piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
AkteZ (2026-06-23 15:57:04+00:00): Das stimmt. Irgendwas muss mit der Ortung nicht geklappt haben. Habe es zum Entfernen markiert. Danke für den Hinweis.
AriAlvarez (2026-06-22 20:28:06+00:00): Thanks for updating the walkways in Lincoln!
Zrop (2026-06-22 19:11:02+00:00): Hallo Vinzenz Mai,
haben wir die Erlaubnis der Stadt Hürth die Daten von huerth.de in OSM zu verwenden ? Ich konnte nichts finden.

Gruß
Zrop
kartograph (2026-07-28 10:51:03+00:00): Hi Bastianowitz :),

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4743830648 scheint weiterhin in Kiosk zu sein. War da nur kurz ein Plattenladen?
Bastianowitz (2026-07-28 18:40:16+00:00): Hallo,  keine Ahnung wie lange dieser Laden dort war. Als ich das letzte mal dort.lsng bin,  war der Laden voller alten Speichermedien. Und wie er sich nannte konnte ich ja auch hier einpflegen.  Aktuell kann ich sonst nichts zu sagen. Da müsste ich wieder da hin schauen.
eggie (2026-06-22 18:19:48+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback Geef svp concreet aan wat je hebt aangepast of toegevoegd. Doe ook niet te veel in één changeset.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
pippo6 (2026-07-14 11:19:10+00:00): di nuovo, hai cancellato cestini esistenti a Scauri come già 7 mesi fa nel cs 175925448
pippo6 (2026-07-14 11:18:56+00:00): di nuovo, hai cancellato cestini esistenti a Scauri come già 7 mesi fa nel cs 175925448
malaerba (2026-07-14 13:00:48+00:00): Sì, perché non ci sono più: in tutto il comune c'è solo la raccolta porta a porta.
malaerba (2026-07-14 13:09:09+00:00): In via Laparelli invece al momento ce n'è uno solo per il vetro.
eggie (2026-06-22 18:23:25+00:00): Feedback   Geef svp aan wat je hebt gedaan. Bv Je hebt een boom verplaatst?
Waarom zou men in Hogeland een boom hebben verplaatst.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=184443885

Schade ontstaat door schuiven met de kaart in editmodus. Dan selecteer je iets en gaat schuiven met de kaart. Dan schuift niet de kaart, maar bv zo'n boom.
eggie (2026-06-22 18:25:44+00:00): De boom heb ik teruggeplaatst.
cuzi (2026-07-05 22:38:07+00:00): Bridge open again according to this note: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5377547
ElectricK (2026-07-08 13:13:05+00:00): I just drove this section yesterday and I can confirm the bridge is open
cuzi (2026-07-09 20:35:28+00:00): Thanks!
felipeeugenio (2026-06-22 23:38:05+00:00): Hola. Una cosa es la calle, y otra es el número, pero aca parece que agregó la dirección como nombre.
Voy a corregirlo. Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184444692
flohoff (2026-06-23 10:19:12+00:00): Moin,

also wenn der weg nicht mehr da ist dann wäre doch sowas wie "visbility" oder "surface" und "Smoothness" richtig. 

"access=no" Impliziert das da ein Schild steht - sowas wie "Betreten verboten".

Und wenn der weg wirklich weg ist dann würde ich da eher ein "razed:highway=track" draus machen

access sind ja eher rechtliche beschränkungen.

Flo
matpie (2026-06-25 18:51:42+00:00): Moin,
danke für die Erläuterung, das ein Weg nicht mehr existiert hatte ich bislang auch noch nicht.
Ändere ich gleich.
BR, Matthias
Dawid2849 (2026-06-23 09:23:40+00:00): Nie tu jest Porytowe Wzgórze, w dodatku było już zmapowane: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/565066883
Gafek (2026-06-23 09:35:27+00:00): najmocniej przepraszam, jestem tu nowy, myślałem że jak oznaczę to miejsce jako Porytowe Wzgórze to obejmie cały ten obszar. Czy myślisz, że mimo zbocza zaznaczonego jako Porytowe Wzgórze warto zostawić ten tag tylko w bliżej prawidłowej lokalizacli?
Wildsharky (2026-06-30 09:10:46+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184472768
qstep (2026-06-26 16:14:59+00:00): Hello. Volt vasútállomás helyes címkézése abandoned:railway=station vagy disused:railway=station kellene legyen. Ha valamire van címke, ne írd be szövegesen. Gondolom Google-ről másoltad, mert ott ez a neve.

source címkébe felesleges a Mapbox, ha a módosításcsomagodban megadod. De nem adtad meg, tehát így nem lehet eldönteni, mi az igazság.

w1531492467 - biciklitárolónak nem szokott neve lenni.

place=hamlet is tökéletes volt, mivel Ebszőnybánya nem Tokod városrésze területileg, csak közigazgatásilag. A wiki szerint a hamlet egy önálló, 100-200 lakos körüli kis falu. place=village lehetne még, de semmiképp sem suburb.
Ltrlg (2026-06-25 21:14:51+00:00): Ces traces apparaissent bien sur les orthophotos les plus récentes de l’IGN (2025 dans cette zone). Il n’y a rien qui puisse faire penser que Bing et ESRI y sont plus récentes.

Ou plutôt le contraire : les deux arbres vers https://www.openstreetmap.org/?mlat=47.434178&mlon=-0.524224 ont clairement été coupé entre leur présence sur Bing/ESRI et leur absence sur les orthophotos de 2025.

Par conséquent j’annule.
YBau (2026-06-26 17:08:14+00:00): En effet, je constate la même chose. Merci pour votre correction. 
Je ferai à l'avenir plus attention aux dates des photographies aériennes que j'utilise
flohoff (2026-06-23 07:15:33+00:00): Hi,
cool das du bei OpenStreetmap mit machst. Du könntest dir bei den Changeset kommentaren ein bisschen ausführlicher werden. "Diverses" ist schwierig und führt dazu das man sich alles einzeln ansehen muss.

Hier hat dein Changeset zu einer routing änderung geführt und "Diverses" ist dann sehr verdächtig.

Hier die routing änderung. 

https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=701797,1293519#51.72757,6.31609,14z

Dein changeset setzt da die maxspeed runter - daher vermutlich richtig die änderung.

Also - Die Changeset Kommentare sind kommunikation mit den anderen Mappern ;)

Keep going.

Flo
rajdhani (2026-06-23 11:46:35+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184472981
Wildsharky (2026-06-30 09:11:44+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184473852
literan (2026-07-05 09:02:52+00:00): вы этой правкой сломали большущий полигон леса, и вообще от балды натаскали разных точек. по сути такие неаккуратные правки это неосознанный вандализм. Правку придется откатить, будьте аккуратнее в дальнейшем
grzegorz75jan (2026-06-24 01:42:31+00:00): Trochę nie w tym miejscu https://mapy.geoportal.gov.pl/imap/Imgp_2.html?locale=pl&gui=new&sessionID=BE1F4D86-FE53-4DA7-9198-CC413439319A

https://postimg.cc/gallery/sgx0YYF

Niekoniecznie jest to szczyt

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:natural=peak
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:natural%3Dhill

Podane w edycji źródło jest deko niepewne pod kątem legalności oraz wywołuje ostrzeżenie o zagrożeniu w przeglądarce internetowej.

"§ XII

Licencje na oprogramowanie i mapy cyfrowe

1. Mapy cyfrowe

Kupującemu "mapy cyfrowe" udzielamy licencji na wykorzystywanie pliku z mapą we własnym zakresie, oraz wykonanie jednej kopii na nośniku CD, w celach archiwizacyjnych. Zabronione jest dalsze rozpowszechnianie plików map, w szczególności: wielokrotne wykonywanie kopii plików i dalsze rozpowszechnianie, publikowanie pliku z mapą (lub jej fragmentów) w internecie lub innych mediach, umieszczanie pliku z mapą w jakiejkolwiek bazie danych."
https://compass.krakow.pl/regulamin-zakupow
kubahahaha (2026-06-24 10:27:36+00:00): 1. Przesunąłem lokalizację szczytu na zgodną z pomiarem który udostępnił @grzegorz75jan

2. natural=peak vs natural=hill - ju tak się przyjęło w Polsce że używamy tych tagów trochę niezgodnie z przeznaczeniem, ja bym zostawił tak samo jak są oznaczone okoliczne góry.

3. Licencja mapy nie wygląda na kompatybilną z OSM - ale skoro zmieniamy lokalizację i wysokość na podstawie Geoportalu (w którym jest też nazwa), to dobrze się składa, bo nie zostanie nic co byłoby objęte prawami autorskimi.
Nie używaj na przyszłość takich map objętych prawami autorskimi - nie można ich wykorzystywać jako źródło do edycji OSM.
Yog Sot (2026-06-24 14:51:11+00:00): dzięki kuba za proste wyjście.
Pawelski44 (2026-06-24 18:39:05+00:00): Ok dzięki za pomoc i wyjaśnienie
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-06-23 13:02:21+00:00): Hi! Please do not remove footway links. Here, you removed foot access to parking G1 from sidewalk. Thanks!
VLD317 (2026-06-23 18:30:53+00:00): Thank you for bringing this to my attention. We had removed the link due to the presence of designated crosswalks that are separately mapped and which provide parking lot access. Since the link has been restored, we will not edit the feature further. Happy Mapping!
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-06-23 18:59:36+00:00): Yes, Links are there so they are adding routes for paths people would really take, especially when detours are available but non-attractive.
eggie (2026-06-23 05:26:22+00:00): Dag Rosanna,

Wanneer wandelen is toegestaan op een pad met access=private kun je het beste foot=permissive taggen ipv yes.

MVG
eggie
Wildsharky (2026-06-30 09:12:32+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184511533
Dodko (2026-06-24 20:59:15+00:00): Please can you rewrite (inscription) the entire text from the board?
https://mapy.com/s/herobedozo
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13956047843

I use the name item for the name of the person the board is about, it's easier to find, it's also in a different bold font on the board.
josm19902026 (2026-06-22 20:13:18+00:00): Please focus on drawing accuracy from the start, so we can avoid wasting time on revisions and invest our efforts into delivering new work
josm19902026 (2026-06-22 20:14:13+00:00): source:	

Bing Aerial Imagery, 

Esri World Imagery.

, Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta.

, Landsat WMTS.

, Mapbox Satellite.
Glassman (2026-06-26 01:58:50+00:00): It most likely should be tagged as a driveway, highway=service +service=driveway. Can you make the change?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184448704
Tomas Straupis (2026-06-23 05:48:49+00:00): Mes nebraižom juostų kaip atskirų vektorių, juostų informacija rašoma į lanes žymas. Ir dabar sugadinta kelių hierarchija, random būdu besikaitaliojanti į service kelius.
Couldbethere (2026-06-23 11:35:18+00:00): Hello, thank you for your feedback.

I'm sorry for the confusion caused by my edits. I tried to represent the situation with separate lanes and boom gates, but i now understand that the correct approach is different.

I have attempted now to fix it by merging the split roads back into a single oneway road and using lanes=2 tag, and i added the boom gate node. However i am still not fully confident that i have corrected everything properly.

Could you please let me know if this is now correct? if not, i would really appreciate it if you could explain how you would map this area proeprly, especially regarding how to handle the lanes and boom gates in this kind of layout. I want to make sure i understand the correct approach so i can improve my mapping in the future.

Thank you again for help.
Tomas Straupis (2026-06-23 15:46:10+00:00): Hello. Yes, it looks fine now, thank you!
Zrop (2026-06-22 20:49:52+00:00): Hallo  Vinzenz Mai,
noch mal die Frage: Haben wir die Erlaubnis der Stadt Hürth die Daten in OSM zu verwenden ?

Gruß
Zrop
crossingover_ (2026-06-22 20:34:53+00:00): Проспект 600 річчя - 2 полоси (але широкі), Василенка - 2 полоси. Також дороги проходять через спальні квартали.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2026-06-23 12:58:28+00:00): Hi! Please do not remove unmarked crossings, because your changes broke routing for pedestrian at this intersection. Crossings are needed for pedestrian to cross the street there, even if there are no marked crossings for foot traffic. Thanks!
VLD317 (2026-06-23 18:31:26+00:00): Thank you for the follow-up and for considering pedestrian routing. Since you've already made the adjustments, we will not edit it further. Happy mapping!
rajdhani (2026-06-23 12:17:14+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184474326
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-23 02:16:45+00:00): Reversed node drag and inexplicable removal of building=* tag and fixed misformatted phone=* for SEO POI in changeset 184455331

https://osm.org/changeset/184455331
eggie (2026-06-23 05:20:24+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback  Het adres heb ik weer verwijderd. Er zijn hier adresnodes.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
yelisey90 (2026-06-23 07:27:38+00:00): You've connected a road https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1531511322 to a stream https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1099642911
Altts (2026-06-23 11:53:07+00:00): Thanks! fixed it.
ezekielf (2026-06-23 20:43:02+00:00): Hi mapmeld, thanks for keeping an eye on the Champlain Parkway opening, but you're early by a week.  Quoting from the linked WCAX article:

"the outbound side of the Champlain Parkway headed toward Interstate 189 will open mid-morning on Monday, June 29.

The following day, Tuesday, June 30, inbound lanes headed toward Burlington will open. "

Please revert until next week.  Thank you!
mapmeld (2026-06-23 20:57:56+00:00): my bad... I was in the area on Sunday, my Uber driver said it was opening the next day, and when I saw Monday/Tuesday I thought it was happening.  Just reverted both changesets.
ezekielf (2026-06-23 21:04:16+00:00): Thank you!  I live in the area an am looking forward to collecting some Mapillary imagery once it opens next week.
Mikey0909 (2026-07-22 00:19:00+00:00): Is not a flock camera, is a Verkada Remote Series CR63-E
Filohipo (2026-06-22 22:53:56+00:00): Porque foi retirado o nome de Quinta da Matinha ?
As cartas oficiais consultadas tem desenhados os edificios com esse nome
PL 2188677 (2026-06-22 23:14:34+00:00): Porquê? Porque está errado e essa informação não está correta. A fonte oficial é esta https://www.dgterritorio.gov.pt/atividades/cadastro/pesquisa-de-seccoes-cadastrais Direção geral do território e como pode ver na cartografia atualizada ali, a designação está errada e não corresponde. Tenho em posse toda a documentação deste terreno e isso que diz está errado. Na cartografia têm a obrigação de ser corretos.
Filohipo (2026-06-22 23:52:53+00:00): Ok. Então qual é o nome correto ?
Já foi Quinta da Matinha. Agora é Herdade da Matinha ?. Coloco eu o nome, ou coloca o Sr ? Já agora diga por favor o nome do aglomerado de casas que já não pertencem á Matinha.
Filohipo
Mateus 5/3
Filohipo (2026-06-23 00:30:53+00:00): Consultado o registo cadastral sou levado a concluir que o meu caro  PL 2188677 tem toda a razão. Os edificios à direita  (mais afastados dos painéis solares) não pertencem à herdade da Matinha (antiga Quinta da Matinha) apesar de lá estarem. Fazem parte de outra parcela da mesma folha. Mas há edificios não registados...
Por acaso o  PL 2188677 já reparou qual é o mapa base que a DGT usa ?
Sim é este, que pode ajudar a melhorar, Pode constatar aqui:
https://snic.dgterritorio.gov.pt/visualizadorCadastro?
não coloco o link completo por razões obvias. 
Talvez não saiba, mas o Estado Português ( o Sr e eu e mais alguns milhões) poupa milhões de euros ao não pagar direitos à Microsoft, Google ou similares,
caprieldeluca (2026-06-23 01:08:40+00:00): Hola, gracias por contribuir! Revisé en iD y me parece que tiene sección Issues. Saludos!
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Argentina#Contacto
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184451614
mueschel (2026-07-03 16:19:58+00:00): Hi,
what are these *_ref tags? Both are not yet used in any other place, and reference numbers are commonly tagged as "ref:***".
Loopslol7 (2026-07-05 02:23:51+00:00): Hi, 

these tags were based on a conversation I had with a utility pole worker, I believe from PG&E. They said they use the barcode number (there is a barcode on the label with the number) as one way of internally identifying the pole, but there are also joint reference numbers, which they use when communicating about the pole with other companies or things that are using the poles. those, albeit unique, tags seemed like the best way to add that data. if there is a more common tag that would fit this use of references, im happy to use it.

it seems locally here there can be many different reference numbers for the exact same pole, just that they are used for different things.
mueschel (2026-07-06 15:42:01+00:00): If you don't have better names than "barcode" and "joint", you can keep them.
Use the ref:XYZ scheme and not xyz_ref. And it might be good to add the company name as well:
ref:PGE:barcode
This helps keeping tags specific without overlap with other, unrelated ref numbers.
Loopslol7 (2026-07-08 00:45:14+00:00): Yes, those are the most accurate names I have for now!

Ok, ref:PGE:barcode and ref:PGE:joint sound like nice tags :), the reasoning makes sense.

Thanks for the direction, Loopslol7
ScrawnyMeowth1 (2026-06-24 15:36:57+00:00): Hi Natfoot,

Thanks for adding more landcover here! Did you add name=G 2 on purpose to the grassland?

Also, I recommend not using Bing imagery to trace along the Columbia shoreline here. It was taken when the water level was way higher than normal and some areas were flooded. 

I see you're on the OSM World discord server if you want to chat there.

Thanks!
ScrawnyMeowth1 (2026-06-24 15:38:06+00:00): Also, in my experience, most mappers frown on the idea of mapping landuse as multipolygons with shared ways in between. You might consider just creating single ways for each landuse area.
Natfoot (2026-07-01 06:10:13+00:00): yeah sorry about the G used it for the multipolygon.  please point me at the documentation for land coverings. about multipolygon use. 
Thanks
arafqus (2026-06-23 18:28:31+00:00): Hi, I hope this finds you well. I would like to know how you came into the conclusion of downgrading the classification of these segments of 5th of July Road between A and Annaba when they fit the criteria to be classified as motorways (as they were previously tagged), one of the most important and easily identifiable qualifications are 2X2 ways with additional emergency lanes on both ways on the right side, which are paved and found in the segments mentionned above.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-21 05:41:31+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed import from unauthorised source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186096731
arafqus (2026-06-23 18:23:20+00:00): Hi, I hope this finds you well. I would like to know how you came into the conclusion of downgrading the classification of these segments of the highway between Cheraga and Tesala El Merdja junction when they fit the criteria to be classified as motorways (as they were previously tagged), one of the most important and easily identifiable qualifications are 2X2 ways with additional emergency lanes on both ways on the right side, which are paved and found in the segments mentionned above.
QuiLe (2026-06-25 03:42:32+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM! Please remember to put the full name of the street, so Conveyor Dr. should not be abbreviated and use Conveyor Drive

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Abbreviations
Dimitar155 (2026-06-23 08:11:02+00:00): Принципно такъв завой е забранен, когато има стрелки за ляв завой или когато на светофара има лява стрелка. По-скоро може да се добави except=bus, за да не се генерират маршрути за всяка кола с обратен завой.

Поздрави,
Митко
flohoff (2026-06-23 10:15:39+00:00): Moin,
nur weil ich gerade zufällig gesehen habe:

name=Schulsporthalle 

ist nicht so richtig gut. Das name tag wird nicht für Beschreibendes genutzt sondern nur für EIgennamen. Also sowas wie "Schloß Neuschwanstein" oder "Konrad-Adenauer-Haus"

Beschreibendes sollte in "description" - Und mit der Schulsporthalle muss nichtmal das sein. Das müsste mit leisure/sport und so beschrieben werden.

Flo
derbossmapper (2026-06-24 07:31:14+00:00): servus,
hast Recht, hab's geändert :) danke für den Hinweis!
yelisey90 (2026-06-23 07:35:21+00:00): reverted for Giorgi Atoneli Street: already present at https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18995349

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184462925
NG218 (2026-06-25 05:20:53+00:00): Reminder to keep changesets as local as possible and not globe-spanning:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-23 06:21:11+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
Are the added names real?
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-23 06:21:18+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
Is the added name real?
KevinOs (2026-06-23 06:32:21+00:00): Please stop making these modifications buddy. They have been marked as "private" indicating they are not for public use nor access. You do not need to add a name to them. We get it you don't want people on your land but this isn't the way to modify the map correctly and will just get your edits reverted for vandalism. You own the land, not the map.
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-23 06:21:22+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
Is the added name real?
arafqus (2026-06-23 18:26:04+00:00): Hi, I hope this finds you well. I would like to know how you came into the conclusion of downgrading the classification of these segments of RN 1 between la Cote and Baba Ali junction when they fit the criteria to be classified as motorways (as they were previously tagged), one of the most important and easily identifiable qualifications are 2X2 ways with additional emergency lanes on both ways on the right side, which are paved and found in the segments mentionned above.
confusedbuffalo (2026-06-23 09:22:18+00:00): There are a few here that were something like 293492195.0, that looks like a bad import with a phone number converted to a decimal number. I think that it should in fact be +62 293 492195, without the trailing 0.

E.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12397882289/history

I haven't checked all of the objects here, but some are still visible on https://confusedbuffalo.github.io/phone-report/indonesia/jawa-tengah.html for today, because of when the data was extracted.
FajrAl (2026-06-23 09:39:04+00:00): I realized earlier that the PMI humanitarian POIs came from an import, but I hadn't double-checked them yet. I just took a look, and indeed, the .0 shouldn't be used. Thanks for the heads-up! This looks like a small data issue that requires manual editing, not a tool error.
MappingMore (2026-06-24 08:24:37+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184511989
yelisey90 (2026-06-23 09:59:50+00:00): reverted for those streets that are already present in relations (e. g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20702822 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18365886 , https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15056525 etc.)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184468652
SpeedMcCool (2026-06-26 00:58:01+00:00): Not sure I understand your reversion. Why would a street being a member of a relation preclude including an etymology tag on it?
yelisey90 (2026-06-26 05:01:58+00:00): Because it's the purpose of that relation, with type=street, to unite all the tags that concern the whole of the street, like wikipedia, etymology, old_name (if not in use any more) and so on. So a software that shows etymologies of street names should get them from that relation as well.
SpeedMcCool (2026-06-27 23:24:26+00:00): Yeah that doesn't make the tag incorrect on the individual ways though. And, some data consumers, (like MapComplete, which I used to add the tags) don't recognize the tags when they're only on relations. I don't think these reversion are correct
yelisey90 (2026-06-28 06:47:59+00:00): Then open an issue with MapComplete to recognize the tags from the relations, both from type=street and type=associatedStreet
SpeedMcCool (2026-06-29 15:03:08+00:00): That's not the expectation here. The key name:etymology:wikidata is correct on each individual way, and just because a tag has been accurately placed on a nearby way or relation does not somehow make it incorrect to attach it to another way.

Regardless of whether MapComplete should recognize name:etymology:wikidata on relations, it is correct to attach the key to individual ways as well. I would appreciate it if you undid your reversions.