piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
wolfbert (2026-05-09 06:16:59+00:00): Das Gras rund um die Abfahrt von der S33 finde ich suboptimal. Es geht nur ums Bankett. Das kann man schon mappen wenns sein muss,  dann aber lagerichtig (also kein Gras unter der Autobahn), schon in Hinblick auf area:highway (falls das jemals passiert). Ansonsten hat das Bankett eben keinen landuse.
MalboGHG (2026-05-09 07:47:40+00:00): Habe das Gras nun entfernt.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182412292
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-09 12:23:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149775072 where the changeset comment is: Reverting automatic name changes; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7392 4.
billykerman (2024-04-06 18:12:33+00:00): This edit was marked as suspicious, however upon looking at this changeset, and OSM I can see a bus terminal that looks like it in the train station. As I can see your source is listed as local knowledge I trust you have been to this transport hub in the past. If this is a incorrect edit, I trust you to revert it, however if it isn't then I trust you know this area. Have a great day and thank you for contributing to OSM!
dkter (2024-04-09 03:05:40+00:00): I have been here, yes. I changed this and a few others because I noticed that some of the subway stations in Toronto are labelled as "Transportation Building" while others are "Train Station Building". Wanted to make them consistent. Let me know if I'm doing anything wrong here
Frans S (2024-04-06 13:07:28+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
One of the validator jobs is to reviews the taggings of highways .  Experience learns that traces of highways are regularly wrong tagged.

How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway (main choices in rural areas)
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.

In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path. Use footway only in urban (town) areas.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)

In JOSM, use the measure tab or, draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (don't map that bulding)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tracks should always be avoided for through-going traffic or within urban areas.

Important. Please connect highways to each other, where obvious,  to get a network which can be used by GPS NAV systems.

Best regards
MxxCon (2024-04-09 02:22:34+00:00): While the way you mapped this is not outright wrong, I personally try to map features without fully overlapping each other because then it becomes a bit awkward when you want to select one, but the other one keeps getting selected.
In this specific case, rather than mapping this fence as a separate object, you could simply add barrier=fence tag to the parking lot itself since that's one of the features of this parking lot..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149625407
Coplact (2024-05-01 02:30:21+00:00): Makes sence. My original idea was to use the barrier=fence tag but was confused on how to indicate the fence_type tag. I was able to add both tags to the single object now. Thanks again for the feedback!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149625407
ZLima12 (2024-07-06 18:50:13+00:00): Hi there,

I've moved "Saw Mill River Parkway Lands" to the note tag, since this isn't really a common name for these woods. Since there isn't really a commonly used name for them, I've gone ahead and added noname=yes as well.

Best,
John
Lumikeiju (2024-04-05 22:32:50+00:00): Hi - thanks for your contribution!

OneBusAway no longer returns results for stops 25930 and 25060, so deleting these "highway=bus_stop" nodes is a good change.

Note that OSM also includes "public_transport=stop_position" nodes on the way which the bus travels (in this case, 35th Ave NE) as part of how bus stops are mapped - so I've gone ahead and deleted those nodes as well. (Changeset: 149634946)

I've recently been working on updating some of the transit infrastructure mapping in this area, and changes like yours make that process a lot less of a headache. Thank you, and happy mapping!
Marlex HC S DE RL DE CV (2024-04-05 17:48:53+00:00): Bien ocupamos difusión en nuestra empresa gracias
MxxCon (2024-04-09 02:25:42+00:00): If you want, you can indicate if this compressed air is free or not by adding fee=yes/no tag.👍
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149626795
5m4u9 (2024-04-07 05:17:40+00:00): hola, gracias por añadir al mapa el restaurante.

Corregí algunos datos más del restaurante que estaban publicados en su facebook.
TrickyFoxy (2024-04-05 18:40:07+00:00): Поподробнее, что вы хотели изобразить? Сейчас просто нарисовали дорожку поверх дороги
MxxCon (2024-04-09 02:35:33+00:00): If you are mapping individual parking spaces or groups of them, rather than the whole parking lot, you should use amenity=parking_space tag rather than just "parking". There's a preset for parking lots vs parking spaces.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149627494
Pter Pan (2024-04-05 18:40:00+00:00): https://www.taekwondo-institut.de/standorte/berlin/#adresse
mavl (2024-11-13 07:58:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159079753 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: incompatible sources - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16857].
jcr83 (2024-04-05 19:45:52+00:00): Bonjour,
Quelle est votre source pour dire que c'est un faux dolmen ? Cela ne peut pas être un abri de berger, c'est beaucoup trop petit.
jcr83 (2024-04-05 19:53:40+00:00): Trouvé un article de Nice-Matin : https://www.nicematin.com/histoire/histoire-connaissez-vous-ce-mysterieux-monument-perche-sur-les-hauteurs-de-vence-770373
YvPat (2024-04-06 07:52:34+00:00): Bonjour jcr83,
Je suis préhistorien et j'ai fait un détour, lors d'une rando, pour aller voir ce que c'était. La structure ne colle pas du tout avec un coffre funéraire néolithique "normal" : elle utilise deux dalles du lapiaz, dans leur position naturelle, sur lesquelles sont élevés des murets, recouverts par la table (dalle sans doute extraite à proximité). Je ne peux pas lire l'article, réservé aux abonnés, mais je doute fort de la datation préhistorique, d'où ma modification. On est dans le registre de la construction en pierres sèches, abondante localement.
On peut remettre le nom local, s'il est bien attesté, mais je persiste à penser qu'il vaut mieux enlever "megalithic", au profit de "ruins" plus général.
jcr83 (2024-04-06 19:30:55+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour votre réponse. Je vais me renseigner auprès d'une association locale d'archéologie. Je n'ai pas de problème pour accéder à l'article de Nice Matin, sans y être abonné.
En attendant d'en savoir plus, je vais déplacer "Faux Dolmen" du champ "name" vers le champ "description", car ce n'est pas un nom,
jcr83 (2024-04-07 19:40:57+00:00): Voici la réponse que j'ai reçue :

Le CHAAM est en train d’étudier le cas, dans une perspective élargie. En fait, des « Tombes de chef de tribu » (notez la présence des guillemets), nous en avons déjà recensé 5 ou 6 et ce n’est peut-être pas fini.

Pour ce qui est de l’hypothèse « tombe", personne n’a fourni d'argument sérieux pour l’étayer. Aucun archéologue professionnel ne la soutient. L’hypothèse alternative qui prend en compte le contexte agro-pastoral est, elle, une bonne base pour pointer vers une autre explication.
YvPat (2024-04-08 10:26:04+00:00): Merci ; ça confirme mon analyse. J'aimerais bien voir les autres... Si vous avez d'autres informations à ce sujet, vous pouvez me contacter directement : yvpautrat@gmail.com
jcr83 (2024-04-08 21:24:15+00:00): Je vous suggère de prendre contact avec le CHAAM (Cercle d'Histoire et d'Archéologie des Alpes-Maritimes) : http://www.archeam.fr
N1T3R (2024-04-05 21:51:49+00:00): For such a huge changeset, can you split it into multiple uploads in the future?

Changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Have a look at: "Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thanks for considering.
Anonymous897234 (2024-04-05 21:59:59+00:00): Agreed. Phone app wasn't logged in, and apparently aggregates old changes to a single changeset.
ExecutableFiles (2024-04-05 18:44:33+00:00): Accidentally put in the previous changeset description. This changeset added details to the Jefferson Substation in Madison
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-05 18:50:21+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793838157

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Filip009 (2024-04-05 20:58:37+00:00): Ahoj, aj si ho nahlásil/napísal mu, že sa to takto nerobí?
segi (2024-04-05 21:05:01+00:00): Veru nie. Priznám sa že ma dosť vyčerpávajú také konverzácie :/
Filip009 (2024-04-05 21:14:50+00:00): Ja si zvyknem prechádzať changesety nováčikov. Väčšinou aj tak neodpovedia, ale odhalím tým napríklad takýchto vandalov.

Tu sú nejaké moje komentáre :D https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=10553599&commented
segi (2024-04-05 21:21:29+00:00): ja mám zapnutý RSS feed na okolie Piešťan a pozerám čo kto mení a tohto som si všimol že najprv skúsil zmazať tagy a keď sa nič nedialo tak pomazal celé cesty.
Skúsim mu teda niečo napísať.
martiensch (2024-04-13 17:46:46+00:00): Hey Jan,

Jij staat toe dat het vrachtverkeer (delivery) in beide richtingen over de Grote Markt mag rijden. Waarom?
Er stond een oneway=yes op. Die werkt prima, want per definitie niet van toepassing op voetgangers.
De andere optie is om extra oneway:taxi, oneway:mofa, oneway:vehicle tags te plaatsen. Maar oneway:vehicle is hetzelfde als oneway :P
martiensch (2024-04-13 17:48:38+00:00): Ach. En de gemeente heeft echt weer een pareltje afgeleverd met die gekke verkeersborden voor de Grote Markt...
Jan Wilts (2024-04-13 19:40:05+00:00): Hmm, ik vind een oneway=yes opzich wel prima. Ben alleen een beetje huiverig omdat het niet letterlijk met C3 bebord is.
gendy54 (2024-11-25 22:30:00+00:00): Bonjour,

Pour les adresses, par ex Rue du 19 Mars 1962, bien les mettre en relation (le mieux) ou en noeud avec la voie. Là, les adresses n'étaient rattachées à aucune voie
android5027 (2025-06-29 04:25:18+00:00): monkeyruler90,

I'm working on adding trails from the Strava heatmap in the wooded area north of Saddleridge Drive.

Is there a sign or other official designation naming this path segment "Trail Trial 1"? If the name is not official, please remove the name tag.

Additionally, from aerial imagery, this way appears to just be a dirt path. Offroad trails are typically tagged highway=path, not highway=footway. What do you think about changing this way to highway=path?

Thanks!
jb54osm (2024-04-06 13:45:12+00:00): Hi Nicolas,

I was at the Camphuijsstraat today. This street (and a lot of other streets in this neighbourhood) has no cycleways (shared lane or fietsstrook). There is also no pictogram. 
You might have been confused by the "uitgezonderd" traffic sign or the white parking lanes.

I'm going to correct these tags the next days.
Nicolas Charbonnier (2024-04-06 21:38:16+00:00): Yes that's true. 
I was using Street Complete and there was no option to indicate that you can actually ride bikes in both ways but without painting. 

Tell me how you correct it so I will adapt (I may have did the same mistake on others street in Den Haag).
jb54osm (2024-04-07 10:35:32+00:00): I saw that page in StreetComplete while trying to figure out what had happened. It is best NOT to use that page. Most one way streets for cars but two ways for bikes / mofa / moped have no extra white lines or pictograms on the road.

I will go through your edits in a slow pace. If there is anything peculiar I'll leave a short note.

Have fun mapping.
NeisBot (2024-04-07 11:04:04+00:00): Hello IJNSena, thank you very much for your contribution to the OSM project.

It would be great if you could use the comment field to describe your changes. This makes it easier for others to understand and follow your adjustments on the map more quickly.Please see https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments 

Thanks!

#HappyMapping
#ADescriptionSaysMoreThanASingleChar
Jrachi (2024-04-06 06:08:45+00:00): Manca ancora il tag che identifica l'oggetto:
amenity=atm
Spiegazioni alla pagina:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity%3Datm
Il brand invece è il nome della banca
Ivo
Mannivu (2024-04-06 07:06:51+00:00): Ciao, grazie per le tue aggiunte! Devo solo farti un piccolo appunto: i landuse non vanno attaccati alle strade perché sarebbe come indicare che un campo coltivato arriva fino alla riga di mezzeria della strada.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149630035
AngM2007 (2024-04-05 19:29:46+00:00): #gwgeog
N1T3R (2024-04-05 21:51:35+00:00): For such a huge changeset, can you split it into multiple uploads in the future?

Changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Have a look at: "Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thanks for considering.
euroPathfinder (2024-04-05 21:52:56+00:00): Hi AnneRV,
please keep your changes local, as you will trigger a lot of mappers when your changesets span over a large area. Plus you make it difficult for them to assert your contribution is of high quality.

Sincerely,
euroPathfinder
bxl-forever (2024-04-06 00:25:48+00:00): This changeset seems to contain many bad items.  A revert is a possible option here, unless someone is willing to spend some time reviewing every POI one by one. :-(

For instance:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793983475 is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11591001550

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793983472 has no name tag but the user set a name as name:fr

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793983470 is a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1265785084

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793994670 is a park tagged as a node

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11793983476 has name=A and then a French "translation" with a much longer name + invalid phone syntax

… and possibly more problems.
euroPathfinder (2024-04-06 07:42:47+00:00): @bxl-forever: Agreed, the data quality seems to be very poor. I'm uncertain if it would be preferable to keep low quality data or to revert the changeset. I'll leave the decision up to you, as you're the more experienced mapper with lot's of experience in reverting.
map per (2024-04-07 10:14:17+00:00): Please don't revert this changeset, that would do more harm than good. All in all the data looks legit to me, with just some minor problems like duplicates or strange names like "A". 

The "A" name is not the users fault, but a bug in OrganicMaps.

@AnneRV:
Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
tekim (2024-04-06 16:58:47+00:00): Hello, Thanks for your edits to the map.  I see you cited "Google Streetview" as one of your sources.  Unfortunately, we are not allowed to use Google Street View when editing OSM due to Google's terms of use.
tekim (2024-04-06 16:59:04+00:00): Reverting a changeset that used a source that is not allowed

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149663912
kalle_kruse (2024-04-06 17:57:35+00:00): Thanks
jm428 (2025-03-18 20:24:10+00:00): You shouldn't add personal information to the map because anyone can see it. I have deleted it.
VLD549 (2024-05-01 18:34:35+00:00): Hi, I have written this message to you several times I realize. I am not a mapper, merely someone who revises. Therefore, I am not sure if this is a rule or something someone prefers.
But I recently understood that in case of voetwegen, we should write the name first, and then the number.

A message from one of your mapping colleagues: 
Putting the name as first gives priority to the name and puts the administrative number (of a system that is old and confusing) on a second place.

Should I change the order now to Blakebergweg - Voetweg 106?

Could you find out with your manager for example whether this is really a rule? It would be very helpful.

Thank you in advance!
joost schouppe (2024-05-02 07:48:43+00:00): Hi there,
Heh, we don't have managers :)
We do have a community that sometimes develops conventions. This issue is already briefly discussed here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Slowroads#Names
Note that we follow what's on the ground, so you can't just have a general rule for which part of the name should come first. If there is signage on the ground, I think the wiki is pretty clear.
If you want to discuss this, you can start a topic at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/be/61 or on the chat at https://app.element.io/#/room/#osmbe:matrix.org
VLD549 (2024-06-10 15:29:30+00:00): Thanks for the answer.
balint36 (2024-04-06 11:36:52+00:00): Szia!
Keleti esetében lehet, inkább érdemesebb megtartani a node jelölést.
Amíg egy node jelöli az állomást, addig mi azt odapakolgatjuk, ahova akarjuk, jelen esetben a csarnokban volt. Area esetén (pláne a Keletinél) sokkal nagyobb területet foglal magába, hiszen lefedi a kocsijavító műhelyt, a fordatókorongot és a végponti váltókörzetet is. A nagy kiterjedése miatt a jelölő is elmozdul, amibe a node-dal ellentétben már nincs beleszólásunk, ezért az a csarnoktól elég messze, nagyjából a 901-es kitérőhöz csúszott, ami nem informatív.
gymate (2024-04-07 11:56:41+00:00): Szia! Volt egy hosszú vitám a Community Forumon az állomások jelöléséről (https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/railway-station-as-an-area/104839/), és arra jutottunk, hogy amikor csak lehet, érdemes areaként jelölni az állomásokat, mivel több információval bír. Az area használatával egy geometriai kapcsolat képezhető az állomás és annak vágányai, váltói, jelzői stb. között. Továbbá így egyértelműen lekérdezhető az állomás (infrastrukturális) kiterjedése is.

Egyetértek azzal, hogy a jelölőnek a csarnoknál kellene lennie. Azzal viszont nem, hogy ezt az area node-dá való visszafokozásával kellene elérni, hiszen ez egy 'tagging for the renderer' lenne.

Az OSM Carto fejlesztői nyitottak a probléma orvoslására (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/105#issuecomment-22244012), küldtem is nekik egy javaslatot (https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4946#issuecomment-2030223085). Ezt azonban egyelőre elutasították, többek között a `railway=station` tag areákon való használatának ritkasága miatt. Amint elterjedtebb lesz – ezen szerintem egy proposal is segítene a `railway=station` taggel kapcsolatban, amit később lehet, hogy be tudok vállalni –, vissza lehet majd térni erre a kérdésre.

A GraphHoppernél pedig már tavaly leadtak egy feature requestet a multipolygonoktól / -hoz való útvonaltervezésre (https://github.com/graphhopper/graphhopper/issues/2857).
Tómas Ingi (2024-04-14 17:42:18+00:00): Hi!

I have some thoughts on this retagging, mostly in terms of deciding what is a part of the station and what not. As an example, why is this (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10379253912) node a part of Keleti, but not this (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/228385724) area? This seems to be a rather arbitrary distinction; an artefact of how the different landuse=railway areas happened to be split.

I can see how mapping railway stations as areas could be useful in some circumstances. That being said, how would you justify the choice in where to map the boundaries of the station, both in this context and in general? Would you agree that the borders extend too far in this case, or is there a sound reason for them?
bkil (2024-04-14 18:34:35+00:00): From the perspective of public utility/usefulness (közhasznúság), it is primarily informative to map the area which is designated and open to passengers, including shops, gates, signs and platforms up to the point of the warning sign saying "no entry / for workers only" at the end of each platform. Tagging and encircling anything else is... something else.
gymate (2024-04-14 19:10:19+00:00): Hi Tómas!

> why is this node a part of Keleti, but not this area?

You're right, I haven't noticed that entry signals are already on the map. Therefore I guessed their positions. This is why the linked node was incorrectly part of the station.

> Would you agree that the borders extend too far in this case

Yes—thanks for the heads-up. I've adjusted the station boundaries accordingly: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150006448

> how would you justify the choice in where to map the boundaries of the station

The area of a railway station is between its entry signals on both sides (or, in this case, the only side). See: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway%3Dstation#As_an_area
woodpeck_repair (2024-04-08 10:05:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149727340 where the changeset comment is: Aufräumen nach erneuter 'geocodec'-Mappingaktion s. https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Global_ban_of_user_geocodec
TuAmigoElEditor (2024-04-06 00:53:28+00:00): Hola. En este conjunto de cambios le puso nombres a las casas como 01, 02, etc. Supongo que estos numeros son la dirección de lote. La direccion de lote se mapea con "addr:plot" y las manzanas con "addr:block". 
La etiqueta "name" solo se aplica cuando el objeto tiene un nombre en especifico como "Casa Basadre" o "Casa Juridica".
Saludos.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-09 12:26:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149775072 where the changeset comment is: Reverting automatic name changes; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7392 4.
Kerploonk (2024-04-05 21:09:51+00:00): *Ölkelduvegur
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-09 12:26:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149775072 where the changeset comment is: Reverting automatic name changes; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7392 4.
aixbrick (2024-04-06 08:08:53+00:00): Hallo,
die Restrictions werden alle nicht benötigt, da es keine Markierungen oder Schilder gibt, die es verbieten vor oder hinter der Insel zu wenden.
Gruß
Christoph Rackwitz (2024-04-06 11:02:54+00:00): Danke. Habe diese Relationen entfernt.
aixbrick (2024-04-06 14:32:38+00:00): Danke :-)
SomeoneElse_Revert (2024-04-09 12:26:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149775072 where the changeset comment is: Reverting automatic name changes; see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7392 4.