piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aixbrick (2023-06-16 11:01:07+00:00): Der Kommentar "B 399 ist ausgewiesene Bundesstraße " erweckte bei mir den Eindruck, dass die Änderung auf primary nur erfolgte, weil es eine Bundesstraße ist.
Die von dir genannten Straßen waren bis vor einigen Jahren auch höher in OSM eingestuft, bis ein User das geändert hat, u.a. in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77035764 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/77036696.
Wenn du aufgrund von Vor-Ort-Kenntnissen meinst, dass diese oder auch die Schoellerstraße eine hohe oder höhere Bedeutung hat, dann kannst du das natürlich ändern.
MarcoR (2023-06-20 06:24:24+00:00): Ciao!
Penso che un negozio di animali non sia il tag corretto per una colonia felina, a meno che i gatti non siano in vendita :)
Ho controllato sulla wiki e chiesto anche ad altri mappatori e sebbene non esista un tag specifico, credo che quello più adatto sia amenity=animal_shelter + animal_shelter=cat (vedi la wiki per maggiori info: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Tag:amenity%3Danimal_shelter)

Buon mapping,
Marco.
user_5359 (2023-06-16 14:37:19+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I revert your change set als SEO SPAM (mostly foreign keys).
ivanbranco (2023-06-22 11:30:10+00:00): Hi WieKo68,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/314705858

the commons image linked here doesn't exist on Commons. Maybe the link is wrong? Could you check it out?

Thanks and good mapping :)
WieKo68 (2024-06-11 18:02:29+00:00): poprawione
maraf24 (2023-06-17 07:11:22+00:00): Proszę o niezmienianie prawidłowo otagowanych ddrip na highway=cycleway. Konwencja przewiduje tu highway=path.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-06-16 11:00:16+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/233371603

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Bolt033 (2023-06-16 11:06:33+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for bringing this into my attention, I just took the street from the website. I assume correct one should be Jana Pietrusińskiego, right?
Alexandra
NorthCrab (2023-06-16 11:19:18+00:00): Hey! The .ul prefix simply needs to be removed. From the data point of view now it's ul. ul. <name>, the tag already implies the ul. part.
NorthCrab (2023-06-16 11:20:01+00:00): And then the street name should contain full name including the "Jana" part. You can simply copy the name from the adjacent street :-/
NorthCrab (2023-06-16 11:20:05+00:00): :-)*
Bolt033 (2023-06-16 11:25:27+00:00): I performed the change accordingly. I appreciate your support and help. :)
Alexandra
Frans S (2023-06-16 10:55:59+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. However, not squared.

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137407329
bxl-forever (2023-06-16 10:09:24+00:00): Interesting shortcut, indeed.
Thanks.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/137407354
bxl-forever (2023-06-16 10:10:35+00:00): ↑ The comment above was meant for https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3720027 to thank the user.
emersonveenstra (2023-06-16 10:35:04+00:00): Hi,

Can I please know what source you used for the "stars=2.5" tag?
KateMak (2023-06-16 11:10:56+00:00): Hi!
Expedia:
https://www.expedia.com/Ann-Arbor-Hotels-Hampton-Inn-Ann-Arbor-North.h26065.Hotel-Information
emersonveenstra (2023-06-16 11:44:06+00:00): And you confirmed that using information from Expedia is allowed under the terms of service of both Expedia and OSM?
Frans S (2023-06-16 10:49:13+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator. 
I am sorry to say, but this is not a playground where you can mess around by adding odd mappings like a big area (2 sq km) a building or a café
Please go through the base course to learn how and what to map.


Examples hot to avoid mis mappings can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve 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/137407533
eggie (2023-06-16 10:55:50+00:00): Hoi fincent..
Nav je vraag via PB.
Op zich zie je dat wel meer. In principe volgen we de bebording.

Ik kan momenteel niet via de computer kijken.
Wellicht kan Leo of Thiskal even.kijken.
Die valideren momenteel.
Groet..
eggie
Frans S (2023-06-16 10:53:56+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. However, not squared.

