piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2023-03-20 13:00:18+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133750107
Frans S (2023-03-18 10:15:44+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,
Zoom in far enough to see already mapped buildings. If  you see a note in blue on the bottom line with "hidden objects" you need to zoom in.
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building.  You mapped buildings inclusive the shadow..

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133750176
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 14:00:21+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/9356197991
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9672671608
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10704327122

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
misiek_siersciuch (2023-03-16 16:17:37+00:00): Witam :) Dziękuję za informację- poprawiłem zgodnie z wytycznymi :) Teraz powinno być ok :)
Pozdrawiam
NorthCrab (2023-03-16 21:01:05+00:00): Jest git! Dzięki za szybką poprawkę :-)
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 10:39:14+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1117895696 - etymologia jest w innym tagu niż wikipedia....

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name:etymology:wikidata

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name:etymology:wikipedia
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-25 10:39:29+00:00): Poprawisz tu i gdzie indziej dodałeś?
Frans S (2023-03-18 10:09:50+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,
Be sure you zoom in far enough to see already mapped buildings. See bottom line on iDeditor

Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
Frans S (2023-03-19 09:34:38+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).
Often you can see a yard next to the buid


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133750815
Frans S (2023-03-19 09:35:02+00:00): Don't map/tag yard next to buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133750815
ouioui738 (2023-03-16 18:26:30+00:00): Ca a l’air ok
ouioui738 (2023-03-16 18:26:13+00:00): Ca a l’air ok
olsols (2024-03-17 10:58:59+00:00): nie wiem jak ta rzeczycka droga wygląda od południowej strony, ale jej północny koniec (przy kapliczce) jest zupełnie nieprzejezdny -drzewa na niej rosną a jego kontynuacja przez las to nieutwardzona droga której nie da się pokonać autem - wymagany traktor, albo rower gravelowy

daję znać że zmieniłem w sposób zgodny ze stanem faktycznym zastanym na miejscu
Frans S (2023-03-16 15:29:14+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,
Please improve your mapping skills.!!
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133751735
Frans S (2023-03-16 15:12:43+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,

Please pay attention to next points:
Focus on the objects which need to be mapped. No other objects, please. 
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133751826
SomeoneElse (2023-03-19 13:46:22+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1770168 is a horse trail.  I wonder if you had any idea how horses got across the gaps at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1770168#map=19/51.86521/-0.53875 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1770168#map=19/51.88200/-0.53792 ?
There's a gap in another route in the latter one too.
Best Regards,
Andy
Pikse (2024-12-19 12:01:07+00:00): Ma enne just vastupidi taastasin selle sõlme, sest lastekirjanduse keskusega seotud andmed käivad eeskätt ikka hoones praegu tegutseva asutuse kohta ja mitte hoone enda kohta.
tux67 (2023-03-17 08:52:44+00:00): Hallo Xoladone,
willkommen bei Openstreetmap und danke, dass du mithelfen möchtest, die Kartendaten zu verbessern.
Du weisst aber daß Streetcomplete für die Dolumentation vor Ort gedacht ist und nicht zum Armchairmapping? Du hast hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1148204977 lane_markings auf no gesetzt - das ist nicht korrekt und sowohl auf den NRW Dops und Mapillary Bildern zu sehen. Ich möchte dich dringend ersuchen, nur Dinge zu mappen, bei denen du 100% sicher bist.
Eine gute allgemeine Einführung zu OSM gibts z.B. hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Osm-tutorial.pdf

Solltest du Fragen haben oder Hilfe benötigen, dann kannst du dich gerne bei mir oder im Forum melden:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56

Für eine Qualitätssicherung, an der sich alle Mapper in der Gegend beteiligen können - bitte antworte - wenn notwendig - immer hier im Änderungssatz mit der Kommentarfunktion.

