piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
nyampire (2026-07-01 12:24:54+00:00): こんにちは、OSM Foundation Japanのいいだ（nyampire）と申します。

OSMありがとうございます、OSMへようこそ、、、

と言いたいところですが、あなたの行っている編集はいったんすべてリバート（巻き戻し）させていただきます。
理由は以下のとおりです。

* 編集に利用しているデータが、基盤地図情報の可能性が極めて高い。基盤地図情報のデータインポートは、ライセンスの競合により、許可されていません。
* 事前に相談されていないインポートである。OSMはインポートなどの大規模編集を行う際、Import Guidelineに従った手続きを事前に行う必要があります。
* 事前に相談されていない組織的編集である。金沢周辺を対象に、いくつかのアカウントがほぼ同じ活動をしています。組織として作業を行う場合、組織的編集のガイドラインに従う必要があります。

その他、投入されたデータは、既に描かれた建物と重複して登録されているなど、データ品質の面からも看過できない状況となっています。

また、別のアカウントからコメントをいただき、大学の研究でデータを利用したい、ということを伺いました。
それであれば、代替となるデータセットの紹介や、別アプローチでのアクションなども相談させていただきます。
nyampire@gmail.com までメールをいただけるよう、お手数ではありますが、指導教官あるいはリーダーに状況のエスカレーションを行ってください。
必要に応じてWeb会議などもセット可能です。
nyampire (2026-07-01 12:32:07+00:00): こんにちは、OSM Foundation Japanのいいだ（nyampire）と申します。

OSMありがとうございます、OSMへようこそ、、、

と言いたいところですが、あなたの行っている編集はいったんすべてリバート（巻き戻し）させていただきます。
理由は以下のとおりです。

* 編集に利用しているデータが、基盤地図情報の可能性が極めて高い。基盤地図情報のデータインポートは、ライセンスの競合により、許可されていません。
* 事前に相談されていないインポートである。OSMはインポートなどの大規模編集を行う際、Import Guidelineに従った手続きを事前に行う必要があります。
* 事前に相談されていない組織的編集である。金沢周辺を対象に、いくつかのアカウントがほぼ同じ活動をしています。組織として作業を行う場合、組織的編集のガイドラインに従う必要があります。

その他、投入されたデータは、既に描かれた建物と重複して登録されているなど、データ品質の面からも看過できない状況となっています。

また、別のアカウントからコメントをいただき、大学の研究でデータを利用したい、ということを伺いました。
それであれば、代替となるデータセットの紹介や、別アプローチでのアクションなども相談させていただきます。
nyampire@gmail.com までメールをいただけるよう、お手数ではありますが、指導教官あるいはリーダーに状況のエスカレーションを行ってください。
必要に応じてWeb会議などもセット可能です。
eggie (2026-06-19 05:51:01+00:00): Dag Thom..

Je bedoeling is goed. 
Realiseer je dat al die langsliggende trottoirs die je intekent niet correct routeren. Je zit er als het ware op gevangen.
Probeer maar eens op een hoek over te steken.
Die trottoirs worden meestal opgenomen in de tagging van de highway=residential met sidewalk= left right of both.
Nooit afgevraagd waarom die trottoirs niet zijn ingetekend?
Je zult dan heel veel verbindingen moeten intekenen, die er in werkelijkheid ook niet zijn.
Kijk nog eens naar je 'werk'. 
MVG
eggie
goedegazelle (2026-06-19 11:12:51+00:00): Ik weet niet of de brandkraan met opzet was verwijderd maar ik heb hem voor de zekerheid weer even teruggezet.
BlauweFietsKetting (2026-06-19 14:46:00+00:00): @goedegazelle, bedankt voor je reactie. Dit was bewust, er is in dit groenvak en eromheen geen bovengrondse brandkraan te vinden.
BCNorwich (2026-06-19 14:50:07+00:00): Hi, I've added tags to your buildings, without tags your mapping is meaningless.

