piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-16 22:42:22+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13148168433

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
custodiankeyy (2025-09-17 19:57:43+00:00): Organic Maps haritalarını aydan aya güncelliyor. 5 gün önce bu marketleri zaten eklediniz.
Kiro1957 (2025-09-17 20:01:57+00:00): Kusura bakmayın bunu bilmiyordum uyardığınız için teşekkür ederim
custodiankeyy (2025-09-17 20:05:02+00:00): Rica ederim. Mutlu haritalandırmalar!
custodiankeyy (2025-09-17 19:56:02+00:00): Please don't use "Ev" for indicating houses. Names should be the actual, on-the-ground names of features.

You can also use local knowledge as a source instead of saying 'trust me;)'

Edited:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172083272
AndreaDp271 (2025-09-16 21:13:47+00:00): missing addr:street addr:postcode
Legend 🌟 (2025-09-16 21:43:57+00:00): Nice
felipeeugenio (2025-09-16 22:55:38+00:00): Hola Gustavo. Por favor cuando borres puntos de interés que tengan su dirección, borra solo lo que desapareció, no las direcciones. Estas siguen existiendo y se pierden si haces eso.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172035925
felipeeugenio (2025-09-16 23:43:12+00:00): recuperada
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172035925
GustavoE (2025-09-17 00:25:44+00:00): Hola, a que nodo haces referencia?
felipeeugenio (2025-09-17 12:07:24+00:00): Hola.
A un restaurant peruano (Huscarán) y a un estacionamiento en Pérez valenzuela.
repuse las direcciones.

saludos
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-16 22:12:26+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13148273559

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-16 22:32:20+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13148273559

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-16 22:42:13+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13148273559

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
aTarom (2025-09-17 07:19:34+00:00): Hola, el tag
ref:cat=Cáceres
es quizás 
addr:city=Cáceres
ó
addr:province=Cáceres
Saludos
NeisBot (2025-09-16 22:36:41+00:00): Hi gfhghfg, 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: "Added commercial landuse and modified surrounding ways with some node adjustments"
eggie (2025-09-17 05:57:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  Je hebt hier een administratieve grens een naam gegeven. 
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=172037048
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-17 06:15:06+00:00): Ahh.. de grens weer hersteld zie ik. 

Je zou eens een terugmelding kunnen doen dat de straatnamen eens goed uitgezocht 'moeten' worden, want sommige van je benoemde wegen hebben niet die naam en het aanliggende adres klopt dan ook niet. 
Boomhoorn/ Holtweg.
Ben in het verleden ook wel vreemde naamswisselingen hier tegengekomen. 
Ben bij het Kadaster niet verder gekomen.
https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=244362.01&geometry.y=528416.91&zoomlevel=11.52
Bv adres Tilweg 74 / 't Hooge Loo 1  Gees op zelfde pand?


MVG
eggie
PimV (2025-09-17 09:09:54+00:00): Ik weet niet wat je bedoelt met "een terugmelding doen".Ik ben afgegaan op de straatnaambordjes (voor zover aanwezig) en Google maps. Het lijkt mij vreemd dat de Holtweg daar een soort zijstuk zou hebben en dan verder gaan als Boomhoorn. Mogelijk dat die vakantiewoningen aan de zuidkant het adres Holtweg hebben, maar dat komt dan omdat ze daar aan de westkant aanliggen.
eggie (2025-09-17 09:40:29+00:00): Google Mapse kun (lees mag) je niet als bron gebruiken. Vaak klopt google ook niet. 
Straatnaam borden zijn natuurlijk oke.
In de BGT/Kadaster hebben sommige verbindende stukken geen naam.
De BGT/Kadaster gebruiken wij wel als bron.
Wanneer je ergens niet uitkomt kun je dan om opheldering vragen. Dan zoekt de bronhouder het uit.
Wanneer je zeker bent van je zaak hoeft dat natuurlijk niet. 

https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=243078.95&geometry.y=528423.65&zoomlevel=9.14
flohoff (2026-01-05 09:43:41+00:00): Auch hier - wieder wild irgendwelche objekte mit "Node exzessen" versorgt und wild miteinander verklebt - *gnarf*

Ich repariere das mal.

https://tmp.zz.de/20260105-MortuaryEnvy/Screenshot_from_2026-01-05_10-42-42.png
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-12 06:54:01+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for Dogtopia POI in changeset 184001545

https://osm.org/changeset/184001545
zuzak (2025-09-18 18:34:05+00:00): Thanks for this!
LSWLDN (2025-09-18 19:17:13+00:00): Hi cryptus,

I believe you are mistaken with the utilisation of this site. The "SKMA Hapkido & Kummooyeh New Malden" dojang is located in the ground floor of Watteville house rather than occupying the rebuilt pub building.

