piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-02 11:06:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 130781188 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some made-up names in a made-up language.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130767955
andrebacon2 (2023-01-02 17:34:09+00:00): Hey Diacritic,

Although Toki Pona is indeed a constructed language, it is not a fictional language like Klingon, as it was not created as part of a fictional setting, and was instead created for real-life communication. I have seen localized names in other constructed languages such as Esperanto, Lojban, and Volapuk, so I see no reason as to why Toki Pona cannot be included, especially since all ISO-recognized constructed languages (except Esperanto) have no known native speakers either.

As for the origin of the names, I mainly sourced them from the article I linked for my own convenience. However, almost all of those names originate from suggestions in "Toki Pona, The Language of Good", one of the primary books on the language, published by the language's creator herself. These translations are commonly used within the community to refer to these places.

To address the sourcing issue, I'm rather new to editing OpenStreetMap, and wasn't quite sure how to properly cite non-internet sources in my edits. I think that using the book as a source rather than the article would fit OSM's policies much better, and I probably should have done it in the first place.
SomeoneElse (2023-01-02 18:44:37+00:00): Hello andrebacon2,
There are a few issues here. One is that (as has already been mentioned) the source isn't licence-compatible with OSM, so it has to go for that reason.  Another is that OSM is a map of real things in the real world, as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability makes clear.  While it's possible that I might be able to go to the Pitcairn Islands and find a couple of people (among the 50 there) fluent in this language, I somehow doubt it.
Before importing data such as this into OSM it's important that you follow the guidelines set out at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines , in particular https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines#Step_2_-_Community_Buy-in .  Once you've done that, and the community is broadly supporting of your import, you're welcome to re-attempt it.
Best Regards,
Andy
(from OSM's Data Working Group)
andrebacon2 (2023-01-02 19:34:36+00:00): This makes a lot more sense. However, do I really have to go through the import process for manual edits? No automation was used when transcribing these names, and the wiki pages seem focused on transcribing databases automatically.
 
Also, I thought I addressed the original source in my previous comment? If the book isn't compatible either, that's okay, but I'd just like to know if it is or not before moving forward.
 
Either way, thanks for a clear starting point.
SomeoneElse (2023-01-02 19:52:47+00:00): >  If the book isn't compatible either, that's okay 

A book published in the last few years is extremely unlikely to be licence-compatible.  However, if you know under which it was made available under you can read https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Licence/Licence_Compatibility and see if it does actually fit.

Even if it is, you'll still need to follow https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines before importing the data.
Xvtn (2023-01-03 16:58:10+00:00): While I do personally think the data added is of questionable utility, I agree with andrebacon2 that it doesn't make sense to require going through the import process if edits are being done by hand (meaning, each change is being checked by a human.) Isn't the line between import and non-import that some edits are being made without individual human review?
ZeLonewolf (2023-01-03 17:08:27+00:00): This is a geographically wide-scale edit of items copied from an external database. That's an import in my book. Looking at each item manually to check that it was copied correctly out of the book doesn't turn it into a survey.
SomeoneElse (2023-01-03 17:10:41+00:00): @Xvtn One of the benefits of going through the import process is to discuss whether or not the data is of "questionable utility", as you put it, as well as discussing the licence.  Clearly in this case the person adding the data isn't physically visiting each country in turn, finding a "Toki Pona" speaker and asking them what the name of the country is - they're copying (in a fairly mechanical manner) from another source.  Supposing the other source had one of the names misprinted - how would anyone know?
Xvtn (2023-01-03 17:19:41+00:00): That makes sense. Thanks for the insights @ZeLonewolf and @SomeoneElse.
Friendly_Ghost (2023-01-07 15:03:19+00:00): Thank you for this. What is https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/305639190/history, is it the old label node?
ZeLonewolf (2023-01-07 15:06:12+00:00): Looks like it was. How did you manage to find that?
ZeLonewolf (2023-01-07 15:21:17+00:00): Restored the original node history in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130984993
Friendly_Ghost (2023-01-07 15:56:18+00:00): I was curious what nodes you deleted here, and I found it by looking at the version number, as this one was the only one with version 18 and the others were all on version 2 after you deleted them.

