piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
confusedbuffalo (2025-09-19 07:29:52+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding and confirming these.
I was just looking at phone numbers and it seems you missed the area code (141) off some of the phone numbers here, for example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12140956381
I've fixed that and at least one other
SuborbitalPigeon (2025-09-19 11:34:46+00:00): Oh whoops, the perils of editing using a phone screen in the field I suppose. I'll be more careful in the future.
custodiankeyy (2025-08-26 17:36:09+00:00): Use description tag for descriptions, not the name tag.
custodiankeyy (2025-08-26 17:34:08+00:00): You created hotel twice. Please pay attention to your editings.
eggie (2025-08-26 19:54:30+00:00): Dag Abel..  Volgens mij zijn losloopgebieden iets anders dan een leisure=dog_park.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Ddog_park

This tag is not to be used for parks or other features where dogs are simply allowed - the dog=* tag should be used instead. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-08-26 20:05:15+00:00): Niet gesloten mp hersteld
eggie (2025-08-27 06:33:53+00:00): Die laatste opmerking was voor iemand anders bedoeld https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169262656#map=18/52.450574/4.859681
MVG
eggie
custodiankeyy (2025-08-26 17:42:52+00:00): I checked your changesets. You have made edits in various parts of Turkey within a short period of time. What is the source of these edits? Also, please read my comments on your previous changes.

I'm waiting for your reply.
Clem_24 (2025-08-26 17:51:50+00:00): Hello, 
Thank you. Sorry it is the first time I try to edit on OSM. I use Organic map and I didn't find the comment field. 

I've been traveling 1 month around turkey so I added some spots which helped me during my travel.

Regards
custodiankeyy (2025-08-26 18:09:08+00:00): Firstly, thank you so much for your edits in Turkey.

Secondly, when mapping next time please add names of supermarkets/places. Adding name helps us too much. 

For description tag, I think Organic Maps does not have option for adding description.

Kind regards
Clem_24 (2025-08-26 18:26:49+00:00): OK! I'll do that next time
Thanks for your work
ycomiti (2025-08-26 17:02:17+00:00): I removed the tracking query strings in the website URL.
citrula (2025-08-27 02:28:50+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contribution. You should add the camera at the approximate physical location, not the street intersection. Let me know if you need help moving it
evgenykatyshev (2025-08-27 16:06:21+00:00): Does this pitch actually has this name?
AndyB_66 (2025-08-30 08:41:52+00:00): Po raz kolejny proszę, byś stosował się do zasad nazywania zestawów zmian, obowiązujących w społeczności OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Good_changeset_comments
FMC-Henri (2025-09-23 18:45:55+00:00): Hi,

der Weg osm.org/way/1114997729 scheint mir kein Crossing zu sein. Auf der Strecke ist auf Mapillary keine Ampel zu sein. Nur davor / dahinter. Bitte einmal anschauen.
fmc_7 (2025-09-24 10:27:51+00:00): Hab's geändert.
LG
doug_sfba (2025-11-10 00:49:15+00:00): The boundary for Guadalupe National Park is not rendering in the Standard or the Tracestrack Topo map layers (Though it does render in the Map Tiler OMT layer).
quincylvania (2025-11-10 16:01:33+00:00): Thanks for the heads up, I've resolved the issue. I think it just needed a leisure=nature_reserve tag.
rempshaener (2025-08-26 19:59:44+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Ein Badeverbot hat erst einmal nichts mit der Existenz eines Strandes zu tun.
Das lässt sich über swimming=no (am Gewässer) abbilden.
Ich schlage daher vor, dass du deine Änderungen rückgängig machst.

