piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2026-01-18 08:29:56+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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/10861784825 v4

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Beauty salon"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-01-25 08:59:19+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/177367384
VLD0251 (2026-01-18 14:48:47+00:00): Hello, since this is a farm (مزرعة أشجار زيتون), use `landuse=orchard` with `trees=olive_trees` instead of `natural=wood` (reserved for wild forests).
See: OSM Wiki - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dorchard
Happy mapping!
Taher Nacer (2026-01-19 21:59:40+00:00): Thank you
VictorIE (2026-05-11 22:40:26+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1312824926/

Can the fixme here be retired?

Also access=no seems, eh, harsh. Sometimes routing software sees access=no and just doesn't check the rest of the permissions. There are some staff / contractor vans and cars parked at Gate 26. 

Would the following be better?
access=private
bus=designated
psv=designated

cc LateNightTone
ramthelinefeed (2026-05-11 23:26:53+00:00): Yeah, I would say the fixme tag is a couple of years out of date.  As for 'correct' use of the access tag, OSM wiki appears to say that what's there is fine and any routers should interpret it correctly...   although I'm not sure who decides what OSM wiki says!
NeisBot (2026-01-18 08:28:36+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 15 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1308540270 v2 | 15 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/12117867451 v2
https://osm.org/node/12117867452 v2
https://osm.org/node/12117867453 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177356622
porfiriopaiz (2026-02-06 18:51:14+00:00): Hello NeisBot!

Thank you for the feedback.

Given the original editor has not replied, could you please revert this changeset?

Additionally, what tool did you use to detect these issues?

Thanks in advance.

Porfirio Páiz
NeisRevert (2026-02-08 09:44:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/178258207
where the comment is: "🔄 Revert of unintended geometry change"
pitscheplatsch (2026-02-08 09:49:34+00:00): Hi Porfirio,

thank you. I have just reverted this changeset.

The tool used to detect the unintended geometry changes is running locally on my side (on a server). It is a custom tool that I implemented myself in Java. I am still in the testing phase, as I am not yet 100% happy with all of the results.

Adios!
Pascal
porfiriopaiz (2026-02-09 06:15:18+00:00): Thank you!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-03 07:42:59+00:00): Thanks for actually mostly fixing your SEO spam. I cleaned up remaining tags on SEO POI (description=* was redundant as it merely repeated the name and location, which don't belong in that key, and source:url=* repeats website=*) in changeset 183578468

https://osm.org/changeset/183578468
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-03 07:45:25+00:00): And also used the correct top-level tag for the POI, office=advertising_agency ; it was inexplicably tagged as just a generic office=company . It only takes a few seconds in iD to search for the correct preset to use for your POI, and it is strongly to your benefit to classify it correctly.
Matt McCutchen (2026-01-18 00:29:17+00:00): Signs confirm that "Montrose Shopping Center" includes the southeast building and the west side of the west building.
i2004 (2026-01-18 14:48:24+00:00): ahi hice el ramal x hospital evita
pwbriggs (2026-01-22 19:26:14+00:00): Thanks for the contribution! The data is definitely lacking in this area, so thanks for this info.
Littlebtc (2026-01-18 02:32:31+00:00): ...雲72延伸繪製
coatix (2026-02-07 15:10:05+00:00): Ein Objekt zu viel gelöscht ;) Das war die Hausnummer, fixed. Siehe https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/1716505763
hahae (2026-07-04 01:00:56+00:00): 您好，红绿灯要黏路上，谢谢
aharvey (2026-01-27 11:16:20+00:00): I just improved some of the geometries from Esri World Imagery and Mapbox imagery which shows the changes.
inas (2026-01-28 01:08:57+00:00): Great.  I'll have another look.
Taya_S (2026-01-27 07:46:13+00:00): Why is it worth mentioning that this memorial is near a market place?

Also why did you add the wikidata tag to said market place to this memorial?
rohieb (2026-01-18 05:06:22+00:00): Ah, hab noch das Gebäude gradegezogen auf Basis von GeoBasis-DE/LGLN DOP20 (2026)
map per (2026-07-20 06:10:47+00:00): Hello DENelson83,

There is a note about an address you added: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5405658 / https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/821124052

Could you please take a looks at it? I'm not sure who of you two is right here.