Thank you for restoring the old node.
MxxCon (2023-01-03 02:46:53+00:00): Hello.
Please note that NE section with the running track and 2 basketball hoops is not part of century playground. There's no public access to that area. It is part of PS370.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130768021
Michael Alvarez (2023-01-03 13:37:59+00:00): The source link from NYC Parks highlights that area as part of the park in it’s maps and speaks about it in it’s history, too.
MxxCon (2023-01-03 17:08:18+00:00): It might be so, but in reality it's not open to public. Ps370 is a school for kids with developmental difficulties and the school keeps things area under strict control. It's always locked up not to allow public access(even during the summer break) and during the school day when kids are there security guards stand by the exit/entrance to ensure that kids don't wonder off or someone unknown get in.
MxxCon (2023-01-03 02:58:47+00:00): Hello.
The football field here is not part of the publicly accessible playground. It is used only by Grady HS.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130768231
Michael Alvarez (2023-01-03 13:40:39+00:00): That area is highlighted as part of Grady Playground in the NYCGovMap and oddly enough has the official NYC park sign located on the football field’s fencing for what it’s worth.
MxxCon (2023-01-03 17:01:37+00:00): I live 2 blocks away from this school and whenever I walk by it's always chained up. The only time I see people there is during school gym class or after school football clubs. It's not open to public.
TomPar (2023-09-24 17:18:09+00:00): Hello.  This was already an "area" because it was part of a multipolygon relation.  Your changes were redundant to existing geometry definitions.  Please refrain from deleting boundary lines.  Are you not seeing the multipolygon relations in your editor of choice?  Thanks.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130768287
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-02 11:06:36+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 130781188 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some made-up names in a made-up language.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130767955
Austrianton (2023-01-10 19:14:42+00:00): Please keep individual change-sets local
pyram (2023-01-04 12:01:38+00:00): Hallo schuff,

leider muss ich dich darauf hinweisen, dass der BayernAtlas derzeit (noch?) nicht für die Übernahme der Adressen zulässig ist. Könntest Du diese wieder löschen oder benötigst Du Hilfe dazu?

PS: Gesehen habe ich es daran, dass Du vierstellige Postleitzahlen und einen in D ungültigen Adressteil "addr:province=Bavaria" genutzt hast.

Gruß
pyram
schulf (2023-01-04 17:30:51+00:00): Hallo Pyram,

das war mir so nicht bewusst, ehrlich gesagt. 

Wenn vierstellige Postleitzahlen eingegeben wurden, dann war des eh ein Versehen von mir, da wir ja doch schon einige Zeit die fünfstelligen Nummern haben. Die Postleitzahlen waren auch nicht vom BayernAtlas, ich wohne in der Gegend, daher kenne ich hier schon ein paar PLZ.

Die Nummern entferne ich wieder.

Grüße,
Ulf

P.S.  meiner ganz persönlichen Meinung nach, habe ich die Arbeit der Beamten eh schon mit meinen Steuern bezahlt. Daher ist das Produkt ihrer Arbeit eigentlich bereits bezahlt. Aber das steht auf einem anderen Blatt…
pyram (2023-01-05 12:42:30+00:00): Danke für die Antwort.
Im Hintergrund laufen seit längerem Gespräche, ob der BayernAtlas für OSM freigegeben wird. Bitte zumindest so lange warten, bis es soweit ist. Ansonsten: Ich kenne genügend Fehler in den offiziellen Daten. Von daher bin ich kein Fan von Copy&Paste amtlicher Daten...
(siehe auch diverse Diskussionen im Forum. Zum Beispiel https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/flurnamen-eintragen/6432 )

