piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Glassman (2025-09-20 23:40:10+00:00): It appears you acidentially dragged a node which I corrected. 

Also, looking at Bing street side imagery, I don't see anything marking the path as no trespassing. A better tag might be ownership=private. Note we only mark ways as private if they are posted as such. Can you review this edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172186515
wandrer32 (2025-09-21 00:28:00+00:00): Thank you! I've attempted to adjust these as you suggested.
Glassman (2025-09-21 01:14:40+00:00): Perfect!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172186515
user_5359 (2025-09-20 09:28:57+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for your addition!

You only added the name of a shop to the building, but did not note that there is also a shop there. If you do not know the spelling of the tag, please look it up in the wiki https://wiki.osm.org.
NeisBot (2025-09-20 01:18:40+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-09-27 07:08:27+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/172195155
user_5359 (2025-09-20 09:32:06+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for your addition!
You mention a church in your comment, but you didn't add any specific information about the church.
foreigner037 (2025-09-22 19:28:43+00:00): Hi,

can you keep the changeset smaller?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Gregory Peony (2025-09-20 08:00:20+00:00): I think you misinterpreted the imagery a little here and mapped a needlessly complex footprint. I flagged the one I'm refering to.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172188412
Ricken Lazlo Hale (2025-09-20 08:09:34+00:00): Yeah, I agonized over that one.  Thanks for the correction.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172188412
Braadpan (2025-09-20 08:33:25+00:00): Dag topoSheep,

Is er misschien iets misgegaan bij het maken van deze wijzigingenset? Voor zover ik kan zien is er geen brievenbus verwijderd, maar is wel het dak van de Gulf een stukje verplaatst. Zie https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=172188444 voor een overzicht van de wijzigingen in je wijzigingenset. Welke brievenbus wilde je precies verwijderen?

Met vriendelijke groet,
Braadpan
topoSheep (2025-09-21 09:39:55+00:00): Beste Braadpan,

denk inderdaad dat er niets mis is gegaan. Het dak mag gewoon terug op zijn plek gezet worden.
vriendelijke groeten
TopoSheep
topoSheep (2025-09-21 09:40:24+00:00): Beste Braadpan,

denk inderdaad dat er niets mis is gegaan. Het dak mag gewoon terug op zijn plek gezet worden.
vriendelijke groeten
TopoSheep
Braadpan (2025-09-21 13:53:20+00:00): Het dak staat weer op z'n plek!
MVG Braadpan
NeisBot (2025-09-20 04:54:40+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains 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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-09-27 07:08:07+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element https://osm.org/changeset/172194162
user_8655426 (2025-09-21 02:18:29+00:00): Hello,
This changeset appears to be an import without community approval. (undiscussed imports)
Also, you didn't check for existing survey points in Japan. Multiple survey points have been added in the exact same location.
I will revert your changesets. (#172189184, #172189514)

Please read the import guidelines.
Import/Guidelines
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines

Abuse
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abuse
user_22337345 (2025-09-21 10:54:17+00:00): yep
旧加卷 (2025-09-20 07:44:52+00:00): This automated edit has been implemented twice. 6 nodes with coordinates 0, 0 were added.
user_8655426 (2025-09-21 09:21:07+00:00): I reverted this changeset and Changeset:172189184. (undiscussed imports) 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172234148
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172234073

Abuse
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abuse
HellMap (2025-09-20 09:12:08+00:00): Hi, when drawing ways, make sure to connect them to other ways, otherwise they are not going to route. You drew https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1431424569 just connected to grass on both ends. I fixed it here.
evdence (2025-09-20 17:12:46+00:00): Thank you
mariotomo (2025-09-22 05:43:00+00:00): Hola y bienvenido a OSM. Por favor acuérdate de NUNCA introducir información sobre las personas. 

A parte eso, gracias por intentar mejorar el mapa OSM. Si tienes información local, observación directa, pide ayuda en encontrar las etiquetas más adecuadas, sin meterlo todo en el "name". 
Una sugerencia: por favor agrega cambios en conjuntos de cambios, es más sencillo revisarlo.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-20 06:00:40+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13157518246

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Gregory Peony (2025-09-20 06:43:16+00:00): Welcome to OSM! You identified buildings in imagery, tagged them appropriately and generally interpreted the overall shapes of buildings well, however the imagery allows them to be mapped more accurately. Please watch the following two short videos about mapping with the ID editor;

https://youtu.be/Xs5wX592E1o 

https://youtu.be/ltn1VOiq5_0

Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
Sammyhawkrad (2025-09-20 09:08:50+00:00): Hi Paul, welcome to OSM. Thanks for adding the school. You should have written the name the same way you wrote it in the changeset comment. You also needed to add the amenity=school tag.
Syl (2025-09-20 08:58:42+00:00): Hello, there is more recent imagery available: ORTHO Express IGN 2025.
DataCleaner (2025-09-20 09:33:47+00:00): Ok, will keep that I mind in the future. Should not be an issue here as the buildings I add come from BD ORTHO 2025 06 15, and I just use the imagery to confirm before adding
Comino (2025-09-20 08:34:59+00:00): Hi,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Use the "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read: https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants#tagging-guidance
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Happy mapping,

