piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Glassman (2026-06-12 16:09:34+00:00): #TIP: Check out https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours on how to add opening hours. It would be great if you could update them to the wiki standards.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183993144
matthewfecica (2026-06-12 00:26:31+00:00): Why are there two separate relations for Bicycle and Hiking routes? It is the same trail, and both are duplicates, so it should be tagged as Route, with hiking and cycling being both tagged as permitted activities
ZoëN (2026-06-12 02:30:10+00:00): It did not display the way it should in bike maps like CyclOSM and Waymarked Trails Cycling. 

I did not know what was wrong and was trying to fix it. I tried using two relations because sometimes using semicolons ( ; ) in tags is inadvisable. 

According to this: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Relation:route#Semi-colon_separated_route_values it seems both methods are used.

Using two relations seems to have fixed the issues in CyclOSM rendering, but I am still not sure how to map this properly.

I will do some more research and I might revert this later.
ZoëN (2026-06-12 03:02:13+00:00): Reverted. Your change was not wrong.

I'm not sure it's completely correct either and the rendering bothers me, but I'm not sure I can figure this out and I don't have time right now to decipher this mess.
matthewfecica (2026-06-15 02:09:44+00:00): I think I figured out the issue. In Waymarked Trails, the Empire State Trail appears but not the SCT designation. The reason seems to be because there are several layers of relations. So the SCT is in the NYC to Kingston section of the Empire State Trail, and the NYC to Kingston section is part of the greater Empire State Trail relation. So there are basically 3 layers, and this is probably why the SCT designation does not appear.

One option might be to do the Empire State Trail as a separate relation, because I frequently visit this trail, and all the signs call it the SCT or NCT, and the Empire State Trail is basically just combining various trails to create a trail that crosses the state, but no one here says "I'm going biking on the Empire State Trail". But since there are many segments I don't want to mess anything up. But if you want to separate the Empire State Trail designation and make all of that its own trail relation, I would not object to that. 

https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=9973398&type=relation

https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=1502196&type=relation
Udarian (2026-06-12 17:37:10+00:00): looking at this ALPR on various aerial imagery in iD it seems to be within the road area, being positioned like this is highly unlikely so please double check the position of this ALPR and fix it.

Happy mapping,
Udar.
Stranger_Dang3r (2026-06-12 17:50:01+00:00): Streetview clearly shows the ALP covering southbound traffic.
Udarian (2026-06-13 19:36:41+00:00): the only cameras I see are off to the side of the sidewalk inside of the verge and not in the road area, I do not see any inside of the road area, even attached to the traffic light. That just further reinforces to me that the position of this ALPR is incorrect. 

Happy mapping,
Udar.
Stranger_Dang3r (2026-06-13 21:39:38+00:00): the cameras are located on the southwest corner of the intersection inside the sidewalk. There are two ALPR's which are covering north and southbound traffic.
DanielAgos (2026-06-12 20:23:57+00:00): Hello There. Why have power tower nodes been moved over 2.8km? Like the https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7603414281 . I assume It was just a mouse drag slip but would you be able to confirm?

Also, nice work on the signaling! I just changed two in Coina platform 2 as the way was reversed
stan1zlaw (2026-06-13 22:32:40+00:00): Hi, I have no idea what happened with the power nodes. I was only working on the railway and did not (intentionally) touch the power grid. Regarding the S8 and S19, I'm pretty sure I had them set the right way, even double-checked the IDs. Again, no idea how they ended up on the wrong side, but thanks for fixing it.
stan1zlaw (2026-06-13 23:04:48+00:00): Regarding the power nodes - manually reverted on changeset #183994557. Cheers
OddlyAngled (2026-06-15 18:07:07+00:00): howdy. stop numbers should be captured in the ref= tag, not name= according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buses and (by standard convention) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names

can you verify and correct these? thanks! :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183994746
Pablo Strubell (2026-06-16 16:59:52+00:00): You are right. 
I made a mistake.
I did not follow the rules. 
But it is a pitty, as the bus number stop, in a way, it is in the name of the stop and it is mostly referred to it by the bus driver, rather than the name itself.
I will correct as soon as I can. 
Thanks for the review.
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-12 02:30:52+00:00): Di OSM sekarang klasifikasi jalan sudah tidak berdasar status kewenangan nya lagi, tolong baca Wiki Open Street Maps bagian Indonesia
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-12 02:32:23+00:00): Tag highway di OSM terkini bukan lagi jalan provinsi, melainkan "Jalan Kolektor Primer" yg menghubungkan beberapa pusat strategis di wilayah perkotaan
Gaung Tebono (2026-06-12 02:52:28+00:00): Klasifikasi jalan di Open Street Maps tidak harus sesuai status jalan nya entah itu provinsi atau kabupaten kota, di Open Street Maps ini semuanya fleksibel karena terminologi di OSM ini berbeda dengan yang acuan peraturan pemerintah. Dan perlu diingat, disini juga saya sengaja buat primer karena jalurnya strategis, menghubungkan pusat kegiatan perkotaan dengan jalan arteri primer
FajrAl (2026-06-12 03:39:51+00:00): Benar. Untuk kesesuaian tag, bisa mengacu ke wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Id:Pedoman_Penandaan_Indonesia#Jalan_Raya
Udarian (2026-06-12 17:22:39+00:00): Next time please connect crossing ways to the roads they intersect with (iD will prompt you to do this) and don't have two pedestrian ways (sidewalks and crossings for example) overlapping each other unless they are on different levels of a building, something that does not apply for this changeset. 

Happy mapping,
Udar.
CatSu (2026-06-12 02:43:02+00:00): Apologies for no comment, it was "Adding buildings"
MelancholicSlav (2026-06-13 04:18:04+00:00): Fisher Hill is not important enough for place=suburb. I have downgraded it to place=neighbourhood.
jhaluska80 (2026-06-12 13:07:15+00:00): Just a heads up, the demolished prefix tag is added to prevent non local people (like me) from accidentally readding demolished feature from aerials.  It also keeps the feature from being rendered / routed on.

Since the purpose is to keep people from accidentally readding, I personally leave them till at least the default aerial no longer shows the feature.

But if you're maintaining the area, it's not worth a revert.

It seems like a silly tag, but it has a real purpose.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lifecycle_prefix
a1phonse (2026-06-24 19:17:33+00:00): Got it -- thanks for the tip! Yes, I try to keep an eye on the area so I will leave it as-is I guess.
FreshlyTweezed (2026-06-12 16:25:22+00:00): I have restored the addresses deleted in this changeset
mseonline (2026-06-12 05:31:12+00:00): 21651 S Beavercreek Rd, Oregon City, OR 97045. The address geocodes to an estimated point near S Sisters Way, which provides no access to the property. The only access is a private driveway that meets the west edge of S Beavercreek Road. Please set the address and point-of-interest location to latitude 45.2936274, longitude -122.5406563, and set the routable access point to the driveway entrance at latitude 45.2942380, longitude -122.5382224. Please do not route this address via S Sisters Way.  Contact: mark@ericksonforensic.com
woodpeck (2026-06-12 07:59:36+00:00): Many of these trails were only added in the past few weeks. Can you explain more what is wrong about them? "Sorted out" is a little thin.
Toby H Ferguson (2026-06-12 15:54:43+00:00): Hi SyrupMap,

I noticed you reverted my changeset  without prior contact. I'd like to flag that OSM community norms ask mappers to reach out to the original contributor before reverting their work — both to explain any concerns and to give the mapper a chance to correct, clarify, or discuss.

The relevant guidance is here:
• Revert etiquette: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Revert#Etiquette
• Good practice: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_revert_without_discussion
• Dispute resolution: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dispute_resolution

I'm happy to discuss the edit — could you let me know what your concern was? If there's a tagging issue, an error, or a local knowledge conflict, I'd rather we work it out collaboratively than through silent reverts.

Thanks for mapping,

Toby H Ferguson
Toby H Ferguson (2026-06-21 02:30:33+00:00): Hi SyrupMap,

Following up on my message from 12 June 2026 — I haven't heard back from you regarding the revert of changeset #183998702.

I'm writing to let you know that if I don't hear from you by Saturday June 27th 2026, I intend to re-apply the original edit. I want to be transparent about this rather than acting without notice.

If you have concerns about the edit — tagging, accuracy, local knowledge — I remain genuinely open to discussing them. A collaborative resolution is always preferable.

For reference, the OSM community guidelines on this kind of situation:
• Revert etiquette: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Revert#Etiquette
• Good practice: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_revert_without_discussion
• Dispute resolution: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Dispute_resolution

Hope to hear from you,

Toby H Ferguson
Toby H Ferguson (2026-06-29 01:14:16+00:00): Hi SM,

Thank you again for taking the time to explain your reasoning. I genuinely appreciate it, and I've spent quite a bit of time thinking about the issues you raised before deciding how to proceed.

Since our exchange I've looked more broadly at how OpenStreetMap, other mapping communities and mapping applications handle unofficial trails. I've also reflected on the balance between accurate mapping, stewardship, and the legitimate concerns of local riders.

Having done that, I've concluded that I should restore the deleted trails. My view is that established, heavily used social trails that are already publicly discoverable are generally appropriate to map in OSM, provided they are accurately tagged to reflect their status. I recognise that reasonable people disagree with that conclusion, and I don't dismiss the concerns you raised, but on balance I don't think they justify omitting these particular trails from the map. This isn’t a decision I’ve reached lightly.  This decision only relates to those established social trails. It shouldn’t be taken as  meaning I intend to map every unofficial trail. 

Rather than trying to explain all of my reasoning in a changeset discussion, I've written a short statement of the principles I'm trying to apply:

[Mapping Established Social Trails in OpenStreetMap](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YsCaVeX_QWeXSP68_7lUi65mF_kLDmNyjac_ISqaweY/edit?usp=sharing)

It's not intended as a rebuttal to your comments, nor as a statement of how everyone should map. It's simply an explanation of how I've arrived at my decision.

I appreciate the thoughtful way you engaged with this, even though we've reached different conclusions.

Toby Ferguson
woodpeck (2026-06-29 08:32:49+00:00): It would have been good if SyrupMap had given their reasons in this public discussion (or on the relevant OSM community forum) rather than in private messages. The topics aren't new and there are many reasons why we map what is on the ground, no matter if it is "legal" or not; the OSM community has created their own detailed reasoning here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

I would have been able to point SyrupMap to this from the start had the changeset comment indicated why this deletion was made. If you do delete a trail from OSM, explain why the trail has ceased to exist (or never existed in the first place).
Taya_S (2026-06-12 08:40:36+00:00): All changesets reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184005614
Herman Lee (2026-06-12 10:49:47+00:00): Please use local language and proper key for the tag "name="
Puffi_fp (2026-06-13 06:39:55+00:00): Please Herman_Lee check around, literally 50% of all other places in all of China have similar descriptive names. This is common practice _aaaall_ around the globe.
+ I can not write Chinese, and would make mistakes if i tried, as do probably many other mappers in China
Herman Lee (2026-06-13 10:31:26+00:00): Next time, maybe you can upload or share the picture of this shop of place. Other mappers and me can teach you how to edit it more properly. Also, you can use the osm community, telegram group, discord group for globle or DM me for uploading this photos. Also, I have learnt that the app you are using have the option to add English only. If you haven't noticed, please check it. Other mappers will also spend time to fix data in such low quality, please respect others.
ljc_jlyb (2026-06-13 14:12:33+00:00): Don't use descriptive names - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only
China (and Mongolia) doesn't have enough mappers to maintain its data quality. If "literally 50%" of other places in China are tagged like that, then would you mind sharing some of them, instead of using descriptive names in your mapping?
Puffi_fp (2026-06-14 09:04:34+00:00): I will certainly not share them, as the names contain useful info for me and other users.
Puffi_fp (2026-06-14 09:05:54+00:00): Removing these descriptive names without adding a correct one just because of a "good practice" (not a rule!) is greatly downgrading OSMs quality.
So no thx. 
I will inform myself and contact the working group on this.
Aethonatic (2026-06-14 18:08:15+00:00): The info may be useful, but "name" is an inappropriate tag for it. Please use the "description" tag instead.
Tomas09 (2026-06-14 20:35:28+00:00): You know you can add a description right? A description can remain but the name will get deleted so even from your logic what youre doing is wrong
Puffi_fp (2026-06-14 22:57:31+00:00): I am mapping using CoMaps form my phone, shere i can't add a description.

But other mappers using other interfaces could put these descriptive names in the description instead of deleting them outright...
Taksine (2026-06-15 02:27:15+00:00): 放一句话在这里，你说什么全国一大半是这个样，但我会竭我所能把这一大半全部改掉。
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-15 09:58:44+00:00): Reverted adding SEO POI with blatant advertising and malformed tags, possibly sourced from Google Maps, in changeset 184128980

https://osm.org/changeset/184128980
旧加卷 (2026-06-12 08:35:30+00:00): The two given reasons are not valid.
There are 3 cays lying on the shoal that are above high tide:
9.7945, 116.4177 - 1.3 meters higher than the local mean high water springs
9.7600, 116.4358 - 0.4 meters higher than the local mean high water springs
9.7117, 116.4921 - 1.0 meters higher than the local mean high water springs
The outer limit of the territorial sea is measured 12 nm outwards from the normal baseline. The normal baseline is the low water line of a high tide elevation feature.
Regarding your claim of "no country exercises continuous or effective control", AMTI (the source which you have used) indicates that the China Coast Guard patrolled Sabina Shoal for 311 days throughout 2025. 
https://amti.csis.org/eyes-on-the-prize-ccg-patrols-prioritize-scarborough-in-2025/
特蕾西娅 (2026-06-12 09:33:15+00:00): CANT YOU JUST LOOK UP SOME INFORMATION? DO YOU HAVE TO COME HERE AND CASUE TROUBLE?
Filip009 (2026-06-14 10:46:44+00:00): Hello, there already exist place village with this name https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/530544399
VLD0251 (2026-06-12 08:58:22+00:00): Hello,

Your current edits are a continuation of the vandalism from your account that was blocked yesterday: osm.org/user/test0022012

Bypassing a block is strictly forbidden.

Your edits will be reverted, and a report has been sent to the Data Working Group (DWG) to have this new account blocked.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-14 00:20:49+00:00): Hi VLD0251. We've tried sending you messages but your e-mail keeps bouncing them as undeliverable? Could you please check your e-mail address? (under My Account) Thanks.
VLD0251 (2026-06-14 08:25:39+00:00): @Fizzie-DWG; thanks for the heads-up. the issue is resolved

Thanks,
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-14 21:27:30+00:00): Thanks!
literan (2026-06-12 18:33:06+00:00): снесено уже
Ozon OSM5 (2026-06-21 12:49:02+00:00): Спасибо большое, что исправили!
MxxCon (2026-06-12 17:26:52+00:00): Thank you for continuing to correct these problems.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184002736
Piskvor (2026-06-12 09:28:05+00:00): Zdravím, díky za doplnění do mapy. Ještě jsem to upřesnil na hazard=dangerous_junction. Sice by to, podle wiki, mělo být tam, kde je i příslušné DZ, ale mazat to kvůli tomu nebudu.

S pozdravem 
Piskvor
jicoord (2026-06-14 07:31:52+00:00): Zdravím také a děkuji za úpravu i spolupráci! O tagu hazard=dangerous_junction jsem původně uvažoval, ale právě kvůli absenci fyzického dopravního značení jsem byl raději opatrný.

Jsem rád, že to takto v mapě může zůstat. Místo je kvůli nedání přednosti a vysoké rychlosti aut opravdu kritické. Navíc je tam několik přechodů pro chodce a křižovatkou neustále projíždějí dlouhé kloubové autobusy linek 177 a 200, což situaci dál komplikuje. Takhle to bude pro všechny přehlednější a jasnější.

Díky a ať se daří
Jicoord
Piskvor (2026-06-14 09:46:54+00:00): No může-nemůže: žádný oficiální schválení neexistuje, jen nějaký mlhavý konsenzus. Je možné, že to někdo za nějaký čas zase vyhodí, kdoví. Uvidíme, nedělal bych si s tím hlavu. 

Mapování zdar, 
Piskvor
kingkingHK (2026-06-12 08:04:22+00:00): Please use `highway=footway` + `indoor=yes` instead of `highway=corridor`.
Samuele Battarra (2026-06-13 13:08:52+00:00): Annullato il changeset perché elimina molti nodi. Probabilmente un edit non andato a buon fine.
canfe (2026-06-13 17:48:04+00:00): Mi pare di aver controllato ma era solo una separazione dei civici dalle attività commerciali mantenendo le prerogative del civico e creando un nodo per ogni cosa.
Non è che c'è un lag nell'aggiornamento ? Io li vedevo creati e non rimossi.
Samuele Battarra (2026-06-13 22:32:09+00:00): Non mi risulta che ci possano essere lag nell'aggiornamento, il changeset tra l'altro ha ormai quasi due giorni, e guardando qui https://osmcha.org/changesets/184003525 risulta chiaramente contenere solo cancellazioni.
canfe (2026-06-14 09:43:25+00:00): E' vero. Qualcosa è andato storto.
Mi spiace e sì che avevo controllato e ricontrollato su campioni più piccoli.
Grazie per aver messo a posto.
yelisey90 (2026-06-12 07:48:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5334191
橘ヒカリ (2026-06-12 12:56:13+00:00): 您好，铁路施工期间线路经常变动。

请等待施工结束，车站示意图、LKJ基础数据、卫星图更新后再进行修改。

另，线路所、车站撤销等应使用disused:railway等前置标签，而不是直接删除node。

谢谢！

Reverted in 184015766
Mannivu (2026-06-13 12:48:55+00:00): Ho annullato l'intero gruppo di modifiche perché sono stati eliminati moltissime attività commerciali esistenti. Pur comprendendo la buona fede, questo gruppo di modifiche hanno tolto tantissime informazioni dal database.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184054874
canfe (2026-06-13 17:47:18+00:00): Mi pare di aver controllato ma era solo una separazione dei civici dalle attività commerciali mantenendo le prerogative del civico e creando un nodo per ogni cosa.
Non è che c'è un lag nell'aggiornamento ? Io li vedevo creati e non rimossi.
Mannivu (2026-06-14 07:07:16+00:00): Non credo, il gruppo di modifiche è chiuso da due giorni ormai. Comunque non preoccuparti, si capisce che non è una cosa intenzionale, ma una svista, per quello mi sono permesso di annullarlo prima della tua risposta.
canfe (2026-06-14 09:43:59+00:00): E' vero. Qualcosa è andato storto.
Mi spiace e sì che avevo controllato e ricontrollato su campioni più piccoli.
Grazie per aver messo a posto.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-13 00:07:45+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20812
Dave Venables (2026-06-12 08:20:20+00:00): Or perhaps addr:place = Grove Bank, addr:parentstreet = Duffield Road?
SafwatHalaby (2026-07-03 15:35:07+00:00): נא להימנע משמות תאוריים כגון "תחילת מסלול". השם הוא שם כפי שהיית רואה אותו על השלט. במקרה הזה מדובר בחניון "שוויצריה הקטנ".
spughetti_tomtom (2026-06-25 08:09:47+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184570663
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-12 11:26:54+00:00): Reverted addition of SEO spam POI with advertising and littered with loads of nonsense tags and values in changeset 184012486

https://osm.org/changeset/184012486
grsprotectionca (2026-06-17 08:30:01+00:00): Can you please revise the suspension of the listing? It's a real business location. No intention of spam activity. Please advice on how to improve the entry so It's not removed? 
Thank you!
CAM-Gerlach (2026-06-17 09:11:15+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for reaching out. First off, let me help explain what OSM is, and how it works--it's a map of the world, not a business directory, and your "listing" was not "suspended", but rather this particular contribution to the map was undone, due to the large volume of nonsensical and incorrect tags/values ("Toll Free Number" and "Languages" are not even close to valid tags, facebook=*, instagram=*, Linkedin=*, Pinterest=*, twitter=* and Youtube=* need to be lowercased and prefixed with `contact:*=*`, name=* should be the common name of the business with no "Inc", etc)

We welcome mappers who wish to add POIs (points of interest) for the business they work for (provided they have permanent, verifiable physical locations on the ground). However, If you're going to add your business or those of your clients, you have an obligation (to both the business and to us) to make every reasonable effort to use correct tags and values. Nearly half the tags added here are invalid or not used incorrectly, several being essentially nonsense, which both pollutes the map with junk data and means they will not be intelligible to any data consumers reading the map, defeating the purpose of your efforts here.

iD's beginner-friendly presets make it relatively easy to fill in this information correctly, and the OSM wiki is a great quick reference for what tags to use and how to use them. However, in this case it is even easier, as the other POI you added in changeset 183904578 https://osm.org/changeset/183904578 had mostly correct tags with only a few that needed fixing, which I did for you in changeset 184012408 https://osm.org/changeset/184012408 . Therefore, you can use that as a blueprint when seeing what you need to change here, and resubmit the POI accordingly. Do note there was one thing I didn't fix there--mobile=* should be phone:US=*, i.e. what you called "Toll Free Number" [sic] here. Assuming you make a good faith effort to get it as close to 100% correct as practical, I can fix any last small bits as needed.

Thanks, and happy mapping.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-25 08:19:12+00:00): Cleaned up SEO spam and other mistagging for POI in changeset 184570988

https://osm.org/changeset/184570988
Martin Constantino–Bodin (2026-06-12 09:16:42+00:00): Hi,
It seems that you made some changes to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/583035433 that were not meant to be part of this changeset. Can you double-check that it is all right?
Thanks in advance.
RahilPasha (2026-06-12 14:36:28+00:00): Hi  Martin Constantino–Bodin,
Thank you for the feedback.
I reviewed the changeset and found that I had created a driveway segment in the US region but forgot to close the changeset afterward. Later, I downloaded a task in Switzerland using the same changeset. However, I did not make any edits to way/583035433 or in that location.
Going forward, I will make sure to keep my changesets smaller and focused on one country or task at a time
Regards
Rahil Pasha