piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2026-02-20 15:17:48+00:00): Hoi.. Er staan twee adresnodes op of vlak bij elkaar. Je had precies de verkeerde te pakken 😀
kijetesantakalu (2026-02-20 15:20:35+00:00): ah ik zie het ja. Organic Maps voegde het telefoonnummer toe aan de node van het adres zelf, terwijl ik in het menu zat om de gegevens van het restaurant te bewerken. klinkt als een bug.
eggie (2026-02-20 15:25:32+00:00): Nou...Het zijn twee verschillende adressen hier. Die app heeft zn beperkingen.
Denk lastig selecteren.
TrickyFoxy (2026-02-22 14:02:59+00:00): 👋 Не вносите личные заметки в OpenStreetMap. Используйте раздел Метки в приложении
eggie (2026-02-17 22:15:50+00:00): Tip  Probeer het gebied van je edits klein te houden. Bv een straat.
MVG
eggie
dknelson9876 (2026-02-21 02:22:17+00:00): Hello Jerry1178,

Welcome to OSM, and mapping in Utah! We're happy to have you. Are you aware that changeset comments are public information? Are you okay with what you've put here being public? If not, you can contact the Data Working Group at data@openstreetmap.org to have it redacted.

Also, please note that adding the name "Driveway" to a line already mapped as a driveway (with highway=service + service=driveway) is a case of descriptive naming, which is discouraged in OSM (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions)
marczoutendijk (2026-02-28 08:09:24+00:00): DWG here:
Unfortunately Changeset comments cannot be redacted by the DWG! Objects can be redacted, but that is not the case here.
Best regards  
Marc Zoutendijk  
OpenStreetMap Foundation  
Data Working Group
Fraxi (2026-02-17 20:09:45+00:00): Здравейте!
Разгледах Ваши промени. Тъй като видях какви данни са въведени за адреса на затворения комплекс(https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1258315614), а и за сградата за търговия(https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1253393555), искам да попитам:
- за комплекса-посочен е №62. Но на коя улица? Ако става дума за бл. 62, добре е да се отбележи с такава стойност. Т.е. addr:housenumber=бл.62. Ако обаче става дума, да речем за ул. "Златните мостове" №62, следва тя да се добави с ключ addr:street. Можете ето тук да прегледате как процедираме и с двойни адреси - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bg:WikiProject_Bulgaria#%D0%90%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B8/ (И по принцип в това уики може да се запознаете с основните практики, според които картографираме).
-за търговската сграда е отбелязан адрес ул. "Иван Кирков" №6. Обикновено, пристройки, навеси, гаражи, сгради за търговия със собственик, обитаващ близката жилищна сграда, намиращи се в общ имот, споделят един и същ адрес.
VNN66 (2026-02-17 20:46:57+00:00): Здравейте и благодаря!
Бизнес сградата/магазин е с официален адрес улица Иван Корков N6.
Затвореният комплекс "Флора Парк 2", обаче, получи официален адрес без улица "ж.к. Манастирски Ливади, бл 62". Индивидуалните сгради вътре в комплекса са с означения "вх А до вх Д". Когато имам време ще ги нанеса.

По темата бл 62 - благодаря отново. ще сменя на 
addr:housenumber=бл.62.
Fraxi (2026-02-18 09:51:48+00:00): Здравейте! За входовете може да използвате entrance=staircase + ref=А(примерно). Иначе за самостоятелни единици могат да се използват и addr:unit(примерно бл.А, бл. Б). Има и такива случаи, но този май не е такъв. 
За да не пиша под друг changeset, искам да попитам: Пътеката osm.org/way/1479868732 минава ли през тунели на сградата(https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1175580474/)? Защото ако е такъв случая, е по-добре да се свърже със сградата в залавните места с точки, да се раздели и въпросната отсечка, която ще се получи, да се маркира допълнително с tunnel=building_passage. Тя и самата сграда може да има нужда от малко изместване(вижте https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling#Drawing_at_the_roof). Но това може по-натам да стане, при по-добри снимки и евентуално оглед на някой картограф отвън.
VNN66 (2026-02-18 13:26:57+00:00): Да, пътеката минава под сградата. На практика е тунел.

Ще го имам предвид при следваща редакция.
Sammyhawkrad (2026-02-17 22:07:30+00:00): Hello NACHINDI _ ABDUL _RAUF, map each building separately. Mapping a cluster of buildings as single buildings is not proper mapping.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-03-14 00:05:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 179832897 where the changeset comment is: Reverting numerous undiscussed road category changes.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2261940 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19961
NeisBot (2026-02-17 19:42:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 12 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1479873679 v1 | 4 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=178695259
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-03-14 00:05:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 179832897 where the changeset comment is: Reverting numerous undiscussed road category changes.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2261940 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19961
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-03-14 00:06:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 179832897 where the changeset comment is: Reverting numerous undiscussed road category changes.  See https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=2261940 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19961
Sébastien Pi (2026-02-19 16:03:35+00:00): Mon héros !
Dommage qu’ils n’aient pas mis le même éclairage que sur la LINO. Ça s’y serait prêté (extra-urbain).
BardafFr (2026-02-19 16:06:23+00:00): Carrément, je me suis dit la même chose. L'éclairage n'est pas du ressort de la MEL, mais de chaque commune, ça viendra donc peut être par la suite
Sébastien Pi (2026-02-19 16:07:21+00:00): Tu serais dire si https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/512500885 est vraiment sur le way ?
Sébastien Pi (2026-02-19 16:07:33+00:00): saurais*
Sébastien Pi (2026-02-19 16:11:36+00:00): J’ai eu ma réponse sur Panoramax. Ce n’est plus le cas,
NeisBot (2026-02-17 20:12:44+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13574357882 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Maquinaria agrícola"
---
Por ejemplo, una versión más neutral y objetiva de tu texto podría ser: "Maquinaria agrícola"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-02-26 05:33:04+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179067809
(Clean up leftovers from previous edits)
eggie (2026-02-17 22:11:50+00:00): Welkom bij OSM. Bedankt voor uw bijdrage.
Deze tags zullen niet renderen in OSM. Soms kun je office=therapist toevoegen mits de vlag de lading dekt.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-02-17 22:14:15+00:00): format website aangepast naar OSM format
https://www.smitsosteopathie.nl/
Rainero (2026-03-15 09:13:28+00:00): Revert mit changeset/179888365
(unzulässige Quelle)
NeisBot (2026-02-17 20:39:39+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 38 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/224433280 v35 | 8 crossings
https://osm.org/way/462905895 v10 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/462906823 v4 | 4 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/3055229233 v2
https://osm.org/node/3253020675 v5
https://osm.org/node/5167615021 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=178697151
NeisReview (2026-02-26 05:33:09+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/178711725
Frans S (2026-02-19 17:25:04+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please add a "ford" on waterway/road crossings .
Best regards
bartgron (2026-02-17 20:52:29+00:00): Opis (tag description) został usunięty - Openstreetmap to nie miejsce na reklamowanie się
eggie (2026-02-17 22:01:48+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Wanneer iets op access=private staat hoef je geen bicycle=no te taggen behalve als er een C14 bord staat. Fietsverbod.
Waarom bicycle=no?

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-02-17 22:08:20+00:00): Je zet  een track op slot met access=private terwijk er twee officiële wandelroutes overlopen.
knooppunt 33 25 en Busch en Damroute.
Mag je daar niet meer wandelen.
Voorlopig heb ik het aangepast met foot=permissive.

Laat maar weten hoe die routes dan lopen 
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=178697967

MVG
eggie
Stephan van Hienen (2026-02-18 20:55:34+00:00): excuses eggie, ik dacht dat dit prive weiland was, wat wel gek is dat het dan vervolgens een doodlopende wandelroute zou zijn ?
eggie (2026-02-18 21:00:37+00:00): Yep... maar je mag op veel meer plaatsen gewoon komen.. Iets moet echt op 'blijkbare' wijze aangegeven zijn. Bv art 461 wvs. of een gesloten hek.
Maar ik ken de situatie daar niet.. ik zie gewoon wandelroutes lopen.
Mapse,
eggie
Stephan van Hienen (2026-02-18 21:03:03+00:00): Ik zal er vandeweek nog even kijken wat er precies aangegeven staat op de bordjes. Er staat iig wel een hek.
eggie (2026-02-18 21:14:39+00:00): 👍
Ben benieuwd...
Stephan van Hienen (2026-02-19 19:08:52+00:00): Vanavond even gekeken en bordje (vanaf de weg richting het zuiden)
Particulier terrein.
Opengesteld voor wandelaars.
https://ibb.co/TBK7yY7G
eggie (2026-02-19 19:13:29+00:00): Ahh... oke..zelfs gaan kijken... dan is foot=permissive de juiste tag icm access=private..
Volgens mij had ik dat al aangepast.

Mapse..
eggie
Stephan van Hienen (2026-02-20 10:57:11+00:00): Ja staat nu idd op access=private met foot=permissive.
Moet er nog iets gedaan worden met broedseizoensafsluiting ?
eggie (2026-02-20 11:11:05+00:00): Hier een draadje wat de mogelijkheden zijn.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/broedseizoen-en-hond/94104
Stephan van Hienen (2026-02-20 11:55:22+00:00): 👍
NeisBot (2026-02-17 21:03:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 11 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1479825072 v4 | 7 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=178698091
NeisReview (2026-02-26 05:33:10+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/178753515
gurglypipe (2026-02-23 10:07:22+00:00): Nice work!
9_tab (2026-04-25 10:08:33+00:00): addr:state=DE would be addr:country=DE . For more see https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2oEl
letihu (2026-04-25 20:52:41+00:00): Gut gesehen. Mein Fehler. Gefixt, vielen Dank.
9_tab (2026-04-26 09:22:54+00:00): There are still more mapped by you at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2oGj . I can change them for you.
letihu (2026-04-26 11:41:35+00:00): Gerne kannst du meine Fehler korrigieren. 
Vielen Dank
9_tab (2026-04-26 12:16:03+00:00): should be ok now: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181842812
letihu (2026-04-27 23:03:45+00:00): perfekt, vielen Dank
9_tab (2026-06-11 09:25:51+00:00): Is it a bug in a tool you are using? There seem to be many more since: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1117198988/history/3
letihu (2026-06-11 09:42:22+00:00): Ich benutze kein tool. Kann sein, dass mir der Fehler öfters unterlaufen ist 😞
letihu (2026-06-11 20:14:20+00:00): Hab ich denn nun alle falschen tags beseitigt? Ich habe heute noch einige gefunden :-(
9_tab (2026-06-12 07:52:30+00:00): I think so. The above Overpass request doesn't find anything and the following lists just a few by somebody else: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2rwf
letihu (2026-06-12 08:34:52+00:00): Vielen Dank. Ich versuche diesen Fehler in Zukunft zu vermeiden ;-)
Viele Grüße Hubert
Glassman (2026-02-18 18:59:24+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good. You could also add the name of the business + any other info like website and phone number along with a tag to describe the type of business. I'll send you more info on OSM in a message. There you can find links to our wiki to help you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178699871
Ale_Zena_IT (2026-02-18 22:14:44+00:00): Ciao,
ho ripristinato la fermata; non è una duplicazione, è la fermata per le linee provinciali (ex ATP). Inoltre per le fermate entro il comune di Genova è possibile la sola discesa (Stiamo capendo quale tag aggiungere per indicarlo).
jonato ieri (2026-02-19 16:45:18+00:00): Ah grazie, non sapevo fossero separate per questi motivi.
Ciao.
NeisBot (2026-02-17 22:15:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13574524354 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "neighborhood gate"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-02-26 05:33:05+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/178700914
Đuro Jiří (2026-02-18 20:32:27+00:00): Ciao Ariannapagnoni, stabilimento balneare è leisure=beach_resort e non spiaggia (natural=beach).
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dbeach_resort
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=beach
Buon mapping
dlegg73 (2026-02-17 22:16:42+00:00): Correction: Source used was Vantor satellite imagery via Vantor Hub 2024-02-01
felipeeugenio (2026-02-18 21:16:29+00:00): Hola. El tag building, es para la estructura, no para el recinto completo.
Voy a separarlo. Saludos y gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/178700790
notaclippy (2026-02-19 12:26:23+00:00): Gracias Felipe
9_tab (2026-02-18 11:13:50+00:00): Pour ceux qui cherchent: c'est à Paris et en Nouvelle Calédonie.
GiovanniPen (2026-02-18 14:08:08+00:00): please, make smaller changeset
Britzz (2026-02-19 08:22:16+00:00): absolument désolé, j'ai enchaîné deux modifications sans m'en rendre compte
AngocA (2026-02-18 00:50:31+00:00): Hola Alejandro,

