piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-09-03 14:48:44+00:00): Karel,

Maar is het wel een fietspad of wellicht gewoon highway=unclassified overgaand na het fietspad in een highway=track voor de boer. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 14:55:15+00:00): Ik denk dat het geen fietspad is. Ik heb het aangepast.
Mocht het wel een fietspad zijn geworden laat het dan even weten.
MVG
eggie
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-02 23:00:49+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2319929715
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/559541079

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
UT93 (2025-10-26 19:00:04+00:00): Schau dir doch nochmals die Adresse vom "Hundesalon Pfötliwösch" an, ich denke, bei der Postleitzahl scheint dir ein Fehler unterlaufen zu sein!
l3mon1zer (2025-10-26 19:38:02+00:00): Absolut richtig, danke, habs angepasst.
custodiankeyy (2025-09-03 19:46:28+00:00): İnternette "Salihli Zeynep Sude Oktay Sosyal Bilimler Lisesi" adında bir sonuç bulamadım. Neden böyle bir haritalandırma yaptınız? Yanlışsam düzeltin.
ftrebien (2026-06-26 02:43:09+00:00): Olá Pedro., Pelas regras de classificação em vigor (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brazil/Classifica%C3%A7%C3%A3o_das_rodovias_do_Brasil#Crit%C3%A9rios_da_proposta), para ser via primária rural, ela precisa ser pavimentada (há 9,5 km sem pavimentação que talvez se poderia relevar havendo debate com a comunidade local) e ser rota principal entre centros urbanos com mais de 20 mil habitantes (não parece ser o caso). Há algum par de cidades desse tamanho para o qual essa rodovia é a rota principal? Se não houver, ela deve ser mapeada como secundária.
custodiankeyy (2025-09-03 19:45:29+00:00): https://salihlinfksbl.meb.k12.tr/tema/iletisim.php Adresine göre isim aynı bir farklılık yok. Aynı zamanda internette "Salihli Zeynep Sude Oktay Sosyal Bilimler Lisesi" adında bir sonuç bulamadım. Değişikliği geri alıyorum. Yanlışsam bilgilendirin.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171423132
McBeeFace4935 (2025-09-03 00:20:28+00:00): im sorry
CAM-Gerlach (2026-05-24 23:17:29+00:00): Removed blatantly promotional SEO spam description and logo tags in changeset 183130361

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183130361
Glassman (2025-09-03 23:23:28+00:00): This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

Using data from google is against their terms of service. This has been revoked
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171384791
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-12 09:02:18+00:00): Cleaned up remaining SEO spam and other tagging for Dogtopia POI in changeset 184006488

https://osm.org/changeset/184006488
Pontius (2025-09-03 16:23:41+00:00): Why is one side named 'High Cross Road' and the other name 'South High Cross Road'?
Hufkratzer (2025-09-03 20:53:13+00:00): Hi,
regarding https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1426757471: If this area is really just a "paddock, connected to stable", then it is not a riding centre; perhaps it belongs to one, but then there should be another object (node or area) for this riding centre. Related wiki pages:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse=animal_keeping
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/410524276 (example)
5m4u9 (2025-09-03 14:50:28+00:00): Hola, bienvenid@ y gracias por querer mejorar el mapa.

Debes elegir mejor la "categoría" de lo que quieres editar... para el edificio de vivienda elegiste "área residencial"... debiste buscar como vivienda o casa o edificio.

no importa, ya lo arreglé.
Udarian (2025-09-03 03:12:23+00:00): I live near this area, and it is in my commute, this building does not exist, neither does the park.
Sammyhawkrad (2025-09-03 07:53:03+00:00): Hello Mohammed,
Welcome to OSM and thanks for adding your local knowledge to the map. When there are changes in a road, edit the existing one. Adding a duplicate geometry is incorrect. 

I'll fix this, but take note for future edits. 

Best,
Sam
schockocraft (2025-11-12 12:21:46+00:00): The stop position you re-added at Friesenheim Mitte got moved around the corner into Sternstraße in 2020
Comino (2025-09-03 05:22:16+00:00): Hi,

Thank you for your contribution to BTCmap. By sharing information about Bitcoin friendly businesses, you’re helping to support the Bitcoin community. The experience will be even better for users if the map also shows details like the address, house number, city, phone number, opening hours, and a website or social media account.