PS: Nein, die Vermessungsverwaltung muss sich mit Gebühreneinnahmen refinanzieren und wird nicht nur über Steuereinnahmen finanziert. Der Wegfall von Einnahmen (zum Beispiel aus dem Verkauf amtlicher Adressdaten - weil dann kostenlos über OSM erhältlich) würde im Umkehrschluss zu höheren Steuern führen müssen... ;-)
pyram (2023-01-05 12:44:22+00:00): PPS: Die Erfassung der PLZ ist in D eigentlich überflüssig, da flächendeckend PLZ-Gebiete erfasst sind. (Ist aber nicht "verboten".)
gscholz (2023-01-04 09:06:30+00:00): Hi Ronan_SV,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relation of "Sonsonate":

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=130769541

I have just fixed this:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7011532/history

Guido
Jack_Ware01UK (2023-01-02 02:50:26+00:00): Correction - Ferrysburg*
CurlingMan13 (2023-03-01 13:49:54+00:00): What did you change, and why?  Please try to elaborate more in your changeset comments.
kimo (2023-01-04 07:38:42+00:00): What source was used for these new roads?
kimo (2023-01-07 11:22:17+00:00): I have visited both these locations and the added streets are not visibly under construction. What was the source for these streets? Should they be changed to proposed? Or should they be removed as they aren't an accurate representation of what is on the ground?
Markus366 (2023-01-02 07:44:20+00:00): Hallo. Danke für die Eintragungen.  Aber nochmal die gleiche Frage, wie zu den Hinweisen:

Auf welchen Quellen beruhen diese Infos?

Gruß Markus
MGoede (2023-01-02 18:39:12+00:00): Wer sind Sie den? Gerne können Sie die 03606-6770 anrufen und fragen ob der AED dort hängt.
MGoede (2023-01-02 18:50:59+00:00): Hallo Markus habe dir eine Mail gesendet.
CloCkWeRX (2023-01-03 05:01:08+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135871916 intersects with a building - this doesn't seem to reflect bing imagery.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:34:23+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:54:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
pitscheplatsch (2023-01-02 20:09:13+00:00): Hi. Welcome to OSM.

This changeset should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
user_18149442 (2023-01-25 18:34:30+00:00): Pascal, bitte um einen genaueren fehlerhinweis, ich finde auf suspicous nichts
nevw (2023-01-02 14:11:12+00:00): Hi
there are further problems to fix here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.09668&lat=-26.67230&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
You seem to be proceeding without a complete understanding how multipolygons need to be constructed correctly in the osm.
You need to understand the info provided here on our wiki
There are also examples of correct and incorrect multipolygons.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
nevw (2023-01-02 14:12:17+00:00): It may be easiest to revert the two problems areas I have left comments on.
corz23 (2023-01-06 05:46:16+00:00): Hi, apologies for the delay in getting back to you on this.

On review of my edits, I am just wanting to confirm that the two problems you are referring to are: 1. duplicate segments, and 2. inner segments that should be outer segments?

If this is the case, I see where I went wrong with the duplicate segments, and can make corrections for those. However, I am a bit unclear on why the segments excluding the road from the area should be changed to outer, and would appreciate some clarification on this.
nevw (2023-01-06 11:35:10+00:00): Hi
inner parts of multipolygons cannot touch part of the outer ring so the way you are using them is not valid.
I think you don't need to use any multipolygons to map this area as it complicates the area unnecessarily for other mappers.
Each of the blocks could have a simple polygon and be tagged landuse=residential or you could have a much bigger polygon (including all the residential streets in the area) tagged as landuse=residential. Residential parks are often included as part of the residential area too but you can exclude those if you prefer not to.
Here is an area near me that is mapped with a simple polygon around each residential block of houses - there is no need for multipolygons to be used here.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-27.20985/153.01471
Although he could use a simple polygon, the mapper that did this has used a separate one member mp for each block because he will split the sides into multiple segments as he maps in far greater detail as in this area nearby.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/-27.21190/153.02439

...but he is still only mapping each block of houses with the one polygon or multipolygon and not trying to combine multiple individual blocks in to a multipolygon.

If you use just a simple polygon for each block you no longer need to worry about duplicate segments either.
corz23 (2023-01-07 02:13:15+00:00): Thank you for that clarification, I see where I have gone wrong in doing this. I will work through the needed corrections both here and on the Buderim Pines area as I am able.
nevw (2023-01-07 04:06:49+00:00): Thanks. If there is a named development area or a neighbourhood at sub-suburb level you could still group all the individual blocks together as a mp, each with the role of outer, and name the development.
pitscheplatsch (2023-01-02 20:10:21+00:00): Hi. Welcome to OSM.

Same again, this changeset should be reviewed by the local community. Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
user_18149442 (2023-01-25 18:34:49+00:00): Pascal, bitte um einen genaueren Fehlerhinweis, ich finde auf suspicous nichts
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:48:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
eggie (2023-01-02 08:16:37+00:00): Dag Jeroen,
Je vraagt feedback.. 
Geen onderbord aanwezig met de uitzondering voor tweewielers?
oneway:bicycle=no ?

MVG
eggie
JeroenBrouwer (2023-01-04 06:50:05+00:00): Hey Eggie,

Scherp! Jawel, dat onder bord is er wel, het is dus enkel voor autoverkeer. Moet ik dit nu zelf aanpassen en opnieuw uploaden?

Groet,
Jeroen
eggie (2023-01-04 06:57:32+00:00): Hoi Jeroen
Wanneer fietsers tegen de richting inmogen dan oneway:bicycle=no toevoegen. Is er geen uitzondering .. dus geen onderbordje..dan laat je het zo.

Het is ook meestal maar niet altijd.
Een aanpassing wordt een nieuwe changeset.

Mapse
eggie
user_12523467 (2023-01-02 13:07:04+00:00): hello

why did you change it form "one way" to "Assumed to be no", do you know for sure it's not one way?
or do you think that cars can cross this road to the highway on the opposite direction of the traffic.

please when you edit don't depend on satellite imagery only, yon need a local knowledge as well.

best regards
little_maper (2023-01-02 13:43:24+00:00): Hello Lamassu;
I removed the tag because you added a oneway tag for this street
Link :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1027028497/history
and if you see this image its not make sense to set this street oneway.
https://ibb.co/ZJh9BMj
Link
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1027028495/history
if you know this street specific please let me know and I will fix it.
Regards
little_maper
user_12523467 (2023-01-02 14:17:54+00:00): hello again

yes it is a one way street, the exit from the highway is temporary closed, thus it is a one way street.
again without local knowledge it is not appropriate to edit road based only on satellite imagery.

I presume that you have a group to communicate between #digitalegypt members. please inform your colleagues to not edit the street based on outdate satellite imagery.

best regards
little_maper (2023-01-02 14:33:22+00:00): Hello Lamassu;
I reverted this street as it was
Regards
little_maper
eggie (2023-01-02 08:20:02+00:00): Dag pepper..

De gebouwomtrekken horen geen adressen te krijgen in OSM Nederland. We gebruiken de import adresnodes van het Kadaster. 

De vorm van de hoofdwoning lijkt me niet kloppen.
Daar is een gedeelte van gesloopt lijkt me.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2023-01-02 08:26:07+00:00): Alle begin is moeilijk.. Vooral gezien die regeltjes binnen OSM hoe te mappen. 

