it seems Relatify creates duplicate ways quite often.
Frans S (2024-10-25 14:43:40+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Difficult to map from this imagery
Issues found on your mappings
E: Buildings not squared.
H: Included a yard of clearing.
High building(s) incorrect mapped. See par 20 chapter About Buildings


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340818
mini-me (2024-10-25 19:15:46+00:00): Но зачем? Это ведь один объект
Peter_Otp (2024-10-26 14:15:33+00:00): Я ориентировался на официальную схему поселка у КПП - там указаны очереди застройки поселка - видимо этот параметр  уже устоялся как дополнительный параметр, облегчающий локализацию нужного адреса, своего рода район дачного поселка
mini-me (2024-10-26 23:58:44+00:00): Скорее застройщику просто лень было отредактировать картинку из своих рекламных материалов.
Из-за тега place=allotments геокодеры будут выдавать это имя как часть адреса. А в официальных адресах уж точно не будет никаких очередей.
Peter_Otp (2024-10-28 15:56:00+00:00): Переделать снова в одно отношение не проблема, я могу снова вернуть все в одно отношение, если  нужно. Я думал, что просто так подробнее будет.
Frans S (2024-10-25 14:46:44+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping.
E: Buildings not squared.
H: Included a yard of clearing.
High building(s) incorrect mapped. See par 20 chapter About Buildings


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340986
Frans S (2024-10-25 14:48:13+00:00): A few objects you mapped are just walled yards.
Check if there is a shadow visible of a building.
If not, it is not above groundlevel and therefor not a building. Check that .
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158340986
JassKurn (2024-10-25 14:41:40+00:00): Changeset reverts changeset 158208435 which deleted clearly existing breakwater.
CurlingMan13 (2024-10-25 15:32:54+00:00): Reviewed as requested.  Keep up the good edits.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158341127
Metzor (2024-10-27 08:11:57+00:00): Hallo Gerhard,

Hier habe ich um Mithilfe gebeten:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/hilfe-beim-kreuzungreparieren-gesucht-ulm/120725

Schönen Sonntag!
Metzor
Gerhard24 (2024-10-27 09:56:27+00:00): Hallo Metzor,

Vielen Dank für deine Ausführungen und die Kritik. Offensichtlich habe ich die Schwierigkeit und Komplexität eines solches Unterliegens weit unterschätzt. Im Nachhinein stelle ich fest, dass ich mich eindeutig übernommen habe und ich bedaure, dass da jetzt so viele Probleme vorhanden sind im Vergleich zu vorher. 
Da mir noch viel Wissen fehlt, hast du einen Vorschlag, wie ich das am besten erlernen kann?

Gruß, Gerhard.