piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Vis_M (2025-04-25 16:08:10+00:00): Why did you reclassify it as residential road? This is an MDR and according to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India/Tags/Highway, it should be tagged as secondary.
VictorIE (2025-05-08 11:57:45+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1254167585

With heritage=2, what does the "2" mean? :)
geozeisig (2025-05-09 05:35:41+00:00): Hi,

heritage=2 means that the protection refers to a country. The gradations are the same as for admin_level.
VictorIE (2025-05-09 07:13:23+00:00): Thank you.
geozeisig (2025-05-09 12:30:35+00:00): heritage is the main tag for listed buildings.
Then you still need heritage:operator and ref:IE:niah.
See also
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:heritage#Ireland,_Republic_of
YTKacperSKY (2025-01-29 07:58:01+00:00): Why is there no_straight_on on this intersection?
Francoerbi41 (2025-01-29 11:12:48+00:00): Was a mistake, now is correct.
fe
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-12-17 16:22:15+00:00): Hello! looks like in your edit you wrong make the lake r1260423 broken and it can't been displayed now

It was fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160308129 , and suggest you use some validation tools for large relation (natural feature or administration boundary) such as JOSM
Karma Howlin (2025-02-04 05:03:56+00:00): Okay, thx for notes.
NeisBot (2024-12-11 07:36:38+00:00): Hi AMmyo, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 84% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 33 building(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=160156396
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-11 10:05:04+00:00): Looks like some contributors added buildings, while others decided to play 'build and remove' later ...
nevw (2024-12-11 20:30:10+00:00): Looks like some fixing up to be done still
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.06091&lat=-37.83143&zoom=12
nevw (2024-12-12 21:54:11+00:00): Select the ‘analyze on map’ tab to see where the gaps are
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=15621556&noCache=true&_noCache=on
nevw (2024-12-12 22:19:39+00:00): "probably needs cleaning up but I'm unsure how to do that "
You do need to fix this and a good start would be to use an editor like Josm that has better capacity to edit and validate such relations.
nevw (2024-12-12 22:41:06+00:00): If you find that you need help with this, let me know.
TheSwavu (2024-12-14 22:52:48+00:00): Hi nevw,

I went to try and fix this one, but it turns out we don't have permission to use the data source (https://www.aec.gov.au/electorates/gis/licence.htm).

Not sure how to resolve this one.
nevw (2024-12-15 00:25:54+00:00): Victoria is the only state that has boundary=political mapped and all those are state boundaries and tagged political_division = au_vic_la.
NT has Casuarina mapped and that appears in error along with the Kooyong boundary (political_division
  	au_cth_HoR).
I think it should be deleted if we don't have permission to use the source in osm.
The AEC redraws the boundaries before elections and it is probably better for them to provide mapping unless we get permission and have a regular import to keep them up to date.
nevw (2024-12-18 03:46:46+00:00): @GraziePrego do you want to try to get explicit permission from the source or use another source which we have permission to use so that we can add this to osm or shall we revert it?
nevw (2025-01-02 04:24:18+00:00): No response from mapper regarding the adding of Kooyong boundary political division from invalid source and will revert these changesets soon.
nevw (2025-01-03 07:08:54+00:00): I have reverted these now which added Kooyong boundary political division from an invalid source.
nevw (2025-01-03 22:20:47+00:00): Deleted incomplete Division of Kooyong in Vic as no suitable source found yet.
Ptigrouick (2024-12-12 13:03:17+00:00): Bonjour,
Le modification qui a été faite sur le nom de cette salle de fitness le 11/12/2024 n'est pas opportune. Le fait que ce soit une salle de sport à Saint-Gély n'a pas à figurer dans le nom, ces infos sont déjà portées par les tags et la localisation. Le nom du lieu est juste "Le Concept". Sinon vu que l'activité occupe tout le bâtiment j'ai déporté les tags sur le bâtiment et j'ai supprimé le noeud. J'ai aussi changé le tag leisure=sport_centre en leisure=fitness_centre qui est plus approprié pour ce cas.
𒂼𒄄　 (2024-12-11 09:45:05+00:00): لايوجد هنا استدارة للسيارات، هذا هو طريق لمرور القطار فقط، واذا مرت سيارة عليه فهذا مخالف للقانون.    
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341739555
Mohamed_Taha (2024-12-11 12:43:16+00:00): شكرا لتوضيحك لقد قمت بحذف الطريق
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-11 10:46:33+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Just a test?
afa ahmad (2024-12-11 10:59:20+00:00): I use this test to test transdem, because I am making this train route and need changes to this map to be converted in transdem and entered into the trainz simulator.
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-12 16:54:23+00:00): Thank you for your response.

Can you please revert your changes?
NeisBot (2024-12-11 09:22:37+00:00): Hi chillguy, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 80% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 8 highway(s)
- 9 building(s)
- 4 natural(s)
