piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MxxCon (2024-05-20 07:10:00+00:00): Hello.
The correct way to encode kids ride free is "fee:conditional=no @ age < 12". You can see this documented at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fee:conditional
Also I don't think toll=yes is a valid tag here. Rather it should be fee=yes.
Please correct these issues.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151552200
borovac (2024-05-21 21:41:11+00:00): Hi kentact,

Could you please explain why you use the tag “destination:lang:sr” and other variants? When we look at the wiki page for that tag, we see that it is abandoned and not in use (see here).

I’m curious if you contacted the community before adding those characters en masse, as I don’t see any discussion about it anywhere. The official forum for OpenStreetMap in Serbia can be found here.

I kindly request that you start a topic related to this issue on the official channel. Until a consensus is reached regarding adding the “destination:lang:*” tag, I recommend temporarily stopping further additions. Otherwise, I will write a complaint to DWG regarding this matter.

These decisions should be made collectively within the community, rather than by an individual setting rules unilaterally.

I saw that you added to 2257 relations. I would like to ask you once again to stop adding until you have agreed and received approval from the OSM Serbia community.

All best borovac
MxxCon (2024-05-20 07:12:13+00:00): Hello.
It's a different business but they kept the same email address?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151553636
Artemisia Vulgaris (2024-05-21 08:41:56+00:00): Good catch, no, they have a new email address. I've updated the node.
MxxCon (2024-05-20 07:13:14+00:00): Hello.
What is the source of this information?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151554016
map per (2024-05-21 07:48:50+00:00): Because of review_requested:
This edit looks good, thanks!
Filip009 (2024-05-20 12:52:56+00:00): Zdravím, nejak som nepochopil význam týchto zmien. Ide teda potok pod cestou, alebo sa s cestou križuje? Vy ste ho teraz spojil na 3 miestach, aj keď bol uvedený, ako culvert. Takže nechápem zmysle tejto zmeny. Taktiež by som sa chcel spýtať, či celý potok od začiatku, po druhú cestu je vedený pod zemou.
GeoMechain (2024-05-27 14:48:10+00:00): Already mapped : https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11871558144
Interactiondesigner (2024-05-27 18:36:56+00:00): 👍
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-11 23:11:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152564229 where the changeset comment is: revert dubious edits around Szczecin, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16136
i2004 (2024-05-20 00:49:51+00:00): me ayudarias con la linea 148
i2004 (2024-05-20 01:01:32+00:00): te termine en ambos sentidos el ramal dardo rocha y lavalle
AgusQui (2024-05-21 02:31:57+00:00): Te puedo ayudar corrigiendo el mapeo, de ésa línea lo único que sé es que va a Varela
i2004 (2024-05-21 12:39:58+00:00): https://tucolectivo.info/148 te mando el link de la 148
AgusQui (2024-05-22 00:00:30+00:00): Esa web no es valida para usar en OSM, ver: https://tucolectivo.info/terminos, recuerda que debemos usar fuentes abiertas y preferentemente recolectar los datos uno mismo para evitar copiar errores.
JosephLaCatter (2024-05-19 23:27:19+00:00): Thank you for helping me out! I really appreciate it!
map per (2024-05-21 08:07:14+00:00): Because of review_requested:

The edit looks good, thanks!

One remark: In case you know the more precise locations of house number 4 and 6 it is preferable to add separate nodes for each address. Otherwise adding them comma separated to the whole building is fine as well.

Best regards
map per
mrpulley (2025-12-13 09:49:29+00:00): Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked at survey)
BHSPitMonkey (2024-05-20 01:57:12+00:00): I just sat down to map this and was shocked to see someone had beaten me by just 2 hours! If you were on the route yesterday, so were we :)
talapus (2024-05-20 02:06:26+00:00): Hilarious! Indeed we were --- started around noon.
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 21:36:02+00:00): Is landuse=meadow really correct for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/992478432/history ?
From the available aerial imagery it definitely looks like some sort of farmland.
The changeset comment is "farmland=grass -> landuse=meadow ", but this (and other examples here) weren't previously "farmland=grass".
Mapd123 (2024-05-22 19:22:59+00:00): reverted
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 09:32:21+00:00): Is the change to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/999575898 correct?
If this is farmland, I'd expect it to be tagged as pasture or something, like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/999575890 just to the south.
gurglypipe (2024-05-20 11:18:08+00:00): Indeed, this change is not correct.

