piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
porfiriopaiz (2025-10-23 04:24:30+00:00): Hola J00SECI,

¿Podrías indicarme qué fuente de información has consultado al momento de realizar los cambios de las etiquetas de los elementos que has modificado en este conjunto de cambios?

Quiero hacer la observación de que estos elementos fueron originalmente agregados por contribuidores profesionales que en su momento han citado las fuentes de información en las cuales se han basado sus contribuciones.

¿Podrías hacer lo mismo?

Entretanto, podrías abstenerte de modificar sin fundamento alguno las contribuciones hechas por otros voluntarios.

Únicamente estás entorpeciendo el trabajo que ya han realizado.

Atentamente,
Porfirio Páiz
porfiriopaiz (2025-10-24 00:48:18+00:00): 

Hola J00SECI,

¿Podrías indicarme qué fuente de información has consultado al momento de realizar los cambios de las etiquetas de los elementos que has modificado en este conjunto de cambios?

Quiero hacer la observación de que estos elementos fueron originalmente agregados por contribuidores profesionales que en su momento han citado las fuentes de información en las cuales se han basado sus contribuciones.

¿Podrías hacer lo mismo?

Entretanto, podrías abstenerte de modificar sin fundamento alguno las contribuciones hechas por otros voluntarios.

Únicamente estás entorpeciendo el trabajo que ya han realizado.

Atentamente,
Porfirio Páiz
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-10-21 06:29:00+00:00): Araştırmama göre demişsiniz. Bu bilginin kaynağı tam olarak nedir?
Zrop (2025-10-21 09:07:16+00:00): Hallo LinoHammer,
wie kommst Du darauf das dieser Straßenabschnitt https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1269089069 auf beiden Seiten einen Bürgersteig hat ? Es gibt hier nur auf der linken Seite einen Bürgersteig.

Gruß
Zrop
Zrop (2025-10-21 09:05:47+00:00): Hallo LinoHammer,
wieso änderst Du hier https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/201427625 von "Bürgersteig rechts" auf "Bürgersteig rechts separat" ? hier ist rechts keine separater Bürgersteig eingezeichnet.

Gruß
Zrop
Dušan Kreheľ (2025-10-20 21:39:49+00:00): Source (right): DTM 5.0 shading of Slovakia
Syl (2025-10-21 13:52:11+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour le traitement de ces notes, quelle source avait vous utilisé pour confirmer leur contenu ?
Pouvez-vous préciser le numéro des notes utilisées dans la source pour faciliter le suivi des modifications ?
Everteal (2025-10-21 14:25:27+00:00): Bonjour,

Pour ce changement, la note d'origine est la 4915141 (la seule en lien avec le chemin modifié). Concernant la vérification de source, la note a été générée par OrganicMaps, et l'auteur indique qu'il n'y a pas de panneau à proximité, impliquant qu'il ou elle a vérifié sur place.

Vu que les notes cochées disparaissent au bout de 15 jours, je ne m'étais pas posé la question de préciser la quelle en était la source pour des toutes petites modifs comme celle ci. Je le ferais à l'avenir :)
Syl (2025-10-21 16:39:25+00:00): Merci :)
Jordi MF (2025-10-20 22:23:59+00:00): Muchas gracias por esta edición, Taureendil. Hace tiempo que corrijo, poco a poco, toda esta zona mal mapeada como "tierras de labranza" que, en realidad, son "orchard". Pero no doy abasto con otros temas.

Saludos!
DaveF (2025-10-23 18:15:01+00:00): There si already a railway=station tag. Please don't duplicate.
CRCulver (2025-10-31 18:00:04+00:00): Why did you remove the shop=yes tag from this BP petrol station:

> https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4207333701#map=19/38.900456/22.448418

I added that tag based on a personal survey, I saw with my own eyes that this petrol station has a shop.
CRCulver (2025-10-31 18:06:07+00:00): OK, I have seen that you have erroneously deleted this tag from multiple amenity=fuel in Greece. I have reverted your changes in changeset 174032962.

Tagging petrol stations for shops is particularly important for cyclists, who want to know all opportunities for snacks and drinks along a route. If you don’t like my shop=yes tag, which is widely used, then you can tag shop=kiosk or shop=convenience as described on the OSM wiki article for amenity=fuel. Deleting the tag entirely, however, is not appropriate.
NeisBot (2025-10-21 00:16:28+00:00): Hi tornehsaoitehrnoetsh, welcome 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].

Based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added addresses, phone numbers, and shop details, including fast food and jewelry amenities"
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
TrickyFoxy (2025-10-24 12:36:54+00:00): Спасибо за помощь
OSM_RogerWilco (2025-10-29 07:45:45+00:00): Moin panzeron,

bei Einbahnstraßen tragen wir nicht noch zusätzlich die Abbiegebschränkungen ein. Die ergeben sich bereits durch das oneway=yes.

Wenn Du Zeichen 267 als Punkt direkt auf den highway einträgst, denke bitte daran auch die Richtung anzugeben. Entweder die Wirkrichtung mittels traffic_sign:forward/backward angeben oder die "Blickrichtung" der Schildervorderseite durch direction=* angeben.

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
panzaeron (2025-11-02 08:14:57+00:00): Moin Roger Wilco,
danke für den Hinweis, habe ich geändert bzw. die Abbiegebeschränkungen gelöscht.
Alliegaytor (2025-10-21 01:00:05+00:00): Hi JuKrab, just letting you know that you forgot to add building=yes to the building outline you drew here. I've added the tag in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173560367 . Now it will render and show the name on most renderers

Thanks for adding all these businesses and clinics in Bendigo :)
Zrop (2025-10-21 09:08:04+00:00): Hallo LinoHammer,
wieso hast Du die Hausnummer der St. Agnes Kirche von 1 auf 18 geändert und "addr:city=Köln" entfernt ? Die Hausnummer 1 war korrekt.

Gruß
Zrop
GeorgeKaplan (2025-10-21 05:09:18+00:00): Bonjour, le tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:amenity=social%20centre?uselang=fr a une autre signification que celle souhaitée dans la note d'origine.
Everteal (2025-10-21 14:12:23+00:00): Oups oui bien vu je suis passé un peu vite sur celle là. J'imagine que ce serait plus plus un amenity=community_centre ?
LordGarySugar (2025-10-22 01:20:36+00:00): Wow! The landuse looks so much nicer now!
hexplore (2025-10-22 17:14:44+00:00): Hey, thanks!! I walked through here the other day and noticed that it needed some work 😀
aharvey (2025-10-21 02:54:02+00:00): What's there now? If it's a construction site best to use landuse=construction.
ilovecycleways (2025-10-21 03:24:36+00:00): Currently nothing yet, has almost been fully demolished now so no where near the end of the construction. Will change the landuse.
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-22 00:26:59+00:00): Does the ref actually continue past the last interchange?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173560566
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 01:31:36+00:00): According to Wikipedia, yes it does, apparently, despite clearly not being built to Interstate standards (no physical barrier between the carriageways).
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-22 02:01:03+00:00): I wouldn't consider that necessarily a reliable source but a starting place for further research.  Also a single-carriageway expressway would be highway=trunk, expressway=yes, oneway=no.
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-22 02:02:37+00:00): Any chance we could get some Mapillary imagery?  I understand it's going to be an imposition for most people to do that given how remote the turnpike is.  I'm just not convinced Wikipedia's not making a rounding error.
KentClark (2025-10-21 03:05:32+00:00): On further inspection it appears that this route permits cycling in one direction up until the driveway near the top.
Frans S (2025-10-21 07:48:17+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project. Accurate mapped !
A road, sole access to a company, ought to be mapped as a highway=service.



Buildings are often not correct mapped. Especial the high rise buildings and buildings which shows their side views  as well. Check this footage how to map these buildings 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsfUcslLtVc

Best regards
Frans S (2025-10-22 14:11:17+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)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings

A: Inaccurate mapping. 

B: Overlapping buildings.

E: Buildings not squared or rounded.
H: Included a yard of clearing.
High building(s) incorrect mapped. 
Check this footage how to map high buildings

https://youtu.be/dsfUcslLtVc?si=yH6eWDbsb_ILAVb9
 Or See par 20 chapter About Buildings


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

Please solve all issues shown by the IDeditor before you update your mappings

Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
Frans S (2025-10-22 14:14:23+00:00): And,  buildings should be tagged as building=yes. !
Best regards
DanhengOSM (2025-10-21 07:10:40+00:00): changeset过大，请拆分之
Frans S (2025-10-23 13:54:55+00:00): Hello again. 
These mappings are far below par as well.
See my comments on your mappings.
Baconcrisp (2025-10-21 19:27:16+00:00): Hello Flap,

I have a question about your tagging. of this stretch of road. According to the wiki, this shouldn't be classified as a motorway since there's an intersection with traffic signals on it which means it would most likely be a trunk or lower.

I also looked into your proposed tag, but didn't quite understand its purpose. Was this discussed on the community forum or somewhere else as mentioned on the Proposal Process wiki pagehttps://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process#Mandatory_announcements? I'd be interested to learn more about its purpose and its relevance to the map.

Baconcrisp
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173561358
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 01:28:14+00:00): 1. This specific road section, the one I changed just now, does, in fact, have no traffic lights, qualifying it as fully controlled-access highway.
2. https://osm.wiki/Proposal:Motorway_classifications
Baconcrisp (2025-10-22 14:35:32+00:00): I double checked and there are traffic lights at that intersection which can be seen in available Mapillary(2018) and in Bing satellite imagery(2024). Do you have a more recent verifiable source to confirm this intersection has changed? This is a standard model for these types of intersections in Utah.

I did read your proposal, but its relevance wasn't clear. What you proposed can already be described with current classifications and tags. I also could find your proposal mentioned on the forum or mailing list which is required according to the Proposal Process guidelines here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal_process. If you really think your proposal has merit you need to follow the guidelines on that page so the community can help you improve it and vote on it.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 19:17:10+00:00): 1. You're completely right. There is a gantry right above the SPUI junction. However, by convention, the `traffic signals` node should be placed at the location where vehicles need to stop. In this case, it's before the stop marking line visible in Bing Maps Aerial. That's where I placed the traffic signal, and that is why I made that segment a motorway. I've added the gantry to the database and changed it back to secondary.
2. Thanks for sharing the info; I had no idea I had to do that first. There's already a discussion in the OSM Forum about highway classifications, so I'll likely change my tags to make more sense. Once again, thanks!
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 20:42:03+00:00): (Also, I just realized that my proposal is still in its draft phase, partially because I needed to come up with a better tagging scheme first.)
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 21:41:36+00:00): Done
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-10-21 06:57:12+00:00): Why did you set this road, which is located far from residential areas, as highway=residential? (In your latest changesets, it's always the same thing—you've changed the way tags incorrectly.)

And, please write changeset comments explaining the changes you have made. See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Oregonian3 (2025-10-21 17:58:15+00:00): The reason this road is primary is that there is no corresponding interchange to 3300 S from northbound I-215 to the one from southbound I-215. 3300 S is the primary road in the area, and this part of Wasatch Boulevard serves as the access to 3300 S from I-215. Reverting this change as it breaks this primary connectivity (and the related change that upgrades 3900 S to primary since it doesn't serve a primary function here)
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-10-22 01:24:01+00:00): This is only an incomplete interchange. There is no way for southbound drivers to enter I-215 unless they also go to 3900 South. Similarly, northbound drivers on Wasatch Blvd have no direct access to the freeway anymore, unless they again turn onto 3900 South.
Oregonian3 (2025-10-22 01:55:06+00:00): Exactly. The only reason this stretch of road is primary is that it serves as the northbound off-ramp from I-15 to 3300 S. In fact, the fact that we have incomplete interchanges here is the only reason why it's primary. If there were an on-ramp to access 3300 S directly from I-15 northbound then that would be the primary route.
Fidelis Assis (2026-01-13 16:16:39+00:00): Hi CharliePlett.
Your editing reduced the area of ​​the Colônia Nova brazilian distric to 1/17 of its actual size according to IBGE. Did you have any information to make that?
CharliePlett (2026-01-14 04:25:46+00:00): Well, I have a file on Mennonite colony boundaries, so I updated it on OSM to match that. But if you have an actual government source then your source might be more truthful.
CharliePlett (2026-01-14 04:26:35+00:00): Or is there a difference between the Mennonite colony and what you call a district?
Fidelis Assis (2026-01-14 16:47:05+00:00): In Brazil, a district (admin_level=9 in OSM) is the main subdivision of a municipaliity (admin_level=8 in OSM).  "Colônia Nova" is a Brazilian district belonging to the "Aceguá" municipality and its area is much greater than the one after your editing. You can check the original size in previous versions or consuting IBGE files.

The IBGE, the Brazilian institute responsible for publishing official demarcations, is the main source we use to map boundaries in OSM. You can access their maps at the address below:

https://www.ibge.gov.br/geociencias/organizacao-do-territorio/estrutura-territorial/26565-malhas-de-setores-censitarios-divisoes-intramunicipais.html

For convenience, I maintain versions converted to GeoJSON at

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1AmqbiGYSOeSqbb8mQzWX99Gk408gzmiw?usp=sharing

Those GeoJSONs can be used as a "background layer" both in iD and JOSM.
NeisBot (2025-10-21 04:36:20+00:00): Hi Shamardina, welcome 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].

Based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Updated Russian name on a way"
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Alliegaytor (2025-10-21 06:55:46+00:00): The service roads should be connected to the road, not just the cycleway
TimbyT (2025-10-22 18:18:22+00:00): The sidewalk, curbs and crossings were deleted here. However they are valid per imagery. Is there a reasoning for their deletion?
rothg (2025-10-22 18:46:45+00:00): Deleting valid features that currently exist on the ground goes against OSM Good Practice (at best) and is reportable Abuse (at worst). I sympathize that having separately-drawn sidewalk ways and sidewalk tags on the same street feels redundant but that's not an acceptable reason to delete.

I advise reverting this changeset as well as the following changesets which improperly delete sidewalks, crossings, or other features.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173565067

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173564917

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173565257

Adding valid information is always welcome; deleting valid features is not.
fynng (2025-10-22 20:58:26+00:00): Thank you, I thought the redundancy was a valid reason. It won't happen again, and I appreciate the explanation
bpiotrowicz86 (2025-10-27 15:03:04+00:00): Dzień dobry!
Z ciekawości, jak znalazł Pan projekt budowy/organizacji ruchu?
Michał Paluchowski (2025-10-27 15:12:13+00:00): UM Warszawy publikuje regularnie zatwierdzone projekty na swojej stronie:
https://um.warszawa.pl/waw/rowery/projekty
bpiotrowicz86 (2025-10-27 15:14:20+00:00): Dziękuję!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-21 04:17:15+00:00): see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118997679
aharvey (2025-10-27 23:07:46+00:00): I think to meet https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cyclestreet it must be a road that is signposted/marked to be explicitly for bicycles as the primary road users with motor vehicles as secondary users.
Bondi Maps (2025-10-25 20:22:03+00:00): Porque? Quilmes está dividido entre Quilmes Oeste y Este. Incluso aparece dividido así en la página oficial del municipio. El cambio no coincide con la realidad.
Bondi Maps (2025-10-25 20:22:51+00:00): Lo mismo con la ciudad de Florencio Varela, que en realidad su nombre oficial es San Juan Bautista. Si bien no es necesariamente usado, es el oficial, no hay nada que hacer
AgusQui (2025-10-26 01:08:59+00:00): No estaba al tanto, pensé que estabas tratando de indicar como se le dicen a las 2 partes de Quilmes (como en Moreno que se suele decir Moreno Norte y Moreno Sur pero no existen como tal oficialmente).
Habría que borrar esta relación: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2067960 o mejor transformarla en el este para mantener el historial.
Veo que al "este" se llama Quilmes sólo, yo pondría alt_name=Quilmes Este.
Florencio Varela no recuerdo haberlo tocado.
Por otro lado te comento que los miembros de las relaciones boundary deben estar con rol "outer" para indicar que son los límites exteriores y evitar problemas con las diferentes aplicaciones que usan OSM.
Bondi Maps (2025-10-26 01:35:54+00:00): Hola Agus, buenas noches. En efecto, no fue como en el caso de Moreno, igual entiendo que lo hayas pensado de esa manera. Quilmes Este se lo nombra como "Quilmes", lo mismo pasa con Bernal y Ezpeleta. Banco poner el alt_name.

Y gracias por comentarme como se nombran las relaciones.
i2004 (2025-10-21 09:41:53+00:00): me podrias ajustar los cambios en la 164 con el recorte a pompeya
notmyproblem1 (2025-10-21 04:40:30+00:00): sorry for the big changeset, this is what happens when you touch the old relation of la spezia
FajrAl (2025-10-21 11:48:11+00:00): Thank you for fixing!
Flamen_Sru (2025-10-23 11:54:24+00:00): Glad to help, happy mapping
EräsHenkilö (2025-11-07 10:02:42+00:00): Tässä näyttäisi olevan moottoritieksi merkitty tietä, joka selkeästi ei sellainen ole. Voisitko selittää ja perua muutokset?
HSL_PALAUTE (2025-11-13 12:52:44+00:00): Länsiväylän osalta muutokset peruttu muutoskokoelmassa https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174604067. Aiheuttivat hieman harmia, koska highway=motorway oletusarvoisesti yksisuuntainen digitointisuuntaan ja joukossa oli osuuksia puuttui oneway=no tagi, jolla tuo voidaan ohittaa. Kyseessä ei kuitenkaan ole moottoritie.
liljaadeliina (2026-01-12 09:34:32+00:00): Kiitos tiedosta
j numminen (2026-05-08 20:07:56+00:00): Tässä oli peruttu myös Purokummuntien liittymään tehtyjen uudistusten kartoitus. Siksi palauttelin muutoskokoelmassa changeset/182399072 aiemman muutoskokoelmani changeset/168840394 tuotokset takaisin kartalle. Lähteinä ovat viime kesän havainnot paikan päältä ja kuva-aineisto Esri World Imagery.
Gregory Peony (2025-10-29 03:21:51+00:00): Hi, it looks like you applied an invalid layer tag here. Please read https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:layer to better understand its use.
julcnx (2025-11-02 10:29:25+00:00): Thanks for your contributions! While you added some new paths, many existing forestry double tracks were downgraded to “path.” These tracks are regularly used by 4WDs and ATVs, and although they can become temporarily impassable during the rainy season, as a rule, any trails 2 m wide or more is considered a track, regardless of its condition. I will revert your track > path changes. Thanks for your understanding. Julien
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173563873
rempshaener (2025-10-21 13:55:25+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Das sieht gut aus. Auch hier noch einmal der Hinweis: am besten gleich auch noch die Nennweite (der Zuleitung) und die Position erfassen. 

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-10-21 06:29:37+00:00): dzięki za poprawkę! I ogólnie dzięki za mapowanie

ale mam małą uwagę - to chyba highway=service z odpowiednim surface=

highway=track jest na dojazd do pól/lasów/itp
TrickyFoxy (2025-10-27 10:17:09+00:00): 1. name — лишний, из landuse=military понятно что это
2. яндекс.карты не используем
MorevPro (2025-10-27 11:39:37+00:00): принял! спасибо
cuzi (2025-10-21 10:05:46+00:00): Could you please write changeset comments that are a bit more explicit. E.g. something like "updated landuse" or "added forests". 
It is hard for other people to understand what you changed when all the changesets have the same comment.
NeisBot (2025-10-21 05:42:42+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
NeisBot (2025-10-21 05:42:42+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form: "Dental clinic in Hyderabad"
NeisReview (2025-10-22 15:47:10+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element https://osm.org/changeset/173624234
NeisBot (2025-10-21 05:51:42+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
NeisBot (2025-10-21 05:51:43+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form: "Dental clinic at house number 86 street 110"
NeisReview (2025-10-22 15:46:22+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/173634666
NeisBot (2025-10-21 05:57:42+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form: "Medical clinic for various health conditions"