piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2024-06-24 11:34:56+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)
Buildings not squared.

Connect node of buildings to highway

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/152338838
neuhausr (2024-06-06 21:19:10+00:00): Hi Doug, you have the right idea with the tag, but it should have both highway=crossing and crossing:island=yes (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:crossing:island). Before getting too far into that, though, it looks like Lyndale needs to be split into two one-ways where the island is, and 45th St split so that cars won't get routed through the island. If you want help on that, you can message me! Happy mapping, Brad
Doug Shidell (2024-06-07 16:51:54+00:00): Hi Brad,
I definitely need help on that. I want to learn more about mapping on Open Streets, and the learning curve will be quicker with some help. Thanks for the offer.
Henry572 (2024-06-08 11:40:29+00:00): Hallo Felix-66,
Sieht gut aus! Man könnte zwar diskutieren, ob die Breite für einen Bürgersteig ausreicht, ich habe aber auch nichts dagegen.
Gruß, Hendrik
hwierzbicki (2024-07-13 19:30:23+00:00): Hey Alan,

I've noticed that you've been changing the tower construction type (tower:construction) designation of some sites from "monopole" to "freestanding". 

I just wanted to give you a heads-up that "monopole" is the industry standard term for these types of sites. While "freestanding" is a general catch-all term for sites without any guy wires, it is less specific than "monopole." Additionally, "monopole" is already widely used, with over 9,000 nodes worldwide using this tag.

Thanks!
MxxCon (2024-06-17 15:46:47+00:00): Hello.
Is this correct branch= tag value?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152340063
VictorIE (2024-06-19 08:56:38+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1284210829

I'm not sure if it is useful to map paths as **both** ways and areas. It seems like an unnecessary duplication - the normal rule is one feature on the map for each feature in the real world.
ViriatoLusitano (2024-06-19 16:21:00+00:00): Hello Victor,

Following this https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:area:highway%3Dfootway
whb (2024-06-08 07:16:29+00:00): Guten Tag,

bei diesen beiden Objekten handelt es sich um Stützmauern. Auf diesen ist das Laufen oder Sitzen evtl. möglich, diese sind aber sicher nicht aus Gras.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1192087469
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1192087466

Viele Grüße
whb
Niiepce (2024-06-14 16:45:23+00:00): Hallo,
Danke für den Hinweis. Dann sollte die Objekte auch als Stützmauer getaggt werden. Ich habe highway=footway und surface=grass entfernt und durch passende Tags ersetzt

Viele Grüße
Niiepce
whb (2024-08-13 09:48:05+00:00): Inzwischen steht 4,7 m dran.
Niiepce (2024-08-18 11:30:03+00:00): Danke für das Update
kapazao (2024-07-14 11:09:31+00:00): Hola, cuando actualices una carretera nueva debes tener en cuenta el resto de elementos del mapa relacionados y atributos de los elementos que editas.

Si pones como abandoned una etiqueta highway, también deberías tener en cuenta el resto de etiquetas.
Si dejas en abandono una carretera porque han hecho una nueva, debes ver qué pasa con las rutas de autobús y otras que pasaban por ahí, ya que sino te las cargas.

Por otra parte deberías indicar de dónde sacas la información de la carretera nueva para que otros usuarios puedan verificarlo, ya que sino se podría dar como una invención o copia de fuentes no válidas.

Este tipo de ediciones con tantos errores y problemas podrían ser revertidas, por lo que deberías tenerlo en cuenta para otra vez.
Ya me encargué de corregir la zona.

Un saludo
Yury Yatsynovich (2024-06-27 18:43:51+00:00): The "name" tag is supposed to be filled in Belarusian, NOT in Russian
Антон-1983 (2024-09-16 16:38:10+00:00): Я не знаю белорусского языка
galen8183 (2025-02-02 01:39:46+00:00): Hi, many of the POIs at the Cambridge SmartCentre you added are outdated, please cross-reference with object history, business websites, and street-level imagery together if you aren't directly surveying these locations.
Some of the edits are also entirely incorrect, like adding semicolon-separate values where they should be replaced fully.
Thanks
Metzor (2024-06-06 18:07:00+00:00): Hallo SchwäbischesBrot!

