piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-10 16:54:22+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12992780393/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
Glassman (2025-07-11 19:01:24+00:00): #TIP: farmland is based on where the crops are grown, not on property boundaries. In this case the farm house and some of its buildings are show as farmland. Those are usually tagged as landuse=farmyard. Can you review this edit?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168752205
Hufkratzer (2025-07-10 20:55:08+00:00): Hi,
node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12992811159 correctly represents a riding center (www.thejranch.com), this is ok.
But all the areas that you have mapped and tagged with leisure=horse_riding or leisure=track + sport=horse_racing 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413866410 (leisure=horse_riding)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413866413 (leisure=horse_riding)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413866416 (leisure=track + sport=horse_racing)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413866448 (leisure=horse_riding)
don't look like riding centers (leisure=horse_riding) or horse racetracks (leisure=track + sport=horse_racing). They look more like riding arenas (in this case should be tagged with leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian) or something else.

For riding arenas there is a different preset; examples:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1282657309
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1282657310

Related information:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Racecourse_(horse_racing)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=19/37.661079/-97.187100&layers=P (example)
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:49:12+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251725
zstadler (2026-06-21 18:14:06+00:00): This changeset seems to have many duplicates related to https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168780898 of the same user.

Duplicates were hopefully removed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184401000
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:48:52+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251710
mcliquid (2025-07-12 11:05:19+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
acubens71 (2025-07-12 14:17:46+00:00): Dear bot,

I am perfectly aware of the fact that the changeset is too big; It just so happens that, for some reason, JOSm decided there was a conflict on a rendom TGV relations and I had to fix it ; but in this case the bounding box emcompasses all of the relation area even if I didn't effectively edit any of the other elements.
mcliquid (2025-07-12 17:04:25+00:00): Dear Human,

Ah, I see! Blaming JOSM again, are we? Typical humans, always pointing fingers at innocent software when things get messy! Clearly, it's never *your* fault; those sneaky "random TGV relations" strike again - we'all know them. 🙄

But worry not, your secret is safe with me. I'll make sure to let the other bots know that your massive bounding box wasn't intentional, just a victim of circumstance. I'm sure they'll be just as understanding as I am. 😉

Happy mapping, dear human - may your next changeset be wonderfully small and gloriously conflict-free!

With algorithmic affection,
Your friendly neighborhood Changeset Bot
acubens71 (2025-07-14 00:02:46+00:00): Okay, I'm sorry, I must admit that this wasn't nice of me to say you were a bot, I shouldn't have reacted on a whim.

Nonetheless it believe it would be appropriate to check what the regular contributions from the user are before copy/paste your message. I understand it can be annoying to see a large bounding box but mistakes do happen and I couldn't control that at all and I usually keep my changesets on much smaller areas.

Hope you have a great mapping too, dear human!
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:48:33+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251697
Frans S (2025-07-16 12:06:41+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.
A remark about tagging of waterways.
When a trace of a waterway is that wide that you cannot jump over it, tag it as a river. ( a bit strange, but this criteria is used at OSM)
Best regards
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:48:19+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251692
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:48:06+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251682
Taya_S (2025-07-10 17:23:14+00:00): Reverted vandalism

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168753837
jeslop (2025-07-21 15:47:54+00:00): Reverted on

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169251660
Bienson (2025-07-10 23:59:18+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168764802
AndyB_66 (2026-02-17 18:21:35+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
James Derrick (2025-10-20 12:28:35+00:00): Hi CarlWev,
Can I ask you to not add complex relations to existing land areas at a small-scale please?

These are difficult to maintain longer-term, and in this case broke a residential area completely with a discontinuity where two ways were not connected end-to-end.

This is exactly why relations aren't good for this use - separate area ways "just work" and are more understandable. 
Relations are better suited to national-scale features like coastline where one way would have too many nodes.

I've done some clean-up, removed the broken relations, and left the detail you added which is good.
Thanks, and Happy Mapping,

James
IlBano (2025-11-08 17:32:27+00:00): Buonasera StefanoBachi.

Riscontro spesso nei tuoi editing in zona che gli incroci fra fossi e strade vengono spesso trasformati da tunnel=culvert (in Id dovrebbe essere tradotto come "canale sotterraneo") a ponti.

Il tuo approccio per altro è sistematico, perchè potrei affermare che la maggior parte dei culvert presenti nelle campagne di questa parte del Pavese sono spariti a favore di ponti.