The rebuilt pub building does not currently have a new tenant, so simply sits empty.

Google maps mistakenly places the dojang within the rebuilt pub but this is not correct. Is it possible you have relied on google maps here? 

Please revert the location of the dojang and the shaping of the empty rebuilt pub.

Please note, google maps data is not licensed for usage in Openstreetmap.

Kind regards,
LSWLDN
LSWLDN (2025-10-06 18:56:14+00:00): I have reverted this changeset to restore the correct location for SKMA Hapkido & Kummooyeh, and to restore the correct geometry for the empty rebuilt (formerly the Fountain) pub.

Please see further changesets in the comments, to retain the modifications made to the Watchman pub, and to 20 Fairfield South which were correct.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172929828
LSWLDN (2025-10-06 19:05:01+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172929986#map=19/51.398898/-0.255051

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172930128#map=19/51.407518/-0.297687
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 03:44:54+00:00): Hi,

I previously added this preserve following a survey. I did a GPS recording (though I didn't upload it), but then supplemented this by using the NYS Orthos color IR imagery which gave a fairly good view of the trails here. I should have better indicated that I used imagery to get the path geometry here, but I would just ask that you try to make sure that the previous geometry is inaccurate before fitting paths to your GPS recordings. Such recordings are subject to drift and other inaccuracies, so it is best to combine it with other sources when possible.

In this case, I restored much of the old geometry, since your changeset moved paths off of alignment. However, I incorporated changes using your GPS track, which did show that I had the path wrong in a couple places. I will resurvey sometime soon to double check things.

The imagery I used here is actually the 2021 version of the color IR imagery, since for whatever reason the newer versions don't give as good of a view of the paths. If you want to see this in iD, you can paste this link into the box that comes up when you click "Custom" under the background options: https://orthos.its.ny.gov/arcgis/services/wms/Latest_cir/MapServer/WmsServer?FORMAT=image/jpeg&VERSION=1.1.1&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=0&STYLES=&SRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 03:48:45+00:00): I see now that you have reverted these changes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172939770 . Please take a look at what I've said here to understand why I made those changes.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 05:20:12+00:00): Actually I see that you didn't revert, you just removed the attribution I added. I added it back since the current geometry does indeed come from both the aerial imagery and the GPS tracks.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 11:42:12+00:00): I don't think it is a good idea to rely on satellite view too heavily, since conditions on the ground can change, and data collected in the field should be considered the most reliable. As an example, the condition of the trails here have changed significantly since 2021. My GPS track was from several weeks ago, and what I would consider recent. 

I'm only adding greater level of details to the trails that I hike. If there is a point every 300 or so feet it doesn't accurately represent the trail, but if there is a point every 40 or so feet, it will provide a more accurate representation of the trail on the ground.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 11:47:56+00:00): Another example, the path near Avalon that you modified, satellite view showed it as being in the parking lot. While my GPS track showed it accurate and as being just south of the edge of the parking lot. Please try to collect first-hand field data before making any significant edits to my work. 

I have no problem if you want to field check my data by going there and recording a track and comparing it to mine...etc. However major edits without actually visiting the park in person is not really a good idea.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 20:27:57+00:00): I am not relying on the imagery too heavily. I did not map these trails until I did a GPS trace several months ago, so that I could be more confident in what I was seeing on imagery.

I compared the imagery from 2021 and 2024, and where the trails are clearly visible on both, there appears to be essentially no change to their alignment. If you look at a road that has many traces, it appears that the NYS imagery is well aligned, with the median track following the road well. Therefore, it is likely that the GPS trace here is not entirely accurate, especially since the elevation changes and tree cover in this preserve will cause distortions in the readings.

In this case, I believe the previous detail in almost all places was sufficient. There were a couple places where I benefited from your GPS track in addition to mine, and I incorporated those changes. But please, overfitting to GPS when there was already a good level of detail does not improve the data quality.

Also, I did not change the geometry of the path by Avalon. I only split the way and modified the part that was in the woods. The part that went on the grass, that you said went through the parking lot, was added by you and not touched by anyone else.

I do appreciate the work that you are doing, as you have done quite a few good GPS traces and added trails that weren't there at all before. But I also put quite a bit of effort into this park to make sure things were accurate, and I don't want that to go to waste.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 21:02:40+00:00): I looked at the history and saw that you added some of those features roughly 6 months ago. Don't worry, the data you originally had helped a lot. I was only improving on it since several trails, trail names, bridges, parking lots, trail  kiosk were missing and I've added those.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 21:18:30+00:00): I appreciate that, but still, I ask that you not overfit trails to GPS for the reasoning I provided above. GPS helps a lot, but aerial imagery is going to give better resolution. Looking around nearby GPS traces on roads, you can find examples of drift and distortion, and that is only going to be more prevalent with the conditions in hiking areas. If we are confident that the trail alignment has changed since imagery was taken, then I would disregard that imagery, but I don't think that's the case here.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 21:34:42+00:00): But aerial images should not be the sole factor for hiking trails. If its a road, or rail trail or paved surface that is easily visible, that I could understand. The trails here don't look like they are maintained, and particularly in the southern part of the park there are areas that I think might have changed slightly. 

