piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Fraxi (2026-06-22 16:56:53+00:00): Здравей!
Добре е да поглеждаш дали за обектите, които добавяш/редактираш, няма наземни снимки(освен ако лично не си бил наскоро на съответното място). Защото ето например https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13392619413 е отбелязана като порта/портал. Но на снимки(макар и от 2024 г.) там не се вижда такава, не се вижда и ограда в близост. Там има шахта. Да, възможно е и сателитните снимки да са те подвели.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=42.274850780817985&lng=22.668045752792978&z=19.9&mapStyle=OpenStreetMap&panos=true&pKey=1601582900434282&x=0.6817324888687155&y=0.5238340721410166&zoom=0&focus=photo

Това аз може да го махна.
Fraxi (2026-06-22 17:29:28+00:00): Но явно и снимките на MAF не са актуални, защото на наземните снимки се вижда Т-маркет, а на сателитните го няма и като сграда.
Termininja (2026-06-23 09:37:03+00:00): Редакциите са правени не по снимки, а по реално видео от преди половин година. След толкова време вместо да си губиш времето да коментираш просто може да отбележиш актуалното състояние.
Fraxi (2026-06-23 11:21:51+00:00): В такъв случай оставям на друг да отбележи актуалното състояние, изобщо за зоната, тъй като явно по-скорошни данни няма, а на живо лично аз няма да ходя скоро.
dypa (2025-12-23 10:07:47+00:00): При указании размеченных не регулируемых пешеходных переходов нельзя использовать тег crossing=zebra, см https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:crossing=zebra

Пожалуйста при внесении следующих правок используйте теги (Размеченный (нерегулируемый) пешеходный переход)
crossing=uncontrolled
crossing:markings=zebra

Заранее спасибо!
Higashimado (2026-02-01 22:48:12+00:00): 您好呀~ 作为 admin_centre 的节点是要求是个地点，最好不要把 place 标签删掉的，这个我给您更改了
DanhengOSM (2026-02-02 06:18:16+00:00): 非常感谢，先前用ID编辑器的时候不是很了解具体的tag
ilias_ (2025-12-21 13:43:26+00:00): you forgot to save your changes in Spain before moving on to Cuba, which made a huge changeset. Also, you should use the international format (+34) for phone numbers.
Lyon-St-Clair (2025-12-23 10:32:57+00:00): c'est toi qui a remis le tracé du 38 par l'avenue de Serres ? Le hic c'est que la déviation est prolongée au delà du 4/01
dcenkuwibeks (2025-12-21 12:10:06+00:00): Änderung nach lokalem Aushang, bitte mal schauen, ob ich was technisch übersehen habe. Die Verlegung der 23 und 31 nach Billstedt hatte ich vergessen, die sind in folgendem Änderungssatz drin: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176214669

Die Linie 618 fährt seit Fahrplanwechsel gar nicht mehr, kann man die 3 Relationen einfach so löschen?

Zum Gegenchecken: https://www.hvv.de/de/ueber-uns/neuigkeiten/neuigkeiten-detail/viele-neuerungen-zum-fahrplanwechsel-am-14-dezember-2025-154148
Angel Deshkov (2026-01-17 15:17:16+00:00): Gràcies Jordi pels canvis!
Total Design Technology (2025-12-27 14:48:48+00:00): New Office
Bartek444 (2026-01-07 18:22:34+00:00): Wewnątrz zajezdni to raczej MPK jest zarządcą
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-03-05 12:18:26+00:00): @Anas masuris - jesteś pewien co do np. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/952035949/history ?
Anas masuris (2026-03-05 21:57:47+00:00): Nie wykluczam, że na terenie Stacji Obsługi to właśnie MPK jest zarządcą. Miałem się za to zabrać, więc jutro lub w weekend to zmienię (wraz z numeracją torów)
dzamper (2026-03-19 14:55:19+00:00): Tory na terenie Muzeum przy ul. św. Wawrzyńca to chyba też nie ZDM? 🤔
Anas masuris (2026-03-21 17:28:15+00:00): Zmieniłem na "Muzeum Inżynierii i Techniki". Jeśli jeszcze będzie coś do skorygowania, to piszcie :)
rarad74 (2025-12-21 12:18:49+00:00): Hi. You leave alot of streets unconnected. Please pay atention, or use an app which you can/know how to use.
rempshaener (2025-12-21 17:27:20+00:00): Hallo,
was ist denn der Sinn, hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1026783840 das access=private rauszunehmen?
Viele Grüße
Zrop (2025-12-21 18:20:43+00:00): Hallo rempshaener,
dieses Stück Weg befindet sich doch noch im öffentlichen Raum.