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
AVerne (2025-08-26 20:21:42+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Klingt logisch. Da an den beiden Stellen aber auch kein Strand ist, habe ich die Änderung so gelassen.
rempshaener (2025-08-26 20:37:54+00:00): Okay, das ist natürlich was anderes.
Viele Grüße
gurglypipe (2025-08-26 18:07:29+00:00): Nice!
Dodko (2025-08-27 08:21:47+00:00): Ak presúvate adresu na iná dom treba ju komplet skopírovať so všetkými tagmi, aj s addr:conscriptionnumber, addr:place, ref:minvskaddress
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093332504/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093332496/history
i2004 (2025-08-26 19:37:50+00:00): se extendio la 102 o todavia no?
AgusQui (2025-08-26 21:11:08+00:00): Nop
bartgron (2025-08-26 18:32:52+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-09-17 22:19:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 172087218 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some vandalism in Cairo.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18743
totera (2025-08-27 09:13:15+00:00): It is correct for a church to have both tags amenity and building
tatsiana-krauchanka (2025-08-27 18:38:24+00:00): Hello! You're absolutely right that using both amenity=place_of_worship and building=church is the correct way to map a church.
I did notice, though, that in this case the building footprints are overlapping with building w1424141771. According to the Simple 3D Buildings guide (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings), buildings shouldn't cross each other. This can cause rendering issues and incorrect data.
Therefore it would be better to map these as separate building:part features, or even as just a POI if it's a small part of a larger structure.
Thanks for your work on the map!
AndyB_66 (2025-08-26 18:24:31+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
jmapb (2026-07-20 14:44:10+00:00): Hi, what's the source for these operator tags? I'm particularly concerned with the community gardens, which are generally operated by local gardening clubs-- I don't know of any that are operated by the city.
MapSpot (2026-07-21 14:01:55+00:00): This designation like the one for 6th Street and Avenue B Community Garden was based on NYC Parks signs at the northern and eastern entrances to the park, showing the name, opening hours, etc.

Can let me know if there's a more appropriate tag for this type of city oversight which may not entail directly operating the park.
jmapb (2026-07-23 03:31:20+00:00): These signs indicate membership in the GreenThumb program, not that the gardens are actually city-operated properties. They do resemble the signs the Parks Dept uses for its own properties so it's bound to cause some confusion.

Being in the GreenThumb network does not indicate city ownership or operation. For example, the Suffolk Street Garden (https://osm.org/way/207573814) is correctly tagged with operator=New York Restoration Project, but it's also a GreenThumb garden.

New York Restoration Project operates several gardens around the city, but most are run by local neighborhood gardening clubs. I can't promise there are *zero* city-operated community gardens (haven't surveyed them all!) but it shouldn't be presumed from signs featuring the Parks Dept logo.

If we want a tag that indicates membership in the GreenThumb program, I guess I'd suggest network=GreenThumb? (Or =NYC Parks GreenThumb to be a little more specific?)
jmapb (2026-07-23 03:40:17+00:00): On second thought tagging them with an ID (ref:nycgreenthumb or something like that) would be more useful. Maybe the "gardensid" code from https://data.cityofnewyork.us/dataset/GreenThumb-Garden-Info/p78i-pat6/about_data
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 11:42:05+00:00): Hallo Ventox23,
die angabe segregated=yes/no gehört nur an gemeinsame oder getrennte Rad- und Fußwege die als eine einzige Linie erfasst sind. Ich kann der Beschreibung der Challenge auch nicht entnehmen, dass dies dort anders gesehen wird.
Grüße Langläufer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171045096
Ventox23 (2025-08-27 21:14:58+00:00): Guten Abend Langläufer,

Ah danke für die Info, dann habe ich das scheinbar falsch verstanden und im Wiki nicht aufmerksam genug gelesen. Tut mir leid, ich werde die Wiki Seite für den Tag nochmal nachlesen.

Gruß Ventox
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171045096
Dimitar155 (2025-08-26 20:15:12+00:00): Здравей Лъчо,

Доколкото виждам в момента има няколко точки на различни места и с различни категории за един и същ обект. Коя е точната позиция на обекта? И коя е вярната категория? Кафене, бар, хранителен магазин или нещо друго?

Поздрави,
Митко
Лъчезар Костадинов (2025-08-26 20:24:27+00:00): Вярната категория е "Лавка за пакетирани  изделия и безалкохолни напитки". Забележката ви е напълно адекватна, но точката която излиза след като регистрирам обекта, не е точното място на което се намира реално. В процес съм на разучаване, как да коригирам или изтрия грешните точки, които по принцип са на максимум 50 метра от реалното местопобожение на обекта.
Dimitar155 (2025-08-26 21:10:29+00:00): В OpenStreetMap, това вероятно отговаря на "kiosk" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=kiosk).

От всичките точки, коя е на точното местоположение или най-близо до него?
Лъчезар Костадинов (2025-08-26 21:28:47+00:00): Тази срещу зелените площи, които в случая са парк.
Dimitar155 (2025-08-26 21:37:46+00:00): Обединих ги в нея (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13098870038). Ако съм изпуснал нещо, може да го допълните.
SD Mapman (2026-01-23 15:54:55+00:00): So I have connections with SD Game and Fish, and DC Booth really isn't a production hatchery anymore. Sure, they have some stocking work (mainly to avoid federal sequestration) but the primary purpose of this facility is for education and tourism. The real aquaculture work is done at McNenny west of town. That's why I tagged it as an aquarium, since the primary purpose is to showcase the fish, despite whatever lies the Booth Society tells to gain funding.
quincylvania (2026-01-23 16:06:54+00:00): Oh okay, thanks for the feedback. I reverted the tag removal and added a note.
hoserab (2025-10-09 15:35:39+00:00): FYI what you see on the City of Calgary MyProperty map is just the former Adelaide Street right-of-way label. The street itself, and portions of 9th and 11th Streets, were demolished 5-6 years ago to accommodate the Green Line LRT, and they are never coming back. See https://www.calgary.ca/content/dam/www/transportation/ti/documents/transit-projects/green-line/info-notice-adelaide-jeffries-park.pdf (PDF download).