Edwin Comino
https://btcmap.org/tagger/6794624
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-09-20 12:20:29+00:00): Hi! Please do not add turn:lanes that are not painted on the ground. You seem to add data for the router only.
sbedwal_Lyft (2025-09-23 05:55:12+00:00): My name is Santosh and I’m a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. 
Many thanks for letting me know about the issue on turn:lanes added.
According to our approach we refer to the green signboard closest to the junction. The green sign board is visible in below street-level imagery which is freshest: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XgpxsNTSnUf14Keejiium5ersr25xSAO/view. If there is a directional arrow indicating an exit, we use that to assign the turn as slight_right.
I will be grateful if you provide your thoughts on these edits.

Kindly let me know if you're unable to access the imagery link, and I will resend it.

Best regards,
Santosh
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2025-09-23 10:30:55+00:00): OK, thanks! However, please do not remove the placement=transition and change the number of lanes when there is a width:lanes:start/width:lanes:end also. Thanks!
lyctkel (2025-09-20 10:54:03+00:00): Hi emvee,
Hier is de situatie vergelijkbaar met die van wijzigingsset 172197385. Ook hier is een extra geldautomaat ingevoerd, terwijl er op geldmaat.nl maar één staat.
Ook de openingstijden van de geldautomaat kloppen niet, omdat de geldautomaat van buitenaf toegankelijk is en onafhankelijk van de openingstijden van de winkel kan worden gebruikt.
lyctkel (2025-09-20 14:15:15+00:00): Geldmaat.nl is echt verschrikkelijk. Ik heb het net ter plaatse gecontroleerd. De bestaande automaat en de nieuw automaat bestaan, hoewel geldmaat.nl alleen zegt dat er een automaat is ...
emvee (2025-09-21 10:49:17+00:00): Bedankt voor het checken!

Net zoals bij de vorige werken de links van de website tag wel.

Ik kan je het Geopackage aanbevelen, een stuk duidelijker dan de website ;-)
emvee (2025-09-21 11:07:20+00:00): De geopackage op het forum heeft deze nieuwe automaten nog niet, deze wel:

geldmaat_20250921.gpkg

https://e.pcloud.link/publink/show?code=XZiFVUZ3EO9p2lpmC4WvSnVXrvq0BdQtJQV
eggie (2025-09-20 07:53:05+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
TheSwavu (2025-09-21 22:53:22+00:00): Hi, 

There are a number of problems with this:

1. Seperate ways are only used for highways that are physically seperated.
2. You have highways crossing highways without a junction node.
3. The roundabouts have shortcuts ie: the entries and exits share common nodes.

I have reverted these changes. The better way of mapping the lanes you need to be in is by using https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:turn Limits on where you can change lanes can be mapped with https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:change

Happy mapping.
archie (2025-09-20 08:32:28+00:00): Hej, observera att husnumret har en egen tagg: addr:housenumber. Således skall numret inte finnas i som värde i taggen addr:street.
kimsteinbachreif (2025-09-20 12:48:19+00:00): Okej, tack för hjälpen. Första gången jag gjort detta så var osäker. Ska vara mer försiktig nästa gång!
habi (2026-05-04 07:56:16+00:00): Ciao Saltador1234

Ich bin wegen https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5277809 hier.
Du hast hier den Weg aus der OpenStreetMap-Datenbank entfernt, indem du den von `highway=path` zu `highway=no` gemacht hast.
Du schreibst, dass der Weg nur for forst- und landwirtschaftliche Nutzung zugelassen ist.
Da der Weg in der Realität existiert, ist es gut, diesen als `higway=path` zu erfassen und die entsprechenden `access`-Tags dazuzugeben, damit der private Charakter des Weges korrekt abgebildet ist.
Sie dazu auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Ich habe das in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182191521 erledigt.