This land is not *natural* grassland, it’s cultivated, and so should be tagged as landuse=meadow meadow=agricultural. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Gurglypipe/landuse

That tagging is different from how I tagged it 2 years ago because my understanding of grass culture has improved, and I think the tagging standards around farmland-vs-meadow have solidified in the general OSM community a bit.
gurglypipe (2024-05-20 11:18:59+00:00): @DorneyLake123, please don’t change ‘invalid’ farmland/meadow tagging without local knowledge of what’s actually cultivated there and how, otherwise you’re likely to lose information from the map.
gurglypipe (2024-05-20 11:24:24+00:00): Tagging fixed/updated in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151574258 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151574399
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 12:08:53+00:00): Thanks!
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 21:20:48+00:00): I've also reverted the others of this tag that were changed such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/795506947/history .  There's likely a better tag, though.
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 21:16:47+00:00): I've reverted this, for the same reason as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151555979 .  "farmland=grassland" is an unusual value, but it's surely less incorrect that "natural=grassland", which isn't farmland at all.
If you're familiar with the area, perhaps have a look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/farmland#values and see what specific value (not counting generic stuff like "field") best describes the nature of the farmland here?
map per (2024-05-21 08:01:31+00:00): Because of review_requested:

Landuse=commercial doesn't really fit for this area (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1284748656). It would be better to use either landuse=construction (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dconstruction) or landuse=brownfield (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dbrownfield).

Best regards
map per
map per (2024-05-21 09:38:13+00:00): Hoch als Hinweis: Im ID editor ist landuse=commercial, landuse=brownfield, etc. etwas versteckt und man muss unter "Bearbeite Objekt" erst noch "Eigenschaften" ausklappen, um die "Tags" in der Tabelle sehen zu können.
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 22:04:27+00:00): The "landuse=grassland" was my typo - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13011741/history for the original value.
It's a patch of river bank, so "grassland" is perhaps a bit of a stretch.  I didn't see any grazing on it when I was there but if used for that then maybe "landuse=farmland; farmland=pasture" might make more sense.
Tomas_J (2024-06-19 13:55:06+00:00): The path name "Nudi Oplatil" is not correct. This is beither the official name (the path has none) nor the usuall name for this path. Delete it pls. It is also valid for multiple objects around which you named.
Tomas_J (2024-06-21 10:03:38+00:00): Hallo, as you did not react to my previous comment under this changeset and you continue in the editing the area in a (in my opinion) not correct manner I send you the list of few of the mistaked I believe you did. Could you correct them pls.?
Examples:
The path name "Nudi Oplatil" does not exists in 'on-the-ground' reality 
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/469426844#map=17/50.10446/15.72134

The path name "Nudistická pláž Naturista Kempování" does not exists in 'on-the-ground' reality 
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/469426843#map=18/50.10468/15.72752
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/469426834#map=18/50.09937/15.72320

The path name "Beach Colorful Swim Trunks" does not exists in 'on-the-ground' reality 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1284749650

The beach is named in English "Naturista nudist beach (12 of 12)" in name tag instead of the Czech language
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1286698220#map=17/50.10616/15.72817

The beach is cut into many pieces and numbered in the name tag (e. g. "7 of 12") instead of relation usage 
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1282262617

The camping site does not exist on the ground (I did a survey) 
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11899597948
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11899597947

The beach name "Plážové barevné plavky" does not exists in the 'on the ground' reality
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1282298707

The lake name "Písnik Oplatil (2 oF 2) does not match with it's wikidata name "Oplatil II"
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/27778344

Suspissious names e. g. "Pratum - Meadow" in mixed English and Latin (?) without source 
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49100557
...and many more in the area.
SomeoneElse (2024-05-20 22:07:49+00:00): If this is agricultural pasture then "landuse=farmland; farmland=pasture" might be the best option, or maybe "landuse=meadow; meadow=agricultural".
StreetSurveyor (2024-05-20 23:17:42+00:00): These were not done erroneously. They were done since they're service roads that belong to the cemetery. Please do not make these changes again.
aduxas (2024-05-21 11:59:20+00:00): Sorry, this won't do.  In many cemeteries, roads do have names.  Not here.  As soon as the Cemetery decides to name its roads, they can be added.
aduxas (2024-05-21 13:05:15+00:00): BTW the reason I noticed this is that it interferes with another mapping activity I'm involved in.  Your change is unnecessary.  There is a mapping entity for Saint Mary's Cemetery already.
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-20 04:03:28+00:00): Why did you delete everything?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151557329
Kovoschiz (2024-05-20 03:40:04+00:00): This is a less simple issue. Many "Playground" were  `=playground` before wrongly, which is defined for children's playing only. I corrected them to  `=sports_centre` to emphasize they are for sports, and differentiate from other "Park". `=sports_centre` is not limited to indoors.
NeisBot (2024-05-20 02:55:04+00:00): Hi Charmzeee, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1284767293

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-21 07:59:51+00:00): Hello, please do not add fictional features to the map.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:30:36+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151614569
ZinaidaZ (2024-05-20 09:51:14+00:00): Добрый день! Вы использовали хэштег нашей команды, хотя не являетесь картографом ВК Карт, пожалуйста не используйте наш хэштег.
Также Вы указали landuse на полигоне здания, что является ошибкой, тк landuse - это территория, не здание
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151558172
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-20 18:32:45+00:00): Хештег проставлен автоматически с maproulette
mavl (2024-05-21 03:21:15+00:00): @Alina Chebakova  
Здравствуйте. Как вы, наверное, знаете целью проекта OpenStreetMap является создание свободной карты мира. Это означает, что можно пользоваться только свободными источниками данных (например, личными наблюдениями на местности).  Подробнее об этом можно почитать в статье:  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:FAQ  
  
Вы пользовались источниками, защищёнными авторским правом (такими как Яндекс.Карты). Пожалуйста, не добавляйте в OpenStreetMap данные из таких источников. Ваши пакеты будут просмотрены и, возможно, отменены. Поэтому вам лучше пока не редактировать карту.  
  
Владимир Маршинин  
Рабочая группа по данным
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-21 09:12:37+00:00): @mavl Добрый день. Я пользовалась только спутниками от Bing и своим знанием местности, по яндексу маппинг не производился
mavl (2024-05-21 16:33:44+00:00): Добрый вечер.  
Данные, которые вы добавили, были удалены. OpenStreetMap не может публиковать данные из несовместимых источников. Более подробно можно почитать в условиях участия (которые вы приняли).    
  
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Open_Database_License/Contributor_Terms
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-20 18:33:15+00:00): Хештег проставлен автоматически с maproulette
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-20 18:33:17+00:00): Хештег проставлен автоматически с maproulette
nevw (2024-05-30 12:41:59+00:00): Hi Luen
osmi found a duplicate segment somewhere here...
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=146.80028&lat=-19.14874&zoom=15
Let me know if you can't find a problem.
Luen Warneke (2024-06-03 02:38:14+00:00): I have made and edit and hopefully this is fixed in changeset # 152181592
217541OSM (2024-08-15 02:12:43+00:00): I think landuse=fairground is a better tag
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dfairground
217541OSM (2024-08-15 02:17:06+00:00): I made the changes and also added the website link
willkmis (2024-08-15 16:07:19+00:00): That seems sensible. I'm not sure I agree with adding leisure=park as well though, which is meant for landscaped, city parks used for general recreation: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dpark. Does Fairplex really match this description?
217541OSM (2024-08-16 02:54:30+00:00): You make a good point. I think that landuse=fairground might be sufficient. I'll remove the park tag
felipeeugenio (2024-05-20 12:11:30+00:00): Hola. Por favor no usar building=yes para recintos completos
citrula (2024-05-20 06:59:08+00:00): please leave a changeset comment that briefly describes what changes you are making - it makes it easier for others to understand what you are doing later
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151558565
Savinja (2024-07-18 08:42:24+00:00): Hello ShubhamShinde 
Thank you for mapping! 
I have removed the way 817798974 as there is no connectivity between side walks or residential roads. 
Please inspect your task carefully before closing. 
Happy Mapping!
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-05-27 06:21:29+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work, and it looks good.#OMGuru#OSMCha
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151559464
FajrAl (2024-05-22 23:50:32+00:00): Kenapa Anda menghubungkan Jalan Raya Puspiptek dengan Jalan Puspitek?????: 1273971012. Saya orang lokal di daerah ini.

Why do you connect Jalan Raya Puspiptek with Jalan Puspiptek?????: 1273971012. I am a local in this area.
SimpsonDesert (2024-05-24 10:59:53+00:00): Hello FajarAlim, thank you for reaching out. After evaluating the area, I recognize that the connecting road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273971012) appears disused. Would it be appropriate to assign a disused:highway=* tag instead? Let me know if that is an appropriate solution in your opinion. Otherwise, I will kindly defer to your edits in Tangerang Selatan. Let me know if there are any other features that I have modified that need any corrections. Have a good day.

Terjemahan Otomatis:

Halo FajarAlim, terima kasih sudah menghubungi. Setelah mengevaluasi kawasan tersebut, saya mengetahui bahwa jalan penghubung (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273971012) tampaknya tidak digunakan lagi. Apakah pantas untuk menetapkan tag bekas:highway=* saja? Beri tahu saya jika itu solusi yang tepat menurut Anda. Jika tidak, saya akan menunda pengeditan Anda di Tangerang Selatan. Beri tahu saya jika ada fitur lain yang telah saya modifikasi yang memerlukan koreksi. Semoga harimu menyenangkan.
FajrAl (2024-05-25 11:25:46+00:00): The road is now walled at the end of it, so it's not accessible even to the pedestrian
SimpsonDesert (2024-05-29 10:45:33+00:00): Thank you for the information! I noticed that the road (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273971012) is still connected to the village road network. It is now disconnected to reflect the barrier separating them. Have a great day!

Terjemahan Otomatis:

Terima kasih untuk informasinya! Saya perhatikan jalan tersebut (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1273971012) masih terhubung dengan jaringan jalan desa. Sekarang terputus untuk mencerminkan penghalang yang memisahkan mereka. Semoga harimu menyenangkan!
TheSwavu (2024-09-27 10:14:57+00:00): Hi,

This changeset deleted the bounded locality of Stirling Ranges National Park. 

Is there a reason you did this?
Warin61 (2024-09-28 08:39:54+00:00): There were two relation for the park.. pick one and one only? 
One feature = one OSM entry. 

I picked the one that looked to have the most detail.
fortera_au (2024-05-20 05:54:08+00:00): It looks like you've managed to accidentally make n3759965257 part of w169331951 (South Terrace). I've fixed this up already for you, just an FYI.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151560311
fortera_au (2024-05-20 05:56:00+00:00): It actually looks like you've moved that node too, so I've moved it back.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151560311
mueschel (2024-05-21 13:43:34+00:00): Hi,
you added 'mmsi' and 'mmsii' tags here. These are not yet used in other places. 
However, there are many "seamark:radio_station:mmsi". Would it be possible to use this tag?
DENelson83 (2024-05-21 15:17:53+00:00): Go for it.
Rotilom (2024-05-20 19:56:25+00:00): Thank you for fixing!
tekim (2024-10-04 21:40:29+00:00): Thanks for adding all of these great tree polygons!  Just a little request, could you avoid gluing/snapping these to trails?  It makes refining the position of the trail a little more difficult? Also, what is "semi_evergreen"?
Hb- (2024-05-21 09:37:43+00:00): Mit diesem Änderungssatz wurden die Tags ref=Postleitzahl von den beiden Relationen gelöscht. Warum wurden gültige Daten aus der OSM entfernt?
EN: With this changeset the tags ref=Postalcodenumber were deleted from both relations. Why was valid data removed out of OSM?
Hb- (2024-05-25 06:27:14+00:00): Furthermore the ways 1284719906 to 1284719912 forming the Wustweiler Seelbach have been deleted. Why?
yrtimiD (2024-05-20 12:14:58+00:00): Hi, looks like you used misaligned Bing maps and moved originally  correctly positioned roads.
There are few gpx tracks near this area which you can use to adjust aerial images alignment.
Please consider fixing or reverting
yrtimiD (2024-07-14 18:57:55+00:00): ping?!
b-holdet (2024-05-27 13:06:20+00:00): Jeg tror at du lige skal genbesøge denne rettelse:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/547989723
grin (2024-05-21 09:59:09+00:00): Szia!
Látom, hogy elmozdítottál pár RTK-val mért utat (accuracy=0.5). Megkérdezhetem, hogy milyen eszközzel sikerült az 50 centinél pontosabb mérést korrigálnod, illetve milyen körülmények között? 
Példa: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/296194417
Ha esetleg tévedés volt, akkor kérlek, hogy legyél sokkal óvatosabb, és a nagy pontossággal felmért objektumokat csak akkor módosítsd, ha nagy bizonyossággal meggyőződtél róla, hogy a te mérésed pontosabb, vagy az objektum megváltozott a pontos mérés óta. 
Kérlek jelezz vissza, hogy ez szándékos és valós volt-e! 
Köszönöm!
tapai (2024-05-21 10:58:08+00:00): Szervusz,

Szándékos volt a változtatás, de nem szeretném elrontani a térképet ezért ha még megvan a mérésed (mert hiszek az rtk pontosságában) és vissza tudod állítani az eredeti állapotot, akkor légyszíves csináld meg (bocsi). Előszeretettel használom a SrtavaHeatmap és a garmin fenix 7 gps mérését. A Tour de Hongrie alkalmával bringáztam ezen a szakaszon és több helyen észleltem, hogy a térképi vonal eltér a rögzített nyomvonalamtól és ilyenkor ránézek StravaHeatmap-re és javítom a térképet. A StravaHeatmap-et egész jónak találom, sok helyen segíthet, illetve megerősíthet (de ez csak az én véleményem).
Mégegyszer bocsi ha belerondítottam.

Üdv,
Tápai
silversurfer83 (2024-05-20 16:48:55+00:00): Moin :)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1284796380
meinst du nicht, dass das ein man_made=storage_tank + content=slurry ist?

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151563006
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-20 07:10:21+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Klucz addr:place oznacza brak nazwy ulicy. Kombinacja z addr:street (który definiuje nazwę ulicy) jest błędna.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3048115821

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_12500175 (2024-05-20 07:07:44+00:00): Hinweis 4246847
d_berger (2024-05-22 18:14:53+00:00): War ja gut gemeint, nur wurde der Strassenabschnitt letztes Jahr neu gestaltet, womit die Luftbilder veraltet sind.

Nachdem ich dies im Mai 2023 bereits angepasst habe, habe ich die Änderung mit CS151690237 zurückkorrigiert. Liebi Grüess
Pawka (2024-05-20 07:33:17+00:00): Ah, I see there is already a bench added which I've missed. Please revert my change and I apologize for the mess.
Dino Michelini (2024-05-20 08:18:23+00:00): Ciao, ti segnalo che hai usato il tag name in modo improprio per un percorso mtb. E’ sbagliato e va inserito con name:mtb. Per mappare i percorsi mtb devi fare riferimento alla pagina wiki di OSM https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Mountain_biking. I tag riportai nella pagina sono poi utilizzati nel rendering in mappe specializzate some questa https://openmtbmap.org/. PS. prima di mappare leggete sempre la wiki di OSM eviterete di fare errori banali come questo, grazie
bxl-forever (2024-05-20 08:46:39+00:00): Hello,

Why did you draw a building on aerial imagery instead of using the official GRB basemap?  The shape of this building is incorrect.
felipeeugenio (2024-05-20 12:26:46+00:00): Hola Sebastián. 
Todo parece indicar que te llegaron las recomendaciones por parte de Pablo o bien leíste los changesets, pero las últimas ediciones están todas perfectas. gracias por eso.

Saludos
S_Carra (2024-05-22 21:55:25+00:00): Leí los changesets. 
Saludos
mike140 (2025-12-11 00:39:37+00:00): Весь будинок вже має номер 4к2. Навіщо було позначати під'їзди як окремі адреси?
okolobasik (2025-12-19 14:45:50+00:00): а я тут до чого ?  які під'їзди?
mike140 (2025-12-19 22:30:03+00:00): Наприклад: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9702813 - це під'їзд №10 будинку 4к2. На street view видно навіть табличку з написом "Під'їзд 10". А ви додали до нього тег адреси addr:housenumber=4к2-10. Але адреса вже є на цілому будинку: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9702809
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-20 18:32:01+00:00): Хештег проставлен автоматически с maproulette
Alina Chebakova (2024-05-20 18:31:53+00:00): Хештег проставлен автоматически с maproulette
FajrAl (2024-05-22 23:40:47+00:00): Hai, kenapa diubah klasifikasinya? apakah tidak melihat catatan?