piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse (2023-05-29 12:36:45+00:00): Привіт avinet_ua,

Як ви знаєте, DWG повертає деякі з ваших механічних змін до OSM після численних скарг.

Ми також отримали скаргу щодо https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3102875794/history. Як видно з https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/3102875794 ви видалили попередню (російську) назву та додали українську.
Враховуючи історію Криму, я б очікував, що вузол 3102875794 насправді матиме назви кримськотатарською (можливо, кількома орфографіями), російською та (з 1954 року) українською. Якщо місце має назву певною мовою, будь ласка, додайте її як "name:language=whatever". Тег «ім’я» повинен бути визначений людьми, які живуть у місцевості. Дивіться https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf для отримання додаткової інформації.
З найкращими побажаннями,
Енді Таунсенд, від імені робочої групи даних OSM
SomeoneElse (2023-05-29 12:37:18+00:00): Здравствуйте avinet_ua,

Как вы знаете, DWG вернул некоторые из ваших механических правок в OSM после многочисленных жалоб.

Мы также получили жалобу на https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3102875794/history. Как видно из https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/3102875794 вы удалили предыдущее (русское) имя и добавили украинское.
Учитывая историю Крыма, я ожидаю, что узел 3102875794 на самом деле будет иметь имена на крымскотатарском языке (возможно, в нескольких орфографиях), русском и (с 1954 года) украинском языке. Если у места есть название на определенном языке, добавьте его как «имя:язык=независимо». Сам тег «имя» должен определяться людьми, живущими в этом районе. Подробнее см. https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf.
С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Энди Таунсенд, от имени Рабочей группы по данным OSM
Glassman (2023-02-28 21:51:47+00:00): Why did you remove the driveway - it appears in the latest imagery? Can you review this edit and add the driveway back if it still exists?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133057806
GerdP (2023-03-05 14:10:05+00:00): Du hast hier die Warderroute Geestweg auf disused gesetzt. Wenn die tatsächlich nicht mehr ausgeschildert ist, dann sollte sie nach meiner Meinung gelöscht werden.
jmsbert (2023-03-08 21:40:00+00:00): Hallo NGL-engel,
heute wurde ich von user "Pathumthani" angeschrieben, der  für den Wiehengebirgsverband als Wegewart tätig ist und dachte, ich sei es, der die Relation durch Setzen von "disused:" verschwinden lassen hätte - diese Änderung geht wie GerdP schreibt, nicht auf mich zurück. Jedoch stelle ich mir die Frage, was der Grund für die Änderung ist. Aus dem allgemein gehaltenen Änderungskommentar lassen sich leider auch keine Details ablesen. Bitte um Rückmeldung. Für Wegwart Pathumthani sowie den Hauptwegwart des WHV wäre es neu, dass dieser Weg nicht mehr existiert...
Gruß aus CLP, jmsbert
NGL-engel (2023-03-10 23:20:38+00:00): Hallo GerdP und jmsbert, 
   ich bin auf auf einem der Hümmling-Pfade unterwegs gewesen. Dort läuft man oft gleich mit dem Geestweg. Auf den Teilstücken auf den ich unterwegs war war die Beschilderung des Geestweges so lückenhaft bzw. nicht mehr vorhanden das ich davon ausgegangen bin das dieser nicht mehr gepflegt wird und somit nicht mehr existent. (Die Wege selbst sind natürlich noch da.) Ich habe allerdings versäumt mich bei dem Wegewart vor Ort zu erkundigen - eventuell betrifft es ja zufällig nur das Teilstück das ich abgelaufen bin. 
Deswegen habe ich als halbherzige Zwischenlösung den Weg nicht gelöscht sondern ihn nur auf "disused:" gesetzt. So kann man ihn - wenn er wieder in Stand gesetzt wird- ruckzuck wieder herstellen. 

Wäre nett wenn ich eure Meinung dazu hören könnte.
Gruß Angela
GerdP (2023-03-11 06:42:38+00:00): Die Relation ist ja längst schon wieder "used". Ich würde bei solchen überregionalaen Routen immer erst mal nachfragen. Sowohl bei denjenigen, die für die Schilder zuständig sind als auch bei den OSM Kollegen. In D z.B. über https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56
NGL-engel (2023-03-11 16:08:01+00:00): Naja, ich finde das ein Wanderweg den man nicht mehr begehen kann (weil viele Schilder fehlen) nichts auf OSM zu suchen hat.
Aber ich lasse das mal so stehen wie es jetzt ist....