Viel Spaß beim Mappen wünscht
tux67
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133752068
Frans S (2023-03-16 14:56:03+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping here.
Please move buildings which are not accurate placed over the imagery to the correct place.
Don't connect nodes of buildings to each other.
See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link
Best regards
mini-me (2023-03-16 15:03:20+00:00): Уточнять дороги лучше в трезвом виде
JassKurn (2023-03-17 11:50:16+00:00): Hi quishpapa. You have affectively duplicated tags? The station had the tag proposed:railway=station, and you've added railway=station, plus a couple of other tags that apply it's functioning as a station. The station is still not open so I assume the "proposed" part should still be before several of the tags?
bxl-forever (2023-03-16 14:59:34+00:00): Hello,

Thanks for this.

I am surprised the municipality put it again as a one-way street because it had recently been made a two-way street again.

Just one thing: I warned you in a previous comment about making sure to add exemptions for cyclists (oneway:bicycle=no).  Now you do it, this is fine.  But please do *not* invent tags such as "oneway:foot=no".  Whereas cyclists follow rules for vehicles (because under Belgian law cyclists *are* vehicle drivers), pedestrians can go everywhere in both directions, so you don’t have to do anything special for pedestrian routing on one-way roads. ;-)
joren_VH (2023-03-16 15:10:23+00:00): Hello

I did not see it was recently changed. In that case, probably the change I just made was wrong and should be reverted. Should I just remove the tags, or is there another way? I am sorry for the trouble!

Thank you for the information on "oneway:foot=no", I will keep it in mind!
bxl-forever (2023-03-16 15:54:06+00:00): In OSM we only map what we have seen with our own eyes, as recently as possible.

The street was put one-way last summer when they implemented a new traffic scheme across the entire Cureghem area.  They reverted almost everything around October-November because residents were protesting heavily, and launched a new study.

If you have surveyed the place in the last weeks and if you are sure it was a one-way street here, then it is fine and we will keep it.  Where does your information come from?
joren_VH (2023-03-16 16:16:04+00:00): I looked at the 'Map Data' -> 'Photo Overlays'. Normally I check that the photo is more recent than the last change. This time, I somehow missed it. I am sorry for that.
bxl-forever (2023-03-18 16:27:31+00:00): A fellow mapper took photos this morning and confirmed the street hasn’t changed.
I’ll undo your edit.
joren_VH (2023-03-20 06:41:33+00:00): Thanks for keeping an eye on everything! I will be more careful next time.
eggie (2023-03-16 16:41:38+00:00): Dag Jurriaan...  
Zo'n block houdt al auto's tegen. motor_vehicle=yes hoeft niet op reguliere wegen.
Ligt er geen barrier=block ter hoogte van de parkeerplaats? Op het parkeerplaatsje heb ik motor_vehicle=no verwijderd anders kun je er nier parkeren.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-03-16 18:27:08+00:00): ...of highway=path surface=paved ?
rskedgell (2023-03-16 15:32:28+00:00): Please stop doing this, until you know what you are doing.

Reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133754509
BCNorwich (2023-03-17 08:48:50+00:00): Hi, I wonder if you are aware that your new road Way: Marteru - Achanta - Koderu Road (1154764575) is tagged as a 3-mile long bridge, And that for the greater part, it duplicates an existing highway. If a way needs amending it's OSM practice to amend the existing way.

I've removed the duplicated highway and long bridge.

Regards Bernard.
rskedgell (2023-03-16 15:36:32+00:00): Please stop it. There are NO missing trunk roads in London, none of our trunk roads are called "trunk road" and we're really quite keen on not having the our main railway lines turned into roads.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133751915
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-03-16 15:37:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 133754728 where the changeset comment is: Revert some new-user misunderstandings in London
adiatmad (2023-03-21 05:10:53+00:00): Hello, I just want to make sure that the tag oneway=-1 is correct or not? (https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/215398547)
outofoffice (2023-08-08 16:37:20+00:00): Hi Younes996! You removed the highway=track from the path, was this an accident?
silversurfer83 (2023-03-16 18:37:30+00:00): Hi
Wir kommen der Sache langsam näher :)
Wie ist es mit den anderen Informationen wie Telefonnummer und Öffnungszeiten? Sind das noch die der alten Besitzer?
Bei Fragen einfach melden
Grüße
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133754587
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-03-16 15:37:01+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 133748019, 133748091, 133753177, 133753490.
mavl (2023-03-24 10:29:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 134051515, 134045911, 134058112 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible source - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6981].
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-17 09:44:57+00:00): Is it intentional that you deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4560371193/history ? Edit description mentions brand update, not shop deletion
map per (2023-03-16 17:09:05+00:00): Hallo Khorek,

die Toilette (1) ist dort schon seit 7 Monaten eingezeichnet. Hab den doppelten POI wieder gelöscht. 
Bitte fürs Bearbeiten die Kartendaten regelmäßig aktuallisieren.