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137407937
woodpeck (2023-06-16 12:07:51+00:00): Dear Anders Wiig, there is a clearly visible road here on aerial imagery. Your deletion of valid data amounts to vandalism. Please do not do this again or your account will have to be blocked. If using the road is illegal for some reason (and this is obvious from on-the-ground signage) then you can add appropriate access tags to the road (e.g. access=private for a private road).

The fact that a structure has been built illegally is never sufficient reason to remove it from OSM. We don't delete a building from OSM just because it has been erected without permission either!

Best regards, Frederik Ramm, OSMF Data Working Group (
Ticket#2023061610000139)
kartogr (2023-06-16 12:47:46+00:00): I'm not at liberty to edit the map as everyone else? Of course I am. That means removing things as well as adding things.
woodpeck (2023-06-16 12:52:33+00:00): Everyone will get blocked for vandalism when they remove things that actually exist. Just like you.
kartogr (2023-06-16 13:11:59+00:00): This is not vandalism. And who decides what must be included? And no one can remove things?
woodpeck (2023-06-16 13:21:08+00:00): OSM wants to record what is there on the ground. That is our mission. If you delete something from OSM that is there on the ground, then you are acting against our mission.

Of course deletions are possible, and even desired, if something in OSM is wrong, or if something that was there on the ground earlier is now removed. 

If you can show that the aerial imagery we have for this area is outdated, and that the track has been dug up and trees have been planted there, and the buildings on the north end of the track are now unreachable by vehicle but only from the water side, then of course it is a good thing to delete the track. 

But you cannot delete the track just because it is illegal or because you would prefer people not to know about it.
woodpeck (2023-06-16 13:26:26+00:00): Account blocked in https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/7216
Wulfmorn (2023-06-16 13:50:38+00:00): Additional info to note: The source of the road was initially the official road network database (Elveg) https://vegkart.atlas.vegvesen.no/#kartlag:geodata/@300547,6619615,14
woodpeck (2023-06-16 18:09:27+00:00): The land owners claim that this road is permanently closed for renaturation, that nobody, not even the land owners, may use this road, that the buildings at the north end of the road may only be reached from the water and have no vehicular access by land. If that is indeed correct, then (and only then) it could be possible to change the tagging to "abandoned:highway=track". Do we have any local mappers who can verify the situation on the ground? If what the land owners claim is true, we would expect some form of permanent barrier at the south end of the road, rather than just a sign or a lift gate, or at least signage that makes it clear that nobody is supposed to use this path (rather than just "private path").
Wulfmorn (2023-06-17 02:26:40+00:00): I don't know. It's pretty rural. Given the rather aggressive deletion, I sense a neighbor feud going on.

It would be good to have a neutral party, preferably a known mapper check the status - but, alas, this is rather rural. If there is a barrier or similar, a recent photo would probably be enough to convince us that the road is no longer accessible, which only leaves the question: will it still be accessible for walking, or bicycle?

Either way, retagging to fit the situation is ok, hard deletion is not - partially because it will only lead to someone else seeing the road on the photos and adding it back in.  It would also show up as a missing road in the Norwegian road import.
LockOnGuy (2023-06-16 10:50:06+00:00): Hello Renas, may I know why did you change the name for NODE: 9897016572 ?    
The name should be the official name of the Flag in Iraq which that would be "ئاڵای هەرێمی کوردستانی عێراق" that is the name the flag registered as in Iraq as the flag of the region, not just "ئاڵای هەرێمی کوردستان"       
Also I see you added "wikidata" and "wikipedia" tags for it, this is wrong, it should be "flag:wikidata" and "flag:wikipedia"     
Regards.
Renas Azad (2023-06-16 10:58:08+00:00): hello
i am sorry, it shuld be exactly as you say, i will edit it.
thank you for the notice.
merylstreet (2023-06-18 08:46:04+00:00): Hi Snusmumriken, I noticed that the street/housenumber disappeared for node 573359413, did you mean to include it in an address relation?
Snusmumriken (2023-06-18 12:33:57+00:00): Indeed, thanks
mini-me (2023-06-16 16:55:45+00:00): Примечательный факт: oneway отображается на рендере, но не влияет на роутинг. oneway:foot влияет, но не отображается.
Frans S (2023-06-16 11:38:20+00:00): Hello. This is a building and road mapping project.
Please focus on that ! and don't waste time on mapping other features.
Best regards
Taya_S (2023-06-16 12:33:43+00:00): hallo Bert,

Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.

Weet jij toevallig ook wat dit gebied nu is geworden? Als dit park niet meer bestaat dan mag deze namelijk ook op de kaart verwijderd worden en vervangen worden door wat er nu is. 

Groeten,
Taya
Bert036 (2023-06-16 13:35:01+00:00): Bedankt voor de reactie en tips. Ik durfde het park niet helemaal weg te halen van de kaart want iemand heeft er mogelijk zeer veel tijd ingestoken om het parcours er goed op te tekenen. Het heuvelachtige park is in 2017 door vrijwilligers en met steun van een grondverzetbedrijf aangelegd, maar vorig jaar werd het weer volledig met de grond gelijkgemaakt. Het is nu weer een anoniem open grasland, net als de strook ernaast aan het fietspad.
Taya_S (2023-06-16 13:44:29+00:00): Zie dat je het al verwijderd hebt, helemaal top!
tomzyl (2023-06-17 09:02:22+00:00): Niby co tam jest budowane? Tor został zabudowany i nie ruszany od czasu budowy st. Warszawa Główna.
Marek-M (2023-06-16 13:04:15+00:00): Cześć, nie wiem czy masz wiedzę o tym, żeby nawigacja wiedziała jaka jest dopuszczalna prędkość w danym miejscu, to linia z drogą musi mieć ją wpisaną. Posadowienie znaku przy drodze nie dostarcza takich informacji aplikacjom nawigacyjnym. Jest to jednak przydatna informacja, bo dzięki temu można dokonać edycji prędkości na drodze :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137409156
mueschel (2023-06-20 09:51:34+00:00): Hi,
the parking tags you used here are outdated. Please have a look at the current tagging scheme:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Street_parking
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 09:57:26+00:00): Deprecated, yes am aware of that. Since relatively recently mapped will go back over and bring to the newer version.
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 10:50:19+00:00): The latest scheme is actually a little unclear as to what to do with double yellow lane edge lines. Is that parking:left=lane, or parking:left=no, since legal definition is because of the yellow paint, but physically remains possible to park briefly to alight/pick-up passengers/cargo. Opted for lane value.
mueschel (2023-06-20 10:58:57+00:00): Tagging should reflect the legal situation. Physically you can park your car diagonally on a 3 lane motorway... but legally you're not allowed (and shouldn't for obvious reasons)
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 11:04:05+00:00): Except the new scheme deliberately splits physical from legal. Previously just parking:lane:both=no_parking was sufficient. Motorways from rule 240 are generally prohibited from stopping or waiting, so parking:both=no would be fine now. Residentially though as above can actually wait on the double yellows for a bit.
mueschel (2023-06-20 12:04:26+00:00): I'm not fully aware of the implications of a double yellow line in the UK, but wouldn't "parking lane is present but stopping is forbidden" be 

parking:both = lane
parking:both:restriction = no_stopping
?
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 12:06:58+00:00): In UK law it is 'waiting' that is not permitted, with exemption for alighting/picking-up passengers or cargo, typically of under 5 minute duration. So stopping and waiting is conditionally lawful.
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 12:07:41+00:00): Loading can be banned by adding double yellow orthogonal paint to the kerb edge intermittently too. In London there are also double red lines, just to add to the mix.
mueschel (2023-06-20 12:16:27+00:00): These cases should be covered by restriction = no_stopping / no_standing / no_parking.

Wiki says that the UK "no waiting" translates to no_parking which seems to make sense.  

Maybe you can extend the table for the restriction tag with a hint about UK street markings?
Pink Duck (2023-06-20 12:19:36+00:00): That it does, but is all back on the legal limitation side and not the physical explicit lane tagging.

I could add detail about the alighting/loading meaning parking:both=lane is appropriate over parking:both=no for UK double yellow lines.
Frans S (2023-07-01 09:00:55+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project. We welcome you as a new mapper. 
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator. 
I realize and expect no perfect mappings from a new mapper, however, I am sorry to say, but your mappings do not meet the quality standards of HOTOSM.
Please pay attention to next summarized issues. ( see attached document for more info)
A: Not accurately drawn.
B: Overlapping buildings.
D: Connecting nodes of buildings to other buildings or features like roads and residential areas.
The Image quality is not of great help, but map and square each building ! 


Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve 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/137409820
julcnx (2023-06-17 01:20:54+00:00): thanks for your contributions! Just a quick tip: remember to save and upload changes before moving on to the next country. Keeping changesets local makes it easier for reviewers. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets
Taya_S (2023-06-16 12:29:46+00:00): hallo Fred,

Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privébericht.

Groeten,
Taya
Taya_S (2023-06-16 12:53:41+00:00): Hallo VRGjh,

Ik heb een aantal tags toegevoegd
narrow=yes, width=2.15 en ik heb de access voor vrachtwagens voor deze weg beperkt. 

Ik weet niet of dit genoeg is voor de brandweer. Ik hoop van wel, maar ik zal hier in ieder geval ook nog even met wat andere mensen over praten.

Groeten,
Taya
VRGjh (2023-06-16 13:05:52+00:00): dank u, we houden het in de gaten of het voldoende is
Frans S (2023-07-01 09:15:21+00:00): Hello. I reviewed this task as well.
Here you collected multiple buildings as 1 building.
Each building need to be mapped individual.
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137410745
VLD549 (2023-07-12 14:03:30+00:00): Hi, The bus stop has been cancelled as per 01 July. There is no new name mentioned though.
https://www.delijn.be/nl/haltes/509234/?popupClosed=true&offerChangeDate=2023-07-01
VLD549 (2023-12-14 09:14:35+00:00): Hi could you indicate what source was used? I can't find search results. Thank you!
Tom Desoutter (2023-12-14 20:51:17+00:00): Hi, it's Letec.be, because it's not a De Lijn stop but a bustop from the network TEC (wallonie bus) : https://www.letec.be/Planning/Details/Line/3%2520Mouscron__Moeskroen%2520-%2520Comines__Komen/H4003
VLD549 (2024-01-03 16:07:23+00:00): Thank you for letting me know.
JasonBob (2023-07-10 17:44:48+00:00): Can you please provide proof that there is a location here named Lantern Point? I have tried researching this and came to the conclusion that it was a fictitious place.
Taya_S (2023-06-17 07:50:56+00:00): Hallo Remco,

Je vraagt review.

Je had hier een deel van beide wegen verwijderd. In je volgende changeset heb je de barrier=entrance veranderd in een service weg. 

Ik heb de wegen hersteld en ik heb de poort terug gezet met access=yes.

Dit betekent dat het nu getagged is als altijd toegankelijk. ik weet niet of dit klopt, laat me het weten als dit anders is. 

Groeten,
Taya
Lezurex (2023-06-28 05:28:16+00:00): Hallo bresomch,

Du hast hier den betroffenen Teil der Strasse auf proposed, also an den Anfang des Lifecycles gesetzt. Meiner Meinung nach wäre destroyed hier der korrekte Weg, da die Strasse ja schon existiert(e) und nun zerstört/überschüttet ist, sprich am Ende ihres Lifecycles ist. Oder hast du schon Informationen gefunden, dass die Strasse so wiederhergestellt wird?

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:destroyed:*

Beste Grüsse
Lenny
bresomch (2023-06-29 15:22:59+00:00): Hallo Lenny

Du hast recht, destroyed wäre der korrekte Weg.
Ich habe  proposed gewählt in der Annahme, dass die Strasse baldmöglichst wieder gebaut wird, sobald die Umstände das zulassen.
Vermutlich wird es allerdings eine geänderte Linienführung geben.
Es kann ja sein, dass noch mehr verschüttet wird, was sich ja niemand wünscht!

Grüsse
Bernhard
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:15:41+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137117931, 137117932, 137117938, 137117941, 137117946, 137117948, 137117951.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:15:40+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137117931, 137117932, 137117938, 137117941, 137117946, 137117948, 137117951.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:15:42+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137117931, 137117932, 137117938, 137117941, 137117946, 137117948, 137117951.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:15:43+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137117931, 137117932, 137117938, 137117941, 137117946, 137117948, 137117951.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:15:39+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137117931, 137117932, 137117938, 137117941, 137117946, 137117948, 137117951.
marc__marc (2024-08-27 15:16:45+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/246418139
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/244101207
2 building, on on the roof of the other ?
that look like 2 building:part for one building
dhp11_dg (2024-09-02 12:43:13+00:00): It was change from building:part to building so both would render in 3d since one is a flat base with a gabled roof on top. When it was marked as building:part that was the only thing rendered because of the rule to ignore the building if it has parts. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings#Building_outlines
Alternatively I could have drawn another boundary as the building and marked them both as parts.
VLD549 (2023-07-12 14:10:31+00:00): Hi, could you tell me what source was used? De Lijn indicates clearly 'Ronse Steenweg Op Schorisse'. 
https://www.delijn.be/nl/haltes/209349/
Thank you!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 12:40:00+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 131964102, 131964145, 131964224, 131964256, 131964305, 131964412, 131964502, 131964714, 131964726, 131965515, 131965663, 131965743, 131999793, 131999936, 131999952, 132000030, 132006575, 132006747, 132006812, 132006907, 132070061, 132075489, 132572816, 133199742, 133200785, 133200827, 133201022, 133739881, 134211313, 134609363, 135689768, 135690459, 135927311, 135931169, 135931189, 135931206, 135931232, 135931269, 136052377, 136053225, 136053804, 136054339, 136054571, 136055369, 136056261, 136056274, 136446074, 136446587, 136447088, 136448322, 136448872, 136449460, 136449769, 136450221, 136450709, 136451195, 136451609, 136451829, 136452220, 136452797, 136452972, 136453192, 136453599, 136453948, 136454382, 136454737, 137128836, 137279043, 137279190.
erickdeoliveiraleal (2023-06-29 22:33:44+00:00): porque apagou a area verde aqui?
Konstantinos Mavroforos (2023-06-16 12:47:16+00:00): Is it possible to choose/highlight part of, or the whole building, since that place takes a lot of space? (horizontally)
lipuma (2023-06-17 15:55:41+00:00): Hi Heinz, there's 4 ways with unfamiliar tags:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182465179
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182554358
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182554364
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182509245

Just a heads up, happy mapping!
ygcgjp5 (2023-08-29 20:14:54+00:00): 12:00 does not mean midnight. You need to use 24:00
1998alexkane (2023-06-16 17:43:59+00:00): Neither of the bridges you added the surface=metal to appear to have a metal surface, are you certain this is right?
bxl-forever (2023-06-16 13:57:42+00:00): Hello,

If the changeset is about swimming pools, why did you tag this as a simple body of water?  It looks like an ordinary private swimming pool, doesn’t it?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1182467284
Bear-in-a-box (2023-06-16 15:13:09+00:00): 99% of the pools it's obvious. Here I believe it could also be a decorative pool, not a swimming pool. Therefore the classification. One would have to check "sur place" but that's difficult I guess...
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-06-16 14:07:12+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 137306132, 137306347, 137306458, 137306474, 137306502, 137306560, 137347227, 137347240, 137347276, 137347298, 137347302, 137347308, 137347326, 137347460, 137381316, 137381354, 137381469, 137381510, 137381744, 137381778, 137381807, 137381854, 137381882, 137381896, 137381973, 137382491.
adrianojbr (2023-06-16 16:31:50+00:00): Olá, Marcos_Itba_Kaart!

Qual a fonte para a criação dessa via?

Esse trecho está em obras, sendo liberado aos poucos. Passei semana passada ali e não lembro de ter essa ligação entre a marginal e a rodovia.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137413937
Marcos_Itba_Kaart (2023-06-18 08:59:13+00:00): Olá adriano jbr.

Essa edição foi um engano.

Agradeço pelo pela reversão da mesma.

Vou estar mais atento nas próximas intervenções nessa área.
felipeeugenio (2023-06-16 19:15:13+00:00): Hola
convirtió la escuela en la delegación municipal.
Ya no existe la escuela?
NorthCrab_upload (2023-06-16 13:30:19+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/node/10980705235
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10980705245

Pozdrawiam! 🦀