piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:16:21+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

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

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13423346517 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Computer and accessory store"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-01-09 06:55:16+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/177011873

Only the affected tags were deleted; other unrelated data was left untouched
Piagno (2026-01-01 20:21:29+00:00): Thank you for promptly changing the border :)
stosh77 (2026-01-08 08:47:35+00:00): Revised.
Colbertson (2026-01-01 17:12:37+00:00): Why do you map parking spaces like this? Its insanely inefficient and inaccurate. JOSM has a terracer tool thats perfect for it.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-05 08:08:44+00:00): Properly revert addition of promotional SEO spam POI "JPM Real Estate Photography" likely sourced from Google Maps in changeset 183681277

https://osm.org/changeset/183681277
Rainero (2026-03-29 19:31:09+00:00): Revert changeset/180600335
wegen nicht zulässiger Quelle (Bayernatlas).
Senihtu (2026-02-01 06:58:08+00:00): Hi!
Mit dieser Änderung hast Du den Kampweg zur Einbahnstraße gemacht.
Laut OSM fährt die Buslinie 173 dort in beiden Richtungen durch.
Kennst Du Dich dort aus (ich nicht!) und weißt, wie der Bus vom Schulzentrum zur Kita kommt?
Grüße
Senihtu
SimonPoole (2026-01-01 11:34:04+00:00): Hi thank you for helping, but you should have read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Switzerland/2026_Municipality_Mergers and https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/swiss-municipality-mergers-v2026/139876 as you now caused double work on Moutier.
Taktaal (2026-01-01 12:14:29+00:00): Ah sorry, didn't see that. I made separate commented changes for that, to make them easy to revert if they had an error. You can of course revert the changes and re-do them if needed.
SimonPoole (2026-01-01 13:05:35+00:00): As far as I checked the changes look fine. My edits didn't have any conflicts anyway, but Loremo was working on Moutier at the same time as you.
SimonPoole (2026-01-01 13:49:47+00:00): Two small things: the bfs number should be 2056 and the postal code is likely wrong too (shouldn't be set). Moutier got a new number too.
SimonPoole (2026-01-01 15:19:52+00:00): Fixed https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176707191#map=14/46.79294/6.89673
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:18:52+00:00): Hei Empsu, tervetuloa OSM-projektiin ja kiitos osallistumisestasi!

Jotta yhteistyö olisi helpompaa ja muut voivat ymmärtää tekemiisi muokkauksiin, on paras lisätä lyhyt kuvaus siitä, mitä olet tehnyt. Selkeät kommentit auttavat yhteisöä seuraamaan työtäsi ja antamaan parempaa palautetta. Voit löytää vinkkejä hyvien kommenttien kirjoittamiseen täältä[1].
(Auto-translation)
---
Hi Empsu, welcome to the OSM projekt and thanks for your contribution!

To make collaboration easier and help others understand your edits, it’s best to add a short description of the changes you made. Clear comments help the community follow your work and provide better feedback. You can find tips on writing good comments here[1].
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:18:54+00:00): Tässä on esimerkki kommenteista karttojen muokkauksista: "Lisättiin vesiväyliä ojien ominaisuuksilla"
(Auto-translation)
---
Here is a sample comment based on your map edits: "Added waterways with ditch attributes"
silversurfer83 (2026-01-01 17:33:46+00:00): Moin :)

idR wird Wikipedia keinen Stress machen, ich möchte jedoch kurz darauf hinweisen, dass deren Lizenz mit unserer nicht kompatibel ist und sie daher als Quelle leider nicht geeignet ist

Frohes Neues :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176698116
kingkingHK (2026-01-01 11:49:20+00:00): Really `width=784`?
punkinpun (2026-01-01 13:10:22+00:00): Thanks.  It should not be there.  It is removed now.
flohoff (2026-01-15 06:16:27+00:00): Moin,
ich habe hier den changeset reverted und das via lifecycle tags gemacht. Die Tankstelle ist ja noch da und sichtbar - sonst trägt die nur der nächste wieder ein.

Aktuell gibt es ja um dieses dingen eine menge Presse

Flo
icke68746 (2026-01-17 20:13:42+00:00): Hi,
ist ok. Hatte die Diskussion nicht mitbekommen. Als sie die Wasserstofftankstelle in Kamen Ende 2024 schlossen, hatten sie sie zügig zurückgebaut.

