piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Jordi MF (2025-07-28 21:50:55+00:00): Hola Tossal Redó (antiguo usuario adrianmg13, https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/adrianmg13),

Has añadido las etiquetas "addr:place=Tossal Redó" a 92 elementos y "addr:postcode=03110" a 56, muchos de los cuales no deben de llevar esa etiqueta, por ejemplo los "landuse=residential", algún acantilado "natural=cliff" o los highway=residential. Las direccions deben de añadirse solamente a los portales, comercios o similares que claramente tengan una dirección postal para que, por ejemplo, lleguen las cartas del cartero. Todo lo demás es información redundante que no mejora la base de datos.

Saludos
Leo Slager (2025-07-28 10:55:04+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2025-07-28 11:00:12+00:00): Hallo B Zegers,

Heiveld is in orde,
access=yes en oneway=no hoeven er niet getagd te worden, dat zijn default waardes, maar kwaad kan het niet.

Bij het schuiven met de kaart heb je het paaltje op Aardewerk per ongeluk meegenomen en vastgemaakt aan de Teelebeekstraat.
Dat kun je hier zien:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=169586117

Dat paaltje zet ik even terug.
Leo Slager (2025-07-28 11:15:05+00:00): het zit toch even anders.
Je hebt een node van Aardewerk verschoven naar de Telebeekstraat en daar vastgemakkt aan de landuse.

Dat repareer ik even.

Vanaf Kerstenberg naar het W staan er nu 2 wegen op elkaar gekleefd, waarbij de langste niet meer verbonden is met de zijwegen.

Ook dat zal ik even repareren.

Alle begin is moeilijk en we nemen je niets kwalijk.
Veel plezier met verder mappen.
demon_box (2025-07-28 07:51:34+00:00): Ciao CCCGGG, ho notato l'aggiunta del civico su questo edificio
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135643535/
Ti segnalo che in Italia il civico identifica il punto di accesso (entrata) e NON l'intero edificio. Infatti un edificio può avere più entrate e di conseguenza più numeri civici. 
Quindi hai 2 opzioni: 
1. Se conosci esattamente la posizione (entrata) del civico che stai mappando metti tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su un nodo del perimetro dell'edificio (aggiungendo anche il tag entrance sullo stesso nodo);
2. Se invece non hai questa informazione così precisa devi mettere tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su nodo adiacente ma STACCATO dal poligono dell'edificio.
Ho già proceduto con le correzioni del caso. 
Grazie e BuonMapping!
mweper (2025-07-31 01:27:24+00:00): What was the reason for this change? According to official maps of Rosario, this entire section of Mussy runs eastward. This has already been discussed several times with other users.
GashRiver (2025-08-01 15:13:52+00:00): Hello mweper,

Apple has an agreement with Maxar to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. For this edit, I used Maxar satellite imagery via MGP Pro from 2025-03-18 which shows vehicles traveling West and a stop line spanning the full width of the road near https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/545429791 indicating a westbound oneway. The directionality of vehicles on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417966284 also indicates traffic heading West, but without a stop-line visible I could not confidently make this edit. Earlier imagery suggests this road was previously an eastbound one-way, but it appears to have been reconfigured a few years ago to enforce westbound flow instead. I hope this answers your question!
felipeeugenio (2025-07-28 13:11:21+00:00): Hola. Buenos días. Esos caminos que agrego como unclassified, ¿son caminos públicos o son forestales?. No parecen muy accesibles. Gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169586500
rosbeef (2025-07-29 01:47:43+00:00): Son caminos privados para acceder a camino de vecinos. Aun que no esten totalmente transitables por autos chicos en tiempos de invierno, con un buen 4x4 se puede, Pero no son de forestal.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169586500
rosbeef (2025-07-29 01:49:12+00:00): perdon ademas estan supuestamente en la reserva de la biosfera y no se puede intervenir el bosque para produccion intensiva de forestal.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169586500
rosbeef (2025-07-29 01:52:01+00:00): perdon estan fuera de la reserva de la biosfera.no tome en cuenta el previo mensaje.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169586500
felipeeugenio (2025-07-29 01:58:34+00:00): Ok. Gracias. Mañana los modifico. 
Saludos
mweper (2025-07-31 01:25:12+00:00): What was the reason for this change? According to official maps of Rosario, this section of Garibaldi is a two-way street. Please, confirm.

