piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
woodpeck (2026-05-28 09:25:05+00:00): Dear EteRiUSao, in your earlier changesets you have taken care to write good changeset comments. Thank you - this makes it easier for other mappers to understand and verify your work. In the last few uploads, you used only "." as a changeset comment which is less helpful. Please go back to what you did before.
blef (2026-05-28 08:11:34+00:00): Bien vu! Merci.
mueschel (2026-06-02 16:41:03+00:00): Hi,
"restrictions:access" is not a common tag - could you explain what is "designated" during this time?
towns man (2026-06-02 19:01:12+00:00): Hi,
The parking lot can only be used by people with disabilities during the specified period, otherwise anyone can use it.
Best,
qstep (2026-06-02 19:12:35+00:00): I improved the tagging: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183561133

Basically this is a generic parking space but for disabled people only on weekdays.
mueschel (2026-06-02 20:13:01+00:00): "access:conditional=designated" doesn't say anything - apart from that there is some access signed. You're looking for

access:conditional = disabled @ (Mo-Fr 08:00-18:00)
parking_space:conditional = disabled @ (Mo-Fr 08:00-18:00)
towns man (2026-06-03 02:24:06+00:00): Yes, a disabled parking permit is required for legal use.
qstep (2026-06-03 07:54:45+00:00): Thanks, fixed. JOSM reported it as an error, but it's still used nonetheless.
vanagaudi (2026-05-31 16:34:34+00:00): Do not use abbreviations in names in OSM, even if they are written with an abbreviation in the official street name directories.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Abbreviation_(do_not)
ClaveScottPH (2026-05-28 08:38:49+00:00): The boundaries of the Ecclesiastical Province of Lipa should be at the maritime boundaries instead. (if available)
woodpeck (2026-05-28 09:23:04+00:00): Dear MayZueZueSwe, in this changeset you have deleted 136 buildings. Yet your explanation for this is "#hotosm-project-47328 #myOSM #help-mm-mapped buildings building" which is not something that anyone can understand. Have these buildings been demolished? Where they badly mapped when they were added 8 years ago in a project cryptically labelled "#hotosm-project-3344 #MissingMaps #redcross #myanmar #cisco_ops #cisco_it"?

In the future, when you delete buildings, please explain why.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-28 06:41:31+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/11059899561
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/914404173

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 07:19:59+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
is the name real?
kodai clouds (11181480721), v2
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 07:19:51+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
is the name real?
The Chill bunks (11181480721), v3
thechillbunks (2026-05-28 07:42:18+00:00): yes
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 07:45:21+00:00): Thanks for your reply.

And what does it mean?
thechillbunks (2026-05-28 08:17:01+00:00): “The Chill Bunks” is the official name of our hostel/accommodation property in Kodaikanal. “Chill” represents a relaxing mountain stay experience, and “Bunks” refers to bunk-bed style hostel accommodation for travelers and backpackers.
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 08:21:14+00:00): Thanks again for your reply.

Could you please also add these details to the linked OSM node?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11181480721

Furthermore, your hostel is currently connected to a highway node. I think it should be separated from the highway and mapped as an independent feature.
thechillbunks (2026-05-28 08:26:39+00:00): Thank you for the guidance.

I will update the node with additional details about the hostel, including address and accommodation information.

I also understand your point regarding the mapping connection to the highway node. I will correct it and map the hostel as an independent feature.

Thank you for helping improve the map data.
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 08:28:39+00:00): 👍
Vinber-Pro (2026-05-28 08:15:08+00:00): Bonjour
Quel commentaire intéressant, en anglais s'il vous plaît, pour une contribution qui n'a pas de sens et qui a donc été annulée.

reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183289611

et pour le plaisir, vu que je suis sur Bordeaux, je peux me rendre dispo pour venir en discuter au lycée :)
Supaplex (2026-05-28 12:57:36+00:00): 因為描繪非開放授權圖資而回退，請參見 https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/124651
累犯將送至 Data Working Group
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183288147
lyctkel (2026-05-30 09:26:30+00:00): Hi cantanga2,
greetings from the Netherlands.
You added the Erindale Reverse Vending Mashine as recycling centre.
To me it looks more like 
vending=bottle_return ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:vending%3Dbottle_return ).
What do you think about that?
Kind regards,
lyctkel
cantanga2 (2026-05-30 09:40:44+00:00): I agree. That option didn't come up when I searched for some reason. I can't edit for a few days so happy for you to change it
lyctkel (2026-05-30 09:50:02+00:00): Hi cantanga2,
fixed. Further I separated the building from vending=bottle_return (is a node now).
Kind regards,
lyctkel
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-12 03:49:34+00:00): DWG revert - apparent sock-puppet import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185570831
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-10 03:22:24+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183901362
Supaplex (2026-05-28 13:01:52+00:00): 因為描繪非開放授權圖資而回退，請參見 https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/124651 累犯將送至 Data Working Group
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183288656
Supaplex (2026-05-28 13:01:44+00:00): 因為描繪非開放授權圖資而回退，請參見 https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/124651 累犯將送至 Data Working Group
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183289573
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-12 03:49:35+00:00): DWG revert - apparent sock-puppet import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185570831
silversurfer83 (2026-05-31 15:23:03+00:00): Hi :)

bicycle=*, foot=* und andere access=* tags spiegeln an Wegen die rechtliche Situation wieder. Sie sagen nichts über die praktische Nutzbarkeit aus und sollten nicht dafür genutzt werden.

Der Wert bei width=* sollte, wie alle "Komma"-Zahlen mit dem angelsächsischen Zahlenkomma, dem "." geschrieben werden. 

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/183290084
rskedgell (2026-05-28 11:32:04+00:00): Thanks!
alena9292 (2026-06-09 12:09:08+00:00): Поправьте пожалуйста данный отрезок дороги, вы сделали улицу поверх другой третьестепенной дороги
rarad74 (2026-05-29 10:07:10+00:00): Dar nu trebuie sa dezactivezi multiupoligoanele din zona. Daca nu le repari ( deoarece sunt dificil de reparat0 O sa iti dam un revert. Ce e asa de greu in a adauga pe harta ceva fara sa strici?
rarad74 (2026-05-29 10:25:56+00:00): Am reparat intre timp multipoligonul Inclusiv rolul rutei de biciclete pe care ai editat este gresit si nefunctional. Rolurile se fac mai usor si se pot remedia mai simplu in JOSM , nu pe ID editor.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-28 08:21:47+00:00): 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/way/453094144
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1084255150

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-12 03:49:36+00:00): DWG revert - apparent sock-puppet import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185570831
DaveF (2026-06-05 13:43:36+00:00): There is no crossing here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/25723436

Why have you detached this crossing from  the footways
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/25723438

Why have you created a duplicating crossing:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890927800
DaveF (2026-06-05 15:45:41+00:00): There is no crossing here
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2443288737
North14 (2026-06-07 08:15:12+00:00): You’re right, there isn’t an official pedestrian crossing at this point. But pedestrian crossings are often informal crossings. This means that pedestrians don’t just use the designated crossings. In some places, informal crossing tends to occur, for example when a road divides a flow of pedestrians and the route can be shortened by crossing informally. Therefore, in my view, it makes sense to record such informal crossings as well, as they reflect a more realistic use of the route. Of course, this should not encourage unsafe road crossings. In this specific case, one might therefore debate whether my ‘shortcut’ reflects realistic usage or is more likely to encourage undesirable crossings.
DaveF (2026-06-07 11:42:48+00:00): There is no such thing as jaywalking in the UK. Pedestrians can cross anywhere. You should only map actual physical objects, not your best guess of a situation. Please don;t tag inaccurately for routers.
North14 (2026-06-07 15:43:13+00:00): Sorry, but you’re completely wrong there. Please take a look at the description of an ‘informal pedestrian crossing’ in the OSM definitions, and you’ll see that this is exactly what I’m talking about. If only official pedestrian crossings were mapped, pedestrian navigation would be impossible or practically useless, as it would result in a multitude of detours that no normal person would take. Official pedestrian crossings account for only a fraction of the road crossings used. Between a free road crossing and an official pedestrian crossing, there is therefore the ‘informal crossing’, which defines a point where it is very likely that a large number of pedestrians will cross the road. This applies in the UK just as much as in other parts of the world.
DaveF (2026-06-08 11:48:57+00:00): There's a lot of crap written in the wiki.
These two statements are on the welcome page:
"OpenStreetMap is a place for mapping things that are both real and current"
"What it doesn't include is *opinionated* data like ratings, historical or *hypothetical* features"

"it is highly likely that the pedestrian will want to cross" is pure subjectivity. No facts, No evidence.

Once again contributors are adding fantasy data to appease lazy, incompetent software writers.

As I previously pointed out, in Britain pedestrians can cross anywhere. That would mean you'll have to add crossings ever 100mm.

You misunderstand the purpose of routers. They *don't* dictate where someone /has/ to walk, merely  suggest the direction to take. They do *not* prevent anyone from crossing the streets where they wish.

Subjectivity & guesswork have no place in OSM.
DaveF (2026-06-08 12:21:15+00:00): Key:crossing is a secondary, adjective sub tag. Using it as primary tag without Key:highway is terrible mapping.
North14 (2026-06-08 13:07:56+00:00): Hi, I love your persistence :-). It’s good to discuss matters of principle. However, I still see a problem with your dogmatic approach: it would make navigation for pedestrians and cyclists in OSM impossible. Imagine a simple situation: at a street intersection, pedestrian paths converge from all four directions. On the road, just like on the sidewalks, there are no signs marking an “official” road crossing. If we follow your dogmatic approach, there’s no need to mark a road crossing here. That would make it impossible to plan a route from one side of the street across the intersection to the other side, let alone navigate it automatically. Hiking trails could then only be marked on roads, not on footpaths or sidewalks, since those would constantly be interrupted by gaps. That would result in an OSM exclusively for drivers. Is that what you have in mind, or how would you approach the problem?
ntzm (2026-05-30 06:54:27+00:00): I don't think highway=living_street is the correct tag for this, that should be used for designated "home zones" in the UK. There is cyclestreet=yes, but again that's based around a legal definition.
jayaddison (2026-06-07 15:23:00+00:00): From the description in a BBC News article about it, it looks and sounds similar to Argentinierstrasse in Vienna, Austria (way 1299141461), in terms of road user priority.

That street is tagged with highway=residential -- although in a way, I find that the OSM wiki description of highway=cyclestreet seems accurate for both (roadways with signage to indicate priority of bicyclists, however still allowing cars).

Refs:
 - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cy026edpw8lo
 - https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1299141461
 - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:cyclestreet
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-10 03:22:25+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183901362
JochenOSM (2026-05-28 16:33:17+00:00): Hallo mdosch, hat der Mayer's Bäck jetzt auch an Feiertagen geöffnet, oder ist das "PH off" versehentlich verloren gegangen?
mdosch (2026-05-29 06:28:48+00:00): Nicht bewusst, evtl. hat das der Editor von Comaps oder Streetcomplete gefressen. Eins von beidem werde ich zum aktualisieren von Öffnungszeiten genutzt haben.
JochenOSM (2026-05-29 13:07:18+00:00): Ergänzt du das bitte wieder?
mdosch (2026-05-29 16:01:03+00:00): Hoffe das passt jetzt, habe leider gerade keinen Rechner zur Hand.
ika-chan! (2026-05-28 10:33:58+00:00): Hello, we do not use prefixes (e.g. Εθνική Οδός) on name=*: therefore, name=* should be "Πατρών - Πύργου" and not "E.O Πατρών - Πύργου". The prefix can be specified in name:prefix=*, but please spell it out in full (e.g. Εθνική Οδός and not E.O.).