I am confident with the reliability of my GPS data. I often Avenza with maps that have been professionally made, and in many cases my tracks line up perfectly.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 22:08:52+00:00): Again, I did not make aerial imagery the sole factor. If there is a significant deviation between the GPS track and the imagery, more than what is typical for normal GPS inaccuracy, then I will investigate and not blindly follow the imagery.

Even within the same GPS track that you made here, there is as much as a 20ft difference between the two passes you made over some trails. All GPS receivers are affected by this kind of inaccuracy, it is just something that is inherent to GPS.

Yes, the southern part of this park is less maintained and trail visibility is not as good. But for the rest of it, there is inarguably a skew between the actual location of the path and your GPS track. That is expected, as no GPS data is perfect. It is one thing to use GPS tracks without much alteration when that is the only data source available, but I am looking directly at the trails which haven't changed between 2021 and 2024, and the GPS track weaves in and out of alignment with them.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 22:44:00+00:00): Phones often rely on a combination of GPS and cell phone tower signal, and their accuracy is improving each year. I can guarantee you that if I went there with a 2021 model phone and took the tracks, there would be greater error compared to a newer model.

That is how science works. You try to replicate data, and the more data you have, the more accurate your results. In some spots where I had to backtrack and there were minor deviations, I took the average of the two lines. 

I don't see no other GPS Traces, so there is no other data to compare it to. 

And again, you need boots on the ground. 5 years ago it might have been a 6 foot wide gravel path, but if vegetation starts to grow in you will start to have some weaving. I don't know the specific sections you are talking about.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 22:56:20+00:00): I have uploaded my GPS trace. The app I was using didn't record as many points as yours, but with what is there, you can see that there is some disagreement between the two traces. The geometry I had in previously lines up better in the median between both traces than what you updated it to.

If you would like to see what I'm looking at, I would be happy to provide screenshots showing the paths in 2021 vs 2024, and how the traces don't exactly line up with them.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 23:00:08+00:00): Can you send a link to the Trace? And was it collected 6 months ago, or 4 years ago?
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 23:03:08+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/ZLima12/traces/12083672

It was collected 6 months ago. It would be best to look at the trace in your editor so you could see it alongside your trace and the existing data.
matthewfecica (2025-10-07 23:17:02+00:00): Thanks. There are big jumps, which don't capture the curves in the trail. In the southern area, near the landmark tree, I know that part of your trace is definitely wrong, there is a wooden split rail fence around the tree, and the trail curves around it. My track captured this sort of well.
ZLima12 (2025-10-07 23:26:01+00:00): Yes, your track certainly has more points and better represents the layout of the trail. I was mainly trying to show that our two devices got noticeably different readings, for example on the northernmost part of the Hudson Loop. The median between all passes, yours and mine, is pretty close to the path on imagery, so I do think the imagery is accurate here.

The southern part of my track looks weird because I took a few paces onto the center east-west path from each side of it, just so that it would be captured on the trace so I'd know to add it. Yours is more accurate particularly in this area, but this is a good example of how GPS can have drift, since the path that is shown on my trace isn't the exact path that I took. It averaged out some of my movement.

I noticed that you added that tree, so when I made my modifications to restore some of the previous geometry, I kept that section since you clearly had knowledge that I missed.
ZLima12 (2025-10-09 02:27:30+00:00): Since the previous geometry which drew from aerial imagery better follows the median of the two traces, I would like to restore it. What do you think?
Glassman (2025-09-19 02:49:09+00:00): It appears ou accidentially dragged a node of the woods which as been fixed.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172038063
ARandomThumbtack_Import (2025-09-17 00:32:07+00:00): One more point to add in here: This changeset was supposed to be uploaded by the account I am commenting from as per the Guidelines. I just forgot that JOSM was already signed in to my main account, so sorry about that!
kubahahaha (2026-04-04 07:55:35+00:00): Cześć. Pamiętasz może czy ścieżka która tu dodałeś prowadzi do tego cmentarza?
Starałem się namierzyć jego lokalizację i nie jestem na 100% pewien czy to dobre miejsce