Gruß Icke68746
flohoff (2026-01-17 22:38:04+00:00): Die sind geschlosssen - Aber hier ist zumindest nichts zurückgebaut - ist nur ausser Betrieb.

Wirft gerade bis Herford die Müllfahrzeuge mit H2 haben massive Wellen.

Flo
User184756 (2026-01-01 14:21:33+00:00): dzk za naprawe
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:15:21+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 23 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1216190759 v2 | 12 crossings
https://osm.org/way/484933608 v11 | 11 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/11268701916 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176699300
NeisReview (2026-01-09 06:55:47+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/176711194
Glassman (2026-01-03 21:09:18+00:00): Are you aware that the Mapbox imagery is more current and shows the actual finished road? Note: I saw your report on another user who modified the geometry of the way.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176699357
rskedgell (2026-01-03 18:14:46+00:00): Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
rskedgell (2026-01-03 20:26:46+00:00): Set as access=private and name removed. It's included in OS Open Roads as an unnamed "Restricted Local Access Road".

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176796774
kingkingHK (2026-01-01 11:53:13+00:00): Isn't there already `alt_name=`?
punkinpun (2026-01-01 12:55:32+00:00): It looks duplicate since the name appears in the language specific tag.
kingkingHK (2026-01-01 13:27:19+00:00): Sorry if my previous comment was not clear, I meant is the `name=` change really necessary, if the other variant is already document in `alt_name=`? How do you know which one is more correct? Are you sure if "薄刀屻" is wrong when I can find so many uses on the internet?
punkinpun (2026-01-01 14:56:48+00:00): "萡刀屻" is the official name while "薄刀屻" is typo error.   The name of the mountain was updated with the proof of the official map.  Following the naming convention, the path should go with the official name.  "萡刀屻" can be found in the government site.
Kovoschiz (2026-01-02 05:27:14+00:00): 1. Please don't remove other names. All are valid.
2. `name=` is the commonly used one, not `official_name=` 
3. Please don't base your arguement solely from copying other maps. This violates copyright.
bxl-forever (2026-01-01 13:15:51+00:00): Hello,

Containers operated by Oliobox are solely for cooking oil.

I noticed that you retagged the Oliobox as if it was now accepting glass bottles: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8948462242/history
In StreetComplete, the operator of a containers is shown when it asks the question.

Probably a mistake, because in the same change you also (correctly) confirmed the existing pair of glass containers.

Do you remember what containers were here?  If you can describe what you saw (in particular, is the orange Oliobox container still here), I will fix the data here.

Thanks in advance.
kayllab (2026-01-02 11:03:27+00:00): hello! Oh good catch, I didn't notice these were 2 different entries. 

The oil box isn't there anymore. There is the bottle containers in that spot and a regular trash container next to it (the black one with the foot / elbow actionable opening) 

I think we can remove it from the map if you want to update the data.

Thanks again and happy new year!
bxl-forever (2026-01-02 14:09:24+00:00): OK, deleted, thanks for the reply.
dmgroom_ct (2026-01-09 10:57:06+00:00): Please note that the tag "natural=coastline" should not be attached to nodes, only to ways
andershl (2026-01-09 15:21:22+00:00): I am fully aware of that. Unfortunately the official name database only have the points. Please DO NOT just delete them. There are other features in the received dataset that should over time also be extended to areas or lines. In particular islands, lakes, and rivers that I am working my way through. Then comes glaciers, land areas, peninsulas and more. As to the coast, if you have a better proposal for good point tagging of these, please inform me. Then you may remove thhem as long as you do not just destroy the original change sets. I can pull the coasts etc. from the original and re-istate in a way that suits all...
EneaSuper (2026-01-01 12:03:21+00:00): Hello and happy new year!

Why did you change the elements like this? If anything, you could just add tags to what already existed. 😗
Sergio Cabral (2026-01-02 09:58:15+00:00): Hello, happy new year.

Sorry, I did it because the existing element is attached to the Wikipedia, so It is not "editable". Unless I change the labels, but I preferred do not do it. So I placed a new point which can be edited or to add different "languages" if needed (as I did in Portuguese and Spanish).
EneaSuper (2026-01-02 10:11:52+00:00): Oh ok, I think I understand, maybe I'll consult with some colleagues and see if there will be a possibility to fix these things, thanks for the reply 😊
Sergio Cabral (2026-01-02 10:59:25+00:00): Prego!
EneaSuper (2026-01-02 12:46:16+00:00): È arrivata una prima risposta:

- ID "blocks" the item name from being changed if it has an associated Wikidata id. But it only blocks it in quick insertion, if you scroll down in the raw tag table you can edit freely. In this situation, in my opinion, the node can easily be deleted. The name in Portuguese, if it is not official, in my opinion should not be reported

- Ok understood, thanks, but I think that in the case of Christopher Columbus there could also be a name in Portuguese 😗

- I find it difficult because it is not a proper name, as "Colosseum" or the "Tower of London" might be. Hardly a monument to an exonym
EneaSuper (2026-01-02 12:49:14+00:00): Sorry, I originally meant to say that "An initial response has arrived:" 😊
giopera (2026-01-02 13:14:53+00:00): I've made a change adding the tags to the original area, please note that the name= parameter should always be the name "on the ground", so traffic signs, and other information that are on the road should be used plus it's almost always in the local language, I've added the tags in good faith but always remember to check on the ground even for names in other languages.
The tags are editable from the raw area at the bottom of the iD menu or from other editors my editing the tags manually, there are very few things really locked down in OSM.
In this case adding a POI would only be a problem and a violation of the "One feature, one OSM element" principle and personally it's not advised, please try not to create useless elements and update the existing ones.
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-21 20:44:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1463420208

NSI (generujący podpowiedzi w iD) sugeruje shop=chemist dla Hebe.

Ma to sens?
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 15:26:01+00:00): Waarom? Er is niks mis met ruins:building. Lifecycle prefixes zijn breed gedragen en goed gedocumenteerd.

Teruggezet naar de versie van TrickyFoxy.
andrewsh (2026-01-01 15:29:28+00:00): Nothing renders ruins:building, Nominatim doesn’t index it (and AFAIK nothing else does), so using ruins:* on its own does not seem like a great idea right now. I literally don’t see any benefit over building=ruins + ruins=*
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:07:23+00:00): Don't tag for the renderer. File bugs with them if you want them to support it.

Lifecycle prefixes are broadly used and are valid tagging. If someone chooses that approach, redoing their work is not appreciated.
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:11:24+00:00): It’s not just a renderer. It’s a lot of software.
Also, I don’t agree with that mantra as it’s widely understood. It’s not absolute — we need to be practical. Don’t tag for the renderer means primary "don’t tag something as grass if you want it to be gree on the map", not "don’t tag an object with widely supported tags so that it can be seen and found it most software".
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:13:34+00:00): This page explicitly calls out what I’ve done as acceptable:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer#Counter-examples

Changing tags into a more popular and correct form is also OK. For example changing a lake from landcover=water into natural=water is OK and helpful, even if primarily motivated by "this lake is not rendered on the map".
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:14:05+00:00): Is it better that the majority of our users can’t find Vondelkerk anymore? I don’t think so.
TrickyFoxy (2026-01-01 16:19:02+00:00): How about historic=ruins?
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:19:58+00:00): Those counter-examples are based on the assumption that the tag used is not popular and incorrect. For lifecycle-prefixes this is false on both counts.
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:20:51+00:00): I think that tag would be appropriate *if* the church is not rebuild within the next hundred years or so :)
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:21:34+00:00): Jeroen, that’s not what the page says. It explicitly mentions that both are correct but only one is rendered. Which is exactly the case here.
TrickyFoxy (2026-01-01 16:23:21+00:00): > Nominatim doesn’t index it 

It seems to be indexing:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=Vondelkerk

But perhaps this is due to the presence of wikidata=
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:23:59+00:00): Current status is that the thing burned down; the tagging reflects that. What happens next is up to the municipality, and not relevant to this discussion.

Someone got here before you and used tags you wouldn't have. However, those tags are valid, and using them is one way to get support for them improved.