As such I've deleted the roads-under-construction you added in this changeset.
eggie (2025-08-26 19:38:48+00:00): Dag Koen,  Je bedoeling is vast goed, maar wanneer je bos en kreupelhout op elkaar legt zie je alles door elkaar.  
Je zult dat dan netjes moeten scheiden.
Wanneer je zou reageren kan ik je dat wel leren.
Tot nu toe heb je nog nooit gereageerd op opmerkingen. 

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-08-26 19:39:20+00:00): Forest en scrub gescheiden
eggie (2025-08-26 19:48:51+00:00): Bing is op veel plaatsen gedateerd. Je kunt beter de PDOK actueel gebruiken. 
gr eggie
Wynndale (2025-08-26 19:52:07+00:00): What are you doing?
Taya_S (2025-08-27 13:12:54+00:00): Reverted edits made by sockpuppet accounts

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171080366
bartgron (2025-08-26 20:06:54+00:00): Skasowany został bardzo ładnie zmapowany budynek, czy budynek w tym miejscu już nie istnieje? Jeśli jeszcze istnieje, proszę o jego przywrócenie
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 10:22:33+00:00): Kleine Nachfrage: Ist der Radweg mittlerweile beidseitig mit Zeichen 240 versehen? Das cycleway:side=seperate, sollte bitte an der Straße bleiben.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171047735
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 10:23:31+00:00): Ich frage, weil der Radweg bisher mit oneway=yes markiert ist.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171047735
PeeWee32 (2025-08-27 14:36:51+00:00): I do not think this is a oneway cycleway looking at all the cyclist I saw going in both directions. I did see the DE:240 from one side but I have to admit I did not see it from the other side
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 15:27:04+00:00): Whre did you see the traffic_sign? On the east or on the west end?
PeeWee32 (2025-08-27 18:58:04+00:00): It must have been here.  https://osm.org/go/0GwtnzSld
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 19:35:37+00:00): The problem is the law that says, that left cycleways are only allowed  to use if there is a sign. What cyclist do is another thing
Langlaeufer (2025-08-27 19:40:12+00:00): O.k This sign i already found on mapillary. I miss one on the east end. So i will remove oneway and use sidepath from the eastern half of the street/cycleway
PeeWee32 (2025-08-27 20:00:18+00:00): Well it seems strange to me but I guess you know German law better then I do. ;)
diwesser (2025-08-26 19:40:09+00:00): Wrong description. Should read: improved keith's brewery market block buildings.
evod (2025-09-14 19:21:19+00:00): Hi, bitte vorsichtig sein mit Korrekturen von alten Orthofotos. Der Verlauf von An der oberen Alten Donau war von mir schon an den neuen Baufortschritt angepasst.
kabelhaai (2025-08-28 18:45:55+00:00): was een probleempje met de link. Zonder https:// geeft dat een error.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-26 20:22:47+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Podana kombinacja addr:city + addr:place jest nieprawidłowa.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1425076616

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1425076695

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-27 10:43:43+00:00): naprawiono
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-16 11:08:22+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with malformed tags sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184176259