Viele Grüße
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1083802269
CurlingMan13 (2023-03-16 23:16:44+00:00): Do not add duplicate layers of water over a river to make a "water hazard" for your golfing game.  Parts or all of this edit have been reverted
DaveF (2023-04-09 11:09:34+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10739532805
Are you sure this is a bus station?
rskedgell (2023-10-24 06:59:09+00:00): @DaveF Of course it isn't. Removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143049541
eggie (2023-03-16 16:47:29+00:00): Hoi ttt. Gewoon aanpassen. Die BAG gegevens zeggen: start_date 1938.

Dat zal wel eens veranderd kunnen zijn zoals zoveel.
Schuurtjes komen en schuurtjes gaan. Niet alles staat in de BAG.
Soms mag je ook zonder bouwvergunning een schuurtje neerzetten. Dat komt niet in de BAG.
Groet
eggie
tttnnn24 (2023-03-16 17:54:25+00:00): Twee stuk verwijderd; ik heb die  aan de dijk, die wel (nog) in de BAG staat ook in OSM laten staan. Als ik er weer langs fiets kijk ik naar dat exemplaar
sheldonelectric (2023-04-10 17:19:07+00:00): Καλησπέρα, έχει αλλάξει η πινακίδα στο δρόμο;
Ρωτάω γιατί πχ η οδός Τζαβέλα δεν έγινε А. Γρηγορόπουλου, αλλά η οδός Θ. Γαζή έγινε Άλκη Καμπανού.

Σε κάθε περίπτωση, name είναι αυτό που βλέπουμε στη πινακίδα, κρατάμε ως old_name το προηγούμενο, και ως alt_name το εναλλακτικό.

Παραδείγματα https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/926297644
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/194608125
Layft Greater (2024-12-04 11:33:31+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1022767157

not a shop=mall, just landuse
SunnyIsland10 (2024-12-04 22:29:22+00:00): Greetings Layft Greater,

Thank you for reaching out. I am responding on behalf of SilverStorm03, who is no longer in our team. I agree that this polygon should not have the shop tag, since it for landuse, and not the building itself. Thanks for making that update!

Thanks,
SunnyIsland10
pbnoxious (2023-03-20 11:09:41+00:00): Hallo, gibt es einen Grund, dass du hier teilweise Gebäude von geschlossenen Ways in Relationen (aus mehreren Ways) geändert hast? (konkret das Erleinhofer Tor, vorher https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/350100218 jetzt https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15609729 und das benachbarte Gebäude https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/350100218 )

Sehe da auf den ersten Blick keinerlei nutzen und nur mehr Komplexizität durch das Tagging als Relationen: Wenn du nichts dagegen hast, würde ich das in ein paar Tagen wieder zurück in Ways überführen.

Grüße
pbnoxious
Bobbi123 (2023-03-20 13:55:27+00:00): Hallo, mir ist beim nochmaligen Hinsehen auch aufgefallen, dass da am Haus Nr. 16 und dem Erleinhofer Tor mehrere Linien drin sind, die eine Relation "outer" enthalten. Keine Ahnung, warum das jetzt so ist, denn so eine Aufteilung und das Eintragen der Relation war nicht meine Absicht.

Kann es sein, dass sowas automatisch entsteht, wenn man z.B. etwas an dem Punkt teilt, wo die Stadtmauer an das Gebäude anschließt? Das hatte ich nämlich gemacht und vielleicht ist es deshalb entstanden. 

