piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eteb3 (2026-05-31 09:05:31+00:00): Thanks, I have made some edits adding charity registration details, websites, etc. 

Before I upload them, one quick question: 

Does FIC now have number 8 Burnhead Ln? Elsewhere on the web this is shown as a spiritualist church - but the mosque might have taken over the building?
eteb3 (2026-05-31 09:19:22+00:00): Your edits suggest it does, btw, so I'm just double checking. If it does, the two mosques will be right next to each other, separated by just the access passage. On the other hand, the wider web suggests there's a church between them, so if you can confirm, great. If not, no problem, I'll commit these edits and add a note
ibsh00 (2026-05-31 09:22:51+00:00): Thanks for sorting that!

As far as I know, that church is still there. The buildings are attached but should still be separate. I do know that FIC does take up more than just one unit, so maybe why it shows as 6-8, as the spiritualist church is number 8. It doesn’t seem that the map recognises the boundaries of the church though.
eteb3 (2026-05-31 09:26:40+00:00): Ok, I'll commit the edits with the church, and add a note.

Thanks for all your help with local knowledge.
ibsh00 (2026-05-31 09:28:47+00:00): Happy to help, thanks for the time you spent on this.
eteb3 (2026-05-30 22:52:40+00:00): Salam,

I've just removed the building=mosque tag from Alloa Mosque because, counter-intuitively, that tag is reserved for purpose-built mosques. I've retagged as an amenity=place of worship

quick question tho, there is a computer shop in the middle of the area you created. do you know, did that predate the mosque and has not gone, or are they on different levels, or is one or other of them badly placed?

Thanks and happy mapping

eteb3

see here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5318540
ibsh00 (2026-05-30 23:13:21+00:00): Wa salaam,

The computer shop is located below the mosque. The computer shop is on the ground floor (street level) and there is a mosque above it with street access and up a set of stairs. 

Also, some of the mosque is purpose built if that changes anything.

Hope this makes sense.
eteb3 (2026-05-31 08:06:04+00:00): Thank you, that does make sense!

I've added level tags to show the mosque is on the top floor.

As part of the mosque is purpose-built, it could merit the building=mosque tag you set. It seems the consensus among UK mappers is that such buildings ought to "look like a mosque" (in the stereotypical way: dome, minaret, etc), so I'm inclined not to revert to that. (I don't like the rule, but have not won the argument...).

From the 2008 planning application on the Clacks website, it looks like 
- the extension was the long thin building running west along Argyll St?
- the mosque occupies the whole of the top floor? That's less clear:  maybe the musalla itself is just the rectangle you added, with other rooms for madrasa, etc?

Any further help there most welcome. 

https://publicaccess.clacks.gov.uk/publicaccess/files/0F4150907BCC699CFD0AE5340EA41BD7/pdf/08_00306_FULL-APPROVED_FIRST_FLOOR_PLAN-4082802.pdf
ibsh00 (2026-05-31 08:54:31+00:00): Thanks for looking into this.

It’s very interesting that the mosque needs to look a certain way to be classed as a mosque, rather than the purpose that it serves to the community! But equally, I can appreciate that the rule is likely in place to avoid confusion when trying to locate it.

I’ve asked someone who is involved in the mosque to clarify regarding your last points, and they’ve said:
“The long building on Argyle Street is not part of the mosque (yet), although we have planning permission granted, but other factors are in play.”

So I would say what’s currently marked is likely accurate for the time being. As far as I remember, when I came to add it, there was nothing signed previously, so I think anything is better than nothing for sure.

Thanks again for your support.
eteb3 (2026-05-31 09:15:10+00:00): That's great, thank you.

You're right about the rationale for restricting building=mosque. Happily, amenity=place_of_worship + religion=muslim exist to show the purpose the place serves. On the standard rendering at openstreetmap.org.uk, that appears on the map, whereas a "mosque" does not!
JeroenHoek (2024-12-07 09:16:36+00:00): Waarom mogen we secondary_link niet gebruiken? Dit is geen rotonde met gelijkwaardige wegen.
A67-A67 (2024-12-07 14:37:10+00:00): Link-wegen worden gebruikt voor op- en afritten, verbindingswegen op knooppunt e.d. Het gaat hier om een zijweg van een rotonde. Dat is geen link-weg.

Rotondes hebben meestal niet-gelijkwaardige zijwegen. Dat zijn dan geen link-wegen van het hoogste wegtype op de rotonde.
Baloo Uriza (2024-12-09 14:33:23+00:00): Updated the sidewalk with a bit more detail.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160014092
infeeeee (2024-12-07 11:31:32+00:00): Hello! 

