piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2023-03-31 06:40:39+00:00): Buildings should match the actual size.
Бутримова Дарья (2023-04-03 15:52:34+00:00): it will be done. gradually
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134316931
SomeoneElse (2023-03-30 21:32:04+00:00): Thanks - that changeset comment is much more useful - it says what you're doing, why you're doing it and where you're doing it.
Best Regards,
Andy
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-30 19:20:26+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158524149
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158524150

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2023-03-30 20:12:17+00:00): Poprawione
snoozingnewt (2023-03-30 19:38:11+00:00): Hi, thanks for mapping! You should be aware that buildings are usually never pentagonal - their roof is gabled (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gable_roof) and the satellite took imagery that was slanted a bit - so these should all be rectangular.
gscholz (2023-04-01 08:11:46+00:00): Hi VLD190,
this chageset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-0.53944&lat=39.55180&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=134318286

I have just reverted it to fix those issues.
Guido
Mashin (2023-03-31 11:49:25+00:00): Hi. Does this mean that there is sign forbidding access of bicycles?

if yes then I think better would be to have access=yes + bicycle=no.
delonix (2023-03-31 13:54:16+00:00): Good point.   The city just constructed a separate cycle track on the north side of Edgewood ave, wholly separated from the road.  It is expected that bikes will use the cycletrack instead of the road.  It is not explicitly forbidden for bicycles to use edgewood avenue, so technically they are still allowed on the road.   We can change the designation back, no problem.
Mashin (2023-03-31 14:20:59+00:00): There seems to be also bicycle=use_sidepath value 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Compulsory_use_of_parallel_way

But my concern is more about general access=no restriction. If some kind of routing software does not recognize motor_vehicle= tag then it would prevent routing cars through that road. Having access=yes + bicycle=... would be more failsafe.
vasony (2023-05-01 21:22:27+00:00): Szia!

Őrsi Gergely tudhatná, hogy közterületet a főv. közgyűlésnek van joga elnevezni. Persze tudja is, csak a facebookon nem néz ki olyan jól. A jegyzőkönyvben viszont benne van hogy csak javasolja ezeket.
Légy szíves az új neveket proposed:name-be tett át.
https://archiv.masodikkerulet.hu/data/cms193861/nyilt_jegyzokonyv_2023_0330.pdf

Köszi
sugarbotond (2023-05-02 07:07:50+00:00): Köszi hogy szóltál javítottam a hibám.
vasony (2023-05-02 09:07:45+00:00): Köszi, sajnos óvatosan kell ezekkel a hírekkel, mert jellemző, hogy előbb van meg hír mint az elnevezés:
ld:
https://index.hu/belfold/2022/10/06/bejelentettek-de-megsem-neveztek-el-solt-ottiliarol-kozteret/
vasony (2023-06-12 09:16:19+00:00): Szia!

A Kökény köz és a Patak sétány átmentek a főv. közgyűlésen.

A Kökény köz a hrsz. szerint csak a Táncsicsig tart, az azt követő szakaszhoz nem nyúltam, és a Dombos utca 39, 41, 43, Táncsics 58 házszámot meg kellene nézni, mert ezek nem tűnnek jónak.

Az érintett rész:
1. a  II. kerület Máriaremete és Remetekertváros városrészben az 52072/1, 52048 és 52049 hrsz.-ú névtelen közterületeket Kökény köznek,

2. a II. kerület Pesthidegkút-Ófalu városrészben az 54401, 54402/2 és 54402/5 hrsz.-ú névtelen közterületeket Patak sétánynak