Regards Bernard.
Sammyhawkrad (2026-06-19 18:30:28+00:00): Hi BinkalB, your changeset comment says "added building", but edited a place node as a clock. Review what you edit before you hit save.
Nater Kane (2026-07-27 15:42:14+00:00): Hey, the previous size/positioning of the new park features had been added based on the plan drawings and available drone footage. I'm not sure why you resized the skatepark and pickelball/tennis courts. Could you please revert those changes?
topolusitania (2026-06-20 22:45:45+00:00): Reverted 
If roads are private, that info will be indicated
HellMap (2026-06-20 21:40:00+00:00): Hello,

Please do not connect waterways to railway bridges - these are features that do not intersect and are on different layers.

I corrected the three placed on Latvia border.

Thanks
BCNorwich (2026-06-19 14:54:38+00:00): You are adding untagged lines to OSM. These lines are meaningless. Please stop doing this, please read the mapping guidelines or seek help. If you have questions please just ask, maybe I can help.

Regards Bernard.
XimeX (2026-06-19 07:28:55+00:00): Korrekt wäre "Storz" statt "storz". Also großes "S".
Bei den Größen wäre einfacher "B;C;C" statt "75;52;52". Ist jetzt nicht falsch aber in Österreich ist die Buchstaben Angabe die übliche
gpserror (2026-06-19 17:17:26+00:00): What was the point of the empty object https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13951236102 ?
Yog Sot (2026-06-20 20:39:11+00:00): te drogi nie mają wyznaczonych dwóch pasów ruchu
stosuj lane:markings:no
bartgron (2026-06-20 20:53:28+00:00): Teoretycznie wiki dopuszcza użycie tych dwóch tagów równolegle: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:lane_markings
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-21 10:31:54+00:00): > te drogi nie mają wyznaczonych dwóch pasów ruchu 

i co z tego? Jak ma dwa pasy to lanes=2 jest przydatne
Yog Sot (2026-06-21 13:52:38+00:00): Każda droga, która nie jest otagowana oneway=yes ma z definicji dwa wirtualne pasy ruchu. 
Dlatego tagowanie specjalnie czegoś(lanes=2) to deprecjonowanie domyślnej zasady o dwukierunkowości. 
Dlatego jak już, to zasadne było by stosowanie width=* 

width=6 co oznacza standardową szerokość dla normalnego mijania się ciężarówek
width=5 dlamijania sie osobówek
width=4 i mniej normalne mijanie się tylko z motorem itp. 
Choć normalne osobówki też się miną, wykluczając osobówki pickupowe, które w polsce stają sie coraz bardziej popularne, a USA to niejako "plaga"
Dlatego mój opór by stosować `lanes` w oparciu o wirtualna uznaniowość. 

dlatego jak np width=8 to nie będzie uznaniowości, że lane=3 jest zasadne, bo wirtualnie 3 pojazdy się mieszczą. 

Ale faktycznie, angielska wiki od lat twierdzi nie dokładnie to. Co mnie zaskakuje tbh, bo prowadzi to uznaniowości w tagowaniu jak opisane wyżej
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-21 13:57:30+00:00): "Każda droga, która nie jest otagowana oneway=yes ma z definicji dwa wirtualne pasy ruchu. "

ale nie każda ma dwa rzeczywiste (znakowane lub nie) pasy ruchu
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-21 14:00:05+00:00): width może mniej uznaniowe ale dużo bardziej irytujące do zmierzenia
Norbert Wołowiec (2026-06-22 06:06:09+00:00): To jaka w końcu jest konkluzja? Bo widzę, że co człowiek to opinia. 

Większość wiki w różnych językach ma tak jak w angielskiej.

To co jest poprawniejsze:
1. bez niczego?
2. lanes=2, lane_markings=no?
3. samo lane_markings=no?
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-22 16:24:31+00:00): możesz się na https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/pl/40 zapytać

albo szerzej na https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/tagging/71

ale z tego co widzę to Yog Sotowi nie podoba się aktualnie używana metoda (ale dyskusji by zmienić rekomendacje nie zaczął)
literan (2026-06-20 09:54:05+00:00): а зачем здесь кавычки удалили? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28708510

