piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2024-04-29 05:13:58+00:00): BAG import hersteld..  Je zelf ingetekende gebouwen uitgelijnd met de BGT.  Nooit naar de daken kijken. Daar staat het gebouw niet. 
Mapse
eggie
eggie (2024-04-29 09:55:37+00:00): removed landuse=residential.. Duplicated tagging and restore building:part=yes for the second time. Please don't remove BAG data.
Please reply  at questions and remarks.
Gr eggie
citrula (2024-04-29 03:31:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM, thanks for your contributions.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150636460
Metzor (2024-04-29 03:40:20+00:00): Hallo HeilWolf,

Das passt nicht zusammen: eine Beschränkung, die nur geradeausfahren erlaubt, aber zwei Straßen in der Relation, die ein 90°Winkel bilden?
Vermutlich muss die Grünewaldstraße da raus?
Aktuell kann man jedenfalls von Westen kommend die Großgartacher Straße nicht mehr durchgängig befahren.

Schöne Grüße
Metzor
HeilWolf (2024-04-29 07:47:35+00:00): Hallo Metzor,
vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Ich habe den Fehler korrigiert.
Viele Grüße
Heilwolf
Metzor (2024-04-29 18:30:19+00:00): Danke!
eggie (2024-04-29 05:14:35+00:00): Restored BAG import
eggie (2024-04-29 05:27:49+00:00): parking=underground? 
gr eggie
Taya_S (2024-04-29 17:39:31+00:00): En weer 3 nieuwe. Zou je alstjeblieft eens wat aandachtiger willen mappen. Momenteel moeten andere mensen hun tijd verspillen om jouw fouten te fixen. Dat is niet e bedoeling. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277922783
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/57712583
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277911357
mueschel (2024-04-29 16:44:30+00:00): Hi,
"lay_bay" is a new tag - what does it mean?
mweper (2024-04-29 17:18:49+00:00): Sorry. I realized that I wrote wrong, what I meant was https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bus_bay
When I sit down at the PC, I'll correct it.
mueschel (2024-04-29 17:38:29+00:00): Thx! I fixed it.
CopperOppositeKindred (2024-04-28 21:36:05+00:00): Ez alapján csináltam: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Addresses#Multiple_buildings_for_one_housenumber

Rendben van? Erre gondol a cikk "perimeter" alatt?

Mind a sok bódénak ugyan az a házszáma az egyik tulajdonosa szerint, mert technikailag egy telken vannak.

Pár közös kulcsot a cikk ajánlásának ellenére nem vittem át, mert a validáló panaszolta a building:valami kulcsok használatát a sima building nélkül, amit viszont nem hoztam ki mert az változó.
infeeeee (2024-04-29 18:45:52+00:00): Szia!

Semmi baj nem volt a régi számozással, nagyon sok dupla házszám van az országban, validálók is tévedhetnek, nem kell mindig igazat adni nekik.

Ez a valami amit köréjük felvettél szerintem nem ideális, a telekhatárra gondolt a wiki mint lehetőség, mint körülrajzolható, vagy ez az akart lenni?

Még ami lehet: összevonni az épületeket egy épületté, és az üzleteket pontként rakni rá, és cím csak az épületen marad. A különböző tetőformákat meg building:part-ként veszed fel: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings

Közös kulcsokat meg nem kell átvinni. Ne higgy el mindent amit a számítógéped kiír.
CopperOppositeKindred (2024-04-29 20:17:05+00:00): > validálók is tévedhetnek

erre nem jeleztek, csak jobban tetszett a wiki módszere mint hogy többször meg van adva.

> a telekhatárra gondolt a wiki mint lehetőség, mint körülrajzolható, vagy ez az akart lenni?

nem, a telekhatár elhelyezkedését nem ismerem

Viszont ez valóban furcsán néz ki, nemsokára visszaállítom.
CopperOppositeKindred (2024-04-29 20:54:07+00:00): visszaállítva itt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681169
Nadeaua (2024-04-28 21:56:21+00:00): https://www.google.com/maps/@45.4089811,-74.0359588,3a,75y,46.87h,92.18t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sulOzs5D_72yx3a3PECVTfA!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fpanoid%3DulOzs5D_72yx3a3PECVTfA%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.share%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26yaw%3D46.87090534207153%26pitch%3D-2.175099996162615%26thumbfov%3D90!7i16384!8i8192?coh=205410&entry=ttu
Nadeaua (2024-04-28 21:56:51+00:00): Don't change it back to grass it's cleary not grass
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-04-29 12:32:48+00:00): Ça devrait pas plutôt être brownfield? landfill est pour des déchet normalement
Nadeaua (2024-04-30 03:47:38+00:00): Je suis d'accord, mais en même temps Transport Québec met son déblai plein de cochonnerie. Je vais remettre brownfield, je pense c'est ce que j'avais mis originalement.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-04-30 10:10:06+00:00): Haha! Si vous croyez que c'est un endroit pour entreposer des déchets de manière permanente, alors go pour landfill!
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-28 22:41:16+00:00): Please do not map areas such that they fold back upon themselves to create a "hole" in the area.  Multipolygon relations should be used instead.
vasony (2024-04-29 19:24:27+00:00): Szia!

A place nem ilyenekre való, az persze hiba hogy nincs felrajzolva a tér, de attól a Szent Antal térnek az addr:street-ben a helye.

Tamás
CopperOppositeKindred (2024-04-29 20:40:05+00:00): Helló!

Visszaállítom az addr:street-et, köszi hogy szóltál.

Milyen formában kellene felrajzolni a teret?
Más már felvette leisure=park címkével, de az addr:street leírása szerint ennek egy utca vagy egy place=square nevével kellene megegyeznie: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:street

Azon is gondolkoztam hogy a teret átcímkézem place=square-re (a leisure-ről) ~~viszont nem tűnik helyesnek, mert~~ viszont úgy tűnik azt azért vetettem el mert benéztem, és azt hittem hogy a 2 címke ütközik egymással.

Azon kívül hogy visszaállítom az addr:place-t addr:street-re, szerinted rendben lenne ha a meglévő tér objektumra (link lent) felveszem a place=square címkét?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/772534061
CopperOppositeKindred (2024-04-29 20:43:54+00:00): Közben látom hogy a címkét már visszajavítottad.
Ez esetben csak a térrel kapcsolatos kérdések maradnak.
vasony (2024-04-29 20:48:22+00:00): Opció még,  hogy az egyik határoló utcát irod át, mondjuk ott ahol a házak a térre vannak számozva , esetleg ha utca tábla is lenne ott az már bónusz.
citrula (2024-04-29 03:30:11+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contributions. Can you explain the goal in the edits you are making ? You have deleted a highway that appears to still be there, and removed the highway tag from another. I'd be happy to point you in the right direction
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150638451
RazorDaemon (2024-04-30 03:52:54+00:00): There is no highway there. The deletion is a dirt road that was illegal, it goes through the middle of my property. The edit to the other road is because it is not a road, it is a dirt path that is only used as a back access to some ranch land.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150638451
RazorDaemon (2024-04-30 03:53:47+00:00): Also wanted to mention the satellite images are over 4 years old, my house isn't even on these images.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150638451
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-28 22:43:48+00:00): Do not try to mimic holes for your golf game.

Changeset reverted in part or full.
Hufkratzer (2024-04-29 20:33:00+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277936532 ist viel zu klein für eine Reitanlage (laieure=horse_riding); ist sogar recht klein für einen Reitplatz (leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian). Reitet da wirklich jemand auf der Fläche oder wozu ist die?
Vgl. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure=horse_riding
LucGommans (2024-04-29 21:46:01+00:00): Ah yes, it looks like I've used the wrong tag there and it should be something like landuse=meadow + meadow=pasture? That doesn't label the use for horses, though, but indeed an equestrian area is usually round or rectangular and not this odd shape. I don't think it would be too small (~20m diameter on the semi-round west side), just the shape is odd. Does pasture meadow seem correct to you then or should it be something else?
Hufkratzer (2024-04-29 22:29:31+00:00): Sorry that I wrote in German, I didn't see that it is in NL.
There is no general tag for areas that are somehow used for horses. If it is used for riding (maybe in circles or lungeing) it can be tagged leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (preset "Horse Riding / Rodeo Arena"). If not, it may be  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=animal_keeping or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:meadow=pasture or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:meadow=paddock ; there is not really an established tagging, unfortunately, AFAIK.
LucGommans (2024-04-30 21:56:59+00:00): Kein Thema, my profile says I understand German and, after all, in this international project it doesn't really matter what language is used so long as the reader(s) understand :)

I've updated it (changeset 150728290) to use the meadow=pasture tag because the wiki suggests that as the most common tagging scheme these days. Thanks for raising it!
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:45:38+00:00): Hello.
The website you provided here is invalid. It must be corrected.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150638569
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-28 22:43:11+00:00): Again, please do not map things so they should up a certain way for your golf game.

Do not fold areas back upon themselves to simulate holes.  multipolygon relations should be used instead.

This changeset has been reverted in part or full.
literan (2024-07-30 07:21:58+00:00): я поставил access=no на неформальные тропинки, пересекающие ж/д (т.к. по закону запрещено пересекать жд в неустановленных местах)
Frans S (2024-04-29 10:26:49+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped buildings.

Included shadow of a building.

Buildings not squared.

Connected nodes of buildings to a highway.

Highways wrongly tagged. (too narrow to be called an unclassified or residential road)

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150638866
VLD280 (2024-06-26 22:03:09+00:00): Hi there Nickarri,

I am reaching out to you in regards to several changesets in this area that resulted in a lot of overlapping highway errors. I noticed that most of the driveway features have footways in identical positions, which is causing them to be flagged with this error. I wanted to suggest using the "foot=yes" tag instead of duplicating the way. This tag can be put on any already existing highway feature to indicate that it is accessible by foot. More information about the foot tag can be found here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot

I would recommend removing the duplicate footways and adding this tag to the driveways if you want to indicate they are foot accessible. This method is more in line with OSM editing practices, as it reduces clutter on the map and makes the relevant data (foot accessibility) more easily available for everyone who utilizes it. I made the changes described here on a couple features in the changeset linked below, if you would like to refer to it as an example.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153221103

Best regards,
Isaac (VLD280)
citrula (2024-04-29 05:13:34+00:00): Is this actually a beach? it doesn't really look like it from aerial imagery.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150639665
tekim (2024-04-29 20:47:36+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681119
santamariense (2024-04-29 01:28:26+00:00): Olá Tcharles Clunk,

Estive revisando sua edição. Dicas: 
- Nomes próprios sempre no formato inicial em maiúscula, seguido das demais letras em minúsculas. Ex: Arroio Grande, Santa Cruz do Sul
- No Brasil não se faz necessário adicionar a cidade, pois elas são obtidas da delimitação municipal, a qual já está mapeada. No caso de Santa Cruz, nem o bairro, pois a delimitação dos bairros já está mapeada na cidade.
- A documentação do OSM está em wiki.osm.org

Junte-se a comunidade OSM RS (https://t.me/osmrs) e Brasil (https://t.me/OSMBrasil_Comunidade/1) no Telegram para interagir e tirar dúvidas.

Bons mapeamentos
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-29 00:00:13+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2260521901
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2260522330
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277947393
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1277947391

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
tekim (2024-04-29 20:46:50+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681099
tekim (2024-04-29 20:46:16+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681086
tekim (2024-04-29 20:45:04+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681046
tekim (2024-04-29 20:44:36+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681028
tekim (2024-04-29 20:44:06+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150681012
tekim (2024-04-29 20:43:35+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150680997
tekim (2024-04-29 20:42:34+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150680965
tekim (2024-04-29 20:42:01+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150680950
tekim (2024-04-29 20:40:58+00:00): reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150680918
tekim (2024-04-29 20:40:06+00:00): reverting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150680898
fortera_au (2024-04-29 01:50:01+00:00): Hey there, the two larger vineyard areas you've added don't actually exist anymore, that's all housing now.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150641373
fortera_au (2024-04-29 01:51:54+00:00): Also, most of the roads in the winery should probably be either service=parking_aisle or no service tag, service=driveway should only be for the ones leading up to one specific property/building, as per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Ddriveway
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150641373
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:53:46+00:00): Hello.
Is this lane count accurate? Satellite imagery shows that the street is wide enough to fit 2 cars in both directions(plus parking lanes).
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150641912
cat_not_deprecated (2024-05-03 12:57:36+00:00): The street is wide, but not wide enough to have parked cars and 2 lanes moving in each direction.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150641912
tekim (2024-04-29 14:06:43+00:00): Hello, Welcome to OpenStreetMap!  It is great to have you as part of our community.  Unfortunately, when editing OpenStreetMap we are not allowed to use Google Maps in any manner, and I see you cited it as one of your sources.  This is due to Google's Terms of Service.  Allowing this edit to remain on the map puts you, the OpenStreetMap project, and users of OpenStreetMap data at risk.
tekim (2024-04-29 14:07:12+00:00): Reverting a change that used a source that is not allowed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150665548
seattlefyi (2024-04-29 23:54:58+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM! Thanks for the edits! Some friendly tips: 1. Please upload your changes to one area (like a neighborhood or town) before editing the next one over. 2. Your building address tags look pretty good, just please follow the outline a little more closely, and if you press 'q' as the last thing after drawing the building/tagging as a house, it'll square the corners which looks better. 3. The Starbucks is close, but it looks like the brand got attached to the name. Could you please check how it looks?
seattlefyi (2024-04-29 23:55:43+00:00): Cool pond, nice job here!
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-17 01:21:44+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. The information you added is crucial. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150642313
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:57:23+00:00): Hello.
As documented on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:phone#Usage, when adding phone numbers they must always include country dialing code (in US it's +1). Additionally, the numbers should be separated either by - or space.

When adding website address, it must always include https:// or http:// depending on what the website supports.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150642351
fortera_au (2024-04-29 23:33:21+00:00): Hi, I've reverted this changeset because you've removed a segment of road that clearly exists.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150684469
MxxCon (2024-05-03 05:58:41+00:00): Hello.
Why did you delete address information from this building?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150642522
fortera_au (2024-04-29 03:34:19+00:00): Hi, service roads should be highway=service, not highway=unclassified
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150642530
Intrinsical (2024-04-29 03:52:37+00:00): I am currently working on fixing the natural=wetland.
MxxCon (2024-05-03 06:00:02+00:00): Hello.
Is Dun Huang Lanzhou Noodles located in the same space where Cafe PARIS used to be?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150642682
tekim (2024-04-29 17:49:50+00:00): reverting fake edit - no lakes visible in imagery citing by mapper, or any other imagery commonly available to OSM

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150675137
Frans S (2024-04-29 09:26:29+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please use Esri Imagery as requested.
About highways .
Take the rules about tagging into consideration. Mostly narrow traces. (paths)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations
NeretvaRiver (2024-04-30 14:30:58+00:00): Hello Fran S, 
Thank you for reaching out. The modifications were made with the idea that track classification is applicable to most highways within African national parks. However, I will defer to the edits you have made here as it matches the modeling in the area. Have a wonderful day!
mariotomo (2024-12-04 20:19:59+00:00): hi. thanks for the intention to contribute. in order to maximise your impact, please check this osmose report:

https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#loc=12/8.6606/-79.82993&level=1%2C2&item=1220

rivers should flow either to the coastline or into an other river. in OSM lakes, lagoons, and tidal areas (on the land-side of the coastline) are crossed by waterways, to indicate how water from tributary streams flows across the lake, into the outflow river.
mueschel (2024-04-30 14:02:34+00:00): Hi,
could you check your workflow? I regularly find and remove "python = scripts/main.py" tags on some objects.
Glassman (2024-05-01 17:26:16+00:00): It looks like you added a second baseball field the the existing one. I remove the original one.

Also - The address for the field is different from the school grounds with the baseball field is located. Could you verify the address? I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150643182
map per (2024-04-29 20:27:23+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Die Änderung sieht gut aus, danke!
nevw (2024-04-30 05:32:58+00:00): Hi osmi notes error here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.02912&lat=-27.46879&zoom=19
Duplicate segment and role problem
nevw (2024-05-01 00:39:29+00:00): I fixed this now
Kaushik60 (2024-05-20 01:08:19+00:00): This exit has now been closed off
fortera_au (2024-04-29 04:20:04+00:00): Hey there, way 1278041984 looks more like a service road than a track, do you know if it's paved at all?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150643500
tekim (2024-04-29 17:53:01+00:00): reverting fake edit - doesn't look like beach in imageryrting fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150675297
tekim (2024-04-29 17:53:35+00:00): reverting fake edit - doesn't look like beach in imagery

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150675324
seattlefyi (2024-04-30 00:01:59+00:00): Thanks for updating the Arby's. Here you could either select the building outline, right-click and select "downgrade" which would remove all the business tags. Or in the left panel, remove all of the business tags (keeping the building and addr tags (if any) for the next tenant). Last, no need to add a description value! Thanks again, it takes a while to get the hang of editing, but you're off to a good start, and it's always great to have a new editor!
tekim (2024-04-29 16:58:11+00:00): Reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150672808
tekim (2024-04-29 16:56:52+00:00): Reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150672760
tekim (2024-04-29 17:00:09+00:00): reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150672888
meongseolin (2026-03-29 15:12:10+00:00): 您好，这边界数据是从哪里来的？我想编辑下
tekim (2024-04-29 17:55:10+00:00): reverting fake edit - this is not a lake, it might be a fountain

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150675388
tekim (2024-04-29 16:59:12+00:00): reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150672846
tekim (2024-04-29 16:58:48+00:00): reverting a fake edit

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150672831
sahilister (2024-04-29 05:28:36+00:00): Hello Swapnil, 

Nice too see you mapping/tracing water sources in OpenStreetMap. Though you mention, "added water well near my village" in changeset comment, I'm just curious if this is a mass import as finding/tracing/remembering/verifying so many sources in wide area seems difficult to me? 

In any case, do join OSM India channels mentioned at https://community.osm.be/resources/asia/india/ . Happy mapping!

Cheers!
sahilister
SwapnilMali (2024-04-30 01:48:35+00:00): Hello Sahilister,

Thanks you for asking me.

firstly I have added water well area near my village , after complited my area I started to drow  sorrounding areas , so selected drag down comment as "added water well near my village" It is not big village , as per arial immaggry I drow Or digitize water well.

Thanks & Regards,
Swapnil Mali.
chris66 (2024-05-15 13:27:30+00:00): Hi,
betrifft: Röhrenstraße:

hattest Du hier das vehicle=no ergänzt? Wenn ja, hast Du damit das Routing für Radfahrer und Autos unterbunden. 

Die Straße ist beschildert mit  Fahrradstraße, "Anlieger frei".
uknown-gryphus (2024-04-29 07:21:20+00:00): Hi, thank you for the edit, but link roads like this would be better tagged with highway=*_link. This is definitely not a residential road