piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
suchAnight (2025-01-29 22:24:55+00:00): Hello ferog_v, thank you for responding. I have reviewed those resources you have cited. For the most part, those look well documented and clear in the approach to routes that should be classified as trunks. However, in regard to the Ejes de Transporte page with lists of routes and the map of them provided there, there is at least one instance where the current OSM data does not match:

The MEX 175, MEX 175D is currently classified as motorway and trunk along https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344953332  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/783095840 but it is not listed on the Ejes de Transporte wiki page. Do you know if there is an updated map that includes that route for completeness? If you do have access to that information could you update the wiki page with it? It would be a great help to have the most current information to conform mapping to it and get consistency in Mexico’s priority road classification scheme where there has been a lot of disagreement recently. Thank you and have a nice day.
-suchAnight

traducción automática

Hola ferog_v, gracias por responder. He revisado los recursos que has citado. En su mayor parte, parecen bien documentados y claros en el enfoque de las rutas que deben clasificarse como troncales. Sin embargo, con respecto a la página de Ejes de Transporte con listas de rutas y el mapa de ellas que se proporciona allí, hay al menos un caso en el que los datos actuales de OSM no coinciden:

La MEX 175, MEX 175D está actualmente clasificada como autopista y troncal a lo largo de https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/344953332 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/783095840 pero no aparece en la página wiki de Ejes de Transporte. ¿Sabes si hay un mapa actualizado que incluya esa ruta para que esté completa? Si tienes acceso a esa información, ¿podrías actualizar la página wiki con ella? Sería de gran ayuda contar con la información más actualizada para adaptar el mapeo a ella y lograr coherencia en el esquema de clasificación de caminos prioritarios de México, donde ha habido muchos desacuerdos recientemente. Gracias y que tengas un buen día.
-suchAnight
ferog_v (2025-01-29 23:16:06+00:00): I'm afraid I do not have information about it I believe it is a route that was completed a year ago and it hasn't been updated in these resources as the latest date on them is 2023 or even 2022
The documents cited in the wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Mexico/Red_Nacional_de_Caminos#Relaciones_para_caminos) are also the latest provided by the government entity I had updated them to the latest release available.
Perhaps it will be included in the future as anny highway marked as MEX ###D is a high speed toll road so the marking as motorway is correct although I'm not sure about the MEX 175.
suchAnight (2025-01-30 21:24:46+00:00): -Hello ferog_v, thank you for ensuring that the resources are as up to date as possible. Have a nice day. 
-suchAnight
Famlam (2025-01-15 00:53:39+00:00): Oeps, per ongeluk het vorige changeset comment laten staan. Dit had moeten zijn: "knip griftdijk is nu 24/7"
divaddivag (2025-01-15 15:01:19+00:00): Salut Francois, est-ce que tu me donnes le feu vert pour nommer les éoliennes et rajouter le name:etymology:wikidata (c'est un peu mon TOC). Il n'y pas urgence évidemment. David
InfosReseaux (2025-01-15 15:11:40+00:00): Bonjour David

Effectivement je me suis posé la question hier soir.
J'imagine que tu penses à ces noms là ?
https://www.parc-eolien-en-mer-du-calvados.fr/territoire-parc-eolien-en-mer-calvados/devoir-de-memoire-parc-eolien-en-mer-calvados/

Bonne après-midi
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-06-08 14:24:40+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/582013733/history

is there still water mill here? Or is it abandoned?

I am confused why node with just name remained here
streckenkundler (2025-06-08 16:55:09+00:00): Hei Anne,

CS-Kommentar mit https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussions?c=Germany#10/52.1680/14.0007 gesehen. Wäre es bei der Ragower Mühle besser, disused:man_made=watermill zu verwenden? Somit wir klar: "Das ist keine aktive Wassermühle mehr" ist? Oder gibt es dort als technisches Denkmal weiterhin eine Art Museumsbetrieb? @Mateusz: 
There is another point: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12504498014 
In my opinion, this can be merged.