если бы сделали name=Ховрино, тогда да, без кавычек. Но раз оставили такое описательное имя, то не надо удалять
Grass-snake (2026-06-22 18:10:11+00:00): Мне всё равно, исправляйте как считаете нужным.
literan (2026-06-22 18:35:30+00:00): вы на будущее так не делайте, без "все равно", хорошо?
Grass-snake (2026-06-25 17:21:07+00:00): Хорошо.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-19 12:43:24+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, likely sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184314363

https://osm.org/changeset/184314363
user_5359 (2026-06-27 07:56:38+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2slz . What is the mean of the keys
CalTrans
Centerline;TIGER
Public
?
cowboyxup (2026-06-19 22:04:19+00:00): Hallo Majiku,
du hast bei Lohbachsiedlung West, tactile_paving=no gesetzt, jedoch ist dort ein Aufmerksamkeitsfeld mit Auffanglinie vorhanden, also definitiv tactile_paving=yes. Siehe: https://api.panoramax.xyz/en/index?focus=pic&map=17.16/47.263771/11.351638&pic=ba389180-a534-453a-9339-f6a199647815&seq=dff876a3-a8aa-4388-8a09-b140339aafdd&speed=250&users=default&xyz=179.68/-10.64/60
Ebenso die sind dort überall Wartehäuser vorhanden, dh. shelter=yes
Happy Mapping
Andrea Musuruane (2026-06-19 10:57:49+00:00): Per favore, niente prove. Faccio revert.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184299587
habi (2026-06-19 09:20:08+00:00): Ciao noe
Der 5-Seen-Weg ist schon hier erfasst: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19449262, da braucht es keinen tourism=attraction-Punkt dafür hier.
Ich habe den Punkt wieder gelöscht.
Gruss,
habi
habi (2026-06-19 09:25:49+00:00): Ich hab' das in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184306281 korrigiert.
VictorIE (2026-06-22 21:27:42+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/830858226/

Is addr:housenumber=S7 correct?
NightTsarina (2026-06-25 12:48:32+00:00): Hi,
They announced the opening using this address (unit S7 Market Place), even though the eircode finder does not have an address for it
VictorIE (2026-06-25 12:52:01+00:00): Thank you
Udarian (2026-06-19 11:03:41+00:00): why did you delete the city of Miami??

Happy mapping,
Udar.
Udarian (2026-06-19 11:05:10+00:00): as mentioned above the city of Miami still exists

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184310483
Udarian (2026-06-19 11:33:47+00:00): objects in OSM need a tag that indicates what the object is, sadly from my knowledge there is no tags for a "Sales Gallery" for residential development and thus should not be mapped. The crossing added in this changeset is also unlikely to be correct as it was placed in the middle of a building. Also from my understanding all vertices of a power line should have a power pole tagged and there did not seem to be any power poles at the location of the vertex you added to the power line. There are ways to map landuse, if you want help with that feel free to reach out and I can help. 

Happy mapping,
Udar.
NieWnen (2026-06-21 22:40:27+00:00): Cześć,

jeśli są tu CPRy np. tutaj: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1226795076

to ich tagowanie powinno zostać poprawione zgodnie z wiki:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery#Drogi_dla_pieszych_i_rower%C3%B3w

jeśli jest to CPR, to zmiana na highway=path, a jeśli nie to warto usunąć tagi bicycle/foot.

Jako, że jest to edycja wykonywana przez edytor iD to dodam tylko, że zawsze warto patrzeć w tagi.
rskedgell (2026-06-19 14:00:56+00:00): Thanks!

It looks like the "service road" was an attempt by an inexperienced user to add a bus lane - I've added it here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184317336

There isn't any Mapillary imagery for this road, but if TomTom have any there might be bus lane signage visible which confirms the restrictions. I've assumed that it's 24/7 bus and cycle only as a "safe" default.
World_Winner (2026-06-23 04:48:55+00:00): Hello rskedgell, 
thank you for taking a closer look and your kind remarks. 

The bus lane is visible on Bing Streetside imagery from 2019. But unfortunately I don’t have any more recent resources available to me at the location other than the map feedback I have received and I cannot verify the if there are any time restrictions. So I would agree that a conservative assumption makes sense here. 

Thank you again for your message. I appreciate the clarification and the effort put into resolving this situation.
fdv11 (2026-06-29 21:18:28+00:00): Bu yolun yapılması kabul edilemez. Otoyolun bu kısmı şehrin silüetine ve işlevine oldukça zarar verecektir. Yolun altında kalan villalar, apartmanlar ve parklar aynı Trabzon Kanuni bulvarı gibi yıkılacaktır. Bu bir vatana ihanettir. Projenin Konaklı'da bitmesini istiyorum. 30/06/2026 00:18
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2026-06-30 06:38:48+00:00): Merhaba @fdv11 . OpenStreetMap'in Türkiye'deki herhangi bir kurumla ilişkisi yok. OpenStreetMap bağımsız bir coğrafi veri tabanı. Buraya yazdığınız yorumu, bu değişikliği yapan katkıcı ve bir avuç gönüllü OpenStreetMap katkıcısı dışında kimsenin göreceğini sanmıyorum.

"Vatana ihanet" olarak gördüğünüz hususları, ilgili kamu kurumlarına, resmi başvuru yolları üzerinden yazmanız daha yararlı olacaktır. İyi günler.
Blg61 (2026-06-30 16:40:45+00:00): @fdv11, ben bu yolu kendim çizmedim. Antalya belediyesi imar planında bu proje görünüyor. Bende sadece buraya geçirdim. Şikayetinizi bana değil, belediyeye iletin.
Colbertson (2026-06-19 10:28:35+00:00): layer=1 with no other tags isnt correct. If its shallow enough to cross a ford=yes node should be added
kingkingHK (2026-06-19 09:00:34+00:00): Who has ever said that `barrier=gate` implies `foot=no`? And are you sure bicycles are allowed?
jengelh (2026-06-19 11:05:26+00:00): the default behavior for barrier=gate does not seem specified, so the safe bet is to not rely on any particular behavior.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-02 07:09:12+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other mistagging for POI

https://osm.org/changeset/184957848
eggie (2026-06-19 12:26:23+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
kuhni74 (2026-06-19 11:49:24+00:00): danke!
kuhni74 (2026-06-19 11:48:59+00:00): danke!
demon_box (2026-06-19 11:05:37+00:00): Hi ReinerMeyer, I would like to point out that in Italy the street number identifies the access point (entrance) and NOT the entire building. In fact, a building can have multiple entrances and consequently multiple street numbers. 
So you have 2 options: 
1. If you know exactly the position (entrance) of the street number you are mapping, put all the address tags on a node on the perimeter of the building (also adding the entrance tag on the same node); 
2. If you do not have this precise information, you must put all the address tags on an adjacent node but DETACHED from the polygon of the building. 
I'm referring to this building that you tagged:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/187476296/

I have already made the necessary corrections. 
Thanks and Happy Mapping!
ReinerMeyer (2026-06-19 15:29:33+00:00): Hi demon_box, thanks for the hint.
I corrected the tags of this building because there was a mistake. Instead of using building=yes the mapper tagged barrier=gate (see history of this object). The other tags I didn't change.
Reiner
demon_box (2026-06-19 15:34:01+00:00): ah ok, many thanks anyway 🤣
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-19 12:43:52+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, likely sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184314387

https://osm.org/changeset/184314387
K12230LF (2026-06-23 08:38:39+00:00): Bonjour, 
Merci pour vos ajustements. Cependant, attention, la liste des noms est perdu. Vous pouvez utiliser le champ Operator pour les renseigner. Autrement, les utilisateurs ne pourront pas les retrouver par leur nom.
eggie (2026-06-19 09:36:39+00:00): 👍
Marek-M (2026-06-19 11:11:21+00:00): Cześć,

Żabka, to po prostu sklep z funkcją fast_food - poprawiłem Twoją edycję: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184310681
HellMap (2026-06-19 12:08:38+00:00): I don't know if this was a StreetComplete bug, but you added an empty value for board_type here.
maemolol (2026-06-19 15:12:39+00:00): i pressed the "none of those" button for the board type, i don't know why streetcomplete in its infinite "wisdom" put "board_type:" though. i'm gonna resolve this in a moment
vanagaudi (2026-07-12 02:12:37+00:00): Hi, du hast letztens an Multipolygonen gearbeitet. Mir ist da ein Fehler aufgefallen:
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=6.36486&lat=51.09995&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
Ich weiß nun nicht, was deine Änderungen ausgemacht haben, oder was dein Ziel war. Aber um die Multipolygone wieder gerade zu ziehen ist ein wenig mehr Arbeit aufzuwenden. Daher wollte ich vorher mal nachfragen.
Viele Grüße, Helmut
Glassman (2026-06-20 15:26:10+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