When the next church burns down, see if you can be the first to edit it, and use the tags you used (which are also valid).
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:25:37+00:00): I disagree. Tags are not untouchable. If changing them to more widely supported ones ensures better accessibility, that should be done.
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:25:43+00:00): TrickyFoxy: yeah, I've looked at entities with only a ruins:building:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888868619

Nominatim seems to be broken for those.
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:27:56+00:00): andrewsh: We would be retagging all highway=busway and landuse=education to highway=service and amenity=school by that argument (because Carto doesn't render those). Doing that is not the consensus.
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:28:48+00:00): TrickyFoxy: it did briefly show up *because* I changed the tags.

https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/ui/details.html?osmtype=W&osmid=57861238
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:30:17+00:00): Jeroen, buildings, even burnt down, are important features for navigation. Being able to see them is more important than knowing where a piece of land owned by an educational institution has its border.
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:32:51+00:00): If you're using this church in a back-street next to the huge landmark of the Vondelpark to navigate by, you have bigger problems.

Don't worry: in a few months/years it will probably be a building again:

https://nos.nl/artikel/2596704-eerste-bewoners-terug-naar-huis-na-brand-vondelkerk-goede-hoop-op-herstel

Different mapping strategies exist. If the tags used here were wrong you'd have a point, but they are not.
andrewsh (2026-01-01 16:37:50+00:00): How about using the church as a landmark to navigate to the back street while cycling through the park — a totally valid use case. (Admittedly I usually exit the park here either on the right through the gate or on the left by the pavilion.)
TrickyFoxy (2026-01-01 16:39:41+00:00): > it did briefly show up *because* I changed the tags.
> Data last updated: 2 hours ago

Interesting, I thought Nominatim updates its database much faster.

---

Before I turn off notifications from this thread:

I don't insist on using a prefix. What's more important to me is the information that this is no longer the same building. How this is designated is a matter of taste—I'll leave it to the local community to decide.
JeroenHoek (2026-01-01 16:44:41+00:00): By the way: OsmAnd renders ruins:building (and other prefixes) just fine. Don't focus on Carto (which is pretty much unmaintained) too much.
eggie (2026-01-01 12:59:01+00:00): Hoi.. Met dat scrub is iets bijzonders. Tegenwoordig taggen we natural=shrubbery voor dat gemeentegroen. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dshrubbery

Helaas rendert dat niet op de standaardkaart. Op andere kaarten weer wel.
Pas als shrubbery veel wordt gebruikt wil Carto het opnemen in de rendering.

scrub is meer dat dit: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=scrub

Maar kan me voorstellen dat je iets wil zien renderen.  :)

MVG
eggie
SimonPoole (2026-01-01 12:44:33+00:00): See https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/le-constellation-crans-montana/139937 for discussion.
Szymson (2026-01-01 13:44:39+00:00): Granica Słupska zmieniona - ok
Punkt wsi Bolesławice zostawiony po staremu - nie ok:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/31347584
pyrog (2026-03-05 13:40:59+00:00): Hi,

3 node networks routes were broken by your changeset.
You "deleted" this node :
https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/node/1899161927

Could you fix it, please ?

Best regards,
Yves

https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/route/13543656/map?layers=background,hiking,nodes,unused&position=45.78875574,5.94954494,15
https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/route/13543655/map?layers=background,hiking,nodes,unused&position=45.78970632,5.95021115,17
https://knooppuntnet.nl/fr/analysis/route/13543658/map?layers=background,hiking,nodes,unused&position=45.79559149,5.95129500,14
googlenaut (2026-03-09 08:42:00+00:00): i've connect both ends of Rue Benoit Perret. so missing node should not matter.
pyrog (2026-03-09 08:49:56+00:00): Sorry,
It does.

The geometries are fine, thanks.
But the node_network route relations aren't.

Please have a look to knooppuntnet, the node network analyser to understand.

Not so easy the first time but this is a good tool for this type of relations.

Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions.

Best regards,
Yves
googlenaut (2026-03-09 08:57:38+00:00): in addition assuming NO biking on cemetery.
googlenaut (2026-03-09 09:07:26+00:00): sorry, i'm not a relation constructing expert. this usally efforts download of huge mapping areas.
pyrog (2026-03-09 09:15:07+00:00): > i'm not a relation constructing expert

It's not an issue :)

Just take care of osm nodes tagged with network:type=node_network.

If you remove one, all the "node network" relations routes starting from this node will be broken.

FYI node network relation are usually short. From ~50 m to ~5 km.

They start an finish usually from/to a "guidepost".

Do you want that is fix this simple issue ?
coatix (2026-01-01 13:08:03+00:00): Hallo. Bitte keine Nodes löschen, sondern als https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:disused:* markieren! :) Danke
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:16:27+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

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

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13423578650 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "مطعم شواية البخاري في غرب الرياض"
---
على سبيل المثال، يمكنك كتابة نسخة أكثر محايدة وأكثر موضوعية من النص على هذا النحو: "مطعم شواية البخاري في غرب الرياض"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-01-09 06:55:16+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/177011875
Hendrik Helsper (2026-01-02 10:53:07+00:00): You edited two objects in Germany and one in Spain. This makes the changeset area massive. I kindly ask you to please upload such unrelated and distant edits as multiple changesets next time. -Thank you!
pierre_18300 (2026-01-02 15:28:35+00:00): Apologies. I'm new to editing and I wasn't aware of this area problem. I need a better understanding of the software and I'll try to edit only in a limited zone until that. Thanks, P.
Hendrik Helsper (2026-01-02 23:23:50+00:00): No worries. I wasn't aware of this problem either when I started mapping.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-01-25 02:38:18+00:00): DWG revert - sock-puppet

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177667205
vasony (2026-01-02 08:56:53+00:00): Szia!

Az addr:flats nem erre való, a 10/2 típusú házszámot tedd az addr:housenumber mezőbe ahogy régebben.
Wiki: "this is a quantity (e.g. 4) rather than the individual numbers of the apartments" tehát a házban található lakások száma, bejáraton ez semmiképp nem jó.

Tehát ha a bejáraton 10/2 van kiírva, és nem lehet tudni, hogy ez cím vagy lakás:
addr:housenumber=10/2

Ha ez 2-es lakás:
addr:housenumber=10
addr:unit=2

vagy ha fszt 2.
addr:housenumber=10
addr:floor=0
addr:door=2

Köszi, Tamás
toboz (2026-01-02 17:40:24+00:00): Szia! Köszönöm a pontosítást. Ez esetben (és a környékbeli házaknál is) a lakások bejáratát akartam jelölni. Ezek a házak jellemzően 2-4 lakásos társasházak külön bejárattal az egyes lakásokhoz. Tehát a házaknak majdnem minden esetben lesz egy önálló házszáma (sarkon álló ikerházak néha kivételt képeznek), viszont a lakók gyakran kiírják a lakás számát is (pl. 10/1 a 10-es házszám alatt az egyes lakás). Ha jól értem, a javaslatod alapján ebben az esetben a második (addr:unit), vagy harmadik (addr:door) megoldás lenne az ideillő, ugye? Bár külön jelezni az emeletet nekem redundásnak tűnik, tekintve, hogy földszintes házakról van szó.
vasony (2026-01-02 17:56:33+00:00): Szia!

Igen, akkor maradjon az addr:unit megoldás, a másik jobban belegondolva inkább emeletes házakon belüli irodákon/üzleteken szokott lenni.

Ha JOSM-mel szerkeszted, akkor az addr:city és addr:postcode mezőket is töltsd fel légy szíves, akkor nem nekem kell utólag :-)

Tamás
toboz (2026-01-02 18:16:10+00:00): Rendben, így lesz, köszönöm a segítséget!
Dawid2849 (2026-01-01 17:02:59+00:00): https://tygodnikzamojski.pl/artykul/oto-mcdonalds-w-tomaszowie-n2200713
NeisBot (2026-01-01 13:50:21+00:00): Hi atshe resu, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 97% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 15 amenity(s)
- 37 building(s)
- 29 highway(s)
- 1 landuse(s)
- 3 leisure(s)
- 2 military(s)
- 2 sport(s)
- 1 wikidata(s)

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

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=176704022
woodpeck (2026-01-04 13:57:04+00:00): I have reverted this edit, it appears to be a mistake and the changeset comment "편집" does not sufficiently explain why these facilities should have ceased to exist.
atshe resu (2026-01-05 04:59:24+00:00): Satellite images of military through Mapbox Satellite show buildings and roads being demolished without a trace, so I deleted them.