Willkommen bei OpenStreetMap! Schön das du hier mitmachst, die Kartendaten zu verbessern.

Hilfe findest du im wiki oder der community:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Map_Making_Overview
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56

Hier in den Kommentaren können wir beim Eintragenden nachfragen, wenn etwas bei der Änderung unklar ist - oder Tipps für besseres Tagging geben. Dabei ist die Erwartung, dass man eine Antwort bekommt - ist ja ein Gemeinschaftsprojekt :-)

Du hast leider einen Baum in ein Haus rein verschoben:
Das ist der hier:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10922000184#map=19/48.53133/9.30891&layers=N

Oder eine bessere Ansicht:
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/10922000184

Sowas passiert in iD leider mal schnell. Mir ist das auch schon passiert. Also kein Problem.

Könntest du den Baum bitte wieder zurück schieben?

Danke, Gruß und fröhliches Mappen!
Metzor
SchwäbischesBrot (2024-06-06 18:18:18+00:00): Schon erledigt ;)
BCNorwich (2024-06-07 19:09:09+00:00): Fiction removed.
Metzor (2024-06-06 18:29:09+00:00): Hallo SchwäbischesBrot!

Was meinst du genau mit "bitte packstation 104 beibehalten"?

Zur Praxis in Metzingen:
1) Du hast einen Tippfehler im "operator" (Betreiber).
2) in "Fachrichtung" hast du viele Einträge hinzugefügt, die nicht dokumentiert sind. Dazu etwas Hintergrund wie OpenStreetMap funktioniert:
- im Hintergrund sind alle Eigenschaften von Objekten in englisch hinterlegt
- Editoren (wie iD, den "Internetbrowsereditor") können das auf "beliebige" Sprachen übersetzen (die Übersetzungslisten machen noch Menschen)
- Kartenanzeigeprogramme können ebenfalls übersetzen, brauchen aber auch die Liste.

Wenn du nun neue Einträge machst, die der Editor nicht ins englische übersetzen kann, dann kann auch kein Kartenanzeigeprogramm damit etwas anfangen. Bekannte, übersetzbare Begriffe zeigt iD in blau. Die anderen haben ein Problem. Dann lieber die deutschen Begriffe als Kurzbeschreibung in die "descriptionc (Beschreibung) einfügen. Die Liste der bekannten Begriffe findest du durch klicken auf dasi-Symbol und dann weiter unten auf "Dokumentation ansehen klicken". Dann landest du hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:healthcare:speciality

Würdest du das bitte verbessern? Wenn du Hilfe brauchst, einfach melden!

Schöne Grüße
Metzor
ayxis (2024-07-11 06:27:23+00:00): Hi!
Du hast in deinem letzten Changeset zur Baustelle Rastplatz Giesberg dazugeschreiben, dass die Bauarbeiten begonnen haben. Demnach müsste proposed:* zu construction:* geändert werden. Ich würde das mal machen, wollte dir aber geschwind Bescheid geben, da du dich ja scheinbar gut um den Rastplatz kümmerst :)

VG
ayxis
Merlin13245 (2024-06-06 18:43:41+00:00): We do map paths even on private property... so good call not deleting it outright. I would take these steps to resolve the fixme tag you've added.

1. Add new nodes on either end of the trail where the fence and barbed wire are. Add them as "Barrier" nodes.
2. Add a tag to the new section of path in the middle: "access": "private".
3. Remove the fixme tags.

Thanks for contributing to the map!
Lauren1805 (2024-06-06 18:53:55+00:00): The path doesn't exist. I hiked there yesterday and ended up trekking through a sketch mountainside trying to return to an actual trail. It should be deleted, I just didn't know how.
gpserror (2024-06-06 18:56:17+00:00): I also have my doubts that this is a fence.  Fences are usually straight and either follow property lines or natural features and this is neither - however it does track something that's being walked upon so that this is some sort of trail at least for part of the way.  Clarification is needed.
Merlin13245 (2024-06-06 19:05:17+00:00): @Lauren1805 OK gotcha. I'm assuming you're using OSM's online iD editor - steps might be a bit different on other editors.

If none of the path exists anymore just select the path and hit the Delete key on your keyboard.

If parts of the path still exist, select the nodes on each end where the path now ends and hit "Split", then select the section and in the middle and the Delete key on your keyboard.
martien-176 (2024-06-06 18:44:31+00:00): Hi,  thanks for mapping. You requested a review of your mappings. 

Your buildings are well mapped. Good location, square corners and precise outline. 

Thanks and regards, Martien, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152344123
Baloo Uriza (2024-06-06 19:19:48+00:00): OSU took over the tribal college?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152344160
Baloo Uriza (2024-06-13 19:49:08+00:00): Oh, I see how I misinterpreted that.  Never mind.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152344160
H4N5-antw (2024-06-07 12:25:53+00:00): Waarde Joost, Hanswijkstraat is kleine omweg indien zondag idd naar Haacht fiets.
joost schouppe (2024-06-07 15:13:58+00:00): Het andere "lek" in de zone maxlength/maxweight is via de Plankstraat, maar daar is een barriere voor grote voertuigen, dus misschien moet daar ook niet per se een bord staan
H4N5-antw (2024-06-07 19:15:15+00:00): Waarde Joost, 
Plankstraat twee bollards https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=470956128621838&focus=photo : niet alleen grote voertuigen? Of volg ik niet?
joost schouppe (2024-06-08 07:34:38+00:00): Groot in vergelijking met moto's en fietsen enzo. Ik weet de regels niet exact, maar ik dacht dat dit soort zone voor alle weggebruikers moet afgesloten worden. Maar inderdaad, daar is niet echt een issue
joost schouppe (2024-06-10 12:23:22+00:00): Zie ook https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3934489 voor wat meer opvolging
eggie (2024-06-07 13:29:08+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 
Feedback Zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dcharging_station

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
mikimapbuilder (2024-06-07 06:27:56+00:00): Hi! You draw a building over several others instead of trying to follow one building footprint at a time. That is the reason for revert.
Frans S (2024-06-08 08:23:50+00:00): Here you did not tag the buildings as well.
Tags building=yes, added by another mapper.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152345076
Metzor (2024-06-06 21:16:59+00:00): Danke :-)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-28 20:48:53+00:00): Hello!

You used
trail_visibility=good+
on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1190663999/history

Have you maybe meant
trail_visibility=good
?

I am pretty sure that it is a typo, but not sure enough to just replace it (I edited some objects where situation seemed more clear to me).

Or have you used this value deliberately? In such case, what was the intended meaning?

If it is a mistake - can you fix it?
Portti (2025-04-29 06:30:02+00:00): Hello,

That was a typo, thanks for pointing that out. I've corrected it now.
Merlin13245 (2024-06-06 19:19:44+00:00): Nice! Keep up the great work :)
highflyer74 (2024-06-12 15:14:56+00:00): Moin!

Danke, dass du mithelfen möchtest, OSM aktuell zu halten.

Hier sind allerdings einige Dinge durcheinander geraten. Bitte melde dich direkt hier im Änderungssatz, damit wir gemeinsam die entstandenen Probleme lösen können.

Danke!
marczoutendijk (2024-06-06 19:39:26+00:00): Ik heb de weg over deze brug tijdelijk op construction gezet. Ik hou in de gaten hoelang het gaat duren.
dvdhoven (2024-06-07 08:52:49+00:00): Ik heb bicycle=no vervangen door access=no anders heb ik een permanente foutmelding in knooppuntnet.
En naar mijn idee kan niemand voorlopig over de brug, dus access=no is - naar mijn idee - ook toepasselijk.

Vriendelijke groeten,
Dick van den Hoven
marczoutendijk (2024-06-07 18:45:58+00:00): Uitstekende oplossing Dick!
marczoutendijk (2024-07-02 19:41:13+00:00): De brug wordt binnenkort provisorisch hersteld. Een datum daarvoor is nog niet bekend. Ik hou het in de gaten.
dvdhoven (2024-07-06 06:10:45+00:00): Nav een note vanmorgen en ook een notitie in de editor van FB heb ik de brug weer opengesteld De notitie van FB heb ik in de note tekst gekopieerd ipv de oorspronkelijke tekst
marczoutendijk (2024-07-07 12:00:18+00:00): Dank Dick!
wungasaurus (2024-06-09 10:36:03+00:00): Ich hatte die gefällten Bäume jetzt immer als demolished:natural=tree rein, wenn sie nicht ein absichtlich-als-Sitzgelegenheit-o.ä.-gelassener Stumpf sind (wie beispielsweise Spielplatz Erbes-Büdesheim Friedhof). Ob das richtiger ist.. keine Ahnung.
Adam Franco (2024-06-10 19:22:17+00:00): Hi Sebastian, please review these two wiki articles. The tagging convention in the US is to avoid using highway=motorway for very short segments of enhanced infrastructure where the portion that is enhanced to interstate standards is less than 2 miles and isn't otherwise part of the motorway network. In cases like Amherst's keeping the highway=primary and adding expressway=yes is the preferred tagging.

- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance 
- https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:expressway

Please join us in the OSM Community forum's US category: https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/us/78 or the OSM-US Slack's #highway-classification channel to discuss these topics.
Sebastian HD (2024-06-18 21:09:03+00:00): Thank you for the comment! I'll change the way back to primary & keep that in mind
descubrebitcoin (2024-06-06 21:38:18+00:00): Please stop spamming
StarFush (2024-06-06 23:52:19+00:00): I am not spamming? I have been asked by a energy provider company that accepts Bitcoin to add a tag in all the cities they provide power too. What is wrong with that? if someone wants to pay for there power bill in that city they can find out using the btcmap.
descubrebitcoin (2024-06-07 00:48:06+00:00): OpenStreetMap is intended only for physical locations that accept bitcoin in their premises, not for online services.

Please see this link for more information and suggestions: https://wiki.btcmap.org/general/services
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-05-07 15:50:03+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/487016649/history

are you sure it is an active place of worship?
vojtechzaboril (2026-05-07 15:55:26+00:00): Hi, I think it is not. Can you please change it more suitable tag? I'm not sure about historic=ruins (so good for a ruin).
Thanks
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-05-10 04:24:19+00:00): hmmm, is it ruined or merely repurposed?
vojtechzaboril (2026-05-10 09:38:06+00:00): Actually look rebuilt (or similar). Probably there is a museum and the building doesn't serve as church anymore.
I had no idea how to tag it, but removing amenity=place_of_worship would be probably a good move.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-05-11 07:06:31+00:00): edited to

historic=church
historic:amenity=place_of_worship
Arlo James Barnes (2025-09-06 18:18:50+00:00): What sort of site is it?
fititnt (2024-06-06 23:31:14+00:00): Olá Tess2344 (e os demais envolvidos no #hotosm-project-16912).

Pode explicar por que você está deletando vias (exemplo https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/445107454/history) e está editando diversas vias de highway service ➜ unclassified (um dos exemplos https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/445107445/history) ?
MxxCon (2024-06-17 16:18:40+00:00): Hello.
"13W" doesn't seem like a proper name of this feature. It's fine to use it as a ref= tag.
Please correct.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152348981
Jordi MF (2024-06-06 21:48:59+00:00): Estos changesets son inapropiados. Los conjuntos de cambio no están pensados para redactar historias personales.
csimeona22 (2024-06-07 17:34:47+00:00): Correction: Source used was Bing aerial imagery, Mapillary.
VLD549 (2024-09-18 15:01:25+00:00): Hi, I was asked to verify the name change from GroenRijk to GroemRijk. Could you explain the name change? The company's name clearly shows to be GroenRijk.

Thank you!
wvdp (2024-09-18 15:41:47+00:00): We have seemed to stumble upon an error in the NSI.

I've submitted a fix to the NSI.

I also want to apologize for the error. I lean on the NSI to make many quick edits, and most of the time, this has great results. But sometimes there is an error, and I don't notice it. 

https://github.com/osmlab/name-suggestion-index/pull/9960
VLD549 (2024-10-04 12:31:01+00:00): Ok, no problem. Thanks!
itineris (2025-04-28 05:47:05+00:00): Szia!

Kérlek, a building:levels és roof:levels címkéket ne a házszám pontra, hanem az épület kontúrjára tedd, hiszen annak a tulajdonsága!

Köszönöm:
Ákos
MxxCon (2024-06-17 16:21:14+00:00): Hello.
"Hunts Point Interstate Access Improvement Project" doesn't seem like a correct name of this road segment. A name of a construction project is not the name of a street..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152349891
jtracey (2024-06-12 02:37:34+00:00): This changeset broke the multipolygon for Victoria Park Lake. Please try to do fewer things in each changeset, it make it easier to notice these sorts of things.
descubrebitcoin (2024-06-06 21:37:33+00:00): Please stop spamming
tyfi (2024-06-07 00:23:11+00:00): Thanks for catching this even after I closed the note. I only checked the intersection to the east before closing it. Missed the other half of N just to the west
Frans S (2024-07-04 10:04:53+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------
!! tag the buildings. Now you just draw lines without meaning.
Check par 20 of chapter of par about Buildings how to map tall/high buildings.

E: buildings not squared.

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/152350879
CENTSOARER (2024-06-06 22:12:08+00:00): I messed up, duplicated features sharing nodes.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152351427
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2025-01-28 09:15:34+00:00): 5055 is the wrong address
tguen (2025-02-07 02:32:46+00:00): fixed
Lezurex (2024-06-07 07:46:21+00:00): Hi Lôo,

Just so I understood correctly: This street is not a one-way street, even for cars and other motorized traffic? If it's just bikes which are allowed in both directions (and not cars), the tagging before was correct (oneway=yes and oneway:bicycle=no).

For oneway=no there must not be any oneway sign (white arrow on blue squared ground or white dash on round red ground).

Thanks for clarification.
Glyphes (2024-06-08 14:45:15+00:00): Thanks for the clarification regarding the distinction for the oneway for bikes vs cars.

To be on the safe side, let's revert this commit. I know very well the bike rules but can't tell for the car rules due to current construction work where the usual car signs are overriden.

Feel free to let me know if any action from my side is needed to revert this commit, or if this was not yet commited due to the review.

Thanks!
archie (2024-06-07 04:39:40+00:00): Hej, denna changeset har reverterats. Anledningen är att du har flyttat tidigare rätt placerade objekt till fel position eftersom du inte har justerat bildbakgrunden (i detta fall Bing) ordentligt. Bildbakgrunder - speciellt Bing -  har en offset som måste åtgärdas först. Vänligen läs detta först (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_aerial_imagery). 
Även i ditt andra changesett har du infört offset, dvs det som andra har placerat rätt har du förskjutit till fel plats. Det rör sig dock till skillnad från denna cs om få sträckor som kan fixas manuellt.
Vänligen flytta inte det som är rätt placerad i framtiden, tack!
map per (2024-06-07 19:34:29+00:00): Hello CommanderStorm,

because of review_requested:
I'm sorry to say, but the edits of the StudiTUM got a big mess.

- Just in case you didn't see it already a link to the wiki description of the indoor tagging: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_Indoor_Tagging

- you changed the building outline (the building has an irregular shape now instead of being rectangular). --- The easiest way to avoid this is by keeping a small gap between the indoor=rooms and the building outline like e.g. here (1).

- There is a chaos of intersecting highways. --- For corridors inside buildings highway=corridor (2) is used instead of highway=footway. Moreover these corridors should be drawn nicely and not as a bit intersecting mess.

- Out of curiosity: Are you planning to use the indoor data for NavigaTUM?

Best regards
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1081837285
(2) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcorridor
map per (2024-06-11 18:08:18+00:00): Adding indoor data for all TUM buildings sounds like plan. And using the data in NavigaTUM it's a cool usecase of OSM data. 
I also thought about adding more indoor data at TUM, but as there are not that many Maps that support indoor data and TUM students rather use NavigaTUM I didn't do it and prioritized underground stations (e.g. Sendlinger Tor or Müncher Freiheit) instead.

About the editing tools: For more advanced indoor mapping there is no way around JOSM. In comparison to the ID editor JOSM can filter by level (without level filtering you can't handle places with several indoor floors on top of each other). About OsmInEdit I can't say that much, as I only tried it out just now.

And thanks for the clean up of the StudiTUM, the indoor data is much better now!
NeisBot (2024-06-06 23:15:24+00:00): Hi Cyril_val, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1290117592

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck