piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
b-jazz (2026-01-09 05:55:03+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1464143120

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas must not cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green along with the right way. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green, leaving room for the fringe. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two, and every node at the boundary needs to be shared leaving no gaps. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD (built into openstreetmap.org) will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.
George Sears (2026-01-17 15:29:28+00:00): 

Ciao ,

Grazie per il tuo contributo a OpenStreetMap!

Ti diamo un caloroso benvenuto nella comunità di appassionati che da diversi anni integrano e migliorano la mappa e speriamo tu possa appassionarti e continuare a contribuire ancora a lungo.

Se invece il tuo è un contributo sporadico, non importa! Forse conosci qualcuno intorno a te a cui piace fare escursioni, andare in bicicletta o è semplicemente appassionata/o di mappe. Saremmo felici se tu le/gli parlassi di OpenStreetMap.

Oltre a contribuire alla mappa, puoi aiutarci, ad esempio, caricando tracciati GPS, segnalando errori o promuovendo OpenStreetMap.

Se vuoi chiedere qualcosa, o semplicemente condividere la tua esperienza o idee per migliorare, saremo felici di incontrarti nel forum ufficiale
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/it/60 ,
nel gruppo Telegram
https://telegram.me/OpenStreetMapItalia
oppure nella mailing list dei mappatori italiani, talk-it
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-it. Per altri canali consulta la Wiki
osm.wiki/IT:Contact.

Scopri maggiori informazioni sulla comunità italiana
osm.wiki/Italy.

Buona mappatura!
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-07 09:54:26+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11892676177
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1464144564

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-06 16:55:14+00:00): Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In this and some of your recent changesets, you’ve added a large number of features that appear to share very similar tagging. Could you please tell us more about the source of this data and how it was collected? Specifically, I’d like to understand whether this was a data import or derived from an external dataset.

If an external source was used, could you also confirm that its licence is compatible with OpenStreetMap’s ODbL requirements?

Best regards,
Pascal
gabro00 (2026-01-04 19:44:32+00:00): Köszi! Igyekeztem a napokban felvenni a megállókat. Nem messze levettem párat, ezeket jól csináltam? https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5112367
csehpacilla (2026-01-04 20:43:26+00:00): Tökéletes! És én köszönöm, hogy felvetted a megállókat!
eggie (2026-01-04 17:18:03+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback .. Alle formats zijn in het UK English in OSM. Je zou dus in de wiki kunnen kijken bij house=
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:house

Adressen in OSM hoef je niet toe te voegen. Er zijn al adresnodes.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-01-04 18:34:38+00:00): Ik heb wat aangepast.
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-04 16:09:48+00:00): Please stop deleting features!
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-04 16:13:38+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

In your recent changesets, you removed many mapped features. Some of them were created by you (or at least by a very similar account), while other data had been contributed by other users.

Could you please explain the reason for these (mass) deletions?

Best regards,
Pascal
Robert Whittaker (2026-01-06 09:57:53+00:00): Hi LYNX4546,

In this changeset you added a Defibrillator (AED) at a location that seems to be in the middle of nowhere: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13430586701#map=14/53.14690/-3.24989

This seems to be an unlikely location to me, so could I check that this is what you intended to do? If it is correct, could you add a description of the location in the defibrillator:location=* tag to help other mappers and data users understand where it is?

Many thanks,

Robert.
LYNX4546 (2026-01-06 18:10:05+00:00): Nope. Definitly there. Its on the side of the path up moel famau. Exactly where its location pin says as i reccorded its location on site
BCNorwich (2026-01-05 07:28:24+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Have you actually seen the man-made camera mount for surveillance? If not then it's not verifiable as per OSM mapping practice, https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability

A lot of land owners now put up signs saying "CCTV in Operation" that doesn't mean there is a camera in operation. It's the same as the sign "Bull in Field" when there's none present. 

Regards Bernard
b-holdet (2026-01-05 07:24:57+00:00): Hvad er din kilde til at navnet på https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/155813425 skulle fjernes?

Ifølge DAR https://dataforsyningen.dk/data/4729
er strækningen op til nr. 20 benævnt Ebeltoftvej.
atcomapper (2026-01-05 08:00:49+00:00): I mange tilfælde er indkørsler og andre små sideveje i DAR navngivet efter den vej, de forbinder til. Det gør det ikke korrekt. Generelt har sådanne veje ikke et navn, og vi skal ikke begynde at opfinde navne til unavngivne objekter. Her er tale om en længere grusvej, som er en sidevej til Ebeltoftvej, men ikke en del af Ebeltoftvej. Der er ikke skiltet med et vejnavn på stedet. I praksis, hvis du befandt dig på denne vej, ville du jo aldrig sige, at du befinder dig på Ebeltoftvej - men derimod at du befinder dig på en grusvej, som forbinder til Ebeltoftvej.
b-holdet (2026-01-05 08:09:02+00:00): Det er jeg ikke helt enig med dig i.
Det er lidt det samme argument med at hvis jeg står ved et å-løb, så skal jeg have et skilt i nærheden for at kende navnet på åen.
Vil du også fjerne å-løbenes navne, hvis de ikke er skiltet af?
atcomapper (2026-01-05 08:41:18+00:00): Nej, det vil jeg ikke.
atcomapper (2026-01-05 08:45:55+00:00): Men hvis jeg stod ved en lille bæk, som nedstrøms løber ud i Gudenåen - så ville jeg heller ikke sige, at jeg stod ved Gudenåen :)
b-holdet (2026-01-05 09:17:02+00:00): Må jeg komme med et lokalt eksempel:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?lat=56.276358&lon=10.684503&zoom=17#map=17/56.276354/10.684494&layers=N

På dette sted er der ikke noget skilt mod vest, der indikerer at grusvejen hedder Ebeltoftvej. Ifølge DAR så har den et navn og er en del af Ebeltoftvej-klyngen. 

Vejen er offentlig ifølge https://cvf.vd.dk/cvf/mapui.jsp

Følger man din logik om ikke-skiltede veje, så burde vel være en indkørsel til nr. 22

Hvad skal vi gøre her, vil du fjerne dette navn?
atcomapper (2026-01-05 09:27:48+00:00): Jeg står ved de argumenter, jeg præsenterede i den første kommentar, som jeg ikke gider gentage. Hvis du ikke mener, de holder, står det dig frit for at omgøre rettelsen.
Frans S (2026-01-10 12:01:47+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
A remark.
You mapped a clear trace as a highway=unclassified, I agree. But, 60 mtr south of your mapping is another mapped track, no proof on the imagery>
with a history back to 2011. You better adjust that road to the correct trace rather than map another road.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1464150219/history#map=17/3.134634/44.838347

I corrected it.
Best regards
vladigivanov (2026-01-10 12:10:36+00:00): Thanks for spotting that!
NeisBot (2026-01-05 07:23:40+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/13430603552 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Electroprüfungen in Rottenburg Tübingen Böblingen Nagold Horb und Herrenberg"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deines Textes lauten: "Electroprüfungen in Rottenburg Tübingen Böblingen Nagold Horb und Herrenberg"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-01-17 16:40:30+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/177343427
(Deleted leftovers after several edits)
NeisBot (2026-01-05 07:22:11+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 55 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1131907685 v3 | 12 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1131907689 v3 | 12 crossings
https://osm.org/way/17016829 v12 | 7 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/4212470295 v3
https://osm.org/node/4060726237 v3

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176825128
NeisReview (2026-01-17 16:35:45+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/176830591
osmviborg (2026-01-04 16:21:45+00:00): Normalt bruges:
highway=proposed
proposed=*
NeisBot (2026-01-05 07:22:13+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 34 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/220545606 v7 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/220545607 v3 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1079099155 v1 | 4 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/2296567418 v5
https://osm.org/node/9892111614 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176825473
lilynonbinarynerd (2026-01-04 16:26:50+00:00): oops, sorry i forgot to add that this was from local knewledge and bing aerial images.
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:33:21+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 30 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826330
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:34:21+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 25 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826381
Taya_S (2026-01-05 09:42:26+00:00): Reverted deleted farmland. Please do not delete valid data, even if you intend to recreate it

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176852692
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:35:22+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 32 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826420
Taya_S (2026-01-05 09:42:27+00:00): Reverted deleted farmland. Please do not delete valid data, even if you intend to recreate it

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176852692
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:36:22+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 26 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826468
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:37:22+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 42 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826536
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:38:22+00:00): Hi KAYA006, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 21 landuse(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826579
NeisBot (2026-01-05 07:22:16+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 15 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1207524537 v2 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1283787795 v1 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1242094310 v2 | 3 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/11911024048 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176826606
AtlasRaccoon (2026-01-05 16:04:47+00:00): Trying to work out how to reverse a changeset to make sure I don't break it even more trying to fix it and learn at the same time. Using revert.osmz
Jofban (2026-01-04 17:27:47+00:00): Mit `access=private` war der Weg neben den Häusern gemeint, der derzeit `access=no` hat. Gebäude bekommen in der Regel keine Access Tags.
Rooobert (2026-01-04 17:51:57+00:00): Ah ok, danke ist geändert
gscholz (2026-01-05 08:16:05+00:00): Hi SenteInterdite,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=5.72686&lat=45.15573&zoom=18&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

The building shape of line 116032538 is affected here especially:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/116032538/history#map=19/45.156260/5.727574

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
SenteInterdite (2026-01-12 18:12:30+00:00): Hello Guido,
I haven't found the issue you mention. I asked another mapper for help and she hasn't found either. Can you check again if it's been resolved or how I can find the affected object(s) please ?
Thank you very much,
Sente
gscholz (2026-01-13 07:02:49+00:00): Hi SenteInterdite,
the error has obviously been fixed here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177018718

Thanks for your feedback.
Guido
NeisBot (2026-01-04 16:56:13+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your changesets and noticed that the cumulative count of your recent edits (2 changesets) shows that 581 of your last 581 changes were deletions. This is quite an unusual proportion, so I wanted to check with you.

Could you please confirm whether these deletions were intentional or if they may have occurred by mistake?

#DeletionsCheck #Cumulative
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious?uid=23672531
Taya_S (2026-01-05 09:08:56+00:00): Reverted unexplained deletions

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176851414
yelisey90 (2026-01-05 10:23:52+00:00): reverted, vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176854146
Comino (2026-01-04 17:36:20+00:00): Hoi,

Wat was er volgens jou niet goed aan de openingstijden van Chazzz! Food? Waarom niet verbeterd ipv verwijderd?

Happy mapping!

Edwin
Famlam (2026-01-04 17:59:49+00:00): Verkeerde naam voor woensdag, dus tag ongeldig, en gecorrigeerde waarde komt niet overeen met hun pagina's.

Gezien ik me niet verantwoordelijk wil voelen voor openingstijden, verwijder ik alleen onjuistheden en corrigeer ik ze alleen als dit inhoudelijk niks verandert. Op die manier verbetert de kaart alsnog want er verdwijnt een fout.
Famlam (2026-01-04 18:01:24+00:00): *Naam -> afkorting
Comino (2026-01-04 18:16:53+00:00): Wat een bijzondere manier van werken. Dus i.p.v. 1 letter aan te passen verwijder je dan maar informatie? Als je dat blijft doen op deze manier, zal je vroeg of laat ook door andere mappers hierop worden aangesproken. Vriendelijk verzoek dat voortaan anders te doen. En als je het zelf niet wilt aanpassen, zou het netjes zijn dat je degene die de fout heeft gemaakt daarop te wijzen via een opmerking in de changeset. Zo leert de ander daar ook weer van.

Edwin
Famlam (2026-01-04 18:39:40+00:00): Hoi Erwin,

Sorry, blijkbaar was ik niet duidelijk.

Als ik de Wo in We had gewijzigd hadden er onjuiste openingstijden in de database gestaan conform de website. Dit leek mij erger dan geen openingstijden, immers zullen details zoals openingstijden door tooltjes als StreetComplete e.d. op korte termijn weer geflagd worden voor de liefhebber.

Ik zie dat je de openingstijden hebt teruggezet (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176830716), maar dan niet in overeenstemming met de webpagina van de betreffende onderneming, waar deze staan als:

Maandag
16:00 - 21:00
Dinsdag
GESLOTEN
Woensdag
16:00 - 22:00
Donderdag
16:00 - 22:00
Vrijdag
12:30 - 22:00
Zaterdag
12:30 - 22:00
Zondag
12:30 - 21:00