https://infomapa.rosario.gov.ar/emapa/mapa.htm
GashRiver (2025-08-01 15:16:03+00:00): Hello mweper, thanks for reaching out!
I removed the oneway=yes tag from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417967551, as there is a stop line spanning half the road visible in Esri World Imagery which indicates two-way traffic. With publicly available imagery I could not confidently verify that the entirety of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/73899544 is not a oneway, as evidence such as stop-lines or ground-level imagery are not visible along its extent. I am unfamiliar with the resource you provided, but it does seem to indicate this section of Garibaldi supports two-way traffic. I'm not certain whether this resource is compatible with OSM's licensing requirements, but if you're confident in its accuracy and licensing, feel free to remove the oneway=yes tag. Thanks again, and have a nice day!
BaboucheVerte (2025-08-03 17:00:45+00:00): Hi, why did you put it back to a trunk ? I was there in july and it's clearly just a tertiary, nothing more ...
BaboucheVerte (2025-08-03 17:25:02+00:00): I put it back to secondary amongst other update in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169916962
taketaketake (2025-08-15 22:05:35+00:00): 現地確認により編集されたのならhighway=tertiary以外のタグも正しく編集してください
いたずら編集と勘違いします。
mweper (2025-07-31 01:15:27+00:00): What was the reason for this change? Although I am unfamiliar with the area, aerial images from Esri and others show the street as complete.
GashRiver (2025-08-01 15:17:04+00:00): Hello. Apple has an agreement with Maxar to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. I used Maxar satellite imagery via MGP Pro dated 2025-02-17 to make this edit, which shows a concrete feature blocking the connection. However if you believe this to be incorrect, I’m happy to defer to your knowledge.
mweper (2025-08-01 15:29:07+00:00): I don't know the area in person, so I can't corroborate this on-site. If you have more recent imagery than that published by Esri, Bing, etc., and you see a road closure, I can't argue with that.
Greetings.
mweper (2025-07-31 01:21:31+00:00): What was the reason for this change? If you know that this section is two-way, please add the tag “oneway=no” as clarified in the local and global wiki.

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Argentina/Etiquetas#Sentidos_de_calles

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#oneway_=_no
GashRiver (2025-08-01 11:04:22+00:00): Thank you for the information.
small_patatas (2025-07-28 02:38:14+00:00): inexperienced at mapping, so if there are any errors please let me know! :)
custodiankeyy (2025-07-29 21:28:47+00:00): Please write the names without abbreviations.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169693779
Warin61 (2025-08-17 04:55:08+00:00): Train route relation 3134294 - Indian Pacific restored. Other train route relations may also need attention?
LachlanTansey2009 (2025-08-17 06:24:35+00:00): Only the MerredinLink that I can see of. But that is easily fixable and so I will do it myself.
b-jazz (2025-07-29 03:57:51+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417972338

Hey there Matub,

TL;DR You're missing a couple of shared nodes when you draw the boundary between the green/fairway in the above-mentioned link. Please make sure every node is shared. In this case, you missed http://osm.org/node/13030728744 and triggered a Q/A check.

When drawing golf course areas (i.e. greens, fairways, bunkers, tees, etc.), please be aware that the ways (lines) used to outline those areas can't cross over each other. Fairway outlines shouldn't cross over greens or bunkers or other fairways for example. Take a look at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Golf.png for an example of the "Wrong" way to map a fairway and a green. There are some cases where a fringe exists around a green and you should draw the fairway outline completely around a green. Other times, the fairway and green butt up against each other. In that case the fairway and green should share the same nodes at the boundary between the two. When drawing these shared nodes, editors like iD will "snap" to an existing node if you get close enough. If you could go back and clean up where you've made this mistake, that would be great. But more importantly, if you could stop from doing this in the future, it would be greatly appreciated. If you have any questions about golf course mapping, feel free to reach out. Thanks.
canfe (2025-09-21 09:57:45+00:00): way 1417972619 i passaggi attraverso gli edifici non vanno con layer -1 ma con tunnel=building_passage.
Ho corretto
canfe (2025-09-21 10:22:46+00:00): Non mettere nomi alle corsie di parcheggio, in genere quello è il nome per la piazza
canfe (2025-09-22 06:50:39+00:00): name=Monumento alle Vittime dell'Heysel non è un "monument".
Guardati la wiki e correggi i vari "monumenti" a Cherasco, molto probabilmente sono delle stele
Marco_Fix (2025-10-02 01:30:45+00:00): Risolto, grazie
NeisBot (2025-07-28 03:04:35+00:00): Hi HookieeY, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 99% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 19 highway(s)
- 18 building(s)
- 2 natural(s)
- 1 landuse(')

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

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=169588681
Taya_S (2025-07-28 05:47:02+00:00): Reverted vandalism DWG Ticket#2025072810000021

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169592131
mrpulley (2025-08-24 03:31:19+00:00): I've just uploaded some edits from my recent Broken Hill trip, and noticed a couple of edits here that looked odd. I'm not familiar with the Rapid editor, but I'm assuming the AI part of the editor is giving wrong information.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/498017554 was changed from amenity=fuel to shop=fuel. Amenity=fuel is the correct tag (shop=fuel https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=fuel is a related but different tag).
I've updated this at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170905509
I found a couple of other odd changes - I'll comment on the relevant changeset. I haven't checked your other edits.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-07-28 14:54:33+00:00): 在 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169618329 中已退回所有编辑
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-07-28 17:43:48+00:00): Hello, I leave this message because this changeset had been fully reverted by another mapper in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169621588
and I thinks you shouldn't add other language's name in a area currently been actually controlled by a specific country. For example, I know that Viet Nam have a claim about South China Sea, and some of its island, also many other country such as Malaysia, Philippine,  Brunei, have opinion about this. But OSM only handle with actually control, that is, if China still control those island (even have resident and force on it), it will be seen as part of China on OSM. So at this time, please don't add Vietnamese name to it.
Ducminhduongcb (2025-08-01 03:29:21+00:00): ok
MassCartog (2025-07-28 13:56:20+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. The the path you removed in this changeset seems to still exist on the ground. I checked out heatmap data in that area for the last 12 months and it shows there is still a lot of activity on that tail. https://i.imgur.com/EY2wP3K.png

In OSM if a feature exists if should not be removed from the map regardless if its officially closed. If it still exists on the ground it should not be removed yet.

The correct way to handle closed trails is to use OSM's tagging system. tagging "access=no" would be appropriate if its closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

For trails that are permanently decommissioned:
depending on the situation you can add a lifecycle prefix to the highway=* key, such as closed:highway=path or abandoned:highway=path.

See more info here: 
https://openstreetmap.us/our-work/trails/how-to-map/

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Warin61 (2026-02-22 23:14:59+00:00): These are ONLY buildings. 
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dfarmyard

"An area of land WITH farm buildings"

Secondly the name of the farm should be placed on the total area of the farm not just the buildings or the farmyard...
fs_LT (2025-07-28 06:31:54+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:%C3%84nderungssatz#R%C3%A4umliche_Ausdehnung_von_%C3%84nderungss%C3%A4tzen
silversurfer83 (2025-07-28 18:50:10+00:00): Hi :)

warum hast du denn im Schloss Moosham ein zweites Multipolygon erzeugt? Beide Innenhöfe sind doch schon in Relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5826502 mit dem Außengrundriss verbunden.

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169590058
mweper (2025-07-31 01:20:53+00:00): What was the reason for this change? If you know that this section is two-way, please add the tag “oneway=no” as clarified in the local and global wiki.

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Argentina/Etiquetas#Sentidos_de_calles

* https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway#oneway_=_no
GashRiver (2025-08-01 11:04:50+00:00): Hello Mweper,
Thanks for making that update and pointing me to this specific practice on the OSM Argentina wiki page.
Have a nice day!
JoergD66 (2025-07-28 19:15:35+00:00): Danke! Ich wollte den "Radweg" löschen, weil es daneben ja schon einen Radweg gibt, und dabei übersehen, dass der "Radweg" drei Tage vorher noch ein Deich war. Asche über mein Haupt und Danke fürs Wiederherstellen! Dabei hatte ich sogar in die Historie geschaut, aber das irgendwie dennoch übersehen …
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-10-07 17:36:21+00:00): OSM不是开玩笑的地方
phoenixsaigon1698 (2025-07-29 01:36:03+00:00): 9397983 relation này đã mất thành phần "via". Có gì nhờ anh review lại nhé. Rất cám ơn anh.
NeisBot (2025-07-28 05:26:29+00:00): Hi Sonjo, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Modified farm building representation, adjusting geometry and tags, including removal of a multipolygon relation."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-28 05:40:43+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/9942400527
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417987936

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-28 05:50:59+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/2153527737
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2153521173
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2153521554
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2153529552
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2153526097
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2153530923
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182787459
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182787471
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1062305907
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1062305908
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1062305909
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/182787450

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_5359 (2025-07-29 18:04:39+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1381913197, http://www.osm.org/way/1373099745, http://www.osm.org/way/251797662. I assume the tags
Make = the
building = yes
correct = damage
per = instructions
tag = as
is a copy & paste error. I will remove this changes. 

Thank you for the damage mapping.
Thant Zin Maw (2025-07-30 05:21:29+00:00): Thank you for correcting
Nielkrokodil (2025-07-28 16:18:54+00:00): Hallo,
mir ist diese Stelle aufgefallen in der Maproulette-Challenge intersecting landuses
https://maproulette.org/challenge/52564/task/294266957

Ich denke, die Schule sollte kein residential garden sein, sondern landuse=education ohne garden. Auch der Wald (landuse=forest) im (ich glaube) Schulhof erscheint mir fragwürdig. Eher noch wäre das ein park als ein forest.

Was meinst du?
DerKaiserschmarren (2025-07-29 13:52:08+00:00): ich wüsste nicht, dass ich daran etwas geändert hätte. Das war so Bestand meines Wissens nach.

Allerdings bin ich voll deiner Meinung, dass eine Schule kein Residential garden ist.

Falls du nichts dagegen hast, werde ich dennoch den Schulhof so wie hier mit Gras als landcover taggen (wo es auch wirklich ist) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/338543015

Ich hoffe ich konnte deine Fragen klären :)
DerKaiserschmarren (2025-07-29 13:54:41+00:00): Zumindest war es einmal in der History davor auch schon ein Residential Garden. Der neuste Tag stammt aber Augenscheinlich doch von mir: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/335232787/history/11
DerKaiserschmarren (2025-07-29 14:03:59+00:00): Sollte nun alles hier behoben worden sein; https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169675094
Leo Slager (2025-07-28 11:24:10+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2025-07-28 11:26:30+00:00): je hebt een groot vierkant op de kaart getekend en daar een gebouw van gemaakt.
Dat is natuurlijk onbestaanbaar.
Dat kan ook als vernieling van de kaart worden beschouwd.

Je bijdrage wordt weer verwijderd.
NeisBot (2025-07-28 07:15:44+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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-31 19:36:31+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169787567
NeisBot (2025-07-28 07:16:57+00:00): Hello gigisub, welcome to OSM, and thank you for your contributions!

I've taken a look at your recent edits and wanted to discuss a few discrepancies I noticed regarding the surrounding environmental features. Specifically, the locations in your edits don't seem to align with the typical geographical characteristics expected in that area. Here are some (max 10) relevant links to the edits:
https://osm.org/way/1418000380
https://osm.org/way/1418000381

Could you please take a look?
Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#Somewhere
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=169594967
gigisub (2025-07-28 11:20:53+00:00): Looking forward to your response. Sorry, but I don’t know what happened. I drew only a road and three points. How can I fix this? I saved my work, but I don’t see any traces of those polygons or the square
NeisReview (2025-07-29 05:52:45+00:00): Thank you!

Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169608269
NeisBot (2025-07-28 07:15:45+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.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-31 19:36:01+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/169616313
Protoxenus (2025-12-19 13:24:05+00:00): In OSM werden kurzzeitige Sperrungen nicht kartiert. Und wenn du schon etwas sperrst, dann bist du auch in der Pflicht, die Sperrung wieder zu entfernen, wenn sie nicht mehr besteht. 
Gruß Protoxenus
StC (2025-07-30 09:48:30+00:00): Hi,

as far as I can tell this is the changeset that has broken the continuity of Via Podiensis by making the order of members invalid. There is a simple way to avoid breaking relation order when adding a member with iD: just ensure that the relation is fully loaded before adding the missing member. I'll take care of the fix.
Eren00 (2025-07-28 10:32:53+00:00): Merhaba, Bu değişiklikte, tarihi binalar üzerinde zaten mevcut olan etiketler, fazladan bir düğümle tekrar eklenmiş. Yalnızca çay bahçesi düğümü (13030973191) doğru ve anlamlı bir ekleme olduğu için geri alınmamıştır. Haritadaki bilgi tekrarını önlemek adına bu değişiklik, aşağıdaki bağlantı üzerinden geriye alınmıştır:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169605233
Eren00 (2025-07-28 10:41:52+00:00): Düzeltme: Hatalı geri döndürme yaptığımdan dolayı bu değişiklik, 169605437 ID'li changeset üzerinden geriye alınmıştır. Hatalı geri döndürdüğüm değişiklik ise 169605472 ID'li changesette geriye alınmıştır.
NeisBot (2025-07-28 07:46:31+00:00): Hi elmaaaaa, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added residential buildings by creating new nodes and ways, tagging them as houses with a layer attribute."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated