piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Supaplex030 (2026-04-01 17:20:10+00:00): Ich glaube auch nicht, dass die Umbenennung des "berühmten" "Kaufhaus des Westens" sinnvoll ist (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/60541581; https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaufhaus_des_Westens).

Die hier aufgeführten Beispiele zeigen, warum so ein Auskippen von vermeintlichen Korrekturen (du nennst es im CS-Kommentar "Troubleshooting") kontrapruduktiv ist oder sein kann. Es bringt uns nämlich nichts, wenn 10 Bushaltestellen jetzt auch den Tag "bus=yes" haben, wenn du dafür (ich gehe davon aus, ohne lokales Wissen) 4 falsche Tags setzt.

Aus der Taktung, mit der du solche CS machst, und Fehlern, wie hier zufällig entdeckt, würde ich den Schluss ziehen, dass du bei deinen Edits nicht besonders sorgfältig vorgehst sondern vermutlich mehr oder weniger blind irgendwelche automatischen Editor-Vorschläge abklickst. Bitte tu das nicht, zumindest nicht so, wie du es hier getan hast. Das macht OSM wirklich nicht besser.

lg, Alex
literan (2026-03-16 19:42:25+00:00): здесь откачено много корректных адресов, по улицам :)
DerKaiserschmarren (2026-04-09 10:19:50+00:00): Ich rate lieber keine Öffnungszeiten bei der Universität (Area) einzutragen, denn für gewöhnlich ist hier kein Zutritt gestattet. Es wäre besser "by appointment" einzutragen.
Steht auch so auf der Website ;)
ChrissW-R1 (2026-04-09 20:37:29+00:00): Ja, das ist etwas knifflig. Die Öffnungszeiten stimmen, aber ohne Terminvereinbarung kommt man dennoch nicht rein.

Daher habe ich nun access=private und appointment=required ergänzt. Somit sind zum einen die Öffnungszeiten vorhanden (die ja nicht falsch sind) und dennoch ist klar aus den Daten erkennbar, dass man nicht ohne weiteres das Gelände besuchen kann.

Siehe auch https://osm.org/note/5242250
ChrissW-R1 (2026-04-09 20:41:24+00:00): Angepasst in https://osm.org/changeset/181116531
DerKaiserschmarren (2026-04-10 07:20:46+00:00): Okay so passt es natürlich auch ^^
Yog Sot (2026-03-15 23:38:34+00:00): this is wrong
there is no way of knowing that species is equal to genus and so that's why both tags were present
There are apps that read species only
and apps that read genus only
ivanbranco (2026-03-18 13:09:46+00:00): Discussion continued here: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/adding-the-type-of-tree-species-genus/96432/5
NeisBot (2026-03-15 22:21:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13258961031 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Computer store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-23 23:33:19+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180329678
(Restore previous tags. No changes)
mueschel (2026-03-16 17:48:05+00:00): Hi,
could you explain what you tried to map here? All these ways have many foreign tags and no common ones.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-03-17 20:27:10+00:00): thanks for fix!
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:56:57+00:00): Hello. We are really trying to help you, but we do need you to respond and engage the local community. For various versions you treated the silos like squares, then i took the time to round them and make it right. Now you delete everything and add them again interconected from the inside. Which is no way the real shape they have.
So what are you really trying to do here?

regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179920233
eggie (2026-03-19 08:44:47+00:00): Dag A-dg6
Hoe kan een straat met oneway=yes nu afsgesloten zijn met een paaltje?
Is het wel eenrichtingsverkeer bij het oude gemeentehuis.(  's Gravenhof)

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-03-19 08:47:22+00:00): Hoe vaak staat dat paaltje gewoon in het wegdek. Alleen als het markt is?

MVG
eggie
A-dg6 (2026-03-19 22:36:55+00:00): Hi eggie,
Het voetgangersgebied is onlangs uitgebreid, auto's zijn nu niet meer welkom op een deel van de Groenmarkt en de Lange Hofstraat. De paaltjes waar jij het over hebt staan er inderdaad alleen tijdens de markt op donderdag. Ik heb dit alles aangepast nav de bende van bordjes en de gemeentesite.
eggie (2026-03-20 14:32:36+00:00): Oke.. duidelijk.
Yog Sot (2026-03-15 23:31:19+00:00): natychmiast przywróć wszystkie usunięte geometrie, bo inczej będą szły reverty z uwagi na mój aktualnie ograniczony czas dokładnej weryfikacji
uprkos (2026-03-16 06:35:38+00:00): Usuwałem tylko zbędne tagi, zostawiałem obszary jako area:highway=*. Geometrie usunąłem tylko w dwóch przypadkach, tam gdzie i tak nie zgadzały się ze stanem faktycznym i obejmowały inne obiekty.

A na marginesie, komentarze w stylu "natychmiast..." to zadziwiające standardy komunikacyjne, do których nie jestem przyzwyczajony.
Yog Sot (2026-03-16 10:52:51+00:00): Byłem wczoraj zmęczony i nie powinienem tak do ciebie pisać. 
Jednak problem polega na tym, że jak tego nie poprawisz szybko, to wiesz jak jest... i po prostu będą z tego problemy później. 

przykład usunięcia:
delete way 983976238
Nie jest tak jak piszesz

I pamiętaj proszę, że nie piszę tylko o tym jednym changesecie, tylko wszystkich, które wykonałeś.
uprkos (2026-03-16 11:17:14+00:00): Tak, również odwołuję się do wszystkich changesetów, które wczoraj wykonałem. Na kilkadziesiąt zmian usunąłem tylko dwa obszary - jeden który zawierał parkingi jako area:highway=footway, a drugi który obejmował obszar który na orto wygląda jak podwórze bez wyznaczonych stref pieszych. To ten który podlinkowałeś i jeden na zachód od niego.

Jeśli jest jakiś obszar, który zedytowałem niewłaściwie, to przez pomyłkę, i poprawię jeśli ktoś wskaże co jest do poprawy.

Tak naprawdę to mi nie zależy na tych obszarach. Nie mam pojęcia po co ktoś je w ogóle dodawał, ale jak są to mi to nie wadzi. Jedyny powód dla którego się za to wziąłem, to że ktoś uparcie zakładał osobną uwagę na błędnie zmapowany obszar i przez to Poznań to  wielka czerwona plama pinezek. A przed planowaną niebawem wizytą w Poznaniu chcę mieć jasność, które uwagi wymagają rzeczywistej weryfikacji, a które to spam.
Yog Sot (2026-03-16 13:05:22+00:00): obszar drogi może byc przydatny w nawigacji. 
Przykładowo ten plac podwórza, który skasowałeś mogł być wykorzystany do nawigacji od drzwi do drzwi na tym podwórzu. 

Ktos mógł wrzucać uwagi do poznania, ale jak uwaga jest nieprecyzyjna, to napraw uwagę, ale kasowanie obiektów, to niszczenie informacji mapy. 
Dlatego powinieneś wszystkie takie swoje edycje cofnąć i nadac odpowiednie tagi oraz poprawic i rozdzielić geometrię jesli to potrzebne

Jak nie wiesz jakie tagi, to revertuj, i zostaw tak jak było. Tagi poprawi ktos kto wie jakie jak przyjdzie na to czas.
uprkos (2026-03-16 19:47:03+00:00): Przejrzałem wszystkie swoje edycje, dorysowałem area we właściwej geometrii tam gdzie wg aktualnego orto rzeczywiście są znajdują.
NeisBot (2026-03-15 22:54:39+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 17 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/323608162 v10 | 17 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179920489
NeisReview (2026-03-23 23:33:21+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/179940978
pertile (2026-03-16 11:03:26+00:00): Please try not to edit so large areas, in this case you updated source tag with an error
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179920875
Fidelis Assis (2026-03-17 21:08:21+00:00): When updating the limits of an administrative relation, one must download all members of the parent relations of a small changed way to check if nothing else was broken. Sometimes, the small updated way is also part of very large relations (ex. timezones, etc) covering very large areas which are also indirectly  modified. That's probably what happened.
pertile (2026-03-23 22:40:55+00:00): Yes I understand that, but you added a "0" (zero) in source value of this node: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4448105164#map=19/-49.711666/-73.182504
Anyway, it seems you know what you are doing and it is a not intended mistake. Thanks for your time!
Fidelis Assis (2026-03-24 14:29:10+00:00): Oh, I see what you meant, the typo!
I got distracted by the irrelevant mention of  "editing large areas".

I understand you didn't notice, it's subtle, barely noticed, but there was "multiple spaces" in the source between "Sur" and "ISBN". Check version 4 of that node to confirm the double space. Of course I didn't notice it either, but JOSM warned about and I introduced that typo while trying to fix.
I apologize for that. Fixed now.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2026-04-07 09:47:14+00:00): hello, thanks for your edits, however i noticed you didn't align the satellite imagery, so instead of aligning the data you actually offset it by 4 meters (printscreet at https://ibb.co/mVqcm3kB ). can i revert this changeset?
Djack-OSM (2026-04-08 13:04:52+00:00): Hello. This satellite image has incorrect positioning. My changes are made taking into account the corrected positioning of the satellite image, obtained based on real-world exploration of the area with a GPS navigator
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2026-04-08 13:11:55+00:00): hello, this is not satellite imagery on my printscreen, this is the official ortophoto imagery of madeira. try it on JOSM and you will see you misaligned the data  wmts:https://geoportal-irig.madeira.gov.pt/mapproxy/base/service?REQUEST=GetCapabilities&SERVICE=WMTS&version
Djack-OSM (2026-04-08 13:24:28+00:00): Ok, if you are sure of the accuracy of this source, you can revert my changes.
NunoCapeloCaldeira (2026-04-08 13:26:19+00:00): thanks. 100% sure of the accuracy.
Djack-OSM (2026-04-08 13:38:27+00:00): Thank you!
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:47:50+00:00): reemplazado por nodo antiguo, reubicado y con nuevos tags.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179921129
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:46:11+00:00): Hola. Por favor no borrar elementos a los que haya que hacerles correcciones y luego agregarlos en otra edición. Se puden modificar y así no se pierde el historial. Por favor no incurrir en esa práctica.

saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179921181
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:44:42+00:00): Does the park pass under the silos?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179921520
MxxCon (2026-03-16 01:41:11+00:00): OSM is a map of the world NOW. Not how it was in the past or undetermined point in the future. We shouldn't be cluttering the map with things that don't exist, and might not ever exist. Once this signal is actually there then by all means map it. But while it's only proposed, and not even planned or approved, it shouldn't be on OSM.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179921700
IsStatenIsland (2026-03-16 23:26:34+00:00): There is sufficient evidence this signal will exist in the near future. The proposed lifecycle prefix does have some valid uses.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:proposed:*

> A new westbound home signal, No. 7W has been erected 1,101 Feet west of Lack, for westbound moves from A Track to No. 2 or No. 3 Track.

I can't share this bulletin yet until I get the full thing from Amtrak which might take 2 weeks. The bulletin uses present tense even though this thing doesn't exist yet. Even if it's in the wrong location, a move can fix this.
MxxCon (2026-03-17 04:11:12+00:00): I'm not questioning your sources.
And I know that prefix tag is in some use, but I'm generally against about mapping features before they physically exist. My concern is that if the tags aren't updated later, we're left with inaccurate, stale data on the map. If the plan is to remember to update it once it's built, it's better to just hold off and map it accurately when it actually exists on the ground.
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:40:17+00:00): Hola. Por favor revisar las correcciones que te hacemos. que se ve que corregimos y luego repites lo mismo. Un loteo con un puñado de casas no es necesariamente un área residencial resún OSM. Los loteos, cuando están fuera de la ciudad, son Hamlets. La manera en que los dibujas es como lo hacemos cuando están en medio de la ciudad.
Por otro lado, por favor no pegar landuses a los caminos.

gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179921720
MappingMore (2026-03-21 01:44:23+00:00): Partially Revert of 179921655
AndresDuhour (2026-07-25 12:05:20+00:00): Hola, buen día!, hice unas correcciones en el polígono de uso del suelo porque es demasiado grande. Habría que tratar de dividirlo porque abarca toda la ciudad y muchas áreas que no tienen uso residencial, monte, lago, río. Saludos!
Wildsharky (2026-03-25 10:38:54+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:179986762
Wildsharky (2026-03-25 10:43:44+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179980922
NeisBot (2026-03-16 00:39:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 8 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1391943820 v2 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/217134895 v4 | 3 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179922358
NeisReview (2026-03-24 05:33:18+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/179959461
BrummsLee (2026-03-19 18:54:02+00:00): Hello rajdhani!
Thank you for doing this revert! Question... did something go wrong?
In the changeset of user Oberlausitzer42 there were 40 changed streets. In the revert there are only 30. In my opinion, everything has to be completely reverted.

Greetings Brumms 

Sorry for my English via a translation software!
BrummsLee (2026-03-20 14:54:40+00:00): Hello rajdhani!
I have now manually restored the classifications of the missing streets.
Thank you!
rajdhani (2026-03-21 18:19:42+00:00): Hi BrummsLee,
Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
BrummsLee (2026-03-22 10:19:44+00:00): You don't need to look at it anymore. It should be fine now!
Have a nice Sunday!
rajdhani (2026-06-04 18:02:51+00:00): Hi BrummsLee,

Thank you for your detailed explanation and for taking the time to review and clean up the situation. I appreciate your feedback.
My intention was to fix the highway issues which was mistakenly done by  another mapper.

I will keep your suggesitons in mind in my future edits.
BrummsLee (2026-06-05 09:55:08+00:00): 👍
rajdhani (2026-03-17 10:10:27+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:179996380
MappingMore (2026-03-19 03:02:30+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180085875
ajmat (2026-03-17 05:15:13+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 179979039
MappingMore (2026-03-17 04:04:12+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179979343
jm428 (2026-03-16 15:42:57+00:00): Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM!
The outline of the building should show where the base of the building is. This is more difficult when the aerial imagery shows the imagery at an angle, because you'll end up with a much larger footprint than the building actually covers. For that reason I am going to revert this changeset and some other ones you have made recently.
For mapping things on campus I would recommend Esri World Imagery, it has a top down view of all of the buildings which makes tracing them a lot easier, but the buildings are all mapped pretty well already.
iandees (2026-03-16 01:22:33+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9733532751 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
NeisBot (2026-03-16 01:13:22+00:00): Hi Josue 12, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 2 amenity(s)
- 29 building(s)
- 1 craft(s)
- 1 emergency(s)
- 12 highway(s)
- 6 landuse(s)
- 2 leisure(s)
- 3 name(s)
- 6 natural(s)
- 1 sport(s)
- 1 surface(s)
- 3 waterway(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179922846
NeisBot (2026-03-16 01:51:48+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13651126180 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Bakery shop"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-24 05:33:04+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180335094
(Delete spam tags. First version)
mini-me (2026-03-18 19:23:51+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1268699
граница района поломана
rajdhani (2026-03-18 06:46:18+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180041837
NeisBot (2026-03-16 02:00:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13651143120 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Bakery shop"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-24 05:33:07+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180335096
(Delete spam tags. First version)
Glassman (2026-03-17 01:50:36+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179923606
Glassman (2026-03-17 01:51:08+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179923702
Wildsharky (2026-03-25 10:39:27+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179989960
iandees (2026-03-16 03:40:41+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6841253704 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
mikeOSMandPlus (2026-03-16 02:40:11+00:00): Submited 3 times if this node still get rejected I will fucking move back to Google Map.
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 14:09:46+00:00): Hola. Ok si el hotel no existe, pero sigue existiendo la dirección. No borrar todo por favor.
grcias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179923876
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 14:09:47+00:00): Hola. Ok si el hotel no existe, pero sigue existiendo la dirección. No borrar todo por favor.
garcias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179923876
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 14:14:03+00:00): Y otro tema. UNa cosa es la estación y otra es la entrada a la Estación. Ahora lo que acaba de hacer es duplicar la está ción Santa Ana. Voy a corregir eso. Gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179923876
NeisBot (2026-03-16 02:36:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1489308774 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Security Screens Store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-24 05:33:10+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/179924185
topius (2026-03-16 13:52:36+00:00): Service roads are access roads that are not usually part of the regular road network (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice) The road to Wom is certainly a regular road. I corrected it again.
Wilfred Jones (2026-03-16 23:14:18+00:00): Thanks Topius for the correction.
Bartek444 (2026-05-13 17:23:55+00:00): koncepcja nie zgadza się z tym co ostatecznie wykonali
możesz podać link do ortofotomapy z aktualnym obrazem tego terenu
MappingMore (2026-03-18 15:38:45+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180066066
felipeeugenio (2026-03-16 12:22:39+00:00): No tiene mucha pinta de viaducto. Pasé varios de los targs al camino que pasa por ahí. El concepto de separar la vía que pasa por el puente del puente mismo es para otras cosas...

Por favor incorporarse al chat de la comunidad en Telegram para aprender de estas cosas (https://t.me/OSMcl) Ahí cientos de maperos chilenos discutimos diariamente este tipo de situaciones. Por favor unirse. OSM es un trabajo comunitario..
Estamos para ayudar, pero la idea es que aprenda y que no tengamos que estar revisando todo.
gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179924168