piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Túllio (2024-04-19 01:57:01+00:00): Olá! Favor não colocar nome de fazendas em áreas de uso do solo. Isso não condiz com o modo de mapeamento dos termos do OSM.
jacobwhall (2024-08-10 07:46:39+00:00): Hi there,

Thank you for putting the work in to map the Richmond Slave Trail. Today I converted it into a route relation in changeset #155050533. I would be happy to discuss this change and/or ways we can better map this trail. Cheers!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155050533
rskedgell (2024-03-06 06:24:35+00:00): Please don't add fiction to the map. Please don't delete POIs without an explanation. Please use meaningful changeset comments. (Reverted, obviously)
Denay Samosa (2024-03-06 15:10:22+00:00): Hi Rskedgell, 

Could you specify which addition is thought to be “fiction”? 
What is a POI? I dont believe I have deleted anything? Or at least havent intentionally. 
Please specify which changeset comments require meaning. 

Honestly, all help welcome. Im aiming to add another 10 or so businesses over the next month or two so will take any help I can get. I definitely struggled somewhat with the adding of businesses process and found it not that straight forward… 

Kind regards
rskedgell (2024-03-06 16:44:56+00:00): A POI is a Point of Interest. In this case, you deleted a postbox in front of numbers 3/4 Hammonds Ridge.

You also added a taxi rank with a 4 car capacity in the middle of the London Road/Jane Murray Way. Were this not sufficiently improbable on its own, the rank was supposedly called "Pleb Taxi Airport Runs" and operated by "Mr Plebby McPlebbington". I can only speculate as to your motives in including that mobile number several times.

OpenStreetMap is a live database and the addition of fictitious information is generally regarded as vandalism.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Vandalism

Your changeset comment here was "Initial add with Bitcoin tags", which is an inadequate description of your edit.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
HeyRayReh (2024-04-26 15:17:09+00:00): Hi there! I'm just wondering what the source is for all these alley numbers - when I tried to look them up I couldn't find anything, and the LA City geohub has different numbers listed (for example, the alley between Laurelgrove and Saint Clair north of Archwood is labeled here as "Alley 80875" but in the database I found it is numbered 2322002501)
stst415 (2024-04-26 15:39:42+00:00): Hey, Ray Reh.  Good find on the geohub because that was indeed a major source.  And you are correct that they are seemingly temporarily removed from display (I actually think it was a glitch, but I haven't tried reporting it yet).  But the 5-digit names do appear elsewhere at the city and even the geohub still has them in the KMZ files, etc.  I'm linking here to your example alley, https://x3mo.net/LOS-ANGELES-ALLEY-80875    There's been discussion elsewhere at OSM about all this and the consensus seems to be that the 5-digit numbers are the best choice (as opposed to that 10-digit number that nobody has really figured out).  And I've referenced the 5-digit numbers in L.A. city permits (I'm a feature film & TV location manager) and they were properly recognized there.   :-)
Cheers!    ---- Scott
stst415 (2024-04-26 15:42:11+00:00): Oh, and if you're curious, the official alley names for the city of Burbank came from https://gis.burbankca.gov/  But I have YET to find any official designations for the city of San Fernando, so if you ever find it, please let me know!
HeyRayReh (2024-04-26 18:00:47+00:00): Oh ok great, I kinda figured it had to be some source I couldn't access!  I don't think I've changed or removed any since I wanted to ask first - except maybe one that was partially in a shopping center parking lot that I use a lot where I did a bunch of reorganizing?

Also while I was poking around into this wild world of OSM alleyways I did find that I think these alley numbers should be listed as reference codes with the tag ref= (i.e. ref=80875) instead of as name=.  I'm looking at the last bullet point at the end of the "Values" section on this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name#Values .

I think the reasoning here is that when the alley has a name= tag, it appears in most renderings of the map and causes a lot of clutter and confusion.  It seems some renderings know to prioritize displaying street names over alley names, but at least one I use does not so sometimes you have to zoom in further to get a street name than you do to get a neighboring alley name.  That's actually how I realized all the alley names were relatively new.  All of this explanation is to say: I can see you've put a ton of work into this so I don't want you to think I'm just here to be whiny and pedantic!

That said, I do think these should be tagged ref= (or perhaps loc_ref= ? see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:ref ).  If you agree, I'm happy to help out in changing the tags in my area when I get the chance, and in the future whenever I encounter them!

Let me know what you think, and thanks for all your work - who better to have as a mapper than a location scout????

-Ray
stst415 (2024-04-26 18:41:03+00:00): Hey Ray.  Except for that vestigial city-alley-turned-parking-lane change (I support that), thank you for NOT going wider with any removals (there are literally thousands of alley names already inputted in L.A. County). 👍

In the last few years, there have been several prominent OSM mappers working in L.A. (with WAY more experience at this than even I have) who have raised similar questions and cited similar thoughts about reference numbering. After friendly debate, the takeaway has always been to leave the alley names.  They're all tagged with name:signed=no (which was significant for their acceptance), they add to the usefulness of apps like CityStrides and Wandrer, and, importantly, they contribute to public knowledge (not to mention usage since the City uses these numbers too).  That last bit is why I also do deep dives to find official names of all our concrete-lined streams and other tributaries into the L.A. River.  If people see an alley or a creek with no name, they respect it and care for it less than if it was the other way around.
HeyRayReh (2024-04-28 18:56:54+00:00): Hm, I can't speak for CityStrides, but I can say that they definitely have a negative impact on Wandrer as alleys are not *counted* in Wandrer but are *rendered*, and now they're rendered with names that don't mean much (if anything) to 95+% of users - and sometimes those names appear first when zooming in instead of real neighboring street names.

Forgive me if this comes across as overly confrontational, but do you have links to any of those debates?  I only ask because the standing documentation is *so* clear that the numbers belong in the ref= field, it's hard to accept "somebody who knows more than you said it should be the other way" without being able to read the arguments for myself, you know?

I say all this with all the respect for the work you're doing and with the friendliest of intentions.  And oh man have I been sucked into a weird deep dive or two, especially detailing the new spreading grounds (speaking of waterways) and old landfills that have been (sometimes somewhat secretly!) converted to parks
stst415 (2024-04-28 19:05:54+00:00): I'll look for the links, but they're going to be as buried as this conversation is going to be.  Give me some time.  I'm sorry about Wandrer... perhaps contact the programmer about shrinking alley fonts. removing entirely, or giving you points for them.  I listed several reasons the L.A. community accepted the alley names, but I forgot one more -- public safety.  It's a lot easier to call 911 and report "Alley 12345" from your phone than to describe "Oh, I guess it runs north of X Street -- wait, make that south... I think -- and between Y Avenue and I guess Z Road".  Sorry I haven't responded to your private message yet.  I'll catch up on that later and look for links.
HeyRayReh (2024-04-28 19:22:45+00:00): No rush!  You saw how long it took me to get back to you!  I had the thought about Wandrer making a change, and maybe they will have to - but I think, even if you're not getting credit for it, seeing the very occasional famously/recognizably named alley on the map makes sense and is helpful so if I were them I'd be reluctant to change things.  Especially if it's just one area that's having the issue, and the cause is going against documentation (even if rightly so!).

That said, the dude who created Wandrer is WILDLY responsive and nice so I'm sure I could get a hold of him and get his thoughts if the conclusion is the names should stay!
stst415 (2024-04-28 19:39:01+00:00): No problem.  I should keep a list of links anyway.  Some are on OSM and non-OSM message boards and private messages too.

As for the documentation... and as for what Mr. Wandrer thinks... it's all subjective when you come down to the fact that members of different cities and jurisdictions will feel differently.  What's good for L.A. might not be the same in Boston or Birmingham or Botswana.

Anyway, I'll have attachments to send.  Let's continue via email or text!  Both are googlable.  :-)
stst415 (2024-04-28 20:03:00+00:00): Or... my first name only at extremophiles dot com.
HeyRayReh (2024-04-29 18:52:29+00:00): Likewise, I'm sure you could guess my email in one try but...I'd prefer to keep the conversation public? 
 That's how this information can be referenced and shared and other folks can weigh in and whatnot.  If you're thinking of sending screenshots, maybe imgur or something?
HeyRayReh (2024-05-17 19:41:03+00:00): Any luck with this?
Ziemowit Zabawa (2024-03-07 14:36:18+00:00): Jesteś pewien, że linia 1039909827 została już wybudowana? Byłem tam niedawno i nadal nie była gotowa.
:-} (2024-03-07 15:15:10+00:00): Też byłem niedawno, i widziałem jak to wygląda
:-} (2024-03-07 17:07:23+00:00): To chyba nie ta linia, bo to chodnik jest dostępny, a nie ścieżka rowerowa
Ziemowit Zabawa (2024-03-07 20:03:21+00:00): Potwierdzam, podjechałem po drodze z pracy i faktycznie wlot dla rowerów nadal nieukończony, a chodnik OK.
Poprawiłem w zestawie zmian 148358080.
:-} (2024-03-08 20:35:49+00:00): Ok. Dzk.
eggie (2024-03-05 20:48:15+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Tip... Svp niet schuiven met de kaart in editmodus. Dat levert vaak schade op door onbedoelde verplaatsingen van objecten. 

Hete verwijderen van wegen.. dus ook toegangswegen ligt gevoelig. Ook wegen die over priveterrein lopen horen op de kaart met de juiste accesstags. 


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
completely inane profoundly profane (2024-03-05 21:26:27+00:00): Ik heb het er naderhand met een ervaren mapper over gehad mbt het verwijderen van die weg. Hij werd er ook niet zo blij van. Ik vind het goed om het zo te laten en als iemand de weg weer terug haalt, zal ik het niet nogmaals verwijderen.
eggie (2024-03-05 21:31:41+00:00): Oke...  No problem.. De weg had ik al eerder teruggezet.

Er wordt je overigens niets kwalijk genomen.
Verder natuurlijk veel plezier bij het mappen.

MVG
eggie
citrula (2024-03-05 20:30:01+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for your contributions. Not every object has to have a name - in fact, many don't. In this case, unless the field is specifically named "Flower Mound High School Softball Field" I would probably remove it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148265170
CjMalone (2024-03-06 08:05:03+00:00): Looks good to me, thanks
Frans S (2024-03-07 17:03:47+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped
Buildings not squared


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148265668
FraukeLeo (2024-07-24 14:00:57+00:00): Hallo, auf der B 54 ist in der Kurve um den Bleidenstadter Kopf in beiden Richtungen 60 km/h. Seit Jahrzehnten und auch heute noch. Wieso änderst du das auf 80? Ich habs mal repariert.
el_pangolino (2025-01-28 17:15:23+00:00): Huh, joah, stimmt, mein Fehler. Da hab ich wohl den Editor falsch bedient. Danke fürs Korrigieren!
SpinOff (2024-03-05 22:02:37+00:00): Cześć. brakuje przecięcia tych dwóch linii:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/241303403
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1257945666
Frans S (2024-03-24 18:08:10+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped.
Buildings not squared.
Connected nodes of building to other features
followed the treelines rather than extrapolating roof lines.
Oversized objects.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148266252
bagis (2024-07-27 15:37:01+00:00): Hello!

For your information. I have reverted the change on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/284064349 I checked today and it is under construction. Maybe it has been open for a short period?

Best regards,
bagis
airship (2024-07-27 15:58:14+00:00): Thanks for updating. This (important) path between Tvärbanan-Bus Stops has often been closed with very little info when work is being done on the railroads below. So good you did a check (and updated). Will have chance to check it after this summer.
bagis (2024-07-27 16:16:37+00:00): Aha, I had a feeling it had been closed several times before. Good to know.
lyctkel (2024-05-27 10:50:39+00:00): Hi Waldrenner,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/365378868 looks wrong.
You wrote
recycling:glass_bottles:colour=green/clear .
1.  recycling:glass_bottles:colour is used only here
2.  green/clear uses the wrong seperator
Did you mean
recycling:glass_bottles:colour=clear;green ?
Regards
lyctkel
Frans S (2024-03-07 16:19:44+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Inaccurate mapped.
buildings not squared.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148266848
Frans S (2024-03-10 16:31:22+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Buildings not squared.
Included shadow of building in the mapping.


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148266897
dzamper (2025-10-09 18:06:05+00:00): Przy okazji niepotrzebnie powyginałeś idące przez skrzyżowanie linie dla ul. Bytomskiej,  bo miały dodane tagi `placement` :/
d3mol3k (2025-10-09 20:20:35+00:00): ok - sorry - poprawiłeś może?
dzamper (2025-10-09 21:08:52+00:00): poprawię zaraz :)
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-05 20:50:18+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1257959321

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-05 21:00:16+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1257959321

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
❤️‍🔥 (2024-03-06 07:55:11+00:00): Hi, could you please expain why you deleted these suburbs? They seem to be well established names. You may also want to join the discussion at https://osm.org/note/2367238
michael60634 (2024-03-29 13:27:42+00:00): Reverted in 149155931 and 149312679.
Hufkratzer (2024-03-06 20:54:16+00:00): Hi,
ein Roundpen ist keine Reitanlage, das ist ein kleiner runder Reitplatz, und Reitplätze werden in OSM üblicherweise mit leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian getaggt. Dafür gibt es in iD ein Preset mit dem Namen "Reitplatz". Vgl.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/88998100#map=18/49.56526/8.72424&layers=P
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a#Reitstall
langerm (2024-03-07 19:44:07+00:00): Vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Das werde ich gleich korrigieren. LG.
eggie (2024-03-06 12:01:14+00:00): Feedback... Het lijkt me oke zo. Wellicht nog even access=private zetten op de wegen op de parking. Het is anders niet consistent getagd.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=148268331
MVG
eggie
tordans (2024-03-14 14:56:27+00:00): Hallo OpenUnicor, du hattest um eine Review gebeten. Was mir auffällt: Die zusätzlichen Access-Tags sind nicht nötig. Es ist üblich, das implizite "yes" wegzulassen. Du könntest sie also gerne löschen. (Außer dem motor_vehicle=no, das aber auch selten explizit erfasst wird, vgl. auch https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dtrack#Zugangsbeschr%C3%A4nkungen)

Viele Grüße und frohes Mappen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148269163
opendcc (2024-09-04 06:27:44+00:00): Hallo,

vielen Dank für Deine Beiträge zu OSM. Bitte achte darauf, dass Gebäude entlang der Grundmauern erfasst werden und mache diese rechtwinklig (wenn sie es auch in echt sind). In iD gibt es dafür einen extra Knopf.

Servus
CjMalone (2024-03-06 08:02:46+00:00): Ssems fine to me, thanks
mrpulley (2025-01-03 23:03:31+00:00): Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked on survey)
Xvtn (2024-03-06 16:09:14+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Generally, everything looks great! The only major issue is that Google Maps can't be used as a source for any info going into OSM. I see that you also added local knowledge as a source - that's excellent. I think in this case there's no need to revert anything since it seems like you've reviewed this in person, but in the future you'll def want to avoid copying data from google maps.

A couple other improvements here are to adjust the farmland area nearby to reflect the new residential area, and to add an outline shape to the apartments. I went ahead and did those.

Let me know if you have any questions. And thanks for your contribution!!
benoitdd (2024-09-19 10:21:10+00:00): Le bus 66 ne passe plus par la place Baret (piétonne depuis plus d'un an), je ne sais pas quel est l'itinéraire correct. (par ailleurs ligne déviée entre Bucarest et Parc Martin Luther King jusqu'en janvier 2025)
Xvtn (2024-03-06 16:04:24+00:00): Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great to me, except that since the road still exists in real life, it should have some highway=* tag. I think highway=service makes sense here. And access=private like you've done is great! 

I went ahead and added that. Let me know if you have any questions! Thanks for your contributions.
tnan123 (2024-03-06 16:16:25+00:00): Thanks for reviewing!
MissMarcoPolo (2024-03-05 22:48:36+00:00): Correction: Source used was Bing aerial imagery;  Bing Streetside.
eggie (2024-03-06 07:10:48+00:00): De wegen op de parkeerplaats zelf (parkeervakgedeelte) krijgen een extra tag mee.
service=parking_aisle

Dan rendert het ook dunner op de kaart.
Kijk je nog even?

MVG
eggie
gscholz (2024-03-13 06:45:40+00:00): 

Hi Lucas Marques,
your recent changesets have left behind several errors regarding self intersecting lines:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=36.08078&lat=47.23392&zoom=9&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=148270760

Can you please fix this?

Btw. you can avoid uploading such errors by using the internal validator of JOSM.

Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2024-03-18 06:48:03+00:00): Hi Lucas Marques,
these errors still exits, can I get your feedback here?
Guido
eggie (2024-03-06 07:08:09+00:00): Dag Gret Beter geen beschrijvingen in name=... gebruiken.
De P is voldoende.
access=private is gebruikelijker.  Dan heeft het effect op de kaart.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-03-06 06:53:22+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback Zou het geen fitness_centre zijn ipv een station?
Dat is zo'n toestel.

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-03-06 06:58:17+00:00): Info samengevoegd met adresnode en functie aangepast naar fitness_centre
danieldegroot2 (2024-03-16 16:48:42+00:00): Hey Anne,

This was a temporary start/end-ramp for the motorway when it was under construction. It was constructed in segments, which are still tagged as such, i.e. to/from
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1907545966
(Cashel - Cullahill -- Cullahill - Portlaoise);
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R639_road_(Ireland)#20th_and_21st_centuries

This changeset has been reverted by
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148740347

Your changes
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1257998131

Regards,

Daniel
b-unicycling (2024-03-16 19:26:55+00:00): I'm not sure what to do about this.
danieldegroot2 (2024-03-16 20:32:09+00:00): Added in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148748984
Anonix35 (2024-03-12 19:41:35+00:00): I'm not really sure for the slope 43. 
Because on site, at the right of the black slope 39, it's a red trail also.
tekim (2024-03-06 01:00:01+00:00): Hello,  Thanks for the edits, however, we are not allowed to use Google Imagery when editing OSM due to Google's terms of use.
gscholz (2024-03-07 07:02:25+00:00): Hi blacx (imports),
this changeset has left behind a broken boundary relation for "Comarques centrals":

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=1.49791&lat=41.72398&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=ring_not_closed%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2909256/history

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
blacx (2024-03-07 08:49:00+00:00): done
gscholz (2024-03-07 08:56:11+00:00): Thanks for your quick response.
Guido
eggie (2024-03-06 07:00:59+00:00): Dag Eenprofiel De info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode. Format phone aangepast +31...
MVG
eggie