https://osm.org/changeset/184176259
Nod5t5 (2026-03-31 10:03:58+00:00): Hallo Icke68746. 
Nach meinen Informationen entsteht hier ein Autopark durch die Mundt GmbH. Den landuse habe ich auf constuction geändert und die Geometrie, auf DOP20 angelehnt, korrigiert. In die Notes habe ich die Grundlage für mein Wissen eingetragen. Wollen wir das Fixme so belassen, oder möcest Du Dein Wissen in den neu erstellten Landuse übertragen? Siehe Änderungssatz https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180664615
Nod5t5 (2026-03-31 10:18:02+00:00): Laut Liegenschaftskarte sind hier die Hausnummern 15 und 17 vergeben. Du hast aber Nummer 14 eingetragen.
https://www.geobasis.niedersachsen.de/?x=9.634&y=52.4904&z=13
icke68746 (2026-03-31 18:02:42+00:00): Hallo  Nod5t5,
danke. Die Hausnummer hatte ich aus der H2.live-App bzw. von deren Webseite (https://h2.live/). Vielleicht wissen sie es auch nicht genau (https://up.picr.de/50731204ke.png).
Du kannst sie gerne entfernen oder ändern.
Leider komme ich selten an Hannover vorbei, die Wasserstofftankstelle soll eigentlich schon im Bau sein und im dritten Quartal 2026 in Betrieb gehen.
Ich würde das Fixme so belassen, außer Du kannst den genauen Standort der Wasserstofftankstelle orten, dann lösche es und verschiebe den Punkt entsprechend. Ich bin alle Wasserstofftankstellen Deutschlands durchgegangen und wollte eine Einheitlichkeit reinbringen.
Kannst Du mir ein Foto von der Baustelle schicken, wenn Du dort wieder vorbeikommst? Danke.
Gruß icke68746
Wynndale (2025-08-26 20:21:16+00:00): As I previously posted to https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171046562 what are you doing?
Wynndale (2025-08-26 20:46:55+00:00): Have you followed the [organised editing guidelines](https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines)
woodpeck (2025-08-27 07:38:46+00:00): Dear VLD317, the London community is concerned about someone with no apparent local knowledge adding separate sidewalks which is controversial (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/separate-sidewalks-or-not-near-ealing/132613/104). Please discuss the matter on the UK forum before continuing with any MapRoulette tasks that apply to the UK.
woodpeck (2025-08-27 14:58:54+00:00): Made https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/18679 after continued mapping without response.
RVR015 (2025-08-27 15:05:38+00:00): Hello everyone - In my validation process, one of the issues is the separately mapped sidewalks along residential roads. In our guidelines, we have iterated (based on local mapping practices) these sidewalks should not be mapped separately. Our team is in the process of reverting the sidewalks.
RVR015 (2025-08-27 15:07:12+00:00): We do have this OSM TM project shared on our organisation wiki, and I'm more than happy to follow-up in the OSM UK channel.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-26 20:41:12+00:00): 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/13099016179

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2025-08-26 21:09:08+00:00): Dag mdavids   De begraafplaats staat als val al op de kaart  De aanvullende gegevens kunnen dan op het vlak worden aangevuld. Een landuse=cemetary hoort niet op een node.
De naam hoort gewoon de naam van de begraafplaats te zijn en niet een beschrijving.
Dat voormalig kan er uit.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-08-27 06:30:49+00:00): Aangepast al bovenstaand.
Het bos gescheiden van de begraafplaats. 
MVG
eggie
mdavids (2025-08-27 12:27:09+00:00): Heel erg bedankt! Geen actie van mijn kant meer vereist dus? Klopt het dat je het 'voormalig' toch hebt laten staan?
eggie (2025-08-27 12:36:02+00:00): Hoi...   Nee dat is weg als het goed is. De cache van je browser zit je in de weg. Even CTRL-F5 toetsen.. een paar keer.
Probeer maar. 
Mapse
eggie
danieldegroot2 (2025-08-30 10:33:57+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1425083209

Seems to be a small former quarry.
No archaeological site on HEV.
(the surrounding enclosure is marked as a tree ring.)

The area to the south seems to still be quarried from time to time, but such small area could become disused quickly. You can still tag it as
landuse=quarry

Regards,

Daniel
Dafo43 (2025-08-30 10:43:03+00:00): It's marked as an archeological site on the BWO maps.
danieldegroot2 (2025-08-30 16:22:06+00:00): You can view a better version here
https://maps.nls.uk/geo/explore/#zoom=17.3&lat=52.75295&lon=-6.71879&layers=6&b=ESRIWorld&o=100&marker=52.752934,-6.717127
(It is one of the Six Inch maps, but same idea.)
The direction of the 'teardrop' marks indicates the bottom of the slope. There are only arrows pointing inwards, meaning it is likely a pit, cutting or similar.
(surface pits are quaries in OSM.)
Archaeological sites (mainly ringforts) which you refer to ausually have an embankment, which is indicated with two sets of 'teardrops' pointing in opposite directions, or on other variants it is marked as dense set of straight lines pointing outward (connected by ring or not).
You can find style sheets for these maps here
https://maps.nls.uk/view/128076891

Note, not all embankments (mainly unclosed straight-ish segments) indicate an archaeological site. Some are (modern) artificial or natural slopes or bumps/erosion. They were recorded because they are/were sufficiently visible in the landscape or were possible fortifications but turned out not to be. Most of these do not have an entry on HEV.