Spelling entirely in uppercase letters are not allowed.

Could you please update your entry and keep this in mind for future additions?


Thanks so much in advance!

Edwin Comino
https://btcmap.org/tagger/6794624
i2004 (2025-09-03 11:38:58+00:00): te arme la duplicacion de la avenida Martin Garcia
i2004 (2025-09-03 11:44:04+00:00): https://www.quepasaweb.com.ar/linea-720-nuevo-recorrido-nordelta-con-las-estaciones-tigre-y-carupa-del-tren-mitre/
i2004 (2025-09-03 13:19:27+00:00): nuevo ramal de la 96 https://x.com/CiudadDeBondis/status/1963056401275552047
networkException (2025-10-28 23:45:05+00:00): What was your motivation to change the tracks between Bonifatiuskirche and Käfertal Bahnhof from railway=narrow_gauge to railway=tram? Having this inconsistent between both tracks of the same operational line doesn't make sense. This is also inconsistent with all other ESBO lines in the RNV network, which are also tagged as narrow gauge
eggie (2025-09-03 14:42:42+00:00): Dag 7beren.. Ik heb m'n twijfels 
access=disabled ken ik niet behalve als gehandicapt en uitgeschakeld. 
Het zal dus gewoon access=no zijn met evt note= afgesloten wegens....
Wellicht staan er ook hekken.
Wanneer er gewerkt wordt aan de brug zou je deze ook op highway=construction kunnen zetten. 
Wellicht staan er ook hekken barrier=gate
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 14:46:23+00:00): Ik heb het hier even voorlopig op construction gezet, anders zal jouw accesstag niets doen.
7beren (2025-09-04 04:44:36+00:00): Je hebt het al aangepast zie ik.
Merci.
Groet,
7beren
eggie (2025-09-04 04:55:53+00:00): No problem. .. Houd het wel in de gaten wanneer het weer wordt opengesteld.
Het stuk staat nu op construction.

Mapse..
eggie
Claudius Henrichs (2025-09-05 07:24:00+00:00): Hi,
I still think the correct tagging for the SkyShuttle should be monorail because it does not run on actual iron rails. In fact it is running on rubber wheels and the concrete guiderails serve just as that: guiding the rubber tyred vehicle on the concrete track. See the video here: https://youtu.be/lsh2rcEvBPk?si=ak8vrAVNKLpJxs22&t=132
So I would suggest to revert the tagging from light_rail to monorail
WDYT?
Kiana_Kaslana (2025-09-09 02:46:11+00:00): Then why not bus_guideway?
Kiana_Kaslana (2025-09-09 02:57:35+00:00): Besides, its also running on 2 guiderails, monorail where?
StudioMovieGirl (2025-09-03 04:53:10+00:00): I wasnt sure how the "fixme" tag worked and treated it like a boolean. I talked with someone in the discord and aparently I should leave a note in the fixme tag so I edited that in a future commit. Sorry!
KLNaing (2025-09-03 05:00:46+00:00): I fixed unsquared building as below step by step:
I used Mapathoner plugin and selected Unsquared building. Then I added selected unsquared building to Todo list plugin. Then I zoomed in and pressed Q key to make it square building. And I also deleted extra nodes.
Jarek 🚲 (2025-11-01 14:25:53+00:00): Hello,

Your edits have introduced a sidewalk discontinuity at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13115677276, at the crossing of Crestlawn Drive. Can you please resolve this?
PedestrianMapping_HopMapper (2025-11-04 05:59:53+00:00): Hi, The missing sidewalks have been added up to the next junction where the crosswalk starts. We’ll ensure that sidewalks are connected and not isolated. Thank you for your feedback
❤️‍🔥 (2025-09-03 10:14:24+00:00): thanks for your edits as always! i fixed a few geometry problems here, could you please double check if the area is still correct for https://osm.org/relation/16899453 and 
https://osm.org/way/1426771608 ?
Prosperosity (2025-09-05 02:57:51+00:00): Looks pretty good, thanks for that!
RobotFK (2025-09-03 05:16:11+00:00): Source Osm Note und Luftbilder
Glassman (2025-09-03 23:28:40+00:00): There was a track that crossed the road you added so I added a connection where they cross. The track looks kind of iffy. If it doesn't really exist, feel free to remove. 

Also I removed the personal information which isn't allowed in OSM for personal safety.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171388894
user_5359 (2025-09-06 06:06:50+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://www.osm.org/way/697688738. what is the mean of the tag addr:p = с/т Раздолье?
geo_ozon (2025-09-06 18:46:12+00:00): Hello! Oops, a typo. Of course it was meant to be addr:place. Thank you!
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-03 05:51:02+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11306734060

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
bartgron (2025-09-03 20:15:37+00:00): Zmiana jest niekompletna, oprócz zmiany adresu wypadałoby również przenieść punkt w odpowiednie miejsce na mapie. Proszę o poprawę i pozdrawiam
Baloo Uriza (2025-09-03 13:11:37+00:00): There's 5 lanes there, and what the lanes do change 3 times in that length.  Please do a complete job or don't bother with lane tagging at all.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171389631
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-09-04 12:53:25+00:00): Hi Baloo Uriza!

My name is Yuliya, and I'm the Quality Control Lead on the OSM team at Lyft. 
Our mapping process is designed to add turn:lanes tags to the segment closest to the intersection. This approach enables us to efficiently update large volumes of such sections based on the most current data available to us. We appreciate your commitment to quality mapping and rely on your understanding that there are various methods to achieve it. Despite the differences in our approaches, we share a common goal: to display relevant information on the OSM. I have reviewed this edit and found no errors. We have added 5 lanes to this road: https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1426776264  based on the September Lyft-owned Street view imagery: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1rECawuNIP2n6dzToUiwQoyoaX6I-9yrA/view?usp=sharing.

The screenshots will be available for a month. Please let me know if you are unable to view them within this timeframe – I could generate them once again.

Best regards,
Yuliya
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-05 06:00:20+00:00): The issue is not necessarily *where* you decided to add turn lanes. Unless aerial imagery is out of date, there are turn lanes here, you just tagged the lane information incorrectly.

The westernmost way added in this edit should have been given the tags lanes=5 and turn:lanes:backward=left|none|none, but the only lane information given to this way was lanes=4, which is wrong. This way also should have started exactly where the turn lane became available, not as far back as it does here. You added a way in the middle tagged with lanes=6, lanes:forward=3, and lanes:backward=3 which should have been tagged as lanes=5, lanes:forward=2, lanes:backward=2, and lanes:both_ways=1. The easternmost road segment was the only way in this edit that was tagged correctly.
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-05 06:20:44+00:00): See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171480686 as an example
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-09-05 12:40:41+00:00): Hi Pontificator_extraordinaire!

Thank you so much for your detailed explanation.
Here we have modified the lanes tags for the easternmost road segment and middle part (from https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1518000019 to https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13120657642).  However, we did not alter the lane tags for the westernmost way. The lane tag of 4 remained unchanged after the split, as this was the original lane count on the initial road https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/149600048.
We also adhere to the approach that the way should start exactly where the turn lane becomes available. If we were to modify the westernmost way, we would split the start of the turn lanes together, as we did on the easternmost way. But, we did not modify the lane tags for the westernmost way.
I understand why this might confuse you. It's an OSM specific that a new way can form after a split, making it difficult to distinguish which of the new ways had tags modified. It is necessary to compare the data from the initial road with the new one formed after split.

Regarding the middle, we map both_ways solely based on markings or signs. We have not considered using this tag for such middle parts. Thank you for sharing your point of view. I can understand your logic here. We cannot be certain that there are six lanes in unmarked middle section. Perhaps we should consider revisiting our policy. Is there any documentation of similar cases in the OSM wiki or discussions on the forum that you are aware of? We would appreciate it if you could share your insights and rationale regarding this decision.

Best regards,
Yuliya
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-05 15:24:39+00:00): If you "adhere to the approach that the way should start exactly where the turn lane becomes available" then why was that not done in the edit? This is a bad contribution and it's strange that this was internally reviewed as having "no errors".
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-09-05 17:25:57+00:00): As I mentioned earlier, our mapping process is designed to add turn:lanes tags to the segment closest to the intersection, mostly one segment, not all segments closest to the intersection. In this case we did not modify the lane tags for the westernmost way, that's why it hasn't been split. We have modified the lanes tags only for the easternmost road and these edits have been done correctly.
In other words, we did not add incorrect information, nor did we change correct data to incorrect. Instead, we simply added a piece of useful and accurate information to the OSM for this particular part of the road (from osm.org/node/1518000019 to osm.org/node/13120657642).

Best regards,
Yuliya
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-05 17:55:20+00:00): Except the data *was* incorrect. Information added with lane tags isn't just for routing purposes; it should also accurately reflect the road as it exists in reality. This changeset implied the existence of an eastbound turn lane shorter than the length of a car, when it really extends much further than that. Whether or not this is part of your internal mapping standards is irrelevant. You supplied incomplete data within the scope of your edit, and as a result other mappers have to correct the work that you didn't do.
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-09-08 09:48:26+00:00): Hi Pontificator_extraordinaire!

The objective of our edits was to add a turning lane for the westbound.  Eastbound turn lanes were added not for our routing purposes. Since we were adding the lane tags on the middle part, we also added turn lanes for the other direction. 
In this case, there was no need to correct our edits; it could have simply been supplemented with turn:lanes tags here 35.23287, -97.43024. As it stands, the same value was removed and then added back to this section https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1427251581 / https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1426776264. I would be interested to hear your opinion on why you prefer removing all changes instead of supplementing the existing edits?
Nonetheless, I understand your perspective. Do you believe that if our changeset somehow includes editing the eastbound turning lane, we should address it completely along the solid lane, is it correct?

Best regards,
Yuliya
Pontificator Extraordinaire (2025-09-08 13:36:56+00:00): You are not bothering to read my comments or check who made the edits you are talking about. I'm no longer responding to this thread.
Baloo Uriza (2025-09-08 14:42:26+00:00): Situation normal for Lyft...
silversurfer83 (2025-09-04 21:21:21+00:00): Hi :)

hier ist eine Liste der schon bekannten Werte:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:genus:de

happy mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/171389771
❤️‍🔥 (2025-09-03 10:04:15+00:00): what's your source for this edit? the website does not have an address. 

If there is no address on their website, you might be leaking personal information by adding the business owner's home to OpenStreetMap
Nellhunter (2025-11-09 07:49:02+00:00): I know this business owner personally
hatul (2025-10-12 20:06:06+00:00): תודה על כל התוספות
בישראל מסמנים שמורת טבע עם 	
boundary=protected_area ואין צורך להוסיף leisure
rskedgell (2025-09-03 11:08:54+00:00): Shouldn't that be ref:GB-NWM:planning rather than ref:GB:lbn:planning, as that's the ISO 3166-2:GB code for London Borough of Newham?
mueschel (2025-09-03 11:19:45+00:00): That's up to the local community to decide. I just changed the uppercase spelling to the common lowercase.
kapazao (2026-01-28 10:56:14+00:00): Hi, could you give some references about this parking? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/472301979
Regards
notmyproblem1 (2025-09-21 10:36:57+00:00): Pagina Rotor XXL non è sempre scritta, era scritta quando mapillary ha fatto la foto poichè non avevano nessuno da sponsorizzare, quindi il nome è più interno/commerciale che sempre scritto la 
--
Pagina Rotor XXL is not always wrote there, was wrote when mapillary had taken the photo cuz they had nobody to shout out, so the name is more intern/commercial than always wrote there
notmyproblem1 (2025-12-05 10:39:27+00:00): hey mueschel, didn't got a reply, may you please reply? ty
coteyka (2025-09-05 20:04:57+00:00): Я сделал такой вывод по описанию набора правок, в котором содержится ссылка на объект на Яндекс Картах, и отсутствию любой другой информации об источнике правок

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171515773
k2101 (2025-09-03 13:57:07+00:00): Droga nadal jest w budowie. Proszę o cofnięcie zmian.
TrickyFoxy (2025-09-03 22:07:24+00:00): Что это за название? Местное?
muralito (2025-09-04 14:27:42+00:00): Hi. Why did you do this change?
muralito (2025-09-04 14:36:03+00:00): ¨Please ignore my previous comment. It should be highway=primary according to current criteria.
Sanniu (2025-09-11 11:29:49+00:00): Hi, is the https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1426363366 - roundabout?
eggie (2025-09-03 07:31:56+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-03 07:26:15+00:00): Dag E  Je vraagt feedback. Lijkt me oke.. Ik heb de info samengevoegd met adresnode 187

MVG
eggie
BCNorwich (2025-09-03 10:44:21+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The AED position in the middle of these woods far from public access or any highway or habitation, seems strange. It's far from the Norfolk Show Ground. You tag as access=yes, but by whom, when, and how? Thus the question, is this position correct? Who, how and when can it be accessed?

Need help please just ask.
Regards Bernard.
rempshaener (2025-09-07 19:52:23+00:00): Hallo,
auch hier: wie wäre es denn mit ein wenig Kommunikation mit dem Ersteller?
Viele Grüße
osmviborg (2025-09-03 08:29:28+00:00): Hej, jeg har ændret din redigering til at være 'Gennemkørsel Forbudt' (access=destination) ned til cykelbommen.
eggie (2025-09-03 08:24:15+00:00): Je edits..  sidewalk=both ?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=171394413

Vreemd.. waar zou dat in zitten?
NetSabeare (2025-09-03 08:45:49+00:00): Misschien omdat er een aantal zijtakken zijn met dezelfde naam? Die hebben geen trottoirs.
eggie (2025-09-03 08:51:50+00:00): Nee..  Dat weet de editor niet. :)
rempshaener (2025-09-07 19:45:08+00:00): Hallo,
es ist ein wenig unglücklich, noch während einer laufenden Diskussion, ob die Daten überhaupt noch benötigt werden, die Änderung bereits auf description umzusetzen.
Viele Grüße
eggie (2025-09-03 08:45:37+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback  Voeg bedrijven svp toe aan de adresnode en geef ook aan wat de aard van het bedrijf is.. office=company?
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-09-03 08:50:54+00:00): Ahh Terra.. Ik zie het al.. Alle (adres)info heb ik van de gebouwomtrek verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 08:58:13+00:00): Fabian,
Hier heb ik de info samengevoegd met de adresnode.

MVG
eggie
Fabian Hoogvorst (2025-09-03 09:00:46+00:00): Top!
eggie (2025-09-03 08:48:53+00:00): Fabian,

Voor MBO en AOC  gebruiken we college.
Is het VWO, havo, vmbo e.d. dan amenity=school gebruiken.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-03 08:54:11+00:00): Aangepast naar amenity=school
Fabian Hoogvorst (2025-09-03 08:55:48+00:00): Heb deze zelf niet toegevoegd, maar alleen website en keten toegevoegd omdat ik TerraNext aan het toevoegen was. Ik zal me even inlezen en binnenkort al onze vestigingen eens langslopen om te kijken of de boel op orde is.
eggie (2025-09-03 09:02:34+00:00): Klopt, maar de voorgaande mapper had ook nog niet veel ervaring. Je moet het allemaal maar weten... en dat gaat niet van de ene dag op de andere.
We taggen het MBO als college en het HBO en universiteit als university.
Dus vanaf basisschool t/m VWO =school. 
Dat heeft ook met de zoekslagen te maken in welke categorie je het moet zoeken.
Doe aoc's hebben soms één gebouw met MBO en VO samen. 
Het is soms even uitzoeken.
Groet,
eggie
Fabian Hoogvorst (2025-09-03 09:07:25+00:00): ik snap 'm hoor! Ook de noodzaak tot zorgvuldigheid. Het is niet niks, zo'n "vrij" aan te passen kaartsysteem. Zal m'n tengels thuis proberen te houden ;)

Fabian
eggie (2025-09-03 09:11:23+00:00): Laat je niet weerhouden Fabian door een validator :)

Mapse,
eggie
Hufkratzer (2025-09-03 19:48:47+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1426796596 ist keine Reitanlage, das sieht aus wie eine Führanlage, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:animal=horse_walker. In einer Führanlage reitet niemand. Du hast doch schon eine Reitanlage gemappt: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/127112432
Jorisbo (2025-09-04 05:18:58+00:00): Hallo hufkratzer , danke dir deine Bemerkung . Dir noch nicht bekannt , da darfst es andern in etwas anderes . Grusse Joris
Hufkratzer (2025-09-04 17:23:43+00:00): Na klar ist mir das bekannt, steht in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Do_correct_errors, aber da steht auch "However, be respectful to the work done by other mappers and consider consulting them especially when existing data is just tagged with unclear or undocumented methods or tags; often there is more than one way to interpret situations and mapping guidelines.".