piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
trial (2024-12-28 22:51:34+00:00): Bonjour, je suis passé par là au hasard des améliorations des cours d'eau : https://waterwaymap.org/#map=14/48.0176/-4.55735
Si le toit est en dur, building=yes, wall=no, la valeur outdoor_seating=yes suffirait. ou Street. Je ne mettrais pas terrace car terrace sous-entend que ce n'est pas couvert en dur, non ?
trial (2024-12-28 23:03:27+00:00): Ça aurait aussi puêtre cette carte des estuaires : 
https://waterwaymap.org/ends/#map=11/48.0176/-4.5574
trial (2024-12-28 23:15:57+00:00): https://waterwaymap.org/ends/#map=11/48.0176/-4.5574 exemple d'endroit ou je ne suis pas encore passé : on voit des interruptions topologiques, c'est balot
foehn (2025-01-09 11:01:47+00:00): Bonjour,
Voilà c'est corrigé pour les terrasses sur le toit. Merci encore. Par contre pour la topologie du Goyen, je n'arrive pas à le résoudre. Car le fleuve est sous l'influence de la marée et ne  peux s'arrêter à Pont-Croix, ni rejoindre le trait de côte à l'embouchure. Si tu as des propositions..
trial (2025-01-10 09:45:04+00:00): Bonjour, le sens de l'écoulement est simple : c'est celui à marée descendante. Ça coule de source ;-). A priori c'est bon.
trial (2025-01-10 21:32:41+00:00): Et le Goyen arrive à la mer : https://waterwaymap.org/ends/#map=14/48.01075/-4.53765
Là encore pas de souci.
SpinOff (2024-01-10 21:33:28+00:00): Hej. Zmiany które wysyłasz na serwer OSM lądują w globalnie dostępnej bazie danych. Nie można dodawać przypadkowych obiektów w ramach testu.
habi (2024-11-25 07:29:26+00:00): Ciao nvoberwil
Ich bin über die Bäume neben https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11399946346 'gestolpert', weil ich gestern hier durchspaziert bin.
Ich würde bei allen diesen Bäumen nicht die Nummer und den Namen als Namen erfassen.
Ist die Nummer an den Bäumen angeschrieben, und könnte evtl. als Referenz erfasst werden?
Ä Gruess us Bärn,
habi
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-10 16:23:50+00:00): sorry, filter that was supposed to skip it failed

(or more exactly, filter worked and was ignored)

this is now fixed
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-10 16:25:23+00:00): edit reviewed manually, I would do the same manually (I could revert this and apply it manually but it would be pointless)

sorry for a bug
Jrachi (2024-01-11 10:42:45+00:00): Ciao Davide!
Stai facendo un bel lavoro!
Posso solo chiederti se hai lasciato i ref sulla footway  verso Anzino per un motivo?
Non è (ancora) scritto da nessuna parte ma lasciare un ref fuori della relazione a me sembra possibile fonte di errori e fraintendimenti, nel caso il percorso della relazione venga cambiato.

Ivo
rhhs (2024-10-14 15:37:42+00:00): I made some improvements of the paths mapped around Ul. Zemen, but there's more left to be done. It's not very accurate (see note).
TrickyFoxy (2024-01-11 19:08:52+00:00): 👋 You drew buildings with the wrong `Building=yes` tag.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146110413
TrickyFoxy (2024-01-11 19:10:37+00:00): And you did it on top of existing ones.
Shamsudin Ahmed (2025-11-30 18:50:46+00:00): Specific building
eggie (2024-01-10 19:41:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
MissieJ (2024-01-15 23:59:09+00:00): hi, I think you removed several streets in Delano.. These are roads there please do not remove them again. I have verified all street in Wright Co on foot and keep up with new areas.
danieldegroot2 (2024-01-12 18:06:33+00:00): Hey brianh,

Please note, 'relations'(here: tags) are not categories
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relations_are_not_categories
The "noble" designation seems to group whole types of trees together based on their size and/or fruit.
This may be a notable category ('relation') on Wikipedia or Wikidata, not on OpenStreetMap; it is based on subjective, not objective, verifiable details.
It is potentially duplicating information which could be derived from the wikidata (or wikipedia) tag, or for experts from the genus, etc. tags.
Similarly, a tag 'division:beautiful=yes' for numerous types of trees on average with a certain height or fruit, contains basically no useful information. This information can already be derived from existing tags.