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1495917098
Ludrol (2026-04-04 08:15:33+00:00): Tak, był tam cmentarz. Może kilka metrów od scieżki.
NeisBot (2025-09-17 00:57:40+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
NeisRevert (2025-09-26 13:53:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/172487261
where the changeset comment is: 
Remove unclear map edits
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-09-17 11:37:06+00:00): Why did you create another node for the Nellis Air Force Base CDP? There are now two landuse objects that refer to the base in OSM: The military base itself and the complex containing it.
Joseph R P (2025-09-17 18:05:17+00:00): The CDP is a separate, ungoverned entity from the air force base that is only a populated area of a base rather than the entirety of it.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-09-17 23:21:17+00:00): Okay. Well, what parts of the Nellis AFB should actually be classified as Nellis Air Force Base? The base itself or the complex around it? It turns out that the latter is much larger than what is currently shown.
Joseph R P (2025-09-18 20:21:48+00:00): Just like city limits, all land claimed by the base is officially part of and should be tagged as part of the base even if undeveloped, just like how Fort Bragg, Quantico, and A. P. Hill are mapped. Note, annexes like the Nellis Small Arms Range may be better mapped separate from the base proper.
Gregory Peony (2025-09-18 03:11:42+00:00): Hi, the footprint you mapped here represents a building and seems fairly well sized, but it should have been squared and contains an excess node. Use backspace to undo the placement of nodes.

After tracing and tagging features which are likely square or round, please remember to square their corners (q), or circularise them (o), because it is almost impossible and time consuming to draw shapes so percisely by hand. Buildings with metal or pitched roofs tend to have square corners; round buildings are identifiable by the distinctive cresent shaped shadow they cast. Unless the building is clearly a different shape then it's best to assume that it should be rounded or its corners should be squared. In the iD Editor, you can right click for access to editing functions. Since roofs tend to overhang walls trace the initial shape slightly smaller to allow a buffer for any change in size that may occur. In JOSM use the [buildingstools plugin](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Plugins/BuildingsTools). In ID you must draw the shape accurately enough else shapes will not completely square. This [video about squaring features in ID](https://youtu.be/Xs5wX592E1o) has more information and a demo.

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/
ljc_jlyb (2025-10-09 12:16:20+00:00): do not invent names for unnamed features
BigKev97 (2025-10-10 15:06:38+00:00): South Korea uses the junction names to describe the located area. ¿Why can't North Korea do the same?
GOwin (2025-09-17 03:16:15+00:00): Re: changeset comment.
Ginagamit 'to para ilarawan ang mga pagbabagong ginawa mo sa mapa.

Kung may tanong ka, o interesado kang makihalubilo sa mga kasamang nag-aambag sa OSM, dito sa Pilipinas, tignan mo dito ang listahan https://osm.org/wiki/PH.
GOwin (2025-09-17 02:28:40+00:00): Good work! Hindi naman mahirap diba?

Kung may pangalan ang mga kalsada rito, puede mo rin silang i-dagdag.

Sana ay magpatuloy kayo sa pagma-mapa.
mjes15 (2025-09-17 02:59:17+00:00): yes sir, will do. first time ko. always relying sa osm dahil sa qgis at cad works, then this happen walang buildings/houses dito sa site ko ngayon. salamat po
GOwin (2025-09-17 03:03:49+00:00): Glad to hear that you find OpenStreetMap useful for your GIS requirements. Do you mind sharing how you intend to use the dataset, and whether you're from a local government unit, or from the private sector?
mjes15 (2025-09-17 03:26:58+00:00): Private sector sir, telecom company. I used it for planning and LLD design in autocad like a vicinity map. When will updates show up in the system sir?
GOwin (2025-09-17 03:35:13+00:00): Data is saved to OpenStreetMap in real-time.

If you're asking about the map renderers, they should be available in a few minutes (or hours), depending on what type of feature you're editing.

Do a force-refresh of your browser, (Ctrl+Shift+R in Firefox) to dispose the cached map version and display new data from OSM.
GOwin (2025-09-17 03:37:16+00:00): Siya nga pala, dito sa Pilipinas gagawin ang Global State of the Map, next month, 1-3 October. 

Makadalo ka sana:

Details here: https://2025.stateofthemap.org.
sosquqer (2025-12-17 11:08:32+00:00): Hi! You didn't add name:en here
Taya_S (2025-09-17 06:39:42+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18739
tomhukins (2025-09-21 17:26:50+00:00): Thank you for your helpful work improving the map.

I notice you have tagged both the ways in this change as "sidewalk:both:surface=traffic_island" which seems odd as "traffic_island" seems like a confusing value for a "surface" to me.

Is this a mistake or does the value have some meaning I haven't worked out?
bmrushing (2025-09-21 17:52:37+00:00): Hi, i actually had accidentally removed these tags and so I added them back but i did not add them originally and im not sure what they mean
tomhukins (2025-09-21 17:59:41+00:00): Thank you, I hadn't noticed that.  I'll ask the mapper who originally added them.