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183297813
nikdonline (2026-05-30 12:41:44+00:00): I think you actually have a point here but it’s just written like this on every other service
ika-chan! (2026-05-30 14:21:53+00:00): Hello, OpenStreetMap naming conventions are not always the same as other map services. I think we agreed to leave out the "Εθνική Οδός" prefix from name=* and either ignore it or put it in name:prefix=* instead.
map_evq (2026-06-10 15:39:31+00:00): allo JPhoenix11,

nach meinem Kenntnisstand ist der TMR-Streckenabschnitt in Martigny seit dem 29. März 2026 wieder in Betrieb (verifiziert durch TMR). Die Fahrplandaten sind ebenfalls hinterlegt und zeigen eine reguläre Bedienung der Gleise.

Hast du eine Quelle dafür, dass die Gleise weiterhin bzw. wieder als ausser Betrieb erfasst werden sollten? Über einen Hinweis auf die zugrunde liegende Information würde ich mich freuen.

Danke und viele Grüsse
map_evq
JPhoenix11 (2026-06-11 10:06:23+00:00): Hello,

No, I simply corrected the way that the tracks were tagged as construction. If you have info that they are back in service, please do correct it.
Patrick78 (2026-05-29 12:23:50+00:00): Bonjour, ce parking est privé et est réservé aux habitants de la résidence. il n'est pas Q-Park. C'est la même chose pour les autres parkings des résidences Tétras. Merci de corriger
SomeoneElse (2026-06-01 22:35:26+00:00): Looks like this introduced a gap in the Cotswold Way.  I've filled in the gap in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183521302 .
North14 (2026-06-02 06:24:39+00:00): Damn, not again :-( - shouldn't happen. Good thing you're keeping an eye out. Thanks for letting me know, and thanks for the correction. Have a very good day.
Dvorný (2026-05-28 22:16:30+00:00): Revert changesetu z důvodu smazání přechodu.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183326403
MappingMore (2026-05-31 02:53:52+00:00): Partially reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183424465
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 09:57:27+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
IMHO this should be reverted, due to the added/modified name: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8074414495/history/3
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-28 09:57:57+00:00): And of course: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/44669426/history/21
TrickyFoxy (2026-05-28 19:20:27+00:00): Reverted and reported to DWG
pitscheplatsch (2026-05-29 04:16:43+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183321359
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-28 11:12:23+00:00): 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.

"Zabłocie":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989010
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989013
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989019
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989027
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989028
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989043
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989044
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989055
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989056
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13890989057

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
rajdhani (2026-05-29 11:57:20+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:183351522
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-27 11:04:31+00:00): Hi Irinia,

Unfortunately, you have several errors with your tagging here. As you are evidently a paid SEO mapper, you are expected (by both the community and I would assume your clients, as they are paying you to do so) to be especially careful to only use correct tags and values. Otherwise, this not only pollutes the map with invalid data, but also does not serve the needs of your business and your clients, as consumers of OpenStreetMap data will not be able to interpret the tags as you intend them to.

Specifically, while they are much less egregiously invalid than in many of your previous changesets, your opening_hours=* values still do not follow the valid syntax, which means that they will be little better than gibberish to most consumers. Specifically, weekdays are always the first two letters of the English week day name, not the incoherent mix here. See https://osm.wiki/Key:opening_hours for more information.

Additionally, as introduced in your earlier changeset 178501416, you inexplicably added the promotional suffix `(Opening Soon)` to the name=* . This is of course a textbook example of the kind of thing that doesn't belong in a name=* , see https://osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions with multiple examples of exactly this sort of thing under what not to do. Instead, use a lifecycle prefix + start_date=* (or simply don't create the POI until it actually exists on the ground).

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/178501416

Also, as noted in the changeset I fixed and a number of others, while less critical, your phone=* number tags do not follow the community-consensus NANP format (+1-NNN-NNN-NNNN), nor the previous format preferred by some mappers (+1 NNN-NNN-NNNN) See https://osm.wiki/Key:phone#United_States

Finally, as a paid SEO mapper, you should disclose that fact on your profile, and ideally each of your changesets.

Thanks, and happy mapping.
IrinaDanuta (2026-06-29 13:53:47+00:00): Hi,
Thanks for taking the time to leave such detailed feedback.
I've been editing OSM for about four years and honestly wasn't aware I was making these mistakes, as I'd never received comments like this before.

I agree about the US phone number formatting and the "Opening Soon" names. Regarding opening_hours=*, I thought I was following the guidelines, so that was a surprise, but I'll be more careful and validate them going forward.

I've also noted the guidance on paid editing. I'll use a separate work account for future work-related edits and make the appropriate disclosures.

Thanks again for pointing these issues out.
CAM-Gerlach (2026-06-29 16:21:58+00:00): Thanks Irina! Sorry if I came across a little overly harsh above, and I appreciate you taking my feedback in stride.

Your opening_hours=* format is _close_ to being valid at this point; the only remaining error here is using a three-letter rather than two-letter weekday abbreviation--weekday abbreviations must always be the two letter form. Not sure about iD, but Osmose https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#item=3250&zoom=17&lat=29.6993958&lon=-95.3995276&issue_uuid=9781a3fb-e31d-9171-0388-678dbdcd8bef&loc=17/29.699396/-95.399528&level=1 , the Opening Hours editor https://openingh.ypid.de/?zoom=18&lat=29.699396&lon=-95.399528&layers=B0T&filter=none&tags=opening_hours and JOSM's validator will all warn you about this and even offer to fix it automatically in most cases (at least for syntax like this that is close to being valid).

Great, thanks! Make sure to disclose and link to the other account in the bio of each, in the interests of transparency and to avoid any chance of it being perceived as sockpuppetry or evasion. No need to replicate all of it, but you can see what I've done for my alt accounts, for example.

Cheers, and happy mapping!
IrinaDanuta (2026-06-30 10:11:31+00:00): Thanks, CAM! No worries at all, I really appreciate you taking the time to explain everything and point me to those tools.
Noted on the account transparency as well. Thanks again!
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-10 03:22:26+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183901362
Yog Sot (2026-05-28 23:27:01+00:00): usunąłeś pozbruk i Chodnik ? grube porządki.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-05-28 11:12:17+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7791484311
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/702562003

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
rajdhani (2026-05-31 17:27:42+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 183458863
Nakaner-repair (2026-06-09 09:51:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183866122, 183866141, 183866143, 183866127 where the changeset comment is: Revert all changesets by ticki_52 since CS 183039302, see https://c.osm.org/t/144453 for details
DaveF (2026-06-05 13:28:50+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/57833100
Do not attached polygons to ways. 

If the polygon has tagged nodes (such as barriers) they are also associated with the ways.
North14 (2026-06-07 07:52:52+00:00): Hello, I know that adding polygons to lines can sometimes cause problems. However, this isn’t always the case. In most cases, it helps to make the map clearer and makes editing easier.
DaveF (2026-06-07 11:39:11+00:00): It doesn't make it clearer as the commercial area does no extend to the centre of the roads. It makes it more inaccurate. This is poor mapping.
North14 (2026-06-07 15:22:01+00:00): A road is a line no area. It has no center or edge. In this regard, roads are the logical bondaries of commercial areas as well as for other areas that define the various city zones of use. I would rather call freely drawn areas of use with no logical bondaries „poor mapping“.
DaveF (2026-06-08 14:32:36+00:00): Polygons, by definition, have boundaries.
The owners of that commercial area do not pay to maintain a pavement & half a road. Their responsibility stops at the boundary of their property, which is not the centreline of the road!