Sven
JIFFNET (2025-03-30 21:34:14+00:00): Nie nazywamy dróg nazwami szlaków. Od tego są relacje. Cofnąłem zmiany.
eggie (2025-01-15 17:08:31+00:00): Dag A,,  Zou je geen foot=no op reguliere wegen willen zetten.
Het is al weer aangepast door een medemapper met use_sidepath

Alleen bij een voetgangersverbod no toevoegen.. en dan nog behouden ivm met gebruik van de berm.

MVG
eggie
A-dg6 (2025-01-16 01:39:43+00:00): Ik zal er in het vervolg rekening mee houden, dank!
CurlingMan13 (2025-01-15 15:35:17+00:00): Hello.  What is your source for this info?
TrickyFoxy (2025-01-21 22:08:44+00:00): Зачем удалять здание?
mrpulley (2025-01-25 22:17:44+00:00): Maxspeed south of Rocky River Road is correct. I didn't survey north of here, but NSW Speed Data indicates a change of maxspeed a little north of Everton Vale Road, so this will need a survey. I've split the way at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161763046
mrpulley (2025-12-20 05:07:16+00:00): Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked at survey)
Maradona11 (2025-01-19 22:01:02+00:00): Is this new location replacing the George St (temp) location? and do we have it confirmed that its open for 2025 terms?
aharvey (2025-01-19 22:27:33+00:00): I added this based on the new school name appearing in the Geographic Names Register, but I realise the name can be approved well before the construction even starts and the location data isn't always accurate, so I added this one a bit too much in haste.

Looking into it more, it looks like the school will open in temporary buildings on George Street for Term 1 2025 at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1004226287

I'll move this one across to that site, but any further local knowledge or improvements welcome!
Maradona11 (2025-01-19 22:37:04+00:00): no problem. its hard to keep up with the school grounds in the Sydney West growth areas.  Gledswood Hills HS for example is temporarily within Gregory Hills PS school grounds! year 7 only
aharvey (2025-01-19 22:50:13+00:00): Yeah I did that one together with this one, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161365383 I hope I got it right.
YourLocalBasement10 (2025-01-15 02:37:02+00:00): How long does this take to be visible to the public?
Allison P (2025-01-15 07:48:59+00:00): OpenStreetMap is a live database. Any consumers accessing a version of the data after you submit changes will see them reflected.
aharvey (2025-01-15 12:04:03+00:00): See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dual_carriageway

There's no separation here, I'll revert this one.
aharvey (2025-01-15 12:05:09+00:00): further Austlink is the building, do they actually have a company office here?
aharvey (2025-01-15 12:05:40+00:00): and um, not good to delete an existing feature, to just re-add your own
b-jazz (2026-04-19 03:07:25+00:00): Where are there nearly two identical streams around https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1351448946?
BPTT (2026-04-21 17:48:30+00:00): Good catch. No idea. Feel free to remove the worse one.
NeisBot (2025-01-15 03:24:38+00:00): Hi Basabes, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 83% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 76 building(s)

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=161365414
pitscheplatsch (2025-01-15 19:18:54+00:00): Thank you for your private message confirming that the deletions were intentional.
aharvey (2025-01-15 11:39:50+00:00): addr:postcode and addr:state are not necessary here since we have the boundaries of these in OSM already.

The addr:housenumber and addr:street can all be derived from the addr details on the center https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/256702729/history there's no need to repeat this on each feature.

The use of the source tag is misleading since the source of the features is my survey, not the website.

The website tag should where possible be for the specific store, not the whole brand.

You've messed up the opening_hours using opening_hours=opening_hours=...

Phone numbers should follow the format at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Phone_Numbers
aharvey (2025-01-15 11:41:24+00:00): plus you've messed up the branch https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10711420922/history
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-13 00:47:09+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164876351
橘ヒカリ (2025-01-15 12:11:22+00:00): 包括胶黄线在内的正线线路请根据https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:OpenRailwayMap/China_Railway_Line_Number页面的信息添加线路号，并维护电气化相关信息。
PS：紬的故事好感人。
紬ヴェンダース (2025-01-16 11:01:27+00:00): 已修正并维护完成，thx
ZLima12 (2025-05-17 19:51:29+00:00): Hi,

Somehow the relations didn't carry over when you split this way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1351485284

I'll fix it; I just wanted to point it out so that you could figure out what might have been the cause.
ZLima12 (2025-05-17 19:54:42+00:00): Same thing with https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1351485283
Canyon Runner (2025-05-18 00:44:39+00:00): Thanks for fixing his! How did you catch this so i can do my own fixing in the future?
ZLima12 (2025-05-19 03:27:08+00:00): I was changing NY-119 to primary, so I selected all members in that relation and changed them together. When checking my work, I noticed that this part had not been changed, so I looked at it and saw that it wasn't part of any relations.

Do you download data from Overpass? Otherwise if you use the normal way split function, the relations should carry over.
Kovoschiz (2025-01-15 10:24:05+00:00): Please don't add descriptor labels to `name=` , which is for proper names only. This is not a printed paper map. They are harmful to a geographical database. `=aquaculture=` etc already expresses this.
Pontius (2025-01-16 00:03:27+00:00): "In addition, this classification (primary) should be used for less-important alternative routes to inter-city connections tagged highway=motorway|trunk" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Primary

Seems to support keeping it at primary, no?
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:05:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:09:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mueschel (2025-01-18 13:49:25+00:00): hi,
this church got a strange "RAMKLIPP" tag, could you check that?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/37079169
mavl (2025-05-13 15:09:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:05:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
Langlaeufer (2025-01-24 10:28:12+00:00): Sind hier wirklich beidseitig radwege?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4678821
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161367333
MadestCat (2025-01-25 09:13:00+00:00): Das Schild 1000-33 ist auf beiden Seiten und in beide Richtungen angebracht.

Hmm, könnte es sein, dass das für die Straße gilt, da es direkt unter dem Schild Einbahnstraße angebracht ist.

Soll ichs ändern?
Langlaeufer (2025-01-25 09:36:28+00:00): Das Schild gilt nur wenn es alleine steht zu Kennzeichnung eines Radwegd. Hier gibt es die Einbahnstraße frei. Sollten wir korrigieren, egal wer.
MadestCat (2025-01-25 10:44:34+00:00): Ok, dann mach das bitte, ich habe die Stadt aufgegeben, leider.
galen8183 (2025-01-15 05:47:33+00:00): I didn't mean for this changeset to be so large, I got carried away :')
There's always lots more to improve of course...
Vis_M (2025-03-23 14:04:51+00:00): Why did you reclassify it as residential road? It's an MDR road, that's why I tagged it as secondary road. Please explain.
mavl (2025-03-07 15:09:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
Sunset_Sakura (2025-01-16 05:54:59+00:00): You updated Pole Artistry Studio, but that was last updated 9 years ago and the website says it's in Nelson City. I saw it there a few months ago and mapped it there, so probably delete it from Richmond
catgirlseraid (2025-01-16 07:00:44+00:00): poi removed, thanks <3
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
Taksine (2025-01-15 14:47:14+00:00): Здравствуйте, пожалуйста, не рисуйте наугад на OSM. Если у вас есть дополнительные вопросы, свяжитесь с нами.
mavl (2025-03-07 15:05:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:05:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:09:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:08:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mrpulley (2025-12-13 09:17:20+00:00): 172808151 - maxspeed correct
566598935 - maxspeed correct but northern end is too close to junction - corrected at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169613072
763408308 - northern end correct, southern end is 50 zone (corrected by bob3bob3 at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171942094
23848060, 24489094, 86294183, 173810150, 199156557, 452540827, 664091757, 922301321, 1115818850, 1207060819, 1207060822, 1207060825, 172392082 - not checked
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
WWMapper101 (2025-01-16 16:18:40+00:00): Hi, 

Just a quick thing about address tagging in OpenStreetMap. Regarding the addr:country tag, you should be using the 2-letter country code for the country, not the full country name. I have edited this myself now in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161424929 . Please make sure to use the country code next time if adding an address.
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:06:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:09:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].
mavl (2025-03-07 15:07:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163331046 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping - To much access=no -  https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161883386].