Tamás
user_3405044 (2023-03-30 20:21:41+00:00): s/1708/1706/
SomeoneElse (2023-03-30 21:22:29+00:00): Thanks for reverting, but actually https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/413446964/history at least needs to go one stage further back - locals here have said that it's "proposed", if that.  See https://kitchener.citynews.ca/local-news/new-highway-7-between-kitchener-and-guelph-seemingly-snubbed-again-by-province-5158523 , apparently.
SomeoneElse (2023-03-30 21:24:56+00:00): For info see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7008 .
snoozingnewt (2023-03-30 21:42:26+00:00): I see - that user has done this in many other places and it seems easier to mass revert their changesets. However, I'm not experienced in doing mass reverts like that - mostly individual changesets
SomeoneElse (2023-03-30 21:47:11+00:00): No problem - I already had a note set to do a tidy up in a few day's time.  There may of course be other "new users making edits" between now and then.
rylanmario1 (2023-03-30 23:37:10+00:00): I see what i did wrong now. My intention was not to add a route that was actually there, but to improve what someone else had done in terms of what the road is proposed to look like.
rylanmario1 (2023-03-30 23:38:01+00:00): And also, I only just got into doing map edits last night. I've always have had the hobby of mapping, but have never made any map edits.
carwos (2025-10-08 07:59:42+00:00): Hi, hast du da evtl. einen Platzhalter-way vergessen zu löschen, mit dem du die Tags vorbereitet hast? Ich war zwar lange nicht dort, aber ein kurzes Stück Radweg auf der Elbwiese ist da meiner Erinnerung nach nicht.
JochenB (2025-10-09 16:53:41+00:00): Ich vermute eher, es war ein "Einfüge"-Fehler. Statt nur die Tags einzufügen hat es den ganzem Weg eingefügt. Die Shortcuts dind sehr ähnlich.
Danke für den Hinweis, habe es gelöscht!
Dodko (2023-03-31 06:25:13+00:00): Kaviareň tam už nie je?
idpsycho (2023-03-31 09:55:45+00:00): je prestahovana sem, ako som popisal v sprave: https://www.google.com/maps/place/Otto!/@48.1441892,17.1177855,18.81z/data=!4m14!1m7!3m6!1s0x476c891ad8b937cd:0x41a9ba0114f3870e!2sOtto*21!8m2!3d48.1444432!4d17.1180043!16s%2Fg%2F11j4vvz_s1!3m5!1s0x476c891ad8b937cd:0x41a9ba0114f3870e!8m2!3d48.1444432!4d17.1180043!16s%2Fg%2F11j4vvz_s1 - ta lokalita je aj vidiet par metrov na juh v openstreetmap
Dodko (2023-03-31 10:15:08+00:00): Ok, to som si ju nevšimol, že bola duplicitne.
emersonveenstra (2023-03-31 01:14:56+00:00): Hi,

Please make sure your changeset comments are accurate in the future, so it's easier to tell what you meant to do
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-30 21:10:42+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10774190446
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10774190480
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10774190481

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2023-03-31 16:14:38+00:00): Poprawione
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2023-03-31 13:41:01+00:00): نرجوا منكم عدم التخريب لهذا المكان
fahad79 (2023-06-01 10:44:48+00:00): هل لديك مستند رسمي صادر من جهات حكومية يخولك بالتعديل ووضع مسميات او القاب او نبز بالاسماء.
قال تعالى 
(يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا لَا يَسْخَرْ قَوْمٌ مِّن قَوْمٍ عَسَىٰ أَن يَكُونُوا خَيْرًا مِّنْهُمْ وَلَا نِسَاءٌ مِّن نِّسَاءٍ عَسَىٰ أَن يَكُنَّ خَيْرًا مِّنْهُنَّ ۖ وَلَا تَلْمِزُوا أَنفُسَكُمْ وَلَا تَنَابَزُوا بِالْأَلْقَابِ ۖ بِئْسَ الِاسْمُ الْفُسُوقُ بَعْدَ الْإِيمَانِ ۚ وَمَن لَّمْ يَتُبْ فَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ)
Abdullah Abdulrhman (2023-06-01 20:31:28+00:00): هذا الاسم ورد في بعض الخرائط الحكومية القديمة وخرائط الصحراء ولا علم لي بأنه مسيء لأحد، لكن لو كان فعلاً اسمه الحالي تغير ولديك ما يثبت ذلك نرجوا منكم مشاركته هنا
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-06-25 17:15:55+00:00):  Dzięki za mapowanie!