De woning heb ik maar gelijk aangepast. Het adres heb ik verwijderd. er is hier op het erf een adresnode.


https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/index.html#?searchQuery=Ehzerallee%202&resultOffset=0&objectId=0262200000000271&geometry.x=218868.452&geometry.y=463555.97800042&zoomlevel=7&detailsObjectId=0262010000000271

MVG
eggie
RiverBearings (2023-01-18 22:18:18+00:00): Hola FerroCarrilOSM, gracias por trabajar en Tenosique de Pino Suárez en torno a la construcción del Corredor del Tren Maya. Noté que se eliminaron dos conexiones entre el doble vagón de la Avenida Constitución (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/248065609 & https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/903650186) y (https:/ /www.openstreetmap.org/way/793103943 & https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/793103944), pero las imágenes aéreas y los rastreos de Strava GPS respaldan que esas conexiones aún están allí. ¿Tiene alguna información sobre cuándo comenzará y terminará la construcción en estos lugares? Sugeriría dejar estas conexiones intactas hasta que ya no se permita la navegación aquí durante la construcción. Gracias por su ayuda de antemano - RiverBearings

Hello FerroCarrilOSM, thanks for working in Tenosique de Pino Suárez around the construction of the Tren Maya Corridor. I noticed there were two connections that were removed between the dual carriage of Avenida Constitución (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/248065609 &  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/903650186 ) and (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/793103943 & https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/793103944) but aerial imagery and Strava GPS traces support those connections still being there. Do you have any information on when construction will begin and end at these locations? I would suggest leaving these connections in tact until navigation is no longer allowed here during construction.Thanks for your help in advance - RiverBearings
NorthCrab (2023-01-04 02:03:15+00:00): Zmiana jest w porządku, jednak na przyszłość sugerowałbym używanie bardziej "informujacych" tagów surface gdzie możliwe. Paved jest bardzo małomówny. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface

Pozdrawiam!
Palolo (2023-01-15 16:05:17+00:00): Thank you for your interest in mapping Tanzania. Please use the online resources to learn how to properly trace and tag features. In this area you created a building without building=yes thank you.
Baloo Uriza (2023-02-19 16:58:06+00:00): Splitting this up into two changesets would have probably made more sense.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130777202
StefanHRT (2023-01-02 10:35:55+00:00): Die Baustelle könnte tatsächlich ein Park werden, ein Teil hat in ALKIS die LGV88422 (in der Regel Geschützte Grünanlage) ;)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-04 13:42:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 130867861 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unlikely changes in South Osseria.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/130866525 .
gscholz (2023-03-18 09:31:08+00:00): Hi fariborzsepanta,
this changeset has destroyed the boundary relation of "منطقه شکار ممنوع فاراب رودبار":

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=49.82361&lat=36.61655&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=130777663

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Glassman (2023-01-04 23:25:48+00:00): I'm not sure what you were attempting to add but because it wasn't tagged and didn't seem to fit the current imagery I deleted it. Let me know if I can help you get started with OSM. I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130777674
Luzandro (2023-12-12 10:41:19+00:00): Hallo,

warum hast du hier addr:street auf addr:place geändert?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5904840147/history
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/130777686
mcliquid (2023-12-12 11:08:40+00:00): Guten Tag,
nach so langer Zeit habe ich keine Erinnerung mehr an die einzelnen Beweggründe für mein Handeln.
Viele Grüße
user_722019 (2023-12-12 14:54:26+00:00): OpenStreetMap könnte heute monatliche Adressdiffs haben. Inkonsistenzen würden gut sichtbar visualisieren, spannende Vorort Erfassungen wären sichtbar. Diese Chance wurde bereits bei der Konzeption des AustriaAdressHelpers verpasst. Luzandro war mit seinen Diffs bemüht. Warum die Agenda Adresse, gescheitert ist, heute schwer nachvollziehbar. Es war wohl mangelnder Mut der Verantwortlichen etwas zu wagen. Typisch Österreich eben.
Dodko (2023-01-08 21:36:09+00:00): Ak je už v budove adresa https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/138403716 netreba ju dávať duplicitne aj do bodu POI
whb (2023-03-10 16:35:15+00:00): Guten Tag,

wenn sich hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10300112380 jetzt ein Parkscheinautomat befindet, dann ist der Parkplatz https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/852325531 vermutlich nicht mehr kostenlos?

Viele Grüße
whb