piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mazda05 (2023-05-02 17:14:59+00:00): wikipedia=uk:Снагість;ru:Снагость (река)

у Version #4 
Edited 8 days ago by Mazda05

не є корректною розміткою згідно з https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:wikipedia, тому було виправлення
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-09-14 23:36:14+00:00): usuário excluiu vias que voce criou? https://osmcha.org/changesets/140845253/
santamariense (2023-09-17 22:41:31+00:00): Obrigado, erickdeoliveiraleal. Vou tomar providências.
kaartense (2023-10-02 01:45:23+00:00): Só para constar, foi resolvido. Novamente, obrigado.
antonr (2023-05-06 12:31:11+00:00): Hi Krako73,

Why remove natural=spur? These locations are in fact spurs*. place=locality could easily coexist with natural=spur.

* as far as I understand the meaning of that word, being a non-native but experiences orienteerer.
user_18305684 (2023-05-06 16:54:53+00:00): Hi,

to be useful, a value needs to be understood by everyone = other mappers, the people who create maps with the osm data, the people who create gps softwares or any other types of software.

In the wiki, it is written that we can use what we want, that every mapper is free to add any informations.

It is true but if you are the only one  using a value, nobody will see/understand it.

And if you look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/natural=spur#overview, you will see that the 2 values spur was used only by you (zero now because I removed it).

You are right when you say it is possible to use a tag place and a tag natural on the same node.

So I will suggest, if you look at the wiki, part geology related https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:natural#Geology_related, to try to find something more common, like peak or hill or rock or stone, if needed.

Best regards
antonr (2023-05-06 19:02:45+00:00): The data in OSM really does not need to be understood by everyone! If that was a rule it would take only a single really stubborn person to refute all our data, by insisting on not understanding it :-)

Did you (try to) understand the data before deleting? What part of it did you not understand,? If you are unfamiliar with the term spur, maybe the illustrations on page 18 of https://orienteering.sport/iof/rules/control-descriptions/ will help.

I'm open for better tagging, but simply deleting information because you don't understand it is not productive, I think...

I have indeed searched the wiki before adding, and found no relevant tags. It would be counterproductive to map this spur as a rock (as you seem to suggest?) when there is no rock. Or as a hill, when there is no hill, etc.

Kind regards.
user_18305684 (2023-05-16 16:57:49+00:00): When I look at the illustration in your link, if you want to translate this kind of "spur" into an osm tag, I think you cannot do something on a node. I will suggest to add a way with the tag natural=ridge.

(but with the tag viewpoint on the nodes, I think everybody understand that we are not in a hole but on a protruding place. So why to add something else ?)

Best regards
antonr (2023-05-16 20:19:40+00:00): Hi again,
Thanks for giving this some thought!

I've also been wondering whether node or way was better... I think both could be used depending on the circumstances: Way for spurs significantly longer than wide, but node for roundish spurs having width~length.

In orienteering (the sport) it is a must that any feature (a spur in this case) used for a control can be located to within a ~5m radius, and the default location for an orienteering control on a spur is "on top" of the spur. Thus I have a clear intuition that node is ok, and I implicitly assume the "on top" location to be the thing to map. I cannot think of a better part of the spur to map, but open to input! "On top" coincidentally matches the locations of the two viewpoint at hand (but that is of course not in itself a reason for "on top" being the generally understood interpretation of spur...)

Thanks for suggesting natural=ridge. It is a very related concept, and maybe there are cases where both could apply. Yet it is my understanding that a ridge is not (always) the same as a spur. Here are some ways in which I think the two differ:
- A spur is smaller than a ridge
- A spur protrudes from a hillside/slope, whereas a ridge is more of its own feature (probably connected to the first item about size)
- A ridge has a "continuous elevated crest"[1], whereas a spur is always sloping downwards ([4] seems to not agree to this, and have both slope downwards...)
- We have language for both, indicating that separate concepts are meaningful and useful for e.g. navigators. Examples of separate use in [2], [3], [4]

[1] https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=ridge
[2] https://askaboutireland.ie/learning-zone/primary-students/5th-+-6th-class/geography/maps-and-map-reading/landscape-features/valleys-ridges-and-spurs/
[3] https://www.armystudyguide.com/content/Prep_For_Basic_Training/Prep_for_basic_land_navigation/spur-minor-terrain-featur.shtml
[4] https://www.bushwalking101.org/interpreting-map-features/
user_18305684 (2023-05-20 17:08:01+00:00): Thanks for the links.

I saw a lot of spurs in osm, each time they were represented by a way with the tag ridge : some examples here https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1va4

Best regards
habi (2023-05-01 20:00:32+00:00): Die Strasse ist im Katasterplan Bern unbenannt.
aceman444 (2024-08-28 19:08:48+00:00): No toto by sa nemalo robit, vymyslat si cesty, aby sa ulahodilo navigaciam. Uz by tie navigacie mali zacat zvladat plosne cesty.
aceman444 (2024-08-28 19:18:36+00:00): Okrem toho ako pozeram nefunguje iba Valhalla. OSRM ci Graphhopper automaticky naviguju aspon po okrajoch tychto polygonov. Cize pre ne su pridane cesty uplne zbytocne. Treba opravit Valhallu. Nahlasili ste v nej tento problem?

Okrem toho ste vyriesili iba chodcov, ale cyklistov (hoci tu maju vjazd povoleny) stale Valhalla posiela naokolo, kedze ste na Vase cesty nedali prislusne znacky povolujuce pristup. Cize mame fajnovy chaos, na plosnej ulici Kapucinska su ine povolenia ako na tych cestach po okrajoch. Taktiez sa nezhoduje ani len typ cesty (footway vs. pedestrian), co zase len sposobi odlisnosti vo vlasnostiach tychto ciest a iny pristup k nim v navigaciach.
Rom1 (2023-05-10 15:04:30+00:00): Hi, please, don't merge different amenity=recycling. I've retablished the 4 different nodes. Thanks
schoschi (2023-05-10 23:07:00+00:00): Dear Rom1, while I consider mapping each single container (instead mapping all containers as one node) as micro mapping, I don't mind if you prefer it that way 🙂 Was the container for recycling:waste lost during revert or did I just not find it? Best regards, Georg
Rom1 (2023-05-11 11:43:01+00:00): I usually don't use recycling:waste but amenity=waste_disposal + waste=trash https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10886357914
Thanks.
schoschi (2023-05-11 23:31:04+00:00): That's fine for me 🙂 Thank you for mapping it 👍
VLD194 (2023-05-01 20:30:32+00:00): Updated N50 data: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11769097
ovruni (2023-05-02 00:04:11+00:00): Este conjunto de cambios es similar a los anteriores.
Saludos
eggie (2023-05-01 21:57:08+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Rainero (2023-05-01 21:08:50+00:00): Hoppla, zu schnell hochgeladen; Kommentar sollte sein:   
"POIs (aufgrund Meldungen) überprüft, Adressen ergänzt"
user_18305684 (2023-05-02 12:26:01+00:00): Hi,

welcome on osm.

Maybe you should read what is a multipolygon : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon

The tag type=multipolygon is used ONLY on relations, it is useless on a way because a closed way is a polygon but not a multi...polygon.

Best regards
Fresno map (2023-05-03 00:55:30+00:00): Hello, 
I apologize for my mistake, thank you for fixing this!
little_maper (2023-05-02 11:01:22+00:00): Hello Muhammad Faiq Kalhury;
I noticed you made some streets under construction and there are didn't appear in any satellite image and it's floating now because it's connected with streets that are operational
Examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1167811184
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1167809134
Could you provide the source you used and fix these issues, please?
Regards
little_maper
user_3022894 (2023-05-01 21:01:06+00:00): Sorry, falscher / unvollständiger Änderungssatzkommentar.
Er sollte lauten:

Häuserzug Berliner Straße 150 - 168: Mehrere runde Sitzbänke ergänzt und die Positionen von Stadtbäumen entlang der Berliner Straße verfeinert. Einen Mülleimer und drei Straßenlaternen eingetragen, Position von Fahrradabstellplätzen angepasst.
nevw (2023-05-03 03:41:30+00:00): Wineries and other businesses are not added to administration boundaries.
osullik (2023-05-04 18:05:48+00:00): Fixed, thanks for letting me know.
Leo Slager (2023-05-02 10:15:44+00:00): Dag Raymond,
highway=buslane is een niet bestaande tagging.
Er volgt dus in diverse systemen een foutmelding.
De tagging als highway=service is discutabel. Het is geen busbaan maar een normale weg die verboden is voor het andere verkeer.
ik pas het even aan.
Leo Slager (2023-05-02 10:20:28+00:00): Zie ook
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
voor de mogelijke tags.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-05-01 21:10:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/881024938

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
bxl-forever (2023-05-01 22:01:03+00:00): Hello,

Thanks for adding a building.

You may have noticed that names of objects (roads, buildings) always start with capital letters on the map.  It is advised to follow existing practice instead of typing everything in small letters ("residentie botanique").
BCNorwich (2023-05-03 08:25:22+00:00): Hi, I've just removed lots of duplicated sections of highways. Please check your work before uploading it?

Regards Bernard
rarad74 (2023-05-03 09:43:13+00:00): Salut. Au desfiintat sensul giratoriu?
Carto_Ferret (2023-05-03 22:16:26+00:00): Good morning rarad74,

Yes, the “highway=roundabout” was demolished sometime after June of 2022. Apple has an agreement with Maxar to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. Maxar SecureWatch shows construction occurring at this junction in February of 2023, where the roundabout was removed and a new complete highway was constructed in April of 2023.

I hope this was helpful. Happy mapping!

Carto_Ferret
wilfisher (2023-05-23 02:16:10+00:00): Possible to restore these changes and change access to "private"? There was a good amount of useful information here before!
AlwaysRJS (2023-05-23 02:39:08+00:00): What I removed are not trails or paths, they are mowed grass/weeds that regrow. PSE&G uses these mowed sections to get to and maintain their gas lines several times a year. They should not me on any maps.
bxl-forever (2023-05-01 22:06:11+00:00): Hello,

This is a bit strange here: you said that the passage goes *through* the building but the codes you typed into the database are for a tunnel *under* the building.  This looks like a mistake.

Also, it is very unlikely "passage through residentie botanique" is the official name of a path.  Filling the name text box is only for official names of objects, not everything has a name.  Leave the name blank instead.

Finally, you created a junction between your footpath and the river, here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10861143452
This node is connected to both.  This is probably incorrect.  A path is expected to connect the road, not the river underneath.  If you do not fix it, the footpath will be completely useless for routing apps.  Could you please inspect the area and fix accordingly.
tokky (2023-05-01 22:18:22+00:00): hi, 

thank you for reviewing my change 
the path i'm trying to add is a passage through de building you it's open to everyone and you don't need to open doors to use it i'm unsure how to label this correctly you clarify how i should label this
bxl-forever (2023-05-05 20:52:06+00:00): Hello,

The correct tag here would be tunnel=building_passage and no level tag.  Well, I see you have deleted some of your edits, it makes it harder for us to try to follow what you are doing.
user_12500175 (2023-05-02 21:17:24+00:00): Hallo, 
Der Name der Bar ist Maha Bar nicht Mahagoni Bar.
Siehe Website
wcedmisten (2023-05-04 01:36:50+00:00): I believe you may have mistakenly mapped a golf course over top of this hospital. I've reverted this changeset, but please don't delete data from the map like this.
user_1566574 (2023-06-17 20:41:47+00:00): Hello !
Par simple acquis de conscience, je préfère rappeler qu'il ne faut pas contribuer à OSM à partir de contenu protégé par le droit d'auteur (et je n'ai jamais réussi à savoir si les photos de presse en font partie, ça me semble être une zone grise).

Voilà, merci pour tes contribs ! :)
jbfournot (2023-06-18 06:48:18+00:00): Bonjour Antonin,
Merci pour le rappel. En effet, il m'arrive de temps en temps d'ajouter des liens vers des articles de presse ou site-web. Mes modifications sont d'abord le résultat d'une observation sur le terrain, comme ici pour cette bande cyclable. Autrement dit, pour cette modification, ce n'est pas l'article de l'Est Républicain qui est la source du changement, mais bien l'observation sur le terrain suite à une note d'un contributeur. 

En revanche, je suis d'accord que la photo d'un article de presse ne peut pas être la source unique d'une contribution. Il faut d'abord aller sur le terrain.

Au plaisir d'échanger, et merci également pour tes contributions en Franche-Comté ;-)
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-05-16 07:41:41+00:00): Why you changed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/222362342/history to amenity=playground?
wielandb (2023-05-20 18:43:09+00:00): Oh no! That's what happens when you use tags from memory instead of from presets. Thanks for correcting!
impiaaa (2023-05-02 18:34:44+00:00): If a place has closed but the address still exists it's better to keep the object and just remove any business tags, so that the address doesn't have to be re-added
Akiba220 (2023-05-02 22:03:46+00:00): The address of the building in which the now closed restaurant was, is still there (5968 Silver Creek Valley Rd.) as it is associated with the building.
impiaaa (2023-05-03 02:03:22+00:00): The original point had a unit number: 5968 Silver Creek Valley Road Unit 20. The location of that unit number within the building is still useful information even if the business at that address has closed.
Akiba220 (2023-05-03 14:51:47+00:00): I re-added the unit number.
impiaaa (2023-05-03 16:22:03+00:00): Thanks!
BCNorwich (2023-05-03 08:24:56+00:00): You are still making duplicated highways. please stop as it disrupts routing. OSM is not the place to be testing anyway.
NieWnen (2023-05-02 08:13:14+00:00): Robienie z byle jakiej kostki excellent to przesada.
Albert Orliński (2023-05-03 21:51:01+00:00): Dzień dobry,
chciałem wyjaśnić dwie rzeczy.
1. Tagi dotyczyły powierzchni chodników lub dróg dla rowerów, gdzie jest inna nawierzchnia niż na drodze więc nie chodziło mi o zwykłą kostkę tylko niefazowaną.
2 Kostka niefazowana wg angielskiej wiki dla tagu "smoothness" jest zdefiniowana jako jeden z przykładów dla wartości "excellent". Polskie tłumaczenie nie jest tak dokładne ale dla zachowania zgodności z resztą świata powinno być zaktualizowane.
Albert Orliński (2023-05-03 21:54:40+00:00): Zależy mi na wyjaśnieniu tego bo chciałem otagować pewną ilość ścieżek i chodników na potrzeby turystyki na rolkach i nie chcę wszystkiego zrobić "do poprawy".
A też nie ma co ukrywać, że nie mam dużego doświadczenia.
Albert Orliński (2023-05-05 21:44:18+00:00): Hej, dzięki za tak obszerne wyjaśnienia.
Z usuniętym kontem to niepotrzebne zamieszanie z mojej strony, już się nie powtórzy.
Jeśli chodzi o zmiany smoothness dla kostki zwykłej to z ang. wersji wiki zrozumiałem, że wartością domyślna dla kostki jest "good" (kostka bezfazowa została umieszczona jako wyjątek w wartości "excellent"). Dlatego też, fragmenty z kostki, które nie były zdegradowane zmieniłem z "intermediate" na "good".
w kwestii nadawania lub nie "excellent" kostce bezfazowej to faktycznie, ujawnia się największa wada tagu smoothness, tzn. każdy może mieć na ten sam temat różne zdanie. :-)
Ja z jednej strony zgadzam się z Tobą, że jest różnica pomiędzy asfaltem a kostką bezfazową ale z drugiej strony uważam, że nie nadawanie jej "excellent" powoduje, że nadaje się jej "good" czyli taką samą wartość jak dla kostki zwykłej. W rezultacie w imię podkreślenia niewielkiej różnicy pomiędzy asfaltem i kostką bezfazową, popełnia się większy błąd nadając wspólną wartość "good" dwóm istotnie różniącym się nawierzchniom tj. kostce fazowanej i bezfazowej. Ale tak jak napisałeś powinno się to przedyskutować na forum w celu ujednolicenia i wpisania jakichś wytycznych do wiki.
Co do turystyki na rolkach to temat jest bardzo rozwojowy.
Już teraz niektóre regiony w Polsce wydają przewodniki dla rolkarzy. Są takie przewodniki dla Pomorza i chyba Beskidu.
Poza tym osoby z mojej szkoły rolkowej (Rollschool) jeżdżą na rolki do wielu miast w całej Europie.
W Warszawie niewiele do tej pory się dzieje. Na FB jest inicjatywa pt. Rolkowa Mapa Warszawy tj. statyczna mapa z pozaznaczanymi trasami dla rolek. Pomyślałem, że możnaby stworzyć w jakiś sposób informację nt. tras rolkowych w OSM i na podstawie tego często i łatwo uaktualniać takie statyczne mapy dla Warszawy albo korzystać z otagowanych tras przez OSMAnd’a.
Jest problem ze znalezieniem odpowiedniego tagu do tego celu. Problemem z trasami dla rolek jest jakość nawierzchni – musi być super. Najlepiej jeśli będzie to asfalt albo kostka bezfazowa, po kostce fazowanej lub płytach chodnikowych jeździ się bardzo ciężko a inne nawierzchnie są nieprzejezdne w ogóle. Dlatego ciężko jest znaleźć dobry tag do tego celu.
skyper (2024-04-09 18:05:44+00:00): Hallo Bobbi,
leider haben Deine Änderungen sowohl Bus-Relationen als auch das Spurtagging beschädigt. Allgemein war die Kreuzung überfrachtet, siehe https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/komplexe-kreuzungen-kreuzungsgeometrie-spurmapping-wie-mappen/111544/8.
Habe es soweit vereinfacht und die Fehler behoben, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149788911, aber bitte nehme in Zukunft mehr Rücksicht auf Relationen und das Spurmapping.
Danke und Grüße,
skyper
Dodko (2023-09-22 13:41:31+00:00): Telefónne čísla treba písať správne.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10861385133/history
dankarran (2023-05-02 09:15:11+00:00): Nice one, thank you... I was dreading that task!
nevw (2023-05-03 03:53:07+00:00): Hi, you have defined a private property here with the tag landuse=forest. This tag is generally used to define the boundaries of forestry activity. The area is already tagged as being a wooded area.
As the boundary does not appear to be a forestry area or forestry coop, I expect you instead want to show that the track crosses through private property. 
This is normally done by splitting the track at each end of the area that passes through private property and adding the tag access=private or other access tag as suits. If there are gates or fences or signs defining the private property you can also add those.
user_5359 (2023-05-04 15:49:40+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1167428148. What is the mean of the tags
Department = Global Learning
OIncharge = Dr. chelsea Redger-Marquardt- Organizational Leadership & Leaarning
?
mueschel (2023-05-02 13:31:11+00:00): Hi,
please check the tags you added, there are many with spelling mistakes, e.g. 

floor type
Floor type
Floor Type
fLOOR TYPE

the common tag for this is 'surface'
user_5359 (2023-05-04 14:58:53+00:00): Is it possible for you to agree on a spelling of "floor type"? By the way, spaces are undesirable in the key and from the values I would like to draw your attention to the key floor:material (https://wiki.osm.org/wiki/Key%3Afloor%3Amaterial).
MxxCon (2023-05-03 02:12:19+00:00): Hello.
Similar to your other edits, what is the source of this information?

Also there are a couple of issues in your edit.
If you want to indicate that  POI is on a specific floor, OSM has a tag called addr:floor specifically intended for that.
addr:unit is intended for unit/suite/apartment/similar address elements.
Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:* and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:floor
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135595616
ActiveMapper (2023-05-06 12:56:14+00:00): My source of the information is the art galleries' websites, which I include in each node. I'm familiar with these galleries since I've visited them for 15+ years.

Thanks for the tip wrt to floors. I've updated the floors in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135776077 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135776130.
emersonveenstra (2023-05-02 11:21:57+00:00): Hi,

I think you mistakenly made this way a crossing: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1016954430

Could you fix it please? Thanks!
TMoney79 (2023-05-02 13:31:25+00:00): Thank you, good catch! I fixed it in Changeset #135616926 just now.
jmarchon (2023-05-02 18:37:21+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM!
I did a little cleanup on your edits in this area. Feel free to take a peek and let me know what you think. It's nothing major - just a few small issues I stumbled across.

Have a nice day and happy mapping!
h551w (2023-05-03 21:39:07+00:00): Oh, that's exciting! I can't wait to watch it come together
MxxCon (2023-05-03 02:18:21+00:00): Hello.
This edit is not correct. If a POI is in a building, it's more correct to map it as a node within the perimeter of that building.
Your change essentially makes it part of the building (wall) itself.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135596244
ActiveMapper (2023-05-06 12:29:21+00:00): I tried to address that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/135775150. Let me know if more work needs to be done.
gscholz (2023-05-04 08:23:34+00:00): Hi elC0mrade,
your recent activities have left behind several errors in the OSM database regarding overlapping ways (blue markers):

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-39.42224&lat=-8.57041&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

As you may know, this kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps.

Can you please fix this?

If you look closely to the data of this changeset, you can see you have ignored a warning about crossing ways your editor ID has shown you. Please take this kind of warnings seriously.

Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2023-05-07 06:42:11+00:00): Hi elC0mrade, 
these errors still exist, can I get your feedback here?
Guido
mueschel (2023-05-06 10:12:11+00:00): This import created a large amount of data quality issues. E.g.:

- messed up geometries like this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1160297576

- wrong 'name' tags. This tag is just for an actual name, not for descriptions

- mispelled keys like:
Accessibility button
Door Handle
Floor Type
Floor type
Note
Pull/Push
Push/Pull
Reference
door type
fLOOR TYPE
push/pull
reference
solid

- no link to the mandatory documentation of the import
- no proper source of the data

Please read and follow our import guidelines:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
Please read and follow our  Organized Editing guidelines:
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines
Jarek 🚲 (2023-05-02 14:51:09+00:00): Hm, how about keeping the nodes and setting them to disused:railway=tram_stop or whatever instead? Presumably the streetcar will return someday, and it would be nice to have the OSM history kept. Particularly for objects with a long history like https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/384965394/history