Auf alle Fälle Danke für die Hinweise und Infos von Euch.
Gruß
Quintindom (2023-02-27 02:21:41+00:00): Great job!
Glassman (2023-02-28 21:44:46+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133058317
Frans S (2023-02-27 10:10:08+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
Please do not connect nodes of buildings to each other. 
It is a crime to disconnect them. (so many) Connected buildings says that the buildings have a common wall, what we cannot see on the imagery. That is why mappings for HOTOSM always have to be done as individual buildings, except when it is obvious.
Best regards
38446 (2023-03-08 14:44:15+00:00): What is the source of the name you gave the fountain next to St Christophorus church? To my knowledge the name is Marienbrunnen.
In any case, the name=* should be in German, and if you want to add a Slovak name, you can add it as name:sk=*. Thank you.
Pavol33 (2023-03-08 15:27:57+00:00): korrigiert
VLD549 (2023-05-13 12:37:34+00:00): Hi, could you indicate the source you are using? The search results I find show mainly 'van', not 'Van'.
Thank you!
A67-A67 (2023-05-13 13:41:55+00:00): The official name (BAG, BGT, as the sources you found) is in the official_name-tag. The name written according to OSM-conventions is in the name-tag.
VLD549 (2023-05-15 11:57:37+00:00): Hi, thank you for your response. I don't understand what you mean. BAG and many other sites write it with lower case. Shouldn't we also write it with lower case then?
A67-A67 (2023-05-15 17:56:12+00:00): We are writing it in uppercase in the tag official_name.

If you look at an object, for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6611722 , you'll see a list of tags. The tag official_name follows the BAG. The tag name is the official_name adapted to OSM conventions.
VLD549 (2023-05-16 17:23:33+00:00): Thank you for your response!
Baba Berete (2023-02-26 21:02:01+00:00): Très bien fait
impiaaa (2023-02-27 17:14:29+00:00): Hello and thank you for contributing to OSM! In the future, please save your changes in one area before moving on to another; this keeps the total changeset size small and therefore easier to review.
Patchanka (2023-03-01 12:52:34+00:00): bonjour @mattix64100 et bienvenue !

Tout d'abord je vous donne 2 liens utiles : 
- le wiki (qui est une mine d'information pour savoir comment contribuer à OSM) : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bonnes_pratiques
- le forum FR pour discuter avec d'autres contributeurs, poser des questions...: https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/

Concernant les modifications que vous avez faites, pourriez-vous à l'avenir mettre un petit mot au moment de l'enregistrement (et non juste un point !) pour dire ce que vous avez mis à jour (ex :"ajout de détails sur les arrêts de bus"). C'est important, cela permet aux autres contributeurs de comprendre ce que vous avez fait.

merci et bonne carto
VLD549 (2023-05-15 15:08:01+00:00): Hi, BAG indicates it is with lower case. Could you tell me the source that was used?
Thank you!
A67-A67 (2023-05-15 17:53:49+00:00): The BAG is used for the tag official_name.

The tag name follows OSM convention to capitalize the name.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-02-26 21:10:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085344230

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mike140 (2023-02-27 21:46:09+00:00): ви чули щось про мультиполігони? Те, що ви робите потрібно робити з їх застосуванням. Ознайомтесь, будь ласка, з цією статтею: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Uk:Relation:multipolygon, та рекомендую для мапінгу великих територій зі складною геометрією вікористовувати редактор Josm
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-11 16:29:42+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/921319738/history has tracktype = unknown that was added in this edit
Maybe it would be fine to remove it and keep tracktype= empty? That is fine for missing value
ottwiz (2023-02-26 21:25:41+00:00): + source: existing OSM data
kidneyspr (2023-02-27 06:05:30+00:00): BigKev97, inicialmente los dos apellidos en el nombre de la vía 22134916 no tenían tildes, luego se las añadiste y ahora le quitaste la tilde a Sicardó.  Creo que el apellido se escribe Sicardó y no Sicardo.