Grüsse,
habi
habi (2026-05-04 08:00:03+00:00): Ciao Saltador1234
Genau wie in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172195042 angesprochen existieren die Wege hier in der Realität, können deshalb in OpenStreetMap erfasst werden und nicht wie von dir gelöscht werden.
Genauso wichtig ist es aber, durch die sog. access-Tags festzuhalten, dass diese in einem privaten Waldstück verlaufen, damit diese nicht 'einfach so' begangen werden.
Ich habe das versucht, in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182191521 zu erledigen, indem ich den Wegen hier ein `access=private` vergeben habe.
Gruss,
habi
habi (2026-05-04 08:22:37+00:00): Ciao
Hier hast du dem Weg ein `access=unknown` vergeben, was die sonstigen Zugangspräzisierungen von dir hier gerade wieder umkehrt.
Ich habe das in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182192428 entfernt, weil die Tags sonst gut zu passen scheinen.
Gruss,
habi
trigpoint (2025-11-22 20:05:05+00:00): This changeset has been fully reverted by the DWG in changeset https://openstreetmap.org/changeset/175003574
demon_box (2025-09-27 20:16:31+00:00): Ciao Marco, ho notato che in questo tuo changeset che hai chiamato "ref segnavia cai" (come tanti altri...) hai aggiunto su questa way
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1125788605
i tags
osmc:symbol=red:red:white_stripe:232:black
ref=232
ma è completamente errato perchè i sentieri CAI vanno mappati con una relazione che tra l'altro già esiste!
Se tu riguardi bene la way in questione
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1125788605
ti dice Parte di: 6 relazioni di cui la quarta è proprio "Sentiero di Tress - Passei - I Gnaf" cioè il sentiero 232.
Puoi studiare come è composta una relazione da qui
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3872818
Ora procedo a rimuovere i 2 tags errati che hai aggiunto ma ti prego NON procedere più in questo modo.
Se hai dubbi chiedimi pure.
La pagina wiki di riferimento per mappare i sentieri CAI è questa
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:CAI
per favore fermati, leggi bene prima di continuare!
Grazie e BuonMapping!
demon_box (2025-09-27 20:18:01+00:00): ...anche name=232 è sbagliatissimo!!
Per favore parliamone.
Grazie.
eggie (2025-09-20 09:52:40+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Voor de specicifatie zou je nog even hier kunnen kijken.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:healthcare
Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode. 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Gregory Peony (2025-09-20 09:22:43+00:00): Overall the footpritns you mapped here are very good. The Western footprint includes the shadow cast by the building; take care to exclude these from footprints. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172195928
Dilys (2025-09-20 09:14:19+00:00): Wrong changeset comment. Should read:
Ajout et Màj adresses, lieu-dits, routes, chemins, bâtiments, cours d'eau
Source: Cadastre Màj 2025;BD Topo;BANO;BAN: adresse;BD Carthage;Ortho Express IGN 2025;MNT LIDAR HD IGN
Gregory Peony (2025-09-20 09:52:05+00:00): The footprints you mapped here are quite accurate they just need a little adjustment to make them as accurate as the imagery allows. See how I mapped these footpritns in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172197252 Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172196114
foreigner037 (2025-10-28 10:37:02+00:00): Hi,

please avoid using planned and use proposed instead.

Also, this is not how you tag such features. Use proposed:amenity=parking instead.
NeisBot (2025-09-20 09:26:35+00:00): Hi Mclaw_08, 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:
- 134 building(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=172196739
NeisBot (2025-09-20 09:36:48+00:00): Hi caa843a4, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Updated residential area with apartments and added charging station and leisure facilities including pitches and tracks and modified road network with service and pedestrian ways and adjusted building geometries"
martien-176 (2025-09-20 18:27:07+00:00): Hi, you mapped a few buildings over a highway. 

Your editor will give a warning and propose to tag it as higher or lower.

However, you should instead opt to reposition the building or the highway. 

Thanks for your attention and please keep mapping.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172197248
Una tantum (2026-06-20 10:14:19+00:00): @Mattia94raggio forse andrebbero tolti anche 
dispensing=no	 e
healthcare=pharmacy
che ne pensi?
lyctkel (2025-09-20 10:49:21+00:00): Dubbele geldautomaat? 
Hoi emvee, ik zie net dat hier een nieuwe geldautomaat is toegevoegd (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13157753422). Dat is een beetje verwarrend, want er staat al een tijdje een geldautomaat vlak ernaast (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4141016751). Op Geldmaat.nl staat ook maar één geldautomaat vermeld.
lyctkel (2025-09-20 14:14:39+00:00): Geldmaat.nl is echt verschrikkelijk. Ik heb het net ter plaatse gecontroleerd. De bestaande automaat en de nieuw automaat bestaan, hoewel geldmaat.nl alleen zegt dat er een automaat is ...
emvee (2025-09-21 10:44:15+00:00): Ik haal de data via een API van de website maar de website is er inderdaad niet beter op geworden.

Als je beide links opent, die je op de nodes als "website" kan vinden dan laat geldmaat.nl wel beide geldautomaten zien.
lyctkel (2025-09-21 10:46:36+00:00): Ah, bedankt.
felipeeugenio (2025-09-20 11:50:07+00:00): Hello. That is no sand and that is no even close to the real shape of that terrain.
Please engage the community to receive trainning on how to map.
Your editions are being reviewd right now, They look like complete fillers of blank space.

regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172197393
aceman444 (2026-06-24 10:10:47+00:00): What did you fix here? You just removed the correct node that represented the whole volcano, which you now have completely destroyed.
Of course, the 'ele' tag did not represent the elevation at the node location, but that seems to be correct method for volcanos. It was also written on the node, if you cared to read.
olehz (2026-06-24 15:16:05+00:00): I don't remember. It was 9 months ago. In any case, I apologize. The elevation was probably given very incorrectly, plus there's a volcano in the middle of Slovakia. If it's some sort of mud geyser, then the question arises of how to distinguish mountain/volcanic peaks from this type of object.
aceman444 (2026-06-24 17:31:34+00:00): Yes, there is an extinct volcano in the middle of Slovakia (and not the only one). It's crater is at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1379027424 . It is no mud geyser. Maybe the node is missing some website or wikipedia link to show the volcano is real, just extinct. But the remnants shape the whole region here.

The elevation was given precisely, it represents the whole volcano, not just the elevation at the position of the node. Check other major volcanos in the world (Vesuvius, Fuji, Mt. Rainier), how they are done.
It is also written on the node in the 'note' tag, thus for other mappers like you. If you do not understand (and don't bother to copy it into a translator), you are not allowed to touch objects/tags you do not understand.

If you just wanted to fix (wrongly) the suspected wrong elevation you could just delete the 'ele' tag. There was absolutely no reason to delete the whole volcano.
olehz (2026-06-25 05:16:23+00:00): Your comment did make me think more deeply about how we tag ancient volcanoes in OSM, and I'd like to raise a broader question for discussion, if you're open to it.

As you pointed out, there are extinct volcanoes in Slovakia. However, many mountains in the Carpathians are also remnants of ancient volcanic activity. If we were to tag all of them as natural=volcano, we'd quickly run into a problem of definition – where do we draw the line? By that logic, we'd practically have to tag half of the Carpathians, and perhaps even the ancient Tethys Ocean as a geological feature. That seems excessive and goes against the principle of verifiability in OSM.

In this specific case, from satellite imagery, I could not see any clearly identifiable crater, caldera, or volcanic vent. The feature appears to be a heavily eroded remnant of an ancient volcano rather than a recognisable volcanic landform. OSM tagging guidelines are quite clear on this point: the tag natural=volcano should be used for an opening exposed on the earth's surface where volcanic material is emitted — i.e., a volcanic vent. The mapping instructions say to "Place [the node] as close to the centre of the main crater/caldera/vent as you can". If there is no visible crater, caldera, or vent, the tag is not appropriate.

I also checked the elevation using Copernicus DEM data about 9 months ago, as part of a broader effort to verify mountain peaks and volcanic features globally. In this case, the elevation value on the node did not match the DEM data at that location. The actual elevation at the exact point you re-created is 790–800 metres, and according to the terrain/elevation data, it's simply a slope of Mount Mičová. So I was right to delete this fake object. There is no objective reason to tag an ordinary hillside as a volcano.
olehz (2026-06-25 06:29:53+00:00): Regarding your new node (node/12769693915): this mountain already exists in OSM as Node: Poľana (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/26864346#map=15/48.62578/19.47687&layers=P) and is located approximately 4 km to the southeast of your point. Its correct elevation is 1,458 m, which is confirmed by terrain/elevation data.

Regarding the tags for this peak. As we've already discussed, according to OSM guidelines, the tag natural=volcano is intended for marking a visible volcanic vent (crater, volcanic plug, etc.). On satellite imagery, no crater or caldera is visible at the summit of Poľana – it's simply forest. Therefore, for this object, I propose the following tagging scheme:

natural=peak – as the main tag for the physical mountain peak.

volcano:status=extinct – to indicate it is a remnant of an extinct volcano.

volcano:type=stratovolcano – to specify the type.

This approach preserves all the scientific information while complying with OSM's verifiability rules, as it is based on a real physical object (the peak), rather than a hypothetical vent that no longer exists.

Regarding your new node – since it is neither a peak nor a visible volcanic vent, it holds no cartographic value in OSM. Therefore, it should be deleted, and all relevant information should be migrated to the existing peak Node: Poľana (26864346) with the updated tags as described above.

Thank you for your understanding and cooperation.
olehz (2026-06-25 06:37:21+00:00): Remember, OSM is a geographic database that reflects the current, verifiable state of features on the Earth's surface. It is not a repository for geological history or past political borders – we don't map the Tethys Ocean, the Ural or Scandinavian mountains at their Himalayan-like height from millions of years ago, or the historical borders of Czechoslovakia or Austria-Hungary. We map what exists today, on the ground, as it is visible and measurable. ;)