SEO edit - doesn't follow wiki - reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184306761
didier2020 (2026-06-25 06:22:26+00:00): Hello,
there is a lot off duplicated nodes with this changeset.
issues :
https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/issues/open?item=1230&source=&class=3&username=joedal-osm
didier2020 (2026-06-25 06:21:56+00:00): Hello,
there is a lot off duplicated nodes with this changeset.
issues :
https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/issues/open?item=1230&source=&class=3&username=joedal-osm
didier2020 (2026-06-25 06:22:41+00:00): Hello,
there is a lot off duplicated nodes with this changeset.
issues :
https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/issues/open?item=1230&source=&class=3&username=joedal-osm
didier2020 (2026-06-25 06:22:15+00:00): Hello,
there is a lot off duplicated nodes with this changeset.
issues :
https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/fr/issues/open?item=1230&source=&class=3&username=joedal-osm
ratrun (2026-06-20 08:24:59+00:00): Where was this terrible import discussed? It is of bad quality. See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-6.23346&lat=8.62288&zoom=8&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=unconnected_open_ends_1

Please fix this, otherwise I'm going to ask the DWG for a revert.
gscholz (2026-07-02 05:56:17+00:00): Hi joedal-osm,
those errors still exist. Here is an other view showing all the overlapping (duplicate) ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-5.22033&lat=7.51979&zoom=7&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

Can we get your feedback here?
Guido
ratrun (2026-07-03 02:29:14+00:00): I already reported this user two times to the DWG, asking for an 0 hours block, but I didn't get an answer yet.
I analyzed the changesets a bit and detected that the user uploaded exactly the same data with 3 days in between.
Please don't start fixing the data. I believe the DWG needs to do a professional revert here.
Marek-M (2026-06-19 17:38:48+00:00): This type of 'access' is not standardized in the OSM wiki. Instead, the values ​​'private' or 'destination' can be used. Furthermore, such a highway is not 'unclassified'. It is a 'service' highway.
Marek-M (2026-06-19 17:45:41+00:00): I corrected it in this changeset:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184326462
mueschel (2026-06-25 10:15:33+00:00): Hi,
what is a 'socket:ebike'? There are dozens of incompatible ones.
eggie (2026-06-19 11:43:12+00:00): Welkom bij OSM..
Bedankt voor je bijdragen. Let je er svp op om niet de adresinfo te verwijderen. Zo zijn adressen niet meer vindbaar.

Mvg,

eggie
eggie (2026-06-19 11:44:34+00:00): Je verwijdert helaas de adresnodes. Zou je dit willen herstellen?
Mvg,
eggie
Thomasje (2026-06-19 12:16:34+00:00): Sorry ik denk dat ik ze nu heb teruggezet
eggie (2026-06-19 12:20:18+00:00): Hoi.. Het is geen verwijt overigens.
Ik zal je later onze welkomstmail sturen per PB.
Veel plezier met mappen,
eggie
dieterdreist (2026-06-22 10:39:23+00:00): I believe something went wrong here, you are changing the border and now for example this mountain, which is on the border according to wikipedia, is entirely in Switzerland: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/307219462
I didn't check all nodes, but from what I see it seems this is a more systematic problem and not isolated to this peak.
SimonPoole (2026-06-22 14:31:43+00:00): See https://map.geo.admin.ch/#/map?lang=de&center=2636392.89,1094066.59&z=13&topic=ech&layers=ch.swisstopo.swissboundaries3d-gemeinde-flaeche.fill@year=2026@features=6288;ch.swisstopo.hoheitsgrenzpunkte-landesvermessung&bgLayer=ch.swisstopo.pixelkarte-farbe&featureInfo=default&catalogNodes=ech,457,510 (aka "not even close").
dieterdreist (2026-06-22 14:51:29+00:00): Can you explain what your link should show (not even close?). To me it looks like 10m from the border, on swiss territory. All the sources I found seem to confirm the peak is on the border. Can you support the Swiss claim with official Italian data?
dieterdreist (2026-06-22 16:04:43+00:00): After digging more into this, https://www.swisstopo.admin.ch/de/kuenstliche-und-natuerliche-grenzen says Je nach Topografie folgt die Landesgrenze natürlichen Gegebenheiten oder wurde künstlich festgelegt.... Seen, Fliessgewässer und Berge bilden eine natürliche Grenze, für die keine spezielle Kennzeichnung im Gelände notwendig ist.... Im Gebirge wird die «Wasserscheidelinie» (also der jeweilige Bergkamm) als natürliche Grenze festgelegt. Auch diese Linie wird nicht im Gelände gekennzeichnet. Auf Gletschern und Firn bewegt sie sich demzufolge und folgt den morphologischen Veränderungen.
___
Allerdings gebe ich zu dass das nicht unbedingt bedeutet, dass der Gipfel nicht ein paar Meter Abweichung haben könnte, wenn sein Wasser von allen Seiten in die Richtung eines Landes läuft aufgrund der Details der Gipfelform. Andererseits kann man trotzdem diskutieren, ob es in OpenStreetMap nicht angemessener wäre, wenn die Grenze durch den Gipfel läuft anstatt einen Meter daneben (oder auch 10).
SimonPoole (2026-06-22 18:45:40+00:00): See https://www.dsantini.it/dbsn/boundaries/#16.2/45.996337/7.908877 (on the swisstopo site you can switch to a number of elevation layers that are fairly clear on where the peak is). 