Veo que mapeaste "potreros", está bien que los pongas como natural=scrub, pero ponerle la etiqueta name no está bien, ya que no sabes cómo se llaman, y menos como "valdio". 
Este tipo de cosas no son necesaria mapearlas como parte de este proyecto del Task Manager.
jkoe (2026-02-17 22:39:01+00:00): Puh, dass ich da keine ÖPNV-Relation kaputtgemacht habe, war reines Glück …
eggie (2026-02-17 22:37:50+00:00): comment:  phone verplaatst naar juiste adresnode
SafwatHalaby (2026-02-22 13:22:16+00:00): היי, הוספת את פינסקר 30 ממש בפינת הבניין.

אני חושב שהתכוונת לתייג את הבניין עצמו כולו כמו שעשית עם שאר הבניינים
pitscheplatsch (2026-02-18 06:43:29+00:00): Hello,

Thank you for your recent edit changing the name of this supermarket from: "طلبات مارت زون الرحاب" to: "آلَأبّـــــــطآلَ"

After review, the new name appears to be a stylized string of Arabic characters that does not form a clear or recognizable business name.

Could you please confirm: Is this the official registered name of the supermarket?
Taya_S (2026-02-18 07:17:42+00:00): This object currently has 33 versions, could you please explain what you are trying to do?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12251568601/history
NeatNit (2026-02-18 15:13:42+00:00): היי, נראה שהזזת בטעות תחנת אוטובוס בשינוי הזה. החזרתי את התחנה למקומה, אבל אבקש שתיזהרי בעתיד לא להזיז דברים במפה שאת לא מתכוונת.

תודה על התרומה למפה!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/178730446
adamos (2026-02-18 08:27:02+00:00): Třída Osvobození v Příbrami je opravdu teď jednosměrná? Prosím o prověření, díky
pkoby (2026-02-18 17:19:09+00:00): If it's already closed, you can leave the node here and change "amenity=restaurant" to "was:amenity=restaurant". I would then delete the name, phone, website, and hours if it's no longer that business (you could do "was:name"). Anyone who wants more info can look at the history of the node.
NeisBot (2026-02-17 23:06:44+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/923886046 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Plumbing store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-02-26 05:33:06+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179067811
(No visible changes after review)
felipeeugenio (2026-02-18 21:09:56+00:00): Hola. el tag building es para las estructuras, no para el recinto completo de la casa. Además se ve que hizo un copy-paste de varias casas cuando es evidente que varias tienen formas distintas. Por favor hacerlo lentamente. no hay apuro. gracias
Saldepuedes (2026-02-19 02:50:14+00:00): Hola. Todas las casas en esta zona fueron construidas con una forma rectangular y originalmente tenían un antejardin, un pequeño patio trasero y un patio lateral/estacionamiento. La mayoría de estas comparten un muro y el techo con una casa contigua. En los 20 años que estas viviendas llevan construidas, la gran mayoría de las personas ha invertido en un covertizo para la entrada de sus autos, pero no necesariamente ha llenado este espacio con paredes. Al momento de dibujar el edificio, debería considerar solo los espacios con paredes o los espacios con techo también corresponde a estructuras?

Ademas, no podemos saber si hay una nueva estructura en el patio trasero de cada casa porque esta no se ve desde la calle (por obvias razones) y la imagen satelital no deja claro si lo que se ve es una estructura temporal o permanente.