I jedna drobną rzecz. (Poprawiłem, ale na przyszłość) jak dodajesz stację jako obszar to punkt jest do skasowania, po przeniesieniu godzin otwarcia i innego info z niego
user_5359 (2023-03-31 08:06:58+00:00): Hello! Please notice your typo: Use the key access instead of acccess
kechan (2024-03-19 17:38:51+00:00): Wait... how did I do an empty changeset?
Aleks-Berlin (2023-03-31 10:33:13+00:00): Hallo hein22,
bitte schreibe wikipedia=de:Artikel nicht https...
siehe hierzu:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:wikipedia?uselang=de#Bevorzugtes_Tagging
Danke
Josef73 (2023-05-12 04:24:34+00:00): Hello, can you please check the value of the tag opening_hours. It has to be in English. Please look here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours
Thanks
OSMCowboy (2023-03-31 19:58:50+00:00): source was Maxar Premium Imagery
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134321910
OSMCowboy (2023-03-31 21:03:43+00:00): Correction:
Source used was Maxar Premium Imagery
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134321910
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2023-03-31 06:51:45+00:00): Overall great edit and thanks for contributing.
Consider uploading your work more frequently so there's less changes per upload and don't have to be spread over multiple changesets.
Again great work!
Hellight (2023-03-31 07:09:07+00:00): Hello Ikuta,

Thank you for your edits.

However, due to licensing differences, Wikipedia cannot be used as a source in OpenStreetMap.
FYI: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Collaboration_with_Wikipedia
The same is true for most other sources, and so on.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Available_Data

For this reason, I am going to have to revert some of the edits.
Sorry if this offends you.

By the way, the official website of Hokkaido is available as open data that can use ODbL license, and I hope this will be of help to you.
https://www.pref.hokkaido.lg.jp/kn/ddr/94728.html
https://www.pref.hokkaido.lg.jp/ss/dtf/opendata/hokkaido_od_kiyaku.html

For your information, I personally recommend that you focus your editing on areas you have visited, etc., rather than on areas that span multiple countries.
This may naturally reduce the use of inappropriate sources, and would be more beneficial.

Thank you in advance.

---
Ikutaさん、編集ありがとうございます。

しかし、ライセンスの違いなどから、OpenStreetMapではWikipediaをソースとして使用することはできません。
その他大半のソースについても同様です。

そのため、ご気分を害されたら申し訳ありませんが、いくつか編集を差し戻させていただきます。

ちなみに、CC BYがついている、北海道の公式サイトに掲載されている情報は、ODbLライセンスが使えるオープンデータとして公開されているので、参考になればと思います。

余計なお世話でしたら申し訳ありませんが、個人的には、複数の国にまたがるのではなく、自分が訪れたことのある地域などに絞って編集されることをお勧めします。
その方が、不適切なソースの使用も自然と減り、より有意義になるのではないでしょうか。

よろしくお願いします。
Joseph R P (2023-04-06 17:15:10+00:00): Hello, please try to save your changes in one vicinity before editing in another across the ocean, that way your changeset does not appear in feeds like the OSMCha unreviewed changeset feed for other countries. Thanks, and happy mapping!
100glier (2023-04-09 10:00:28+00:00): Hello, I tested android app StreetComplete. Is not possible to choose when the app saves the changes. I will use it cautiously. I am sorry for the annoyance.
emersonveenstra (2023-04-03 11:05:16+00:00): Hi,

For the width key, it has to be a number (with units if it's not in meters). Adding ">3.65" is not a valid width, and won't be understood by any data consumer. If you don't know the actual width, you can just leave it blank so that someone else can fill it in later. Thanks!
Mecheye (2023-04-03 14:42:54+00:00): Got it! Is there a way to mass-edit tags for a certain route? Or check for a certain value of tag within a specific area?
emersonveenstra (2023-04-03 15:04:27+00:00): There is a tool called overpass, it's quite complex but for simple things like this it's pretty straightforward, here's a link to get you started: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1tjl. If you click export, you can load the results directly into JOSM to mass-edit the tags. If you have any questions, the #overpass channels on either the OSMUS Slack or OSM World Discord are pretty responsive, as well as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_API_by_Example and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Overpass_API/Overpass_QL
Mecheye (2023-04-03 22:03:06+00:00): Fantastic, thank you!
NieWnen (2023-04-02 07:39:13+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158570416#map=19/52.03553/20.89186
Czy tutaj jest przepust?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-04-04 12:38:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134494165 where the changeset comment is: Reverting vandalism - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7021
user_18821699 (2023-03-31 08:31:42+00:00): you're a Russian chauvinist! why did you delete the English name?