Thanks and best regards
map per
DENelson83 (2026-07-20 06:24:26+00:00): On-the-ground observations of such elements are always considered most reliable.
map per (2026-07-20 12:37:50+00:00): Thanks for looking into it!
Taksine (2026-07-03 02:13:46+00:00): 你好，OSM不是一个“只给外国人看的地图”，主要name按照OSM规则：https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names，应当标为本国语言，也就是中文，英文名挪到name:en丝毫不会影响外国人来你们民宿的消费。
StreetSurveyor (2026-01-28 00:34:03+00:00): Removing this name without discussion isn’t productive. The road name is present on the city’s official map, and any change should be coordinated with supporting sources.
cubbe8 (2026-01-28 00:51:17+00:00): There is no way that is a motorway
StreetSurveyor (2026-01-28 01:10:25+00:00): I’m not saying it’s a motorway. My comment is solely about the road name — the name appears on the city’s official map, which is why I raised the concern about removing it without discussion.
cubbe8 (2026-01-28 01:12:56+00:00): MassGIS shows it as “Alewife Station Access Road” I have tagged it as such
cubbe8 (2026-01-28 01:13:13+00:00): Concord turnpike seems inappropriate
StreetSurveyor (2026-01-28 01:15:29+00:00): MassGIS is helpful, but for local road naming the City of Cambridge GIS takes precedence. Since it shows a different name, removing or changing the name should be discussed first.
cubbe8 (2026-01-28 01:17:45+00:00): Yes but do you think concord tpke makes sense
StreetSurveyor (2026-01-28 01:20:57+00:00): Yes — it leads to Concord Turnpike and is labeled that way on the city map.
redizon (2026-01-18 05:37:26+00:00): some adjusted secondary road due to gps image overlay. some road were reclarified based from my local knowledge in my hometown.
NeisBot (2026-01-18 08:30:01+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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/13446564315 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Cake shop on Beach Road Kollam"

#MapWithoutSpam
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-18 08:41:44+00:00): Thank you for updating the description. Looks good!

Best regards, Pascal
CAM-Gerlach (2026-05-23 23:08:06+00:00): Merged apparent duplicate HVAC POIs both added by this SEO account and fixed nonsensical address tagging in changeset 183086899

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183086899
dknelson9876 (2026-01-20 02:32:37+00:00): Hello ItsGav, the entire contents of this changeset is deletion of a traffic signal and its pedestrian crossings. I find that highly unusual. Can you confirm that they really took out a traffic signal here?
Supaplex (2026-01-19 10:04:35+00:00): Ficus microcarpa才是完整的學名
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177361189
Kagami (2026-02-22 06:11:43+00:00): 感謝
渤海西岸 (2026-01-18 09:20:29+00:00): 现实中已经没有痕迹的历史事物应该放在OHM里，不应该出现在OSM里
Darnight14 (2026-01-18 15:38:24+00:00): 原来是这样)我是仿的长沙府城
OSM-Contributer (2026-01-18 12:26:43+00:00): Hi, 
Welcome to OSM and Thanks for contributing but I see a problem with this edit which is that if it's a school then how it is a church. 

I understand that the node 13463625087 is actually church. If it is then mark it as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Church mentioned in the wiki and according to me node 13463625088 is actually the node of the school if it is then mark it as https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool .

You might have marked it as church because it is a Christian school but it should be marked as ' amenity=school , operator:type=religious , religion=christian . 

If I am wrong, then you're free to overrule my suggestion. 

I know that tags it might be confusing for new contributers but you'll get hand of them as you become experienced.

Tell me if I was either wrong, right.

Thanks, 
Happy Contributing!
Edelsalami (2026-02-08 13:23:51+00:00): Hallo User alias Streetview247, du hast hier mal wieder die Grenzen des Naturschutzgebietes falsch verschoben. Du kannst die Geometrien nicht einfach definieren wie es dir gefällt -das NSG hat einen fest definierten Umriss. Bitte korrigiere das umgehend. Danke.
rskedgell (2026-01-18 12:23:00+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Many thanks for spotting and fixing that.
Supaplex (2026-01-18 11:29:51+00:00): Hi 
We use the primary language of the country control the land for the name field. Currently, Yung-hsing Island (Woody Island) is controlled by China (People's Republic of China). These changeset will be reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177364924
Supaplex (2026-01-19 06:45:47+00:00): Chào bạn, chúng tôi sử dụng ngôn ngữ chính của quốc gia quản lý lãnh thổ cho trường tên. Hiện tại, đảo Yung-hsing (đảo Woody) do Trung Quốc (Cộng hòa Nhân dân Trung Quốc) quản lý. Những thay đổi này sẽ được hoàn tác.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177364924
Supaplex (2026-01-18 11:29:47+00:00): Hi 
We use the primary language of the country control the land for the name field. Currently, Yung-hsing Island (Woody Island) is controlled by China (People's Republic of China). These changeset will be reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177364948
Supaplex (2026-01-19 06:45:42+00:00): Chào bạn, chúng tôi sử dụng ngôn ngữ chính của quốc gia quản lý lãnh thổ cho trường tên. Hiện tại, đảo Yung-hsing (đảo Woody) do Trung Quốc (Cộng hòa Nhân dân Trung Quốc) quản lý. Những thay đổi này sẽ được hoàn tác.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177364948
Supaplex (2026-01-18 11:29:41+00:00): Hi 
We use the primary language of the country control the land for the name field. Currently, Yung-hsing Island (Woody Island) is controlled by China (People's Republic of China). These changeset will be reverted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177365101
Supaplex (2026-01-19 06:45:37+00:00): Chào bạn, chúng tôi sử dụng ngôn ngữ chính của quốc gia quản lý lãnh thổ cho trường tên. Hiện tại, đảo Yung-hsing (đảo Woody) do Trung Quốc (Cộng hòa Nhân dân Trung Quốc) quản lý. Những thay đổi này sẽ được hoàn tác.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177365101
Yunkers (2026-01-25 16:12:37+00:00): Przecież koło kościoła w Skawinie nie ma żadnego cmentarza. Jest jeden grób. Poprawię to, ale sprawdź czy w innych miejscach nie zrobiłeś czegoś dziwnego.
WieKo68 (2026-01-25 18:40:27+00:00): Dobrze twierdzisz, że nie ma, ale kiedyś był to cmentarz przykościelny. Dlatego taki teren przykościelny, który był cmentarzem, a tak jest w wiekszości przypadków terenów wokół kościoła, oznaczamy tagiem amenity=grave_yard, a nie landuse=cemetery. Więc było to poprawne oznakowanie i nie potrzebnie je usunąłeś
Yunkers (2026-01-25 23:51:27+00:00): Żeby użyć tego tagu w terenie muszą być pozostałości cmentarza, np. stare groby. Tu tego nie ma.
Yunkers (2026-01-26 00:16:45+00:00): Dodam też że obecnie na terenie "cmentarza" parkują samochody za zgodą proboszcza. Znam stosunkowo mało cmentarzy służących jako parkingi ;)
WieKo68 (2026-01-26 08:53:31+00:00): wg AI defija cmentarz przykościelnego to: "Cmentarz przykościelny to historyczny lub współczesny obszar grzebalny znajdujący się bezpośrednio wokół kościoła, często otoczony murem. Historycznie stanowił dziedziniec kościelny, będący miejscem pochówku wiernych danej parafii. Obecnie często traktowany jako zabytek, podlega zarządowi proboszcza i jest integralną częścią terenu parafialnego"
I niekoniecznie musi mieć istniejące groby
WieKo68 (2026-01-26 08:56:23+00:00): https://ksiegarnia.nid.pl/wp-content/uploads/2024/10/Cmentarz_historyczny_poradnik.pdf s. 19: " dawne cmentarze przykościelne, które już w XIX wieku utraciły swą
funkcję. W niektórych przypadkach zachowały się nieliczne nagrobki,
często jednak te cmentarze są całkowicie pozbawione jakichkolwiek
powierzchniowych reliktów dawnych pochówków"
WieKo68 (2026-01-26 08:58:20+00:00): napisałeś "Przecież koło kościoła w Skawinie nie ma żadnego cmentarza. Jest jeden grób. "
Yunkers (2026-01-26 09:19:16+00:00): AI to AI a opis tagu to co innego. Tag amenity jest używany do rzeczy które istnieją. Wiki też twierdzi że ten tag jest używany gdy nie ma już pochówków, nie gdy nie ma śladu cmentarza. Dodane zdjęcie jasno pokazuje o co chodziło autorowi. I ma to sens, gdyby w Skawinie używać tego tagu do każdego miejsca gdzie kiedyś ludzie byli chowani, pół Skawiny byłoby cmentarzem.
Jeden osobny grób oznacza się innym tagiem. To jak najbardziej możesz zrobić jeśli chcesz.
Yunkers (2026-01-26 10:50:05+00:00): Rozumiem że skoro chcesz zabytkowe obiekty mapować jako istniejące to zamienisz Bożnicę przy Kazimierza Wielkiego ze sklepu na synagogę? Bo tak jest w rejestrze zabytków? Park miejski zobaczysz tylko jako część zabytkową, a pałacyk Sokół jako centrum sportowe?
Yukiro (2026-01-26 11:02:37+00:00): Przecież da się oznaczyc ten pojedyńczy nagrobek, więc bez sensu ta kłótnia
Bartek444 (2026-01-18 09:54:29+00:00): Takie zmiany wprowadza się po faktycznej zmianie organizacji ruchu. Już wiele razy były zapowiedzi, a później przekładali termin nawet o kilka dni.
MarcieLLo-KR (2026-01-18 10:00:48+00:00): Masz rację, jak nie wejdzie to się cofnie zmiany. 
A jak wejdzie co najwyżej skoryguje.
berndw (2026-01-18 09:51:10+00:00): Dernbach, nicht Puderbach ;-)
Rainero (2026-03-19 20:40:51+00:00): Revert mit changeset/180128852
(unzulässige Quelle)
Supaplex (2026-01-18 11:31:07+00:00): Hi 
We use the primary language of the country control the land for the name field. Currently, Yung-hsing Island (Woody Island) is controlled by China (People's Republic of China). These changeset will be reverted
Supaplex (2026-01-19 06:45:21+00:00): Chào bạn, chúng tôi sử dụng ngôn ngữ chính của quốc gia quản lý lãnh thổ cho trường tên. Hiện tại, đảo Yung-hsing (đảo Woody) do Trung Quốc (Cộng hòa Nhân dân Trung Quốc) quản lý. Những thay đổi này sẽ được hoàn tác.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177365886
eggie (2026-01-18 10:44:00+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback De wegen in een wijk in aanbouw worden meestal eerst ingetekend als highway=construction met construction=residential.

Zij deze werkelijk al opgengesteld en verhard?
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2026-01-18 10:49:00+00:00): Wellicht heb je hier iets aan
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@52.83623,6.379237,18/?datastrip=20251224_PNEO-03
eggie (2026-01-18 10:53:05+00:00): Je hebt deels je potlood niet van het papier gehaald en dezelfde weg teruggetekend. Dan krijg je duplicated ways. Ik heb die verwijderd.
lanes=3 heb ik ook verwijderd. Dat lanes kun je beter helemaal weglaten.
eggie (2026-01-18 11:20:10+00:00): Het gras heb ik vervangen door landuse=construction met construction = residential
Mapse
Paul10k (2026-01-18 13:46:02+00:00): Uitstekend
JSR1781 (2026-02-20 02:20:36+00:00): why delete null island
tyr_asd (2026-01-20 12:12:46+00:00): Hmm… Diese "work in progress" uploads sind IMHO nicht unbedingt ideal. Jetzt ist im Moment der ganze Nationalpark "kaputt" und scheint z.B: nicht mehr auf den Karten auf, bzw. kann nicht mehr über die Suche gefunden werden. Wäre es nicht besser gewesen, die Änderung erst hochzuladen, wenn du mit der vollständigen Aktualisierung fertig bist? Oder alternativ hätte man zumindest eine Kopie der ehemaligen Nationalparkgrenze in OSM belassen können, bis die neuen Grenzen komplett erfasst sind?

Kannst du die von dir genutzte Quelle evtl. teilen? Dann könnte ich dich gerne beim Vervollständigen der Grenze unterstützen.
DD1GJ (2026-01-20 12:25:09+00:00): Sorry, da ist wohl aus Versehen bei den outer was schiefgegangen, obwohl ich zuerst mal die inner machen wollte. Ich melde mich heute Abend direkt bei Dir. Danke für die angebotene Hilfe.
eggie (2026-01-18 10:55:58+00:00): Parkeermogelijkheden hebbne meestal geen naam. Dus niet name=gebruiken. 