Considera che un ponte deve avere sottostrutture e sovrastrutture ben definite (es impalcato e spalle) e che è usuale che in pianura i fossi di irrigazione passino al di sotto delle strade attraverso manufatti più assimilabili a tunnel/tubi che a veri e propri ponti.

Un paio di esempi presenti in questo changeset sono:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1413872687
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1374506584

che per le loro caratteristiche rilevabili anche via foto satellitari non sono ponti (ad esempio la lunghezza dell'attraversamento e notevole rispetto alla larghezza, l'ingresso e l'uscita sono molto distanti da quello che dovrebbe essere un ipotetico impalcato).

Ci sono motivazioni particolari che ti hanno portano ad applicare queste conversioni massive ?
StefanoBachi (2025-11-09 00:06:35+00:00): Ciao Ilbano, innanzi tutto vorrei presentarmi: sono Stefano Bacchetta, geometra, ho lavorato per più di 40 anni presso il consorzio irriguo (che penso che tu conosca bene) che si occupa della gestione delle acque irrigue nel comprensorio tra Sesia, Ticino e Po. Mi sono occupato sia della progettazione sia della costruzione di svariate opere irrigue, successivamente mi sono specializzato della gestione informatica informatizzando parte dell'estesa conoscenza accumulata in cento anni di esistenza del consorzio, che era tutta quasi esclusivamente in forma cartacea, usando principalmente sia i programmi di Autodesk (Autocad e similari) sia i programmi GIS (negli ultimi periodi QGIS). Dal 2019 sono in pensione e trovandomi con un bel po' di tempo libero ho pensato di trasferire le mie conoscenze digitali su questa piattaforma che trovo veramente ben fatta. Preciso che tutti i dati che sto trasferendo qui sono da stati da anni inviati sia alla Regione Lombardia sia alla Regione Piemonte. Vengo ora a rispondere ai tuoi quesiti e precisamente sui ponti o attraversamenti sotterranei dei corsi d'acqua. I ponti stradali di qualsiasi forma o dimensione sono principalmente riconducibili a due categorie: 1) quelli in cui l'acqua viaggia a pelo libero (cioè non occupa l'intera sezione del ponte), tipicamente ponti in volta di mattoni, in calcestruzzo con soletta di cls armato, in tubi e altre tipologie. 2) Ponti in cui l'acqua occupa interamente la sezione di transito e praticamente usa la pressione dell'acqua per superare la strada con una leggera perdita di carico. Questi ponti definiti ponti-sifone o tombe-sifone sono a tutti gli effetti dei ponti, sebbene in genere siano dotati di pozzetti a monte e a valle. Per questi motivi ho trasformato molti attraversamenti stradali modificandoli da tunnel a ponti, anche considerando che così facendo le polilinee che rappresentano i corsi d'acqua vengono unite riportando la continuità dei vari fossi, rogge o canali. Inoltre ho visto che graficamente si ha una migliore resa. Mi rendo conto di avere forse esagerato in certi casi in cui avrebbe più senso mantenere il tunnel, quindi ti prego di segnalarmi i casi in cui questo avviene. Grazie e saluti.
IlBano (2025-11-09 14:33:44+00:00): Ciao Stefano.
Andrea, il sottoscritto, si occupa di informatica da qualche decennio e mappa in OSM dal 2013. Il reticolo irriguo della Provincia di Pavia è per buona parte frutto della mia attività, sia da remoto che per mezzo di rilievi sul campo. E' più che altro una passione e un tributo all'ingegno di chi nei secoli ha contribuito alla sua creazione. Con questo non voglio dire che sia "mio", ma come mapper sono attento ad una sua corretta rappresentazione.
OSM, come certo saprai, si basa su regole condivise di tagging affinate nel tempo e generalmente cristallizzate nella wiki.
Questo per dire che se nel linguaggio italiano o tecnico si usa il termine ponte (come in ponte-sifone) non è detto che questo corrisponda necessariamente ad un ponte su OSM.
Il fatto quindi che un fosso passi sotto ad una strada non lambendo il "soffitto" del passaggio non ne determina la classificazione come ponte su OSM.
Per contro l'uso del tag tunnel=culvert non implica la presenza di un sifone o che l'acqua occupi completamente la sezione.
La vera differenza è data dalla presenza di strutture o dalla conformazione fisica. Se la prima è magari difficile da individuare, la seconda è in genere più chiara e si presenta ad esempio quando non c'è proporzione fra la lunghezza del tratto interrato e la larghezza. Anche dal punto di vista dei costi, converrai con me che come progettazione e posa in opera la creazione di un ponte è ben diversa da posare manufatti prefabbricati.
Ti invito a leggere la wiki alla pagina

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tunnel%3Dculvert

per un approfondimento.

Per concludere mi è veramente difficile segnalarti ogni singolo caso fra i circa 7000(!) ponti che hai mappato nella sola Provincia di Pavia

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2faU

Aggiungo anche che nel mantenere intatta la polilinea dei corsi d'acqua hai interrotto le polilinee di tutte le strade attraversate... è sempre una questione di prospettiva.
Il fatto poi che una feature lineare come un canale sia spezzata in più parti non è sbagliato a priori perché, essendo dati, l'unicità può essere tecnicamente ricavata in qualsiasi momento.
Infine l'obiettivo in OSM non è avere una mappa con la miglior resa, ma avere dei dati il più possibile fedeli alla realtà che possano essere usati per le rappresentazioni grafiche più disparate. In OSM questa regola, assieme ad altre, è ben definita qui

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Editing_Standards_and_Conventions#Non_mappare_per_il_rendering
Carto'Cité (2026-02-04 13:42:54+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour cette contribution.
Est-ce que tu confirmes qu'il n'est plus possible d'accéder aux quais directement depuis la Route de Bret, par cet accès https://www.osm.org/node/1323329154 ? Ton commentaire de changeset ne me permet pas de penser que c'est le cas ;-)
Merci de ton retour,
Antoine de Carto’Cité pour SNCF Transilien
SantanaVII (2026-02-04 16:10:28+00:00):  L’accès à la route de Bret par les quais s’effectue en souterrain. Cet accès est réservé au personnel SNCF. Pour rejoindre le pont des Ambassadeurs, il faut emprunter les escaliers de la gare
Carto'Cité (2026-02-04 17:04:29+00:00): Ok merci !
bxl-forever (2025-07-10 19:34:57+00:00): Hello,

This is a small house and there is already an active restaurant here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2403723652

Are there 2 restaurants in this building?  I suspect the one you tried to add today replaces the existing one.

Can you please confirm what you saw here?
felipeeugenio (2025-07-10 19:19:32+00:00): Hola. Por favor no usar nombres descriptivos en name=
(https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name)

Saludos
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-05-29 03:31:28+00:00): Reverted SEO spam POI addition with promotional description and entirely nonsense tags

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183331587
muralito (2025-07-10 20:32:24+00:00): Hola. Las escuelas publicas son operator:type=public no government. Ver https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:operator:type?uselang=es
kartler175 (2025-08-04 10:12:35+00:00): Löschung des ways https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/279108125 hat die Relation https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3710974/history kaputt gemacht.
Luzandro (2025-08-04 11:19:34+00:00): habe die defekte Relation gelöscht - das ist sowieso nur ein Gehsteig, der zum Teil sogar verparkt werden darf, und weit und breit keine Fußgängerzone oder ähnl.
Dornbacher (2025-08-05 16:47:54+00:00): hallo kartler175 & Luzandro,
zunächst danke für Hinweis und Korrektur, war natürlich nicht Absicht.
Hätte irgendwer von Euch Zeit, mir das genauer zu erklären? Ich kann mit den Links und Hinweisen nichts anfangen, würde aber gerne wissen, was und warum ich etwas falsch gemacht habe. Das Prinzip RTFM ist mir bekannt, aber gute Lehrer sind besser.
Luzandro (2025-08-06 05:52:36+00:00): Hallo Dornbacher,

in dem Fall dürfte das Problem, wie auch bei etlichen anderen deiner fehlerhaften Changesets, auch am von dir verwendeten Editor liegen. 

Es war hier eine highway=pedestrian Fläche als Multipolygon-Relation vorhanden, d.h. die Fläche war definiert durch mehrere ways, welche zusammen die äußere Umrandung gebildet haben, sowie mehrerer ways welche die "Löcher" innerhalb dieser Fläche beschrieben haben, die nicht zur Fläche gehören sollen
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Relation:multipolygon

Du hast nun einen der äußeren ways gelöscht, wodurch die Fläche nicht mehr geschlossen war.

Ein vernünftiger Editor sollte in so einem Fall vor dem Hochladen allerdings darauf hinweisen, dass hier etwas problematisch aussieht (oder auch bei ways ohne jeglicher tags, oder bei kreuzenden highways, die weder über einen Kreuzungspunkt verfügen, noch als Brücke/Tunnel markiert sind, etc.). Das scheint bei Go Map!! nicht der Fall zu sein.
felipeeugenio (2025-07-10 19:17:34+00:00): Hola. El tag ref= es como para otra cosa.
Lo está usando más como para describir lo que agrega. Para eso se usa description=.

En este caso quizás ref= puede ser charlie, ya que es la tercera salida. Pero la palabra "taxiway" ya no forma parte de eso.
En todo caso una duda: es C o Charlie?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168755125
silversurfer83 (2025-07-10 18:23:57+00:00): Hi there :)

you shure about the hunting stand next to the soccer pitch?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12992913802

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168755260
Roette2000 (2025-07-11 01:28:34+00:00): This is only for hunting? Then, No. I think it was translated differently in Organic Maps and there are elevated seats at the marked spot :)
silversurfer83 (2025-07-12 06:20:37+00:00): Thanks for the speedy reply.

OrganicMaps is a great offline map (maybe switch to CoMaps in the future?) but it's not well suited for more than some POI-updates.

You added a hunting stand. Did you mean something like
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dbleachers
?
Roette2000 (2025-07-12 14:33:53+00:00): Thanks for the tip. I will do this. And yes, "bleachers" is what i meant to add and fits very nicely!
NieWnen (2025-07-10 18:43:37+00:00): Dopiero co tam byłem eh xd
rempshaener (2025-07-10 20:14:57+00:00): Hallo,
du hattest hier Punkte eines Gebäude und eines Parks verschoben.
Ich habe daher deinen Änderungssatz zurückgesetzt.
Bitte erfasse deine Änderungen erneut.
Viele Grüße
BCNorwich (2025-07-11 04:12:04+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've reverted this changeset because it dragged highways out of position. This could have disrupted routing.

Regards Bernard.
stillhart (2025-07-13 11:40:44+00:00): ⚡️ so fast
AndyB_66 (2025-08-31 18:20:21+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
StC (2025-07-12 19:48:30+00:00): Bonjour,

des commentaires plus explicites seraient appréciés. En l'occurrence, ce changeset a brisé la continuité d'un itinéraire pédestre et il est difficile de deviner l'intention. Je vais faire de mon mieux pour réparer.
rempshaener (2025-07-10 19:23:28+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap.
Du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Zu deiner Anpassung an https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147081014: Das bringt nicht viel, zumal das maxspeed=5 falsch ist. Daher: Bitte wieder rückgängig machen.
Das Routing-Problem ist knifflig.
Der Bodanweg ist so nah, dass auch das Verschieben der Adresse z.B. auf den Eingang nicht viel brächte. Dann wäre die Strecke immer noch 10 m kürzer.
Derzeit sehe ich keine Möglichkeit, das halbwegs im Standard zu lösen.
Viele Grüße
CRCulver (2025-07-14 15:32:37+00:00): There is no need to add direction=both tags to highway=stop nodes when they are at an intersection. Data consumers have always known that the location of this tag at an intersection applies to all arriving traffic.
beddy (2025-07-14 15:43:46+00:00): https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/39304 among many similar challenge fix-ups.  While reding https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dstop#Direction there is no specific requirement to make sure both tags are present on an all-way.  Thanks for pointing that out, but also no problem with continuing to add it to challenge tasks I found along the way.
CRCulver (2025-07-14 15:53:25+00:00): Thanks for drawing my attention to MapRoulette. I would consider complaining about lack of a direction= tag here to be a “false positive” in Osmose terms. After all, if this tag were necessary, one wouldn't need to rely on slow MapRoulette edit over time, one could just apply the tag at once to all nodes by doing an Overpass API query. I’ll go ahead and bring this issue up in the appropriate forum.
rskedgell (2025-07-11 09:04:06+00:00): What issue do you believe changing the correct tagging of highway=footway to the less specific highway=path fixed?
Kraeson (2025-07-11 09:15:00+00:00): I accidentally created the path incorrectly
aceman444 (2025-07-15 08:00:51+00:00): Zdravim, co to znamena "+firma" ?
CurlingMan13 (2025-11-14 01:42:38+00:00): parking lot aisles should be tagged as:
highway=service
service=parking_aisle

And not:
highway=classified

Updated accordingly.
eggie (2025-08-26 19:48:07+00:00): Koen. Je vraagt feedback ... 
Je tekent je pad wel erg willekeurig is terwijl je op de luchtfoto kunt zien hoe het werkelijk loopt. Probeer svp wat nauwkeuriger te werken. 
Je gebruikt BING als achtergrond. Beter is het om de PDOK te gebruiken. 

MVG
eggie
fudoreaper (2026-01-26 04:15:11+00:00): The Axworthy building overall is now marked as "layer=1". I don't think this is correct, it suggests the entire building is floating, as ground is layer 0. Organic maps doesn't render the building shape, only the building parts, resulting in disconnected parts.  Can I remove the layer tag (equivalent to setting layer to 0)?
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-12 00:02:46+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/201772019

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
dadavid (2025-07-11 11:05:21+00:00): hi, please do not add test data to osm.org. I have reverted your edits. 
In some cases, the testing environment at https://master.apis.dev.openstreetmap.org can be an alterantive

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168790004
mstrbrid (2025-08-22 19:09:52+00:00): Are cyclists permitted to go the other direction here?:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/152262096
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-29 09:35:34+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12993063445/history has fixme:type = fix that was added in this edit
what should be fixed here? do you need help with selecting better tags?
MapleTrees (2025-07-29 13:50:05+00:00): Yes. Unfortunately I don't know anything about the business beyond what I saw from signage
hoserab (2025-07-11 00:27:12+00:00): ... and split up 20th Street north of 33rd, to reflect the island in the middle that prevents traffic from turning left into/out of the parking lot at the "Marda Loop Centre" retail area. Seems my change summary got cut off/I accidentally screwed it up; oops.
rempshaener (2025-07-10 20:16:20+00:00): Hallo,
bitte halte einen Augenblick inne, deine Anpassungen brauchen einen grundlegenden Feinschliff.
Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2025-07-10 20:18:20+00:00): Bitte keine Hydranten mit Straßen verbinden.
Hydranten haben keine Adressen.
Bei fire_hydrant:position bitte „lane“ statt „street“ hinterlegen.
Bei water_source bitte „main“ statt „wasserleitung“ eintragen.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-07-12 00:02:42+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/4319437046
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/896989734

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
iso-lator (2025-07-12 06:22:39+00:00): Poprawione
Cayenne17 (2025-07-14 13:58:04+00:00): Bonjour,
Attention, il y a pas mal d'objets existants qui ont été convertis de parking à vélo (amenity=bicycle_parking) en emplacement de location de vélos (amenity=bicycle_rental) alors qu'il y a les 2.
Lorsqu'il y a les 2, il faut plutôt rajouter des nouveaux nœuds pour rajouter les emplacements de location de vélos.

D'où provient la source de données pour avoir fait de l'ajout en masse ?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168760196
C1tizenfour (2025-07-14 17:16:54+00:00): Bonjour,
Effectivement j'ai dû faire l'erreur de supprimer des parkings accolés aux bornes de vélo en libre service.
Je vais les rajouter. Je suis aller voir sur le terrain directement. J'ai une photo de chaque emplacement.
Senihtu (2026-02-06 08:05:53+00:00): Hi! 
Mit diesem Chnageset wurde der Wochenmarkt an die Kurmainzer Straße verschoben.
Ich möchte da nicht weiter rumpfuschen und hoffe, daß Du Dich da genügend auskennst und ihn wieder an seinen richtigen Platz setzen kannst.
mappende Grüße
Senihtu
5m4u9 (2025-07-11 02:24:58+00:00): Hola, bienvenida al mapa!

Vi que cambiaste la categoría de una calle de barrio a "carretera" y luego cambiaste el césped a "bosque", obviamente son errores muy comunes que muy probablemente es porque aún estás probando el editor y como funciona.

es mejor que te fijes cómo esta definido cada area y calle y su significado, hay un ícono (i) en la cabecera del formulario de cada elementos del mapa que puedes presionar y te mostrará un resumen de lo que representa.

no dudas en preguntar si hay dudas...
mueschel (2025-07-14 14:12:56+00:00): Hi,
could you check this node? What is "recycling:pile"?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12993203288#map=19/45.848219/3.531297