Ik ga ervanuit dat je hebt geverifieerd dat de website van de onderneming (https://www.facebook.com/Chazzzfood/) onjuist is en vertrouw er dus op dat je deze wijziging niet enkel hebt toegepast om de Wo->We aan te passen? Je changeset toont alleen de PDOK luchtfoto's als bron. Ik geloof je op je woord, maar puur om het (nogmaals) te benoemen mocht je mijn vorige bericht inderdaad verkeerd begrepen hebben en het enkel gekopieerd hebben.
Comino (2026-01-04 23:07:49+00:00): Ik heb degene die toen een foutje heeft gemaakt een bericht gestuurd. E.e.a. is zojuist aangepast.
Znaika (2026-01-07 11:04:27+00:00): Hi, 
zu deiner Information. Die besten von der Lage und die aktuellsten in unserer Region sind die Luftbilder von NRW Orthophoto und nicht von Bing. Die besten Gebäudeumrisse kann man von NRW Liegenschaftskataster übertragen. 
Ein Beispiel, was du modifiziert hast. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/23895602
Gruß, Znaika
eggie (2026-01-04 17:25:57+00:00): Dag Wouter  Dit is helaas niet correct.

Niet simpelweg iets omzetten in een park. Dit gebeurt meestal om het spel PokemonGo te beïnvloeden.
Je verwijdert de details en vervangt deze door een transparant. 
Een park is een (uitgestrekt) terrein, omvattende stukken grasveld, bos en bosschages, vijvers, paden etc. Het is een soort deken over al het andere heen. Bovendien heeft het meestal een naam. 
Leisure=park is de functie en die moet je los zien van wat je ziet de landuse.
Hier een voorbeeld van een park met landuse en een losse cover leisure= park er helemaal los overheen. http://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.80552/4.66665

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-01-04 18:31:43+00:00): Wat landuse ingevuld.
Wouter_Ham (2026-01-05 09:50:57+00:00): Dag Eggie,
Dankje voor je reactie. Ik zal de volgende keer iets meer hiermee opletten. Ik zag dat jij het inmiddels aangepast hebt.

Mvg, Wouter
eggie (2026-01-05 09:55:46+00:00): Yep.. Jouw parkje is er gewoon nog.
Mocht het een naam hebben dan kun je die toevoegen. 
Mapse,
eggie
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-04 17:32:33+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

In your recent changesets, you removed many mapped features. Some of them were created by you (or at least by a very similar account), while other data had been contributed by other users.

Could you please explain the reason for these (mass) deletions?

Best regards,
Pascal
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-04 17:28:32+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

In your recent changesets, you removed many mapped features. Some of them were created by you (or at least by a very similar account), while other data had been contributed by other users.

Could you please explain the reason for these (mass) deletions?

Best regards,
Pascal
aTarom (2026-01-07 14:54:54+00:00): Hola, no teníamos todos en formato de extensión con x####?
Lo pregunté cuando se cambiaron todos a x#### en
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174616947
no sé lo que se habla en esas sesiones, por ello te lo pregunto por si hay cambios, me dices para tenerlo en cuenta y no cambiar de nuevo sin preguntar primero ;D
Saludos
dmlls (2026-01-07 19:35:02+00:00): Hola @aTarom, pues lo cambié porque me salía como un error en Osmose, pero he vuelto a mirar y resulta que con el "ext." también lo marca como error 😅 (https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#loc=14/42.3472/-3.68335&item=3092&level=1%2C2%2C3).

¿Igual había que abrir un hilo en el foro para ponernos todos de acuerdo en un formato? En las MappyHours no decidimos nada al respecto.

Un saludo!
aTarom (2026-01-07 22:37:41+00:00): Lo tengo pendiente, intentaré en esta semana 🤞
dmlls+imports (2026-01-08 15:37:20+00:00): Perfecto, cualquier cosa que pueda ayudar me dices :)
Rainero (2026-03-29 11:00:12+00:00): Revert changeset/180576878
wegen nicht zulässiger Quelle (Bayernatlas).
Glassman (2026-01-05 17:42:21+00:00): #TIP: It's helpful to leave a brief changeset comment describing what you edited. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments for more info.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176828545
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-06 16:54:04+00:00): Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In this and some of your recent changesets, you’ve added a large number of features that appear to share very similar tagging. Could you please tell us more about the source of this data and how it was collected? Specifically, I’d like to understand whether this was a data import or derived from an external dataset.

If an external source was used, could you also confirm that its licence is compatible with OpenStreetMap’s ODbL requirements?

Best regards,
Pascal