Gruß
Zrop
rempshaener (2025-12-21 18:42:42+00:00): Hallo,
ja, auf die Fläche gesehen schon.
Den Anfangsteil des way nicht aufzuteilen, ist  eher die Regel als die Ausnahme, da die Einmündungen über den Linienzug abstrahiert werden.
Einzige mir bekannte und verbreitete Ausnahme: werden Rad-/Fußwege separat erfasst, werden die access-Werte nicht auf privat gesetzt damit der Zugang zu den sidewalk/path ermöglicht wird. Aber auch dort nur zum gemeinsamen Node, nicht zum Tor bzw. der Grundstücksgrenze.
Ich halte die Augen auf, vielleicht habe ich auch nur einen Trend verpasst.
Danke und viele Grüße
Dodko (2025-12-21 15:41:39+00:00): house 	poschodovy_dom
name 	Sukromny dom
toto aplikácie nepoznajú, treba dávať len schválené značky
použite len building=detached
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Tag:building%3Ddetached
rempshaener (2025-12-21 22:13:28+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap.
Du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Ich vermute, du bist über eine Fehlermeldung beim Hochladen gestolpert. Das liegt daran, dass du einen Weg versehentlich verschoben hast.
Du hast auch ein Gebäude gelöscht. War das Absicht?
Viele Grüße
Dodko (2025-12-21 15:39:23+00:00): Názov Slepá ulica aplikácie nepoznajú, na konci ulice umiestnite značku https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:noexit%3Dyes
eggie (2025-12-21 12:31:01+00:00): Dag Must..  Je vraagt feedback.  Wanneer het pad niet bestaat dan kan het uiteraard weg.
Paden die dichtgroeien taggen we vaak eerst met disused:highway=path   Dat voorkomt opnieuw intekenen.

MVG
eggie
Taya_S (2025-12-22 16:35:53+00:00): Hello Jobigutenburg.

I have deleted the Palestine node you added in this changeset. The old one was deleted a while ago, but has now been restored. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9680050863

In the future, when doing something such as adding a node representing an entire country, please be a bit more clear in your changeset descriptions.
Jobigutenburg (2025-12-22 16:44:05+00:00): I will definitely consider. Thank you.
yvecai (2025-12-22 06:45:18+00:00): motor_vehicle=no, vous êtes sûr ? On peut au moins accéder à Chatel l'été.
Peut-être au moins 'destination', je pense.
Dawid2849 (2025-12-21 14:02:57+00:00): Na tym odcinku można w sumie nawet unclassified rozważyć: https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_car&route=54.368584%2C16.721551%3B54.38748%2C16.780747#map=15/54.37811/16.75115

Dosłownie nic tu nie ma, ruch będzie znikomy
Szymson (2025-12-21 14:30:44+00:00): Można, cały czas na bieżąco monitoruję sytuację. Poczekam aż się ruch unormuje po okresie świąteczno/noworocznym i wtedy najwyżej dokona się odpowiednich zmian. To samo dotyczy Sianów - Kawno, tam jest tylko las praktycznie.
Dawid2849 (2025-12-21 15:38:44+00:00): Możliwe, choć tam jednak są ze dwie miejscowości, gdzie w jednej z nich jest jakiś zakład, a przypadku Sławno - Wrześnica jest dosłownie tylko pole.

Faktycznie, lepiej poczekać do końca świątecznego szału.
theDM (2025-12-22 04:19:48+00:00): Czy w związku ze stanem DW 205 od DW 112 do węzła Sławno Południe więcej ruchu nie będzie korzystało z dawnej DK 6?
Szymson (2025-12-22 10:29:34+00:00): Myślę, że nie. Na obu końcach Sławna są fotoradary a od strony wschodniej budynki mieszkalne wchodzą w skrajnię jezdni. Na DW nie ma takich atrakcji, poza tym jest krótsza droga ale za to nawierzchnia jest znacznie gorsza.
theDM (2025-12-22 10:39:07+00:00): Bardziej myślałem o odcinku na zachód od DW 205, przynajmniej do czasu przebudowy DW 205.
Za to odcinek na wschód od DW 209 to nawet chyba mógłby być unclassified?
szalona_entropia (2025-12-23 12:42:46+00:00): Nie powinno być nigdzie unclassified, to jest porządna droga i stanowi objazd w razie zamknięcia S6.
theDM (2025-12-23 23:29:05+00:00): Nie wszędzie. Od Słupska do Sycewic i od granicy województw do Sławna Wschód nie jest porządna droga, tylko węższa jezdnia, a potencjalne zamknięcie S6 to jest raptem anomalia, która ma na szczęście nikłe szanse na wystąpienie.
Kovoschiz (2025-12-22 21:59:10+00:00): This should not be followed, as it's inconsistent. Eg Rt 3 ends on an Exit in WHC. It may be taken to mean the km measuring only.
Kovoschiz (2025-12-22 22:03:00+00:00): 2. The street naming isn't very useful, and it's quite unique to HK. `street:name=` should be enough for gazetted street, and `=motorway_link` can be named by interchanges.
0000FF berries (2025-12-21 13:28:44+00:00): Hi kniederkr :) Thanks for improving the data in Athens :)