in Tatarstan, the English name is also used. see the city of Kazan, use your brain at least sometimes
Владимир К (2023-03-31 13:37:18+00:00): ОСМ - коммьюнитицентрический проект. Пожалуйста, пишите на языке местного сообщества, на русском.
tekim (2024-07-24 16:27:31+00:00): Whether or not these are "official" or not, the evidence on the ground clearly indicates that they are trails.  In OSM we map ground truth, not what some government agency wishes were true.
Hufkratzer (2023-04-01 22:50:16+00:00): Hi,
I think, version #1 of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158569480/history was better than version #2; this area isn't large enough for horse_racing. And the tag leisure=horse_riding is not for stables, indoor arenas, etc. but for the whole facility, so I think it is misplaced on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158569477 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158569478
Compare
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dhorse_riding
Warin61 (2023-10-12 00:55:14+00:00): Reverted - copyright. 

You are attracting attention due to copyright issues.
felipeeugenio (2023-03-31 19:38:33+00:00): Hola. Los silos son man_made=silo

si es que son silos, obviamente.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134324437
wkdgs (2023-03-31 12:51:11+00:00): Hi,

willkommen bei OpenStreetMap. Ich schreibe dir, weil du angegeben hast, dass jemand nochmal über deine Änderungen drüber schauen soll.

Für mich sieht das alles passend aus. Nur eine Sache: Der Tag "highway=footway" ist für explizit beschilderte Fußwege gedacht. Das aktuelle Tagging entspricht diesem Schild:
https://osmtools.de/traffic_signs/?signs=239,1022-10

Ist das korrekt? Falls hier Radfahrer und Fußgänger eher gleichberechtigt sind, wäre ein "highway=path" besser.

Gruß
wkdgs
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134324692
woylon (2023-04-02 13:12:36+00:00): Hallo wkdgs,

vielen Dank für deine schnelle Rückmeldung!

Ja, ich lasse lieber nochmal wen hier drauf schauen, bevor ich "Murks" mache - da das Bearbeiten von Karten doch recht neu für mich ist. :-D

Ich fahre die Tage mal vorbei und schaue, welches Schild da angebracht ist. Das ist doch die beste Variante, oder?
woylon (2023-04-16 13:19:02+00:00): Bei diesem Fußgängerweg ist KEIN Schild angebracht. Was bietet sich in diesem Fall dann am ehesten als Markierung?
user_3022894 (2023-04-17 14:02:43+00:00): Hi,

ich würde in solch einem Fall "highway=path" vorschlagen, wie wkdgs' Vorschlag war.

Zusätzlich könnte man traffic_sign=no als Tag an dem Weg anbringen. Dieses Tag zeigt an, dass der Weg mit keinem Verkehrszeichen beschildert ist.

Viele Grüße
Lukas
aka Elefant
gscholz (2023-04-01 08:26:52+00:00): Hi alisari55,
your recent edit have left behind a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding not connected roads:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=34.98375&lat=41.73110&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, these ways cannot be used by routing software. Can you please fix this? Can you also pleas think about how to avoid this kind a error as this seem to be systematical for your activities?
Kind regards
Guido
Supaplex (2023-03-31 04:27:28+00:00): 已經有了
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1012777014
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134325028
gscholz (2023-04-01 08:26:49+00:00): Hi alisari55,
your recent edit have left behind a lot of errors in the OSM database regarding not connected roads:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=34.98375&lat=41.73110&zoom=10&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

As you may know, these ways cannot be used by routing software. Can you please fix this? Can you also pleas think about how to avoid this kind a error as this seem to be systematical for your activities?
Kind regards
Guido
BCNorwich (2023-04-01 07:58:33+00:00): I've removed your fictional motorway.
pza (2023-04-02 02:47:38+00:00): Had to revert this in 134400002 as City of Sydney Open data isn't a valid source (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources)
emersonveenstra (2023-03-31 10:59:14+00:00): Hi,

You double-tagged https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10774595636 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158589307, can you please remove the tags from the node?
zvenzzon (2023-03-31 11:23:47+00:00): Hej, nu har byggnadstaggen kommit in på skolområdet (igen). Se changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/134320744

Kan du ändra tillbaka så att skolområdet inte har building-tag? 

mvh
pza (2023-04-02 02:09:26+00:00): I see you have listed the City of Sydney Open data as your source.  To the best of my knowledge they haven't yet signed a waiver, so we can't use this data. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Data_Sources
pza (2023-04-02 02:40:45+00:00): I reverted this changeset in 134399936.
Tjuro (2023-03-31 06:58:38+00:00): Hello NastassiaKalesnikava,

How do you differentiate between moped=no and moded=yes on oneways? Since it may vary from way to way if mopeds are allowed. Do your local users specify this, or do you just add moped=yes to everything?

Greets Tjuro
NastassiaKalesnikava (2023-03-31 08:16:38+00:00): Hello! 
Our customer indicates a one-way road and attaches pictures with signs. In this case, there was no picture. However, often one-way traffic does not apply to mopeds. Do you have any information about this section of the road that the 'oneway:moped=no' tag should be removed here? If so, I can fix the tagging for the road.
Tjuro (2023-03-31 08:29:09+00:00): Hello NastassiaKalesnikava,

In that case its fine, however if you do not know for sure what the moped status is I recommend just not adding it. while for bicycles/mofa it can be assumes oneway does not apply, I don’t think that it can be assumed for mopeds. I would say at least 10% of the oneways are also oneway for mopeds.

Greetings Tjuro,
NastassiaKalesnikava (2023-03-31 08:58:38+00:00): Thanks for the detailed information, it will help in future edits.
Thank you!
BaianaFilo (2023-03-31 16:07:56+00:00): oi, boa tarde, Sou nova no Open Street Maps mais a via dentro do posto é privada para abastecimento de carros e não pertence a rua publica ! O correto não é Via de Serviço ?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134328715
BaianaFilo (2023-03-31 16:08:58+00:00): Hi, good afternoon, I'm new to Open Street Maps, but the lane inside the station is private for car refueling and does not belong to a public street! Isn't the correct one Service Route?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134328715
BaianaFilo (2023-03-31 16:14:02+00:00): Olá novamente! Corrigi acreditando no que está correto! / Hello again! Correct by believing what is correct!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134328715
wille (2023-03-31 17:27:05+00:00): Your edit is correct, AusangateMountain. Thanks for the fix.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134328715
AusangateMountain (2023-04-03 05:00:52+00:00): Hello BaianaFilo, thank you for reaching out. From the view from ground level https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=927965214647276 we see a painted median that splits the secondary way entering the roundabout. Wille has made the change here and to the traffic calming island (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158770979) which is accurate to the ground truth. Have a good day. 

tradução automática:

Olá BaianaFilo, obrigado por entrar em contato. Da vista do nível do solo https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=927965214647276 vemos uma mediana pintada que divide a via secundária entrando na rotatória. Wille fez a mudança aqui e na ilha de moderação de tráfego (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1158770979), que é preciso para a verdade absoluta. Tenha um bom dia.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-31 06:40:15+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/457738246

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mavl (2023-04-25 09:10:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:06:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:09:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
mavl (2023-04-25 09:05:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-05-24 15:58:01+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.
Here You Digitized a Road But In Your Changest comment, you mentioned an Updated Building.
A changing comment is very important for Good data Quality improvement.
You can follow these changes comment: "Added Building, Place Name, District Name, Sri Lanka and Suitable Hashtag.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134329937
mavl (2023-04-25 09:08:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 135307362, 135331978, 135327734, 135318197, 135323168 where the changeset comment is: Hi all. The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: valid data are deleted - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7056].
scai (2023-04-20 09:52:02+00:00): Bei highway=residential ist kein zusätzliches motor_vehicle=yes notwendig. Warum wurde das hier ergänzt?
scai (2023-04-20 09:51:27+00:00): Bei highway=residential ist kein zusätzliches motor_vehicle=yes notwendig. Warum wurde das hier ergänzt?
scai (2023-04-20 09:50:42+00:00): highway=service + motor_vehicle=yes? Welche konkrete Beschilderung vor Ort führt denn zu dieser Kombination?