Fixed the phone number format, you can update to this one on your website as well. 06 is the local version of the international prefix +36

https://osm.org/changeset/160023570
Rockedf (2024-12-07 18:45:29+00:00): Thank you for clarifying the mistake. Regards.
Jordi MF (2024-12-09 00:03:58+00:00): I think that there is a big problem with this changet: a country boundary has been deleted (Est Timor  / Timor-Leste).

It should be reverted.
Regards,
Jordi
Aleksandar Matejevic (2024-12-09 07:19:10+00:00): It is not a first time, I have already done this once, and informed the user, but hotosm project has a lot of editors and this turns out to be repeating problem.
I will revert this
ralley (2024-12-07 04:08:42+00:00): Source was actually survey, see Mapillary imagery
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 08:17:31+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 08:18:02+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 08:18:19+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 08:19:04+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 07:58:57+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary of Ecclesiastical Province of Capiz.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 07:55:34+00:00): Correction: Modified administrative boundary of Ecclesiastical Province of Capiz.
Violaine_Do (2024-12-09 19:28:54+00:00): Ia Ora Na et merci pour ta contribution. Ton commentaire de changeset laisse à penser que ce n'est pas un sommet que tu as ajouté mais une donnée personnelle. OSM n'héberge de telles données. J'ai donc retiré l'information. N'hésite pas à commenter si j'ai mal interprété, mauruuru roa !
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160016484
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 09:15:33+00:00): Correction: Reverted a changeset.
Timmy_Tesseract (2024-12-13 03:52:27+00:00): Good morning. 

With this revert you removed various tags including population, official_name, is_in:*, admin_type:PH and more, which all seem to be well-established and aligned with local mapping conventions.

Please consider reaching out to mappers through changeset comments or direct messages if you have concerns with some of their edits. For general discussions about local mapping conventions there's quite an active OSM PH community channel on telegram (https://t.me/OSMPH).

Given the very generic changeset comment one can only guess what caused you to do this revert. Would you mind explaining the reason for the deletions?

Do you maybe have concerns with the change from designation to admin_type:PH? If so, this topic was discussed and voted on in the above-mentioned community channel and wiki documentation has been updated accordingly. 

Generally reverts should only be done if you are very confident that entirety of a changeset is problematic. Most of the time it's better to just load all affected data of a changeset into editor and then selectively modify tags/geometries. This is to avoid reversion of accompanying changes (e.g. updating of population).

Best regards.
Supaplex (2024-12-11 08:53:14+00:00): 你好

學校是範圍，並不是整片都由建築佔用，應當是一棟一棟繪製出學校建築，而非在代表學校範圍加上建築樓層資訊
Fraxi (2025-10-01 07:55:37+00:00): Има таг и за аквариуми:
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=aquarium
Dimitar155 (2025-10-01 07:58:19+00:00): Благодаря, промених го
irritant_turtle (2024-12-07 07:39:04+00:00): Concerned about my deletion of three point markers used to denote building locations, despite replacing them with building outlines, as it appears to go against the "do not delete existing work" instruction given. Would like to know if there is a need or a way to rectify this
jmilot (2024-12-17 20:41:37+00:00): Hi! A general comments about some edit done around Mont-Tremblant. I see you added some sidewalks and paths. Please be sure to actually connect those to the nearby roads. They shouldn't have any cul-de-sac anywhere. Otherwise, as is, this break pedestrian planners that can't teleport from paths to roads. You can use unmark crossing if there's no marks on the ground. 

Here's an example : https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1343088600

Have a good day!
GTMistral (2024-12-17 23:50:38+00:00): Makes sense, thought about that. Merci. Will work on that over time, there are many more in St-Jovite I think too as I added a good number of sidewalks. Around Tremblant, it's still a work in progress though.
wambacher (2024-12-08 10:23:03+00:00): Moin,
es wäre ganz "nett", wenn du die Adresse der PP nach OSM-Konventionen erfassen würdest:

addr:city = Ort des PP und nicht der Stadtteil
addr:suburb = Stadtteil

Dann brauch ich nicht seitTtagen deine Edits zu korrigieren.

Gruß
w
dancingCycle (2024-12-18 08:36:58+00:00): Moin,
Entschuldige bitte meinen Fehler. Das habe ich nicht mit Absicht gemacht. Diese Unterscheidung war mir bisher nicht bekannt/klar. Ich verpflichte mich zur Besserung. ;-)
wambacher (2024-12-19 13:05:29+00:00): Danke

Gruß
walter
NorthCrab_upload (2024-12-07 06:50:47+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2708455571
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1205644810

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 09:37:58+00:00): Correction: Reverted a changeset.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 09:38:48+00:00): Correction: Reverted a changeset.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 18:50:15+00:00): Correction: Reverted a changeset.
ervinjoshuadelrosario (2024-12-07 18:50:34+00:00): Correction: Reverted a changeset.
Taksine (2024-12-15 03:31:45+00:00): This is China, you should write Chinese in name, not English or other languages.
superkiria (2024-12-18 10:59:17+00:00): I used "The most prominent name on a sign posted on the feature itself" (wiki).
Some particular amenities have names in english only there or they have large sign with english name and very small sign of chinese name. It looks like they want to be named by their english names and english names are the main ones.
tastrax (2024-12-08 09:43:38+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, +61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Phone_Numbers .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
emersonveenstra (2024-12-14 17:38:38+00:00): Hi there,

In OSM, the housenumber needs to be added to "addr:housenumber", not "name". Can you please fix https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340703920#map=18/43.821007/-84.773960 and all the houses surrounding it? Thanks!
fester7 (2025-03-09 09:48:20+00:00): Ik zie dat je de construction hebt verwijderd van het Oeverbospad. Maar deze is tot op heden nog niet open. Het 'tunneldak' is nog steeds werkterrein.
FrankOverman (2025-03-09 11:15:15+00:00): OK, al aangepast/corrected zie ik: uitstekend, bedankt.
Amirkan (2024-12-07 08:27:49+00:00): لطفا سریعتر مورد تایید قرار گیرد
ممنون
Al-Hun (2024-12-14 19:07:16+00:00): Bonjour,
Smythstoys n'a pas été remplacé par Action : il a cédé une partie de sa surface à Action (Smythtoys entrée côté Est, Action entrée côté Ouest).
Je te laisse faire la correction ?
article/photo du Progrès : https://www.leprogres.fr/economie/2024/12/12/un-magasin-action-ouvre-a-bron-malgre-les-polemiques-le-succes-des-prix-bas
trucbidule (2024-12-17 14:06:43+00:00): merci, c'est réglé.
ofr1tz (2025-02-25 07:49:45+00:00): This place is still Hangmee restaurant. Kaijin Ramen is located next door: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1077596664
vmicho (2025-05-28 10:50:33+00:00): Zdravim. Toto je co za divoky changeset?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2802996387

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2430303154

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2685257493

Nedava to absolutne zmysel.
vmicho (2025-06-15 19:14:41+00:00): Hello?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-12-06 11:54:52+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12400642236/history has shop = Hittlstetten that was added in this edit
shop=Hittlstetten ? What is the meaning of that shop value? What kind of services or products are sold here? Is anything from https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop or https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Tag_descriptions_for_key_%22shop%22 fitting? Maybe new value needs to be invented? Maybe this data is wrong and there is no shop here? Maybe it is not a shop but something else?
wambacher (2025-12-06 19:11:22+00:00): Strange, that is total bulls.it,
i'll fix it

sorry, walter
wambacher (2025-12-06 19:17:36+00:00): fixed.

btw: no idea why that happend
iamdavid (2024-12-07 21:04:52+00:00): Aud oder Auf? Es sollte so gemappt werden wie es am Straßenschild steht.
trailschneck (2024-12-07 21:17:07+00:00): Aud bestimmt nicht...
gscscnd (2024-12-07 10:23:53+00:00): historic=ruins nie bardzo pasuje do opuszczonych/zawalonych budynków bez wartości historycznej. Zobacz na Wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic=ruins
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Druins
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ruins

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1033558299
Literówka.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340712234
(I na pozostałych drogach.) Czy w terenie są znaki „CAL”?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340712241
Nazwa opisowa, bardziej by się przydał operator.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1340712233
Zbędny layer=-1.
I-76 (2024-12-08 04:59:35+00:00): Yes this took me like 4 hours of distracted time
I-76 (2025-12-01 20:45:12+00:00): *time at 4am
Strubbl (2024-12-07 19:10:53+00:00): Also reverted this one. You accidentally moved way 776733518 through some buildings. There was a warning display in iD editor before you uploaded it. Please take care of fixing the warning first.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160037058
TotallyKenzo (2024-12-07 10:31:23+00:00): Sorry wrong comment, I meant to write “mapped bishops palace”
Dino Michelini (2024-12-14 18:08:08+00:00): Alcune considerazioni ai changeset #160022037, e #160125177. Da come hai modificato i tag agli edifici si deduce che non conosci e (forse) stato a Monterano. Capisco che vuoi mappare/censire borghi fantasmi ma questo non ti dà alcun diritto di modificare o, peggio, cancellare geometrie che sono state disegnate in anni mediante rilievi e classificate su solide basi storiche e conoscenza personale. Ma andiamo con ordine. Hai modificato tutti i tag name inserendo "ex" perché? Secondo questa tua "visione" del mondo il Colosseo a Roma dovrebbe chiamarsi "Ex Colosseo" come la Ex tomba di Cecilia Metella. Nella furia di piegare tutto al tuo pensiero hai anche rinominato  la porta di Pizzinemi che ancora esiste e sta in piedi con il suo arco in “Ex”. Hai inserito un nodo che non serve proprio a nulla (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18356842/history), i tag erano già nella relazione. Il name=Antica Monterano è sbagliato perché mischia e fa confusione tra un sostantivo che è Monterano e Antica un aggettivo. Il luogo si chiama Monterano e l'antico, eufemismo, non c’entra nulla. Il convento di San Bonaventura riporta per ben due volte il name ma in realtà va riportato una sola volta tramite una relazione cancellata. Degli edifici a Monterano non solo hai modificato i nomi corretti ma hai anche cancellato i tag che ne definivano l’uso (monastero, chiesa, maniero, ecc.) e modificato la classificazione di tutti in un generico historic=building e ruins=building. Alcuni esempi https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61683086/history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/61344317/history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/746462721/history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1335591567/history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2450370/history (qui name e alt_name sono di pura fantasia e sbagliati). Ci spieghi il perché? Inoltre, usi impropriamente il tag Historic:civilization=modern almeno prima di utilizzarlo cerca di definirlo e proporlo a votazione nella wiki di OSM (ammesso che tu sappia sai come si fa!). Data la tua scarsa conoscenza di OSM prima di intraprendere impegni simili distruggendo il lavoro di mappatori più esperi e del luogo sarebbe opportuno che facessi prima molta pratica in aree libere di modo da evitare ulteriori danni e confrontarti con i mappatori locali. Insomma, quello che stai facendo è una palese violazione delle regole di OSM.
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2024-12-07 11:11:00+00:00): Hi! Please add access=private to private pools so routing engines don't think these are publicly accessible pools. Thanks!
Szymson (2024-12-08 10:19:15+00:00): Co to za bzdety? Oba te obszary są już odpowiednio oznaczone.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-12-08 18:01:27+00:00): Hi, please use commonly known tag values where possible. Otherwise consumers won't know what to do with them. Most routers will likely avoid routing through unknown highway type.

For parking lot, use highway=service where cars can drive, then you can connect footpaths to them for routing.

I've updated the parking lot, check it out.
ristik (2024-12-08 18:32:47+00:00): Thanks, looks better indeed
4r65th6 (2024-12-12 10:51:47+00:00): Bonjour Nico, merci pour cette modification!
Je ne suis pas certain de highway=cycleway sur la route longeant le train.
Si je lis bien la documentation <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:highway%3Dcycleway> ce tag indique qu'il s'agit d'une piste réservée aux cycles.
Mais il me semble que les voitures ont toujours le droit d'emprunter cette route?
5m4u9 (2024-12-07 17:57:48+00:00): Hola, por si las dudas, una ruta de bus debe contar por lo menos con la parada inicial y final, aun cuando sean solo los lugares que se estacionan los buses y esperan su turno (muy típico en bolivia).

para diferenciar esas paradas de las oficiales y formales de municipio, en Cochabamba, ponemos la etiqueta informal=yes.
eggie (2024-12-07 12:10:22+00:00): Dag Koen..  Je pad heb ik losgemaakt van de landuse.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160024449

MVG
eggie
Filip009 (2024-12-07 12:14:52+00:00): Zdravím, čo má tá cyklotrasa reprezentovať?
Filip009 (2024-12-07 12:15:51+00:00): Lebo ste to nakreslil strašne zle. Je tam nejaké nové C-čko, alebo je tam nový cyklochodník? Lebo teraz ste to spravil tak, že cez existujúce cesty ste nakreslil nový cyklochodník.
Milan Batovsky (2024-12-08 10:50:32+00:00): Dobrý deň
Toto je bezpečnejšia alternatíva k existujúcim cyklotrasám na mapách ako sa napojiť  na Vážsku cyklomagistrálu. Túto trasu osobne na bicykli  využívam. V openstreetmap som nováčik postupne sa učím.
Filip009 (2024-12-08 11:50:25+00:00): Okej, tak pre objasnenie. OpenStreetMap sa snažia čo najlepšie reprezentovať realitu. Čiže, čo je overiteľné, to by malo byť v mape. Čiže pokiaľ tam nie je C-čko, alebo cyklochodník, nedá sa tá trasa nijak v mape zvýrazniť.
NSiecw (2024-12-07 13:33:47+00:00): your change has replaced the existing data with less detail?
Dimitar155 (2025-01-05 13:18:22+00:00): Здравейте и добре дошли в OpenStreetMap!

Благодаря за промяната! Улицата само за коли ли е задънена? Пешеходците могат ли да продължат по Александър Стамболийски? В случай че могат, можете да добавите пешеходна алея свързваща двете улици. Шаблона за "път без изход" също ще трябва да се махне, тъй като в OSM той се отнася за всички видове транспорт (автомобили, колела, пешеходци и т.н.).

За справка: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:noexit%3Dyes

Поздрави,
Митко
Underscore12_ (2025-01-05 17:31:52+00:00): Да, за коли е задъенена улица и не могат да продължат по А.Стамболийски. 

Има стълби свирзващи пешеходната пътека на улицата с тази на А. Стамболийски.
Dimitar155 (2025-01-05 20:03:52+00:00): Може ли да добавите въпросните стълби? От сателит не се виждат, а вие сте по-запознати със ситуацията на терен.
Underscore12_ (2025-01-06 09:06:54+00:00): Направих промените.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161048803
Dimitar155 (2025-01-06 09:46:20+00:00): Благодаря!
Filip009 (2024-12-07 12:49:17+00:00): Zdravím, používajte lepšie popisy svojich úprav https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Dobr%C3%A9_koment%C3%A1%C5%99e_sad_zm%C4%9Bn
Syl (2025-01-03 18:53:05+00:00): Bonjour, qu'est-ce que c'est ?
Red Herring (2025-01-05 09:01:20+00:00): Ce sont des panneaux à différents points stratégiques dans le département 05 qui permet de aire du stop ou de covoiturage gratuit. C'est une action du conseil départemental et de lentreprise mobicoop 
https://mobicoop.hautes-alpes.net/
Syl (2025-01-05 16:11:07+00:00): Merci pour ces précisions.
Du coup l'attribut n'est pas du tout adapté, ça correspond à un type de jeux pour enfant.
J'ai vu que vous aviez utilisé ce même attribut pour d'autres panneaux. Pouvez-vous les reprendre et corriger ?

Pour ici il faut regarder du côté des zones de covoiturage : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:amenity%3Dcar_pooling

Et au passage j'ai vu que vous mettez des noms descriptifs sur chaque objet. Il n'y a pas besoin d'en mettre, les autres attributs suffisent. On ne met un nom que si l'objet en a un.
Red Herring (2025-01-05 17:02:36+00:00): j'ai modifié en mis en aire de covoiturage.
Je vais reprendre les autres.
BCNorwich (2024-12-07 15:54:00+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The warnings above are because you inadvertently dragged a road and bridge out of alignment. No problem though I've restored the highways. 

Regards Bernard.
LuisBoyd (2024-12-07 15:56:36+00:00): Thanks Bernard 

New to open street maps thanks for the help much appreciated!

best regards
Luis
nevw (2024-12-08 11:07:33+00:00): Hi can you check the mp thanks
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=150.61484&lat=-23.40110&zoom=9&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
nevw (2024-12-08 11:26:15+00:00): Best to use Josm for such large features
nevw (2024-12-11 20:22:24+00:00): Looks like Geofabik areas is working ok again
nevw (2024-12-12 04:04:08+00:00): I added four wetland areas covered with vegetation as inners to the water multipolygon extending from Rockhampton barrage to the sea and Josm validator finds it ok. 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160191988#map=14/-23.51048/150.68614
nevw (2024-12-12 06:44:01+00:00): The inners I added to the multipolygon should be tagged islets too I guess, instead of just wetland areas. I’ll do that in the next few days.
mueschel (2024-12-10 14:16:15+00:00): Hi,
could you check this monument? It seems the 'name' tag is actually a 'description' and 'sculpture:name' should be 'name'. Unfortunately I can't find information using the memorialgenweb reference number.