(In case you are not aware yet, we can use the historic maps on National Library of Scotland for OpenStreetMap. As opposed to the maps present on Historic Environment Viewer, which we can't use. We can only use those for reference when surveying.)

NLS:
https://maps.nls.uk/os/6inch-ireland/index.html

HEV:
https://heritagedata.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=0c9eb9575b544081b0d296436d8f60f8

How to use the HEV
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MDILb9r0VX0

If it is not on HEV, and you think it is an archaeological site, you can mark it as
maybe:historic=archaeological_site
note=Not on HEV.
You're welcome to report any possible sites using the NMS monument report form.

Reporting a possible monument
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAXIJsxD1wU

Happy mapping :-)
Dafo43 (2025-08-31 18:50:27+00:00): You've made some good points, so I've removed it now. Location-wise, it seems like a logical place for a fort, but I really don't know. Thanks for the tips as well.
aaronq227 (2025-09-09 17:03:29+00:00): Hi Balli Abokor,

I noticed you reclassified residential and secondary ways to trunk in Somalia. The OSM wiki states the trunk classification is reserved for high importance roads (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrunk). These ways appear to connect to small towns/villages, which aligns better with the definition of secondary as “Major transportation routes connecting cities and large towns” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa). Based on this, would you be open to reclassifying this back? 

Thanks for your time, and I look forward to hearing from you.
torimomo (2025-08-27 06:51:02+00:00): あなたの最近の最近の更新について確認したところ、地理院地図をソースとしているとされる内容に、地理院地図からでは判別できない情報が多く含まれています。
そのため、Google Mapsなど著作権のある情報源を参照して編集を行っている可能性が疑われます。

ご承知のとおり、OpenStreetMapでは著作権のあるデータを参照しての編集は禁止されています。過去にも同様の警告を受けていることから、すでにご理解いただいているはずです。

もし著作権のあるデータをもとに編集を行っていた場合は、速やかに申し出てください。その場合、該当する編集を元に戻す必要があります。

今後の編集においては、必ず著作権的に問題のないデータ（現地調査、自ら撮影した写真、地理院地図など許可されたソース）を利用するようお願いいたします。
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-10-05 03:02:33+00:00): Please don't use roads as boundary members.
This changeset connected a bridge to the road it cosses.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171049734
Elizabeth BS (2025-08-26 23:21:09+00:00): Reverting the changes is already Illegal when this is Colombian Territory https://gaceta.co/contenidos/protocolo-de-rio-la-paz-amazonica/ https://www.invemar.org.co/redcostera1/invemar/docs/mec/mapas/hoja36.pdf
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-08-27 05:07:05+00:00): Hi, Elizabeth BS, stop making some changes that are not accurate even according to your source. I have georeferenced it and fixed everything, but you keep adding some boundaries which are not accurate. Then woodpeck_repair revert distroyed it also. I will fix this one again. Everybody in the world know about famous Tres Fronteras and how it looks.
woodpeck (2025-08-27 07:29:48+00:00): Aleksandar, I am sorry if my revert broke something, I tried to simply go back to the last version before Elizabeth BS's edit. I was unaware that this is an international dispute, I thought it was just the use of an unsuitable source. It appears to be mainly about whether "Isla Rondina" is in Colombia or Peru, or are there other aspects to the dispute?
Aleksandar Matejevic (2025-08-27 07:39:16+00:00): Don't worry woodpecker, this was more for Elizabeth BS, disputes can be resolved with disputed_by and claimed_by tags, but not with wrong boundaries or corrections just in your opinion. My suggestion in all disputed regions is to create 2 relations, one de facto and one de jure, with claimed_by and disputed_by and everything is then mapped correctly, both variants are present. There are many disputed territories around the world with a larger area than this one river island and all local communities are having a chat and found solution that works for them all. Just by finding some map does not mean you should go over and apply it.
SomeoneElse (2025-08-26 20:48:33+00:00): However, someone's attempt to remove the signage pointing northeast at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10863834705 has been only partially successful.
SomeoneElse (2025-08-26 20:57:26+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13099017794 has no NCN number on it.
vasony (2025-08-30 17:54:07+00:00): Szia!

Az épület lépcsőház helye az addr:unit-ban van, ott már szerepelt, így ez a módosítás hibás, visszavontam.

Tamás
German C (2025-12-03 18:25:16+00:00): Hi Lolj, why did you remove the park area? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/679327558 ? https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=171050902 (the red color was removed by you)