Wie auch immer - ich habe den Fehler eben bereinigt indem ich die beiden Gebäude gelöscht und sie deckungsgleich nochmal neu erstellt habe. Jetzt passt es wieder.
Lyon-St-Clair (2023-04-20 16:20:22+00:00): NO, NO, NO, NO they scrap all trees here for Solar Panels (I go to this stadium every 2 weeks) ! Look at Esri imagery. Same for P5 parking.
Lyon-St-Clair (2023-04-20 16:33:48+00:00): I revert all your edits, and you can't have both trees and panels used as roof.
CasGroenigen (2023-04-20 19:14:18+00:00): Oh okay, thank you for reverting it!!
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-03-25 15:46:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134108394 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism and creating fake objects with nonsense names at random places.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-03-25 15:46:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134108394 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism and creating fake objects with nonsense names at random places.
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-03-25 15:46:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134108394 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism and creating fake objects with nonsense names at random places.
mavl (2023-03-24 10:30:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 134051515, 134045911, 134058112 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible source - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6981].
Frans S (2023-03-16 17:34:02+00:00): Hello.  Will you please stop marking tasks as complete mapped? You are a very new mapper. Just map what you can, and stop mapping after you finish a task. Let another, more experienced mapper decide if this task is complete mapped.
Best regards
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133757392
Frans S (2023-03-16 17:36:26+00:00): About highway tagging:

Please apply the rules described in this wiki
Most common taggings.
Rural areas : Unclassified,  track , path, service
Urban areas: unclassified, residential, path.
You tagged an unclassified road as a living road.
Read the wiki where these can be tagged. Not here anyhow.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways

Read also the remarks about tagging of tracks in the instructions.
Best regards and keep mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133757392
Frans S (2023-03-20 10:42:36+00:00): Please tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more.
Map more precisely.
Best regards
user_5359 (2023-03-27 07:36:35+00:00): Welcoem to OSM! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1154800531. What is the meaning of the tag Organization = Prude Ranch? Did you mean owner = Prude Ranch?
Tjuro (2023-03-19 15:03:23+00:00): please note that area=yes on landcover= is not nessesary. landcover is an area by default.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-16 17:20:23+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 miejscowości. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, zastosuj kombinację addr:city + addr:street. Jeśli nie, przekaż nazwę miejscowości w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10739673765
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10739673767
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/327773358
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1098063352

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
ouioui738 (2023-03-16 19:39:41+00:00): Est ce que le nom du magasin est bien la ptit kiiosque ? l'url du site web est orthographiée différement.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133758935
osmann (2023-03-16 21:45:44+00:00): Le nom du magasin est "Le P'tit Kiosque". C'est indiqué sur le site web et au magasin. J'ai ajouté l'apostrophe manquante.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133758935
ouioui738 (2023-03-16 22:29:50+00:00): Le champ name indique « La ptit Kiiosque » avec un La, et 2 i à kiiosque.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133758935
GeoGladbecker (2023-04-02 18:34:46+00:00): Hallo,
du hast hier die Esso Tankstelle gelöscht. 
Da du Europaweit POI löschst würde mich interessieren welche Quellen du dafür hast. OSM Notes sind es zumindest nicht.
Werden etwa alle Esso Tankstellen bald geschlossen!?

Die Esso-Tankstelle hier ist jedenfalls vollständig abgerissen inkl. der zahlreichen Gebäude und Wege.
liamrocker (2023-04-02 20:08:55+00:00): OK, das wusste ich nicht. Mir war nur bekannt, dass die Tankstelle so nicht mehr weiter geführt wird, nicht aber, dass alles abgerissen wurde. Danke für das Update und die Änderung!
Markus366 (2023-03-17 20:17:25+00:00): Hallo und Willkommen bei osm.



Ich habe den Eintrag im name in description verschoben, weil die Bezeichnung "Grenzstein Historisch" sicher kein Eigenname ist. Die Einträge liegen außerdem abseits von Wegen mitten im Wald. 

Wie hast du die Position der Grenzsteine ermittelt?

Markus
Miss Soapie (2023-03-17 21:05:15+00:00): Hey Markus, ja die Grenzsteine liegen im Wald. Ich habe sie direkt vor Ort ermittelt. 
War das falsch? Sonst lösche ich das alles wieder.