I'm writing to you, as you mentioned "review_requested"and you wrote that "don't know how to tag hotel and cafe at once".

My suggestion would be to delete the point for the hotel https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13392730887, and move all these tags to the building https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/449647299 Additionally, we could change building=yes to building=hotel, and add the tag "operator=Ocupa" to the cafe https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12584819690

Thanks again :) If you have any questions, feel free to send a message tome or to the OSM forum for Greece at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/gr/68 :)

Happy mapping!
dcenkuwibeks (2025-12-21 13:06:48+00:00): Bitte einmal auf technische Fehler prüfen, ist meine erste größere Änderung in JOSM. Danke :-)
eggie (2025-12-21 13:23:00+00:00): Hoi,

De info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.
Probeer als het kan daar op bij te taggen.

MVG
eggie
balint36 (2026-03-06 17:18:11+00:00): Van olyan érzésem, hogy a buszmegálló neve nem azt, hogy "Buszmegálló Vasútállomás"
VLD0251 (2025-12-21 17:41:31+00:00): You changed the name:ar tag from وادي الفقير to واد الفقير without providing any source
It would be more appropriate to keep the original name and add وادي الفقير as alt_name:ar
Glassman (2025-12-22 00:55:20+00:00): I have reverted this edit because it appears to vandalize the map. If you disagree, please leave me a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176218740
JeroenHoek (2025-12-21 15:43:17+00:00): What you are doing is not in line with how the wiki documents this. Are you just unilaterally deciding that this tagging method is not OK?
JeroenHoek (2025-12-21 15:45:34+00:00): canoe=portage on a waterway is defined as meaning that you cannot pass there using a canoe (ice_skating is similar). Is this a misunderstanding on your part, or did I miss the discussion about this? The wiki shows nothing on the talk-page for canoe or canoe=portage.
scarapella (2025-12-21 16:00:26+00:00): Hi JorenHoek,

My intention was certainly not to do anything unilateral.  So I'm very happy you brought this to my attention so we can discuss.

Here we are talking about two different tags on the waterway ice_skates=kluning and canoe=portage. 

For the canoe=portage I think the issue comes from inconsistent documentation/conventions.  The convention I am very familiar with is where waterways are marked as canoe=no where you must portage and the portage trail itself is documented by portage=yes (canoe=portage on the way used to be a common convention but in my experience is much less used and the portage access tag is clearer).  This is consistent with the documentation on the canoe tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:canoe
and the portage tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:portage

You are totally correct that this is inconsistent with the canoe=portage documentation. 

As for ice_skates=kluning discussion, the convention and documentation is more clear, and made a mistake.  While the documentation here is ambigious
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ice_skates 

the use of ice_skates=kluning on a waterway to say you must detour is clear here
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:ice_skates%3Dkluning
and therefore the fault is purely mine. 

I'll be happy to revert (may take me a bit) , but I'm curios to have your opinion on the right convention. To me the use of a an access tag to mean both the way you should go and the way you should NOT go depending on the type of way is not super straight forward.
JeroenHoek (2025-12-21 16:12:22+00:00): I've documented ice_skates=kluning myself. I used canoe=portage as an example, so I am familiar with both. I've made some edits to the canoe documentation as well, which I've discussed with others using that tag at the time.

At that point the use of portage on a waterway was analogous to use_sidepath: it is a 'no' which indicates the why as well (a detour is available and either mandatory or physically required).

That is useful, because data consumers rendering a map for non-powered boats can indicate that that stretch of water is part of the route, but requires portage, as distinct from a blocked part of the route with no mapped portage alternative.

If you want to change the meaning of an existing tag, opening a discussion would be step one. By making edits in small areas you are changing an existing tagging scheme quite under the radar. That is not the right way to approach this.
JeroenHoek (2025-12-21 16:14:19+00:00): If you really dislike the way portage is used on waterways, you could propose an alternative which keeps the information (like 'use_portage'), but that would require coordination with other canoe mappers.

Either way, replacing these with 'no' results in loss of valid data, so please do revert.
scarapella (2025-12-21 16:21:53+00:00): Hello,

As promised, reverted this and related via 176224616, 176224548, 176224533, 176224460, 176224449, 176224433, 176224411, 176224354. 

As I mentioned above, the updates on the ice_skates tags was purely an error on my side.  Thank you for pointing out my error. 

As for the canoe tags, I'm happy to revert them here as the convention is totally valid and I appreciate your reminder.  

-scarapella
scarapella (2025-12-21 17:45:12+00:00): I was curious about the relative use of the different canoe portage conventions, so I did a little digging.  

There are currently 88 waterways with canoe=portage 
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hCX
and 1289 highways with canoe=portage.  
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hD0

Looking at the cases where we have a waterway with canoe=portage within 100 meters of a highway with the same, we have 28 instances
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hCZ

Waterways with canoe=no are quite common (which is expected) with 14194 instances worldwide. However, this is meaningless unless we look if they are nearby portages. 
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hD3

So first looking at the highways with portage=yes|designated, we have 6903 worldwide.
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hD4

Now combining the two, we have ~828 waterways with canoe=no within 100 meters of a highway with portage=yes|designated
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hDk
NB: I had to break this down into several queries as overpass-turbo would not return the worldwide result and I might ahve missed a few.

I also checked for cases of mixed conventions, but I did not find any cases where there was waterway with canoe=portage within 100 meters of a highway with portage=yes|designated.
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2hDl

At a minimum I believe we can say that both conventions exist in practice. :-)
rarad74 (2025-12-21 16:55:35+00:00): ALOOOOOOOO!!!!. Trebuie sa stau sa te pazeswc dupa fiecare editare? De ce nu scrii ceea ce faci? De ce desenezi drumuri si le lasi neconectate?
openstreetmapbuddy (2025-12-22 09:07:37+00:00): Uneori, se mai întâmplă să nu se alinieze corect. Totuși, e centimetric, altfel trebuie să zoomez la modu’ în care văd doar 2 cm, ceea ce uneori e greu. Știu că acesta este cel mai respectat servicii cartografic din lume, dar eu chiar încerc.
ld1998 (2026-01-02 17:07:00+00:00): Hey Wilmer! Aprecio muchisimo tu trabajo en Cumaná, pero estos detalles están siendo demasiado buenos... Gracias. Te he modificado la ubicación moviéndola un poco para cuadrarla con la imagen original.
NeisBot (2025-12-27 15:51:25+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1460259135 v1

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your description could be: "Parking at Vienna Airport"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deiner Beschreibung lauten: "Parken am Flughafen Wien"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam #Tag #Description
NeisBot (2026-01-01 17:32:53+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/176712555
(Deleted leftovers after several edits)
rskedgell (2025-12-21 15:03:32+00:00): Thank you!

I only noticed that this could be a problem this weekend, when the name of a London Borough with name tags which included name=* (in English) and name:fr=* but not name:en=* was presented to me in French. I assume that this was influenced by the accept language headers my browser sends, but it wasn't what I would have expected.
Langlaeufer (2025-12-21 19:37:45+00:00): Hi Tracker,
es macht wirklich keinen Sinn Radwege auf Parkplatznebenfahrgassen zu erfassen. Auch Fußwege wären eine seltene Ausnahme und das Nicht-Vorhandensein Muss nicht explizit erfasst werden.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176221650
rempshaener (2025-12-21 19:55:25+00:00): Hallo,
noch einmal der Hinweis auf die Namen.
Bitte erfasse diese nicht.
Ich werde beizeiten alles, was nach Personennamen klingt, löschen. Den Rest schiebe ich nach description.
Viele Grüße
FahRadler (2025-12-23 09:52:31+00:00): Das dürfte die richtige Pos. sein (höchster pkt der Umgebung). Lt älteren TK25 Name korrekt. Ich hatte 2016 nur die ele korrigiert.
Pos kam 2014 von user grungebass.
TheSwavu (2025-12-21 22:03:57+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for you contribution to OSM. A couple of questions:

1. Is this actually where the AED is located? The map point is inside a building that doesn't match you location description?

2. Did you put your own name and phone number as the operator of the AED? Is this what you meant to do?


Thanks.
Rainero-repair (2026-03-31 21:40:55+00:00): Revert in changeset/180692895
wegen nicht zulässiger Quelle (Bayernatlas).
MxxCon (2025-12-22 05:14:09+00:00): Hello.
Why did you delete public_transport=station here?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176223694
MxxCon (2025-12-22 05:12:54+00:00): Hello.
Why did you delete street address, network and railway=station tags?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176223814
MxxCon (2025-12-22 05:11:32+00:00): Hello.
Why did you delete railway:ref=98 tag?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176223976
NeisBot (2025-12-27 15:51:28+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/12613478878 v2

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your description could be: "Restaurant and art gallery"
---
Zum Beispiel könnte eine neutralere und sachlichere Version deiner Beschreibung lauten: "Restaurant und Kunstgalerie"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam #Tag #Description
NeisBot (2026-01-01 17:34:16+00:00): 🚫 Text removed by https://osm.org/changeset/176378982
Thanks @VlIvYur
McKulkin (2026-03-28 14:07:36+00:00): Thanks for fixing up `way 1460228877` . I'm unsure whether the whole edit is actually worth keeping. Something's telling me mapping out cow paths is counter productive and the mapper was a newbie who decided to just proceed.
NickMillerUK (2026-01-18 11:43:47+00:00): Please square the buildings when you map them. Irregular shapes do not reflect how buildings are constructed.
NickMillerUK (2026-01-18 11:47:17+00:00): Ignore me - I see the shape pre-dated your edit. Thanks for contributing to the map.
Szymson (2025-12-21 17:16:37+00:00): Super, dziękuję :)
Dodko (2025-12-25 10:49:27+00:00): duplicitné ref:minvskaddress
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1386655316/history
aceman444 (2025-12-25 16:50:57+00:00): Jasne, dakujem.
Frans S (2025-12-23 16:15:54+00:00): Hello.
Your mappings are below the quality HOTOSM expects.
Please strengthen your mapping skills.
Quality prevails above quantity.
Best regards
eggie (2025-12-21 20:11:46+00:00): Dag schermpeter,

Ik heb een vlak building=roof met layer=1 ingetekend.
MVG
eggie
schermpeter (2025-12-22 13:57:43+00:00): Ok, bedankt.
NeisBot (2025-12-27 15:51:31+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1460286595 v1

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your description could be: "note imagem aérea antiga"
---
Por exemplo, uma versão mais neutra e factual da sua descrição poderia ser: "nota imagem aérea antiga"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam #Tag #Description
NeisBot (2026-01-01 17:35:10+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/176712617
NeisRevert (2026-01-01 17:37:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/176712671
where the comment is: "Remove unclear map edits"
Glassman (2025-12-22 16:13:36+00:00): Reverted for possible vandalism
Senihtu (2025-12-22 06:13:18+00:00): Nochmal Guten Morgen!
auch bei einem access=no muß der Bus sich einen anderen Weg gesucht haben. Oder gibt es für ihn eine Ausnahme? (Immer noch gilt: ich kenne mich da nicht aus. Du schon...)
Interteutones (2025-12-22 18:54:57+00:00): Hallo, ob da ein Bus verkehrt kann ich nicht sagen. Sollte nun wieder befahrbar sein.
JakovBušić (2025-12-21 18:21:51+00:00): The node that was accidentally created was deleted in changeset/176229535 since it served no real purpose.
bartgron (2025-12-22 22:32:45+00:00): Proszę o źródło informacji że tak to wygląda
Sylabowy Kot (2025-12-22 22:42:21+00:00): Ja bym prosił o napisanie PW do użytkownika. Jak to nie poskutkuje, to do DWG. Nie ma co się bawić w komentarze, jak użytkownik nas wszystkich zlewa. Wystarczy wam zabawy z kolejnym kontem, który bawi się w teoretyczne interpretacje stanów dróg.
AndyB_66 (2025-12-21 19:29:25+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
Frans S (2025-12-23 14:53:44+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
 * Please map individual buildings without collecting multiple nearby buildings into a single object..
They have to be mapped individually.
Best regards
NeisBot (2025-12-21 19:14:22+00:00): Hi Salmonings, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 98% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 3 name(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=176231527
pitscheplatsch (2025-12-27 13:41:54+00:00): Do you mean https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10559845231
micheleOSM3 (2025-12-21 20:18:37+00:00): Ciao, non so cosa è accaduto, ma dopo la tua modifica il sentiero 713a risulta incompleto, adesso lo correggo.
Sarebbe anche utile che il commento del changeset possa dare informazioni utili, "inserisci" non è un commento molto significativo.