piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
kasztelan111 (2025-07-07 16:02:49+00:00): nie wiem szczerze mówiąc, dodałem tylko nazwę zgodnie z uchwałą, na wszelki wypadek jako proposed
theDM (2025-07-07 16:30:17+00:00): Ogólnie takich dróg nie mapujemy.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:highway%3Dproposed
Proposed służy do mapowania dróg, które rzeczywiście mają zostać zbudowane i najlepiej dać źródła potwierdzające tę budowę, np. przetarg na budowę lub pozwolenie, ew. plan sytuacyjny osiedla dewelopera.
Uchwała nie przesądza o tym, że dana droga powstanie i jest sporo takich dróg, które mają uchwalone nazwy, ale długo potem nie są budowane.
AntMadeira (2025-07-04 00:10:37+00:00): Faço o mesmo comentário aqui que fiz no outro sobre a antiga freguesia. Limites de censos não têm centros administrativos.

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
hikerben (2025-07-02 21:45:17+00:00): the ALPR reader field of view / direction approximately bearing 150 degrees
Malle_Yeno (2025-08-06 20:39:09+00:00): Hello! Pardon me for commenting in English here, but I noticed this changeset while using Overpass. It appears the commemorative stele was tagged with `memorial:conflict=WW3`. The content makes me believe you meant to tag it as `WW2`, is this the case? Thank you for your time!
PèreForez (2025-08-07 14:33:44+00:00): Thank you for your comment. Memorial-conflict is just now
AngocA (2025-07-09 00:30:18+00:00): Hola Lolj

Genial que agregues detalles de ríos y quebradas. Te quería comentar que puedes ver estas contribuciones en waterwaymap.org.
Ahí también puedes ver los "bucles" que uno puede generar al poner los ways en sentido "aguas arriba."
Échale un ojo a esto: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411676949/history

Cordialmente,


Andrés G.
marc__marc (2026-01-26 20:10:23+00:00): Hello,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19315164
I suggest type=provides_feature :)
AntMadeira (2025-07-04 00:09:33+00:00): Olá, Jota Cartas.
Reparei que adicionaste Belas como admin_centre da antiga freguesia, no entanto, como se trata de um limite administrativo extinto, este não tem centro administrativo. Apenas as freguesias que estão ativas têm centro administrativos. Belas não é um desses casos.

Cumprimentos,
António Madeira.
JeroenHoek (2026-01-07 09:17:09+00:00): This area currently duplicates the BeNeLux. What is the meaning of this entity? Europe/Brussels can refer to one of these:

* Alias used in Belgium for the timezone it  uses (currently CET/CEST).

* Alias for CET/CEST.

* Alias for UTC+01:00.

This relation is none of the above, and appears te combine the timezone aliases Europe/Amsterdam, Europe/Luxembourg, and Europe/Brussels; all of which point to the much larger standard time of CET/CEST.

I can't find any justification for keeping this relation, and intend to delete it. My assumption is that it was created based on a misunderstanding of the cluster of countries in tz-database.
b-jazz (2025-07-03 14:15:18+00:00): RE: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1411687104

The lines that define fairways, roughs, greens, bunkers, water hazards, and tees should never intersect (partially overlap) each other and we noticed that they are overlapping in one or more of the feature pairs in this changeset. Objects that are joining each other should *share* nodes on the border, but not cross over each other. Alternatively, you can go around one of the objects and leave a small gap. For instance a fairway polygon that skirts around a bunker. Please read this wiki for instructions and examples of how to better map golf courses: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls. If you have any questions, please reply here and I'll gladly help clarify things. Thanks!
StreetSurveyor (2025-07-03 00:21:00+00:00): This is incorrect. A quick G image shows this as "New Minton St"
cubbe8 (2025-07-03 00:25:31+00:00): Street view from 2 months ago shows Minton street on both ends. My drive through here today also had Minton street

https://maps.app.goo.gl/UrP3AbckF3uFBREo9
StreetSurveyor (2025-07-03 00:28:13+00:00): Are you sure you’re not looking at Minton St roughly a block away? New Minton has the sign correct.
cubbe8 (2025-07-03 00:29:52+00:00): Yep. It was recently changed
cubbe8 (2025-07-03 00:30:10+00:00): It was new Minton till 2022
cubbe8 (2025-07-03 00:31:40+00:00): Both images are the same angle

2022
https://maps.app.goo.gl/UyZGWaWruW4v874

2023
https://maps.app.goo.gl/QQGJb4uhm4jdT6md9
cubbe8 (2025-07-03 00:32:13+00:00): 2022
https://maps.app.goo.gl/uhaiTuJNEGq6tJ9t8
StreetSurveyor (2025-07-03 00:35:37+00:00): Well, good edit in that case. Not sure why the city decided to change that considering the map still shows it as New Minton.
CorruptComputer (2025-07-02 23:55:32+00:00): This changeset reverts changeset/168342525 and changeset/168396583
NeisBot (2025-07-03 00:22:35+00:00): Hi weikuang, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 100% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 26 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168420992
pitscheplatsch (2025-07-03 04:35:33+00:00): Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional.
skywinder (2025-07-03 00:42:01+00:00): Left road should be removed. Its not exist anymore
dru1138 (2025-07-09 13:05:22+00:00): Why did you shift the Refuge boundary to mean high tide? NWRs extend to mean low.
jimmygu0611 (2026-02-19 16:06:28+00:00): 您好，关于您所作之编辑。一是，osm不收录还没有建成的宽泛的规划区，如果您想在此处做出贡献，请等待这片区域建成后再行编辑。二是，您编辑所使用的标签是错误的，比如您将“林国苗木花卉示范基地”标为建筑物，在osm里，仅建筑物本身（比如一栋购物中心）可以使用“建筑物”标签，区域是不能以“建筑物”表示的。至于您将“物流配送体系”标为“自然树林（natural=wood）”，“观光农业”标为“自然水体（natural=water）”就更是明显的错误了。如果您尚不清楚标签的作用以及如何为一个对象标上合适的标签，您可以首先在 https://wiki.openstreetmap.org 了解osm再行编辑，谢谢。
Czirus2014 (2025-07-03 01:41:50+00:00): Tempo_Big un excelente restaurante
Gregory Peony (2025-07-22 17:42:12+00:00): Some of the footprints you added here are okay, but there are many others where it appears that you mapped them inaccurately becasue existing data was in the way. You should modify the existing data if it is inaccurate to allow allow for accurate mapping. You can use the w or alt+w shortcuts to toggle map data and get a better view of the underlying imagery to make more informed decisions regarding existing data. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168422144
Fenley Jones (2025-07-03 02:09:40+00:00): (I assume) due to the removal of a seperate listing for the 1990s platform to the west, the entire city of Louisville lost the 'LVL' station code on the national map. I have added the train station tag to the union station building, but trains=no, to try to help communicate that no trains serve this. It is however still served by greyhound, bookable through amtrak with the station code LVL.
Supaplex (2025-07-03 13:22:48+00:00): Hi

Is there any change of control here? If not, the OpenStreetMap project follows the de facto status: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Please be aware the nature of the OpenStreetMap project, recording stuff according to the on the ground truth, not by certain countries' claim.

Xin chào

Có bất kỳ thay đổi nào về quyền kiểm soát ở đây không? Nếu không, dự án OpenStreetMap sẽ tuân theo trạng thái de facto: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Vui lòng lưu ý bản chất của dự án OpenStreetMap, ghi lại thông tin thực tế, không phải theo tuyên bố của một số quốc gia.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168444367
Fizzie-DWG (2025-07-03 02:55:09+00:00): Hi. Sorry, but a number of people have extreme concerns over some of your recent mapping of railways & highways. Could you please join the conversation at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/melbourne-disused-rail-line-during-construction/132185 & give us all your point of view? Thanks,
Graeme Fitzpatrick         						
Moderator     		
OSMF Data Working Group
eerib (2025-07-03 02:59:50+00:00): The removal was made for three reasons:

1. OpenStreetMap policy strongly discourages dual naming.

2. Which Indigenous name do you go with when there are multiple in different languages and different dialects? hən̓q̓əmin̓əm̓, Sḵwx̱wú7mesh sníchim, St̓át̓imcets, .... ?

3. This is encouraging well meaning novice users to add dual naming to features where the secondary name is not used at all because they see it on these prominently displayed features.
Sun2306 (2025-07-06 18:29:53+00:00): 1. I can't find anything on https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Multilingual_names discouraging dual naming; in fact, the Canada section appears to recommend dual naming in some cases the case where the dual name appears on signs (like in the Sea-2-Sky). Many places already have dual names present (eg. Estetiwilh / Sigurd).

2. There are many ways to solve this. One could follow signage, more common usage, traditional importance, or perhaps some other rule. 

3. The idea that the "secondary name is not used at all" is quite a bold claim. I am sure that Sḵwx̱wú7mesh speakers call their hometown Sḵwx̱wú7mesh. 

Note: one can just call it Sḵwx̱wú7mesh; "Sḵwx̱wú7mesh sníchim" means 'Squamish language' and is somewhat redundant (though of course it depends on the grammatical construction in Squamish itself)).

I think it's a nice touch for the region in general - I can see the argument of it being toned down and that only specific places of traditional importance be given their indigenous names; for example, Whistler could stay Whistler, being in shared territory where neither nation would permanently reside, and Pemberton can be just Pemberton given that it is usually called Pembert(o)na in Ucwalmícwts (also since Nkwúkwma is the name of a new development in Pemberton and it would reduce confusion). 

But for places like Squamish, and other important sites like Mt Garibaldi, Mt Currie (both the mountain and the town), Joffre Lakes, and Lillooet, just to name a few, I think it would be absolutely appropriate to have dual names.

We could, of course, also contact the nations in question in order to find out their thoughts on naming practices in their traditional territory (and language).
eerib (2025-07-06 19:18:55+00:00): Hello, thank you for reaching out regarding this edit.

1. The Names -> Good Practice -> Multiple Names covers this to some extent.

"Sometimes name=* itself can contain multiple values separated by semicolons:

In multilingual regions or localities, multiple names in different languages may be relevant enough to include in name=*. A separator other than a semicolon, such as "/" or "-" (spaced or not), may be customary locally. This is not a substitute for language-specific keys, such as name:en=* for English."

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Multiple_names

A decision therefore needs to be made whether each name is relevant enough to be added with a separator slash such as a "/". One should also take into account whether that language is used by a significant amount of people in that locale.

2. This would go back to coverage in #1. Does it appear on signage and print materials? Is it used locally in equivalent quantities to the English language name? Do a significant portion of the local population speak the language?

3. I mentioned this due to a few cases:

#1 An International editor edited Indian Reservation boundaries to include dual Indigenous / English language names. However, the Indigenous name is not an officially recognized or locally used name for the Indian Reservations boundaries. For example, in evacuation notices distributed by the Indigenous band the English name was the name used.

#2 The addition of the Indigenous / English language name to Whistler and Britannia Beach. Both of these areas are disputed by Indigenous bands. And, neither name is frequently used by a significant portion of locals and hence fails the test to be included in the default name tag.

#3 A recent edit of The Lions peaks to an English version of the name. The Indigenous name is not the official name, not on signage, and not frequently used by locals.
Supaplex (2025-07-03 13:22:49+00:00): Hi

Is there any change of control here? If not, the OpenStreetMap project follows the de facto status: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Please be aware the nature of the OpenStreetMap project, recording stuff according to the on the ground truth, not by certain countries' claim.

Xin chào

Có bất kỳ thay đổi nào về quyền kiểm soát ở đây không? Nếu không, dự án OpenStreetMap sẽ tuân theo trạng thái de facto: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories

Vui lòng lưu ý bản chất của dự án OpenStreetMap, ghi lại thông tin thực tế, không phải theo tuyên bố của một số quốc gia.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168444367
Comino (2025-07-03 07:21:03+00:00): Hi RVR Arquitetura & Engenharia,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Use the "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read: https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants#legacy-tags
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Happy mapping,

Edwin
NeisBot (2025-07-03 03:15:46+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-05 19:39:01+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/168536721
felipeeugenio (2025-07-03 12:52:57+00:00): Hola Allison.
Muchas gracias por tus ediciones.
Respecto de los edificios, te cuento que con la letra Q puedes cuadrarlos, de modo que queden mostrando ángulos rectos. Los que agregaste claramente son hechos a pulso.

También veo que agrupaste estructuras bajo un mismo polígono, eso es incorrecto. Si acaso hay una acumulación de estructuras, igualmente hay que dibujarlas por separado. Están pegadas, pero son edificios separados.

No hacemos representaciones esquemáticas.

Estas cosas no son problemas graves y es un poco lo que pasa con la mayoría de quienes comienzan. Se corrige fácil y la idea es ayudarte.

Gracias por tu tiempo y tus ediciones. Nos vemos.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168423138
NeisBot (2025-07-03 03:40:35+00:00): Hi neitomonoma14, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 83% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)
- 214 building(s)
- 3 waterway(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=168423462
pitscheplatsch (2025-08-08 16:04:21+00:00): Thank you for your private message and confirming that your deletions were intentional.
Tommybara (2025-07-03 04:38:20+00:00): Can you explain the reason for assigning former Cu Chi district to former Tay Ninh province, and former Can Gio district to Ba Ria - Vung Tau? Keep in mind that boundary=historic is not meant for "creativity".
Tommybara (2025-07-03 19:18:41+00:00): Cu Chi was never part of Tay Ninh, nor Can Gio be part of Ba Ria-Vung Tau. Previously I edited old HCMC to include these two districts, but you reverted this.

Please explain the reason for this. If I don’t see your response by tomorrow, I will proceed and delete all of these boundary=historic because they are clearly incorrect.
aharvey (2025-07-03 05:53:15+00:00): I think these names should go on the airport not the terminal ie. on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/985743235
aharvey (2025-07-03 04:08:37+00:00): Thanks, I just changed this too https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=indoor%20play?uselang=en which I think is a better fit.
Urban Green Place (2025-07-03 04:49:40+00:00): Good edit, I agree, I think that tag is a better fit.
vladosaro (2026-06-14 20:28:49+00:00): Václav, určite je na tomto mieste vo výške 1110 m, tento smerovník???
náhodou objavené
VáclavS (2026-06-15 06:26:38+00:00): Havranie je vyššie na križovatke cyklotás. Asi keď asfaltovali cestu, všetky smerovníky popresúvali. Snáď je to už dnes v teréne v poriadku. Zrušil som ho - bol tam osadený, ale určite tam nepatrí.
022 (2025-07-03 04:42:05+00:00): More details:

For the Saint marys FN the previous boundary was not accurate and had been attached to a ton of canvec stuff so I just deleted the existing and re-imported the correct geometry within the same relation. 

I also changed the admin_level for first nations from 4 to 6 (most other places use 6, I`m not sure why it would be the same admin level as a provincial boundary but 6 makes more sense). 




Added billingual names to all parishes and municipalities within my work area, and added wikidata tags & website information to same. 

Deleted old village boundaries that have been superseded by the 2023 amalgamation. 

Deleted overlapping boundaries between parishes & counties. Removed inconsistent tagging on boundary members. 

Municipalities Completed: 
- City of Fredericton 
- City of Edmundston
- City of Miramichi
- Municipality of Grand Lake
- RM of Nashwaak
- Village of Arcadia
- Village of Grand Manan
- Town of Oromocto 
- Haut-Madawaska








Fixed the total mess that was St Marys nation(Please for the love of God keep the landuse & roads off boundaries); New Import/Alignment of NB Municipal Boundaries; Wikidata tags & billingial names on municipalities & parishes; Fixed overlapping boundaries
user_5173844 (2025-07-03 16:37:30+00:00): Hi Steven,

While I understand your concern about maintainability or excessive details, adding pavements (as well as any other details) is perfectly fine. Mappers may have different ideas on what details are important. There's also no requirement for edits to be complete or even correct, as long as errors are not added intentionally.
rphyrin (2025-07-08 10:28:21+00:00): Regarding the debate on whether we should map the sidewalk as a separate geometry : https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/kumakyoo/diary/406875
Milhouse (2025-07-08 12:47:46+00:00): Hi rphyrin,

Yes, absolutely there are circumstances where mapping sidewalks separately records very useful information, and other places where it adds no useful information, makes the map look crap and incomplete, and can actually complicate routing decisions. 
I would argue that this particular mapping does the latter. I have married separate sidewalks in scenarios like your example when the situation justifies it.
The mapping is wrong for a start, because footpaths end in the middle of nowhere and don't rejoin the highway even though there are pavements available to continue a journey. 
We don't have jaywalking rules in the UK, you can cross a road anywhere, but groups of people for whom specific crossings infrastructure is important are people in wheelchairs who need to know where drop kerbs are and people with visual impairment who may depend on tactile paving. I've already recorded these types of crossings in the area this contributor has added to, they have added more crossings but not even indicated whether they have accessibility features. 
It feels like someone helicoptering into an area, adding some incomplete data wrongly to a couple of blocks and then disappearing again, and it demotivates me from contributing further because who wants to contribute time and effort to a crap map? I might be more sympathetic if they could justify why they have added sidewalks to two or three blocks in random cities around the world?
Cebderby (2025-07-08 15:28:13+00:00): Where the sidewalk is continuously adjacent to the carriageway (no big grass areas etc just an immediate kerb), and has no special access (eg shared cycleway), then the extra footway is a duplicate way.  The public highway is mapped and carries the foot traffic.   We don't add a second footway beside a farm track if it has a public footpath, we add foot= and designation= to the way.  This is just the same; a duplicate way offering no choice of route but adding massively to the complexity of the foot routing calculations and the maintenance of the map.  The path here is a massive GPS routing trap, which says that if you route to or from anywhere in the block around Walmer Gardens (gardens) then you MUST go via the E connection of Walmer Gardens (road) and Erlesmere Gardens (road).  This is fiction, bad mapping, bad routing.
user_5173844 (2025-07-08 16:27:23+00:00): Cebderby, I understand your point but it is still _your_ preference and opinion. Others will disagree, as it is common in all discussions about the level of detail. Please refrain from accusing others of bad mapping only because you disagree with their choices.
Milhouse (2025-07-08 17:49:22+00:00): ndrw6, but people are pointing out how this makes the data harder to work with.
It would help if amalash would reply and acknowledge the incorrect mapping and explain the use case they think they are serving, but since this changeset comment they've ignored they've gone on to:
Map sidewalks to nowhere (which can't even be seen in the aerial imagery) in Saskatoon, Canada:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413229098
Regina, Canada:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413221099
ttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413221103
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413221105
Toronto:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413211813
North Battleford, Canada:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413183824

I suppose at least in Canada it might be a less confident assumption that there will be a sidewalk, but mapping a sidewalk to nowhere doesn't feel of much use to anyone.
Milhouse (2025-07-08 17:50:36+00:00): Also if you are going to map sidewalks as separate ways, shouldn't you then remove the sidewalk=both tag from the road, or at least tag sidewalk=separate?
user_5173844 (2025-07-08 19:49:55+00:00): Milhouse,

My issue with this discussion is calling such changes "incorrect" or "bad mapping" when objectively they are not. I do not see why amalash would need to acknowledge that. Incomplete data are a norm - just look at this map, there are partially mapped fences or individual trees - someone found them useful or simply had fun mapping them.

I don't have an opinion on the sidewalk= tag but having data duplicated at at different levels of detail should be fine, maybe even useful.

BTW, I see at least one reason _not_ to use sidewalk= tags (but I would never discourage them!). When the pavement is discontinuous it chops the road way into multiple segments. This can become unwieldy when combined with other similar tags (speed limits, surface, lane count, dropped kerbs, bus lines).
Milhouse (2025-07-08 22:51:07+00:00): Hey, OpenStreetMap, give me a walking route from 23 Balmoral Gardens to 23 Jersey Road on the other side of the road.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=fossgis_osrm_foot&route=51.502463%2C-0.326765%3B51.502593%2C-0.327133#map=19/51.502408/-0.326554

Yeah, I'm going back to Google maps....
Milhouse (2025-07-08 22:52:38+00:00): If you can't see why getting ways wrong creates a fundamental problem with one of the primary use cases of a geospatial database I don't think it's worth continuing the conversation.