Finalmente, yo decidí agregar la información aquí discutida porque me parece útil tener la posición relativa de cada vivienda en OSM. ¿Debería utilizar otro tag para este propósito?
felipeeugenio (2026-02-19 11:15:59+00:00): Hola @jptolosa te va a contestar mejor com mapear ampliaciones.

Yo no sé si entendí mucho tu respuesta. Lo que si, por favor, si son todas las casas iguales, hacer un solo molde y luego copiar y pegar. Es evidente que varias de las casas agregadas definitivamente no tienen la forma que les diste. Hay algunas que parecen representaciones esquemáticas incluso. Estás en el chat de la comunidad en Telegram?

Saludos
ion_chi (2026-02-17 23:45:30+00:00): Hey, how did you determine that these plots are landuse=grass and not landuse=brownfield? Most of these look like abandoned lots to me on aerial imagery
willkmis (2026-02-18 13:45:58+00:00): Why did you remove traffic signals tagging here? There are mapped traffic signals at the intersection
VLD319 (2026-02-19 16:59:09+00:00): Hi Willkmis, 
Thank you for your question. According to recent ground imagery, there are no pedestrian-specific traffic signals installed for this shorter crossing- they are only functioning for the longer segment. The “uncontrolled” value is appropriate here as it indicates that the crossing is marked but does not have any pedestrian signal control. The vehicular signals are accounted for by node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3372448432. Please reach out with any further questions, thank you!
Thanks,
VLD319
willkmis (2026-02-19 18:52:50+00:00): Hi VLD319,
I strongly disagree that crossing=uncontrolled is appropriate here, as the pedestrian is still expected to follow the vehicular traffic signals or risk getting run over, despite the lack of a pedestrian-specific signal head. These and other situations like this are widely tagged as crossing=traffic_signals and  crossing:signals=yes. See for example the last documented example at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:signals, which is exactly like the situation here and tagged crossing:signals=yes.
Best,
Will
Minh Nguyen (2026-02-19 19:39:12+00:00): Agreed, crossing:signals=* is about whether a pedestrian should wait for a signal of any kind before crossing, just as highway=traffic_signals represents the location where a road user should wait for a signal. If there is only a common vehicular traffic signal head, the pedestrian is controlled by it and this should be reflected in crossing tagging. This is consistent with the law and it’s what routers expect.

I hope Facebook hasn’t been going around flipping these crossing:signals=* values systematically. I kindly ask the team to review your recent edits and correct any tags that arose out of this misunderstanding. If you disagree, please start a discussion on the OSM forum so we can explore a way forward. Thank you for your understanding.
VLD319 (2026-02-19 21:06:47+00:00): I acknowledge your input and have reinstated the traffic signals tags for this crossing. 

Thank you for your feedback, 
VLD319
ieguy3 (2026-02-17 23:28:58+00:00): 13th is the main road to the base
bxl-forever (2026-02-18 00:21:29+00:00): Hello,

I observed some of your latest contributions, where you seem to be interested in micromapping playground areas.

A few comments here, that might be useful to improve your actions on the map and avoid irritating other mappers.

1) Please avoid mapping two remote places in the same changeset.  Make two uploads instead of one.

2) Make sure that your changeset description matches your actions.  If you say that you "added sand", we should not expect that the changeset also adds trees, moves buildings, adds small footpaths (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1479929729) and more.

3) In a previous changeset, you created a playground with surface=sand: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1066910951  This is the correct way to map it, congrats.  However, adding areas with "natural=sand" as you did here is not correct.  Those areas are found in nature, but this is not something to use inside a city.  And certainly not on top of an existing playground having that information.  I understand that some people want the map to "look nice" but this is not accepted.  Please remove those unnecessary sand areas.

Thanks and happy mapping.
Gonéo (2026-02-19 10:04:16+00:00): Attention, tu as un point du bâtiment qui a glissé à l'autre bout du quartier. Le bâtiment coupe plusieurs rues ;-)
Gonéo (2026-02-19 10:05:00+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/85039930#map=18/45.778597/4.875823