As said swisstopo has a dataset of all border points that contains information on if and what kind of marker is at the location.
SimonPoole (2026-06-23 07:40:42+00:00): BTW see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/municipality-borders-qa-and-fixes/142018 for the discussion on the topic.
dieterdreist (2026-06-23 08:41:38+00:00): thank you for the pointer, I have added a summary of my current understanding to the thread.
adamos (2026-06-24 10:31:39+00:00): Bus lines rerouted
aboc (2026-06-25 09:22:58+00:00): Thanks!
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-06-25 15:02:49+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1479918448/history - coś tu budują naprawdę? Czy tutaj jeszcze nie?
PCK46 (2026-06-25 19:03:23+00:00): Wiem, że w okolicy trwają ziemne, stąd wpisałem jako budowaną, ale nie wiem czy się zbytnio nie pośpieszyłem.
d_berger (2026-06-20 17:16:37+00:00): This is not a roundabout. Don't do automated changes based on a ticket system without local knowledge. Thank you.

reverted with CS184360981
Kaduna (2026-06-22 16:11:32+00:00): Hi d_berger, 

Thank you for reverting the changeset. The roundabout tag was already existing before my edit. The GPS traces were also suggesting a circular fashion of movement, so I went on to modify the geometry to a circular shape. Thank you for clarifying the situation and share your local knowledge with me.
kre777 (2026-06-19 13:59:51+00:00): Your “Modified geometry” is absolutely no improvement. If you look at the map, the roads now have 4 sets of 45° bends. The traffic_signals would now have to be entered multiple times. traffic_calming:island is also in the wrong place now. This is a completely pointless set of changes. Why are you changing simple, well-mapped roads and making the mapping and the view more complicated? (Translated with DeepL)
World_Winner (2026-06-23 04:53:36+00:00): Hello kre777, 
thank you for your detailed feedback and inquiry. 

The intention behind this change was to follow the OSM guideline of mapping roads as separate carriageways when a physical median is present. However, I see your point about how the current alignment introduced sharp bends and affects traffic signal alignments. That was certainly not the goal of my edits.

 I will review the geometry again to follow the central axes of the roads and properly realign the traffic signals and the island. If you still feel it would be better to revert it and handle the dual carriageway differently, please let me know. I appreciate your help and your input on this.
kre777 (2026-06-25 09:02:54+00:00): Hi World_Winner,
Thanks for the quick reply. The guideline to map separate lanes when there’s a physical median certainly doesn’t refer to the last few meters of the road, but rather to longer, completely separated "highways". And yes, I belive that a revert would be the best solution. Unfortunately, I’m not able to do that with the ID Editor. I could only revert your changeset “manually.” (Translated with DeepL) Best regards, Kre777
kre777 (2026-07-09 19:10:01+00:00): Since I haven't heard anything else from you, I'll reset this soon. (Translated with DeepL) Best regards, Kre777