Een parkeerterreintje tag je met amenity=parking.
Is dit niet gewoon een terreintje voor de bouwmedewerkers?
MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-01-18 10:58:20+00:00): Even als voorbeeld aangepast naar een vlak amenity=parking
Paul10k (2026-01-18 13:41:23+00:00): Nee, het is een parkeerterrein voor bezoekers van bewoners. 
Ik heb de vorm aan gegeven. Aan de noord- en aan de zuidkant van dit "trapezium" komen elk 6 plekken.
eggie (2026-01-18 13:50:44+00:00): Oke.. maar dan is een vlak gebruikelijk.
Mapse
hlfan (2026-01-29 04:49:55+00:00): Dieser Änderungssatz gehört meiner Meinung nach vollständig revertiert. Die hier entfernte Fahrbahnverschwenkung am Ludwig Koeßler Platz ist nämlich nicht nur für die Dauer der Baustelle eingerichtet, sondern längerfristiger. Und dass basemap.at da hinterherhinkt ist jetzt auch keine Neuigkeit.
hlfan (2026-02-08 00:57:57+00:00): Hab das jetzt in changeset/178249641 erledigt. Es war ja nicht alles betroffen.
Dornbacher (2026-02-08 15:42:31+00:00): danke dir! wollte mir das vor Ort anschauen, wg. deinem Hinweis auf basemap, bin aber wegen Erkrankung bisher nicht dazu gekommen.
hlfan (2026-02-08 16:27:12+00:00): War eine nette Challenge, dieser Vierfach-Merge mit der Wegaufspaltung bei der 18er-Haltestelle. Hab ich mir nicht nehmen lassen können, nur die Punkte zu verschieben und die Topologie beizubehalten.
hlfan (2026-02-08 16:27:35+00:00): Und gute Besserung!
ManuelB701 (2026-05-05 19:31:11+00:00): Nur so zu Info für's nächste Mal: Die Öffnungszeiten folgen einen standardisierten Syntax und können z.B. nicht auf Deutsch (z.B. Mi statt We) oder verschönt (z.B. mit der typografischer – statt ASCII -) angegeben werden.

Wie Öffnungszeiten anzugeben sind, steht im Wiki: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:opening_hours
alexey_zakharenkov (2026-05-25 11:36:10+00:00): Здравствуйте.

Пожалуйста, не рисуйте полосы разгона/торможения отдельными линиями на протяжении десятков и сотен метров, если они не отделены физически. Наличие таких полос отражается в теге lanes=* на основной линии highway.

"A road consisting of one carriageway (bidirectional or one-way) is mapped using one linear OSM-way way, regardless of the number of lanes" (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highways#Carriageways)
NeisBot (2026-01-18 11:33:19+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 12 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/100086054 v16 | 6 crossings
https://osm.org/way/696102006 v4 | 6 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177368176
NeisReview (2026-01-26 06:52:49+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/177411625
FajrAl (2026-07-11 12:05:04+00:00): Ketika jalanan melewati sungai, sesuaikan dengan kondisi dari citra satelitnya. Yang pasti biasanya harus diarungi (ford=yes) atau ada jembatan (bridge=yes), sungai tidak pernah dibuat gorong-gorong (culvert=yes). 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1467964907
NeisBot (2026-01-19 07:34:17+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 47 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1467971997 v1 | 47 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177369603
user_8655426 (2026-01-20 11:51:40+00:00): Hello guyuduo, and welcome to OpenStreetMap (OSM).
It seems that the road you added does not exist in reality, so I have deleted it from the map.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1467971997/history

Please take a look at the following page to learn more about what can and cannot be mapped in OSM.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/welcome
rskedgell (2026-01-18 12:19:31+00:00): (Review requested)

Apart from the highly unprofessional SEO spam, I very much doubt that your premises are in the middle of the road at the intersection of Carting Lane and Herbert's Passage.

Your website gives your address as 20 Wenlock Road, London N1 - feel free to add your business there with meaningful tags. If it's just your office, then you need to add office=company . If you have retail premises, then you would use shop=medical_supply

I've deleted this node.
rskedgell (2026-01-18 12:17:08+00:00): (Review requested)

Apart from the highly unprofessional SEO spam, I very much doubt that your premises are in the middle of the road in Horton Street.

Your website gives your address as 20 Wenlock Road, London N1 - feel free to add your business there with meaningful tags. If it's just your office, then you need to add office=company . If you have retail premises, then you would use shop=medical_supply

I've deleted this node.
eggie (2026-01-18 12:23:40+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
HurricaneGator (2026-01-22 18:20:00+00:00): Hello NunoCaldeira! I noticed that many of the ref tags in Azores and Madeira are being updated to remove the spacing. However, Mapillary from 07/13/24 (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=8423728917638113) shows road signage using ref formatting that includes spaces. I was wondering if there is a particular reason you could share for removing the spacing? Also, do you plan to apply this change consistently elsewhere, such as (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/26355360) where the associated relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2742099) has the spacing removed? Thank you and happy mapping!