Cómo sabes que el cambio que hiciste está correcto? Tienes un "source" que puedas compartir?
Acimut (2023-03-03 14:48:33+00:00): Hola AlexLabrada
Eres el colaborador más longevo activo de mapas de Cuba en OSM 
Algo de ira descargaste acá (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/261042675#map=18/22.43578/-79.90243) lo podemos conversar?
Los únicos perjudicados son los usuarios de OSM que ven desfigurada la representación de la universidad
Las personas conversando se entienden, juntos podemos lograr más cosas y mejores
Saludos cordiales
gscholz (2023-03-18 06:22:19+00:00): Hi AlexLabrada,
this chageset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-79.90139&lat=22.43579&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=133060261

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-05 21:12:36+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5150402677/history has bicycle:repair = yes that was added in this edit
service:bicycle:repair is much more common way of expressing the same info as one from bicycle:repair key. Would you be fine with changing this tagging to a more popular version?

I think that in this case difference in key names are minimal, and benefit from easier use of data would be greater

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle:repair and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:service:bicycle:repair
silversurfer83 (2023-02-27 16:00:42+00:00): Moin :)

Der Name sieht etwas lang aus. Ich denke, der Teil nach dem Bindestrich gehört eigentlich in das Feld "description:de="

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133060330
Hufkratzer (2023-02-27 01:07:00+00:00): Hi,
das kleine runde Ding
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149752586
ist sicherlich keine Reitanlage (leisure=horse_riding); es liegt ja auch innerhalb von "Reitsportanlage Bingenheimer Mühle" (Fläche https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/819021108).
Es könnte sein:
- ein überdachter Round-Pen oder Longierzirkel
- eine Longierhalle
- eine überdachte oder umschlossene Führanlage
Vgl.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure%3Dpitch
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:building%3Driding_hall
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:animal%3Dhorse_walker
scg1176 (2023-02-27 14:27:00+00:00): Hallo, danke für die Prüfung. Es sieht aus wie eine Longierhalle. Habe dazu nichts eindeutiges gefunden. Manchmal ist es schwierig, das passende zu finden. Ich könnte mir vorstellen, das building=yes / leisure=pitch / covered=yes / sport=equestrian passen könnte. Wie würdest du es taggen?
Hufkratzer (2023-02-27 16:35:56+00:00): Als building=riding_hall
Das steht auf
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Reiten
und
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Riding
und
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Riding
und
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposed_features/Riding_hall
Auf
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:building=riding_hall
und
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building=riding_hall
fehlt es; ich werde es wohl da nachgetragen. Danke für den Hinweis.
silversurfer83 (2023-02-27 20:23:01+00:00): Moin :)

Ich verstehe diese Änderung nicht. Hier liegen jetzt die Infos, dass dort eine Bar sei auf dem Eingangsnode während die Infos zum Restaurant auf dem Gebäude liegen. Ist das in Bad Berleburg so üblich oder hast du einfach was übersehen? (kann ja passieren, kein Vorwurf)

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133060384
Yaaaaaaaa (2023-03-01 13:40:13+00:00): hi Surfer :)
Same thing as for the toilets, Osmose just removed the redundant tags (the ones that were on both the entrance and the building).
I let you move the remaining tags as you wish. (I'd recommend to move them to the building).
regards
silversurfer83 (2023-03-01 14:12:51+00:00): Hi
Thanks for coming back to me
I never worked with Osmose yet. Good to know how that works.

Happy Mapping
Silversurfer83
silversurfer83 (2023-02-27 20:26:24+00:00): Hi
hier hast du vergessen "access" vom node mit an das Gebäude zu Übernehmen. Vielleicht bei der Arbeit mit Osmose ein bisschen besser auf alle Tags achten. (abgesehen davon halte ich von Osmose nicht sooo viel. Kann mal hilfreich sein, aber nichts, wo ich ständig nach schauen würde. Meine Meinung ;)

Cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133060396
Yaaaaaaaa (2023-03-01 13:34:29+00:00): hi, thx for the feedback. Osmose did not do any mistake, it just removed the redundant 'toilet' tag from the node (as the building also had the same toilet tag).
Today, I manually moved the access tag from the node to the building. (which is something Osmose could not automatically detect of course)
have a good day
Metapont (2023-02-26 22:42:12+00:00): I forgot to add the following source: https://www.geoportal.nrw/
Hufkratzer (2023-02-27 00:41:48+00:00): Hi,
also nach dem Luftbild würde ich sagen, dass https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149755331 ein Reitplatz ist und keine Reitanlage, vgl.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure%3Dhorse_riding
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure%3Dpitch#Reitplatz
mueschel (2023-03-11 18:08:01+00:00): Hi,
you added some address nodes with a 'CUP' tag - this looks like a tagging mistake, could you check that?
LaniusCollurio (2023-03-13 07:46:42+00:00): Hi, excuse me but what is a "CUP" tag? I don't find it in wiki.....
LaniusCollurio (2023-03-13 07:54:54+00:00): Ah ok, I find it... Maybe a copy/paste mistake... this evening I'll correct, now I haven't got JOSM. Thank you very much
tomhukins (2023-05-31 15:30:42+00:00): Thank you for adding details to OpenStreetMap.

This change adds a new node for "Barclays Bank" but it looks like a duplicate of and older node at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10083334912 which you have edited in the past.  You might want to delete this new, duplicate node.
YomanNH (2024-06-11 08:42:57+00:00): Usunąłem nazwę opisową.
YomanNH (2024-06-11 08:40:34+00:00): Usunąłem nazwę opisową.
multichill (2023-02-27 19:45:02+00:00): Bestaat nu ook als gebouw, zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1149953754 . Tags moeten nog overgezet worden en trappen ontbreken nog
pnorman (2023-07-29 22:22:20+00:00): I drove by here, and these aren't living streets. Living streets seldom exist in Canada and I'm not aware of any in BC.
Privatemajory (2023-02-27 06:17:41+00:00): Bonjour. Merci pour tous ces bâtiments que vous ajoutez sur Tana.

- Question curieuse: ces données sont-elles importées? (L'alignement par rapport aux imageries et la consistance dans la table des attributs semblent dire que les données proviennent d'une certaine base)
- Que signifie les numéros dans addr:housenumber? (La numérotation liée aux rues est assez rare à Madagascar - on ne les retrouve que dans les centres villes - j'imagine que ces numéros représentent autre chose)

Excellente journée!
Rémi_ (2023-02-26 22:24:22+00:00): https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/tag-grande-circulation/13067
Mastrick_Mapper (2023-02-26 22:27:15+00:00): Added buildings and details in this changeset.
Taktaal (2023-09-18 15:47:43+00:00): You added the tag access=no to the path https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/967121167/history in this edit. I'm not sure if this applies here, but access=no usually only applies if a path is illegal to walk on for anybody (i.e. a path in a military area or airport), so it's almost always wrong
twospeed (2023-09-18 16:05:01+00:00): I was following this guidance in the OpebStreetMap Wiki:

List of possible values
The tag takes the form access=*, where * can be any of the following:

Value	Description
yes	The public has an official, legally-enshrined right of access; i.e., it's a right of way.
no	General public access is prohibited. Stronger interdiction than private. Examples: a fully closed road; a restricted military facility.
It is necessary to add additional access (like foot=yes or bicycle=permissive, etc.) to indicate who may use the element, if anyone is allowed. If only specific transport modes are forbidden, for example, at a vehicle no-entry sign, use a more specific restriction like vehicle=no or motor_vehicle=no over the general key access. Keep in mind that sidewalks/pavements are typically included in the highway of the street.
CurlingMan13 (2023-02-27 07:39:15+00:00): Names should not be applied when they are descriptive in nature.  For example, the names should not be "Hole #", this isn't needed.
WC392309 (2023-03-02 00:32:42+00:00): Promoting SR 3171 to secondary is a good idea. However, SR 659 should be secondary from SR 772 to Evergreen Mills Road because it acts as a somewhat important artery in Brambleton. Everything else should remain Tertiary.
Joseph R P (2023-03-02 17:26:05+00:00): Belmont Ridge might still also meet secondary criteria for the meantime due to the roadwork all over the area, but my other reasonings for this change are:
- Northstar Boulevard is being extended down to Stone Ridge to form a single consistent roadway between Lansdowne and Stone Ridge and can even be followed down to Catharpin in Prince William County (making it possible for primary classification in the future), while the Brambleton segment of Belmont Ridge Road will only connect to Arcola.
- Northstar also has commercial developments along its route, whereas Belmont Ridge appears to be intended to serve as a collector road for the residential subdivisions in the area.
WC392309 (2023-03-02 22:11:06+00:00): I get this point now, however, both meet the criteria for secondary, as they are both state routes(unless they are secondary state routes, then they remain tertiary)
Joseph R P (2023-03-02 22:41:19+00:00): The presence of two different state route networks- primary state routes (prefixed by 'VA' on OSM, numbered 599 and below) and secondary states route (prefixed by 'SR' on OSM, numbered 600 and above and equivalent to county routes seen in other states)- rarely ever dictate the classification of roads, as primary state routes' classifications can range from freeways like VA 267, the Dulles Toll Road, all the way down to access roads like VA 399 at the Virginia Museum of Science. 

Secondary state routes, which account for nearly every other road in Virginia minus those in cities and some counties and privately-maintained areas, are loosely classified in a similar way too, as the majority of them are residential streets, collector roads, or rural farm roads but can often times be major thoroughfares or even expressways like SR 606/607 northwest of Dulles or the aforementioned Belmont Ridge Road, which jumps between tertiary, secondary, and primary in different places.

It would be quite difficult to have a road classification scheme based on highway numbers in Virginia (or anywhere in the US really) for those particular reasons.
WC392309 (2023-03-03 18:25:37+00:00): It would, however if Northstar was primary after extending it; that would also mean Ryan Road would be primary because it has commercial and connects Loudoun county parkway to Northstar.
dsaneus (2023-03-02 10:03:11+00:00): Hola.

He visto este conjunto de cambios que realizaste hace unos días. Varios nodos de la vía que modificaste se han desplazado incorrectamente (entiendo que por accidente). Esto ha creado varías líneas rectas que atraviesan desde el Rincón de Beniscornia hasta La Raya.

Ya he deshecho los cambios para corregir esta situación. Hay que tener mucho cuidado a la hora de guardar los cambios, y comprobar que no haya ningún error. Al editar en dispositivos móviles es aún más fácil cometer errores.

También te animo a describir brevemente los cambios que realizas, ya que en la gran mayoría no incluyes ninguna descripción. Para los demás, es de gran ayuda saber más o menos que cambios se incluyen en cada conjunto.

Un saludo!
~dsaneus
SomeoneElse (2023-02-26 22:56:43+00:00): This also fixed accidental breakages in these townlands:

2a3
>  -15462715 | Drimna
22639d22639
<   -5523324 | Poppintree (Finglas)
28127d28126
<   -5378792 | Meakstown
55288c55287
< (55285 rows)
---
> (55284 rows)
Greg_Rose (2023-04-23 22:41:30+00:00): Heya Jake - FYI all 'major' roads + residential & unclassified 'minor' roads are by default "motor_vehicle=yes". Is there a use case I don't know about where this tag is helpful to a datauser downstream?
Greg_Rose (2023-04-24 23:46:03+00:00): btw, Context is that I was removing these tags but then noticed it was you that had added them, so I'm leaving them alone now.
jake-low (2023-04-29 01:07:44+00:00): Hi Greg! Thanks for the info. I didn't realize that unclassified roads were understood to be motor_vehicle=yes by default; I don't think there's any reason to keep this tag on this particular road if that's the case. I don't recall exactly why I added this tag but it was when I was doing some editing along Middle Fork Road to standardize names and alt_names on different segments and add some missing surface tags; I may have added the redundant motor_vehicle=yes on the unclassified road because I saw that it was already present on the track road further along (or perhaps I added the tag to the track road too; I can't recall). In any case, feel free to remove the tag, and I'll keep this info in mind for the future. :-)
Greg_Rose (2023-05-23 00:21:49+00:00): Thx for the reply - I honestly am learning new stuff all the time so thought maybe there was a usecase that I didn't know about!
The 'track' highways are assumed to allow motor vehicles but don't HAVE to: it can still be a 'track' but not allow cars. Any highway classification above that (residential>unclassified>tertiary>etc) REQUIRES that motor vehicles are allowed, otherwise it is retagged as a 'pedestrian_street'.
And then service roads crash the party and everyone goes home. (i.e., I am still not 100% on correct service road usage/tagging).  *frustratedsigh*
Glassman (2023-02-28 22:11:25+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133062113
puchaczowsky (2023-10-21 22:26:21+00:00): czemu obniżyłeś kategorię drogi Jakuba Wagi w Grabowie? jest to przecież główny dojazd do tej miejsowości od strony S61
r2r2r2o (2023-10-22 07:08:09+00:00): Według geoportalu ten fragment nie należy już do drogi powiatowej 1868B. Pytanie tylko, jak bardzo kierować się przynależnością administracyjną względem użyteczności.
puchaczowsky (2023-10-22 13:15:40+00:00): w OSM w takich sytuacjach nie kierujemy się klasyfikacją urzędową

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Drogi#Klasyfikacja_dr%C3%B3g
Glassman (2023-02-28 22:13:18+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133062368