Also, OpenStreetMap is not OpenHistoricalMap, it can't cover all historical data. As far as I can see this is based on a historical law from the 7/8th century, of which I'm unsure how much is still present in modern law.
( https://www.forestryfocus.ie/social-environmental-aspects/cultural-heritage/trees-and-folklore/brehon-laws/ )

This is different from monumental/heritage trees, which have a -current- official, usually legal, protection or designation.
(though often this coincides with a type of tree as well)

I would suggest to reconsider adding such data to OpenStreetMap, also in the future.

Regards,

Daniel
danieldegroot2 (2024-02-06 12:19:05+00:00): Reverted by user in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147123352

In reply to private message;

Leaf cycle/type is mainly useful for landuse areas (wood, forest, etc.) as individual trees are usually not mapped there unless they have some status as mentioned before. Where individual trees are mapped, leaf cycle becomes largely redundant, except where the species(/genus) is unknown or uncertain and users see value in keeping an indication of what it is. It is also much easier to determine.
( is:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree#Use_of_redundant_tags )
Divisions such as 'noble' are less likely to be used by contributors than height, diameter, leaf cycle/type and (even) denotation. Currently, they would mostly be thrown in with denotation=natural_monument(/landmark/avenue..).
( is:
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree#Subtag_denotation_to_indicate_the_significance
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree#Fallen_trees
)
I would suggest discussing addition of specific tags in the general community forum so you get insights from the wider community.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/38/none
If they're okay with the community, you can document them on the wiki
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Creating_a_page_describing_key_or_value
Marek-M (2024-01-10 18:08:10+00:00): Cześć,

Wszystkie ciągi pieszo rowerowe są oznaczane (i tak są tutaj w okolicy zrobione)
bicycle=designated
foot=designated
highway=path

ale tutaj zmieniłeś path na footway
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/352032441

Miałeś do tego jakiś powód?
Marek-M (2024-01-10 18:22:43+00:00): Jednak stworzyłeś tutaj kilka przejść dla pieszych z tagami bicycle=designated
foot=designated
sugerującymi highway=path jako ciąg pieszo rowerowy.

Czy przez te przejścia można przejeżdżać rowerami?

Jeśli tak, to highway powinien mieć wartość path, jeżeli nie, to highway=footway jest w porządku ale trzeba wtedy usunąć tagi bicycle oraz foot.

Zatem proszę zdecydować, które rozwiązanie pasuje do tych dróg.
Jerry_W2k (2024-01-10 19:37:00+00:00): Hejo,

wiesz co, edytowałem sobie w wyjątkowo w iD - w wśród opcji było tylko "Oznakowane przejście dla pieszych" tj. nie było opcji "Przejścia dla rowerów i pieszych jednocześnie", zobaczyłem że po wybraniu przejścia dla pieszych mogę zachować tagi foot=designated oraz bicycle=designated więc nie wiele myśląc tak wtedy zostawiałem. 
W ciągu 24 godzin poprawię i dziękuję za uwagi.

Pozdrawiam serdecznie!
NeisBot (2024-01-11 00:22:35+00:00): Hi topolusitania 👋

your recent changeset has been marked due to a temporary or permanent block from further map edits. 

If you have any questions or if there's anything you'd like to discuss regarding the mapping, feel free to reach out! We're here to help. 

Best regards, 🤖

Details https://osm.org/user_blocks/15568
#ContributorHasBeenBlocked
danieldegroot2 (2024-01-10 17:41:48+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11506335606
indoor=yes ? ;-)
astro_furball (2024-02-14 18:54:32+00:00): The iD in-browser editor doesn't show this prominently, but please note that there are prefixed variants of electrification tags for when the electrification (or the line itself) is still under construction. This matters for OpenRailwayMap rendering as currently implemented.
KofDim (2024-02-17 17:05:00+00:00): Здравствуйте. Объясните, как так получилось, что ваши линии совпадают с линиями треков?
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:22:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
Adam Franco (2024-05-24 13:49:02+00:00): Hi bibliotreka, I've reverted this change as the current community consensus is that highway=trunk is a connectivity-based classification, not a physical-infrastructure classification. highway=trunk is to be used for the most important regional roads that are *not* motorways. The fact that MA-8 doesn't look like a motorway (yet is still an important regional connector between Pittsfield and Vermont is why this road receives the top-level highway=trunk classification. Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance and join us in discussions on https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/us/78 or the OSM-US Slack's #highway classification channel: https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151771021
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:41+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:57+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:02:29+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113700
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:02:16+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113696
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:22:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
Tomas Straupis (2024-01-11 13:11:29+00:00): Nėra čia jokių pėsčiųjų takų. „Rankovės“ yra judantis objektas, į GIS duomenų baze nerašomas.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:01:50+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113673
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:22:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
jeslop (2024-01-10 17:59:56+00:00): El uso de siglas en la etiqueta name está regulado en https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Buenas_prácticas_en_España#Name_con_abreviaturas. Revierto estos cambios.

Jesús López
OpenStreetMap Foundation
Data Working Group
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:00:49+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113627
gurglypipe (2024-01-11 13:08:39+00:00): That looks like a conservatory, not solar panels. It’s in shadow in some aerial imagery (nobody installs solar panels in shadow) and looks to be on the first floor, not the second floor.
SK53 (2024-01-11 14:23:02+00:00): Definitely not solar pv. A conservatory. Will wait until DWG have tidied up recent changesets.
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:01:26+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113651
InsertUser (2024-01-22 16:27:10+00:00): Can you please save more often, the bounding box for this is absolutely massive for no apparent reason.
OldManCelli (2024-01-23 16:27:32+00:00): wow. sorry about that. I must have had an edit that I missed saving. Will do!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:52+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-01-13 01:21:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 146200763 where the changeset comment is: Following a request to the DWG, reverting some fake mapping.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15570 , https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-November/thread.html#30884
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:04:55+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113775
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-10 18:10:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2523851022
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/215549472

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
gscscnd (2024-01-11 11:58:42+00:00): Te wszystkie odnogi są w terenie oznakowane jako Wodzisławska?
Interswd (2024-01-11 16:26:14+00:00): Naprawione. 
Część jest małymi tabliczkami, - część chyba nie, a jeszcze inne tabliczkami prywatnymi. Pojadę kiedyś to podejrzę. Czy jest jakaś różnica w mapowaniu dróg z tabliczkami i bez nich?  Generalnie podążam tutaj za zmianami takimi jak np. tu https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/50.01402/18.48323 (brak oznaczenia) czy tu: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/49.98351/18.50507

Sporo jest takich miejsc w naszej okolicy gdzie tabliczek nie ma ale userzy powprowadzali nazwy ulic. Jak to traktować? Są jakieś przyjęte zasady społeczności? pozdro
gscscnd (2024-01-12 07:13:05+00:00): Są dwa podejścia:
(1) name=* + name:signed=no,
(2) noname=yes.
Wydaje mi się (i pewnie ktoś by mnie poparł), że nienazwane odnogi głównej drogi (w szczególności podjazdy pod pojedyncze gospodarstwa) bardziej by pasowały pod (2). Z kolei (jakakolwiek) ulica bez tabliczki, ale posiadająca (powszechnie znaną) nazwę np. w jakiejś dokumentacji urzędowej to raczej (1). Do tego w odpowiednich przypadkach tagi loc_name, official_name itp.
Interswd (2024-01-14 15:40:17+00:00): ok, dzięki, sprawdzę w terenie i postaram się to zrobić wg tego co wyżej piszesz. Pytanie może jeszcze jak traktować prywatne tabliczki bo takie też się zdarzają?
gscscnd (2024-01-15 20:07:14+00:00): Jeśli jest to znana/używana nazwa, to może być name, jeśli wiadomo, że nikt takiej nazwy nie używa, to np. not:name. Odsyłam do Wiki, bo nic mądrzejszego nie wymyślę:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#Values
mapertzw (2024-01-16 07:06:12+00:00): ok. dzięki :)
balint36 (2024-01-10 21:58:20+00:00): Légy oly szíves, és mutass egy kicsi tiszteletet a források iránt, és töröld a kapcsolatból azokat a részeket, amik nem tartoznak bele!
Ez nem kötözgető játék.
itineris (2024-01-10 22:02:31+00:00): Északi irányban itt vezet a 2-es, mivel a Szitakötő utcáig délre egyirányú.
Országos főutakon nem létezik teleport.
itineris (2024-01-10 22:03:50+00:00): Megint csak most, csak neked:
https://www.google.hu/maps/@47.8146739,19.0928173,3a,39.3y,41.19h,79.37t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sBtjdcbrpoyU2cMmy1ayljw!2e0!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu
balint36 (2024-01-10 22:04:27+00:00): -_-
balint36 (2024-01-10 22:05:07+00:00): Akkor ha a te logikádat követjük, akkor a körforgalom mellett van Rétság, igaz?
balint36 (2024-01-10 22:06:10+00:00): Látod? Totál hibás a gondolkodásod. Látod valahol a 2-es út számpajzsát az úton? Nem. Akarod tudni, mi az ott? Megmutatja, hogy a 2-es főutat milyen irányban éred el.
itineris (2024-01-10 22:07:35+00:00): Ellenőrző kérdés: Szerinted meddig tart északi irányba az M2 autóút?
itineris (2024-01-10 22:08:43+00:00): Igen, ez a StreetView-s tábla valóban destination:ref. Node az M2-es?...
balint36 (2024-01-10 22:09:51+00:00): Nagyon elkeseredetten próbálkozol látom, hogy a saját szájad íze szerint próbálsz bemagyarázni, és copyrightolt dolgot tolsz OSM-re.
Csak nem számoltál azzal, hogy én voltam tényleg ott, és mindent, amit mondok, azt az ott látottakra alapozok. Buszon ülve, volán mögött kerestem a számpajzsot a 20424 és M2 útszakaszokon, de útirányt mutató tábla van.
És ne feleggyük el, hogy a KIRA engem támaszt alá.
balint36 (2024-01-10 22:20:34+00:00): A te - OSM-en nem felhasználható - forrásod a 20424-es számozású útra mutat:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/94879817
A tábla útirányokat mutat (hacsak nem költöztették át Budapestet és Rétságot is a körforgalom mellé), ezáltal helyes megállapítás, hogy cél útirányt mutat, így az a megállapításod is helyes, hogy destination:ref=M2 (meg 2 és E 77-re is igaz, de címkézve is van), hiszen később a 20425-öt valóban elérhető Budapest irányában az M2.
Vagy esetleg azt mondod, hogy Rétság és Budapest valóban elköltözött volna?
balint36 (2024-01-12 15:00:37+00:00): Utolsó felhívás. Legyél kedves a források szerinti állapotot visszaállítani!
balint36 (2024-01-12 16:15:38+00:00): Illetve szabad megtudakolnom, hogy a 12-es és 2-es főút 6 elemből álló körforgalmának (mint csomópont) miért csak 4 eleme tartozik a 2-es főút kapcsolatához annak ellenére, hogy csomópontként ez is egészben a 2-es főút része?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693633724
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693633723
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/94879814
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693633713
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693633722
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/693633727
itineris (2024-01-12 20:44:49+00:00): Azért, mert általában így szoktuk. Bővebb magyarázatért keresheted Úr Balázst! Nekem kevés a türelmem a kötözködésedhez.
balint36 (2024-01-13 00:05:32+00:00): Mégis te kötözködsz.
De semmi baj, van ennél jobb megoldás is, úgy látszik te most azt választottad.
Balázs nemrég még csípőből összevont egy körforgalmat vonalakkal és kapcsolatokkal egyetemben (amivel amúgy gondot is okozott a meglévő kapcsolatokban), valamint több ízben hónapok óta nem ad választ, ezért nem vagyok meggyőzve.
jeslop (2024-01-10 18:08:03+00:00): Revertido en el conjunto de cambios

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146113861
NeisBot (2024-01-12 00:22:33+00:00): Hi GPSMAP67 👋

your recent changeset has been marked due to a temporary or permanent block from further map edits. 

If you have any questions or if there's anything you'd like to discuss regarding the mapping, feel free to reach out! We're here to help. 

Best regards, 🤖

Details https://osm.org/user_blocks/15570
#ContributorHasBeenBlocked
DurgeshSinghChouhan (2024-01-10 18:13:08+00:00): This is an local Punjabi restaurant, this place is popular among travelers for there food, they offer veg as well as non-veg.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-01-10 18:26:40+00:00): I removed links to temporary files hosted at westnordost.de

this images will be deleted after note is closed! Upload your photos to Wikimedia Commons if you want to keep them - note that uploading photos made by someone else needs a license assignment.
MikiDi (2024-01-10 18:31:48+00:00): Ok. Thanks for mentioning. Didn't know about this. This is a pity. There must be some discussion going on to improve this situation? (setting default licensing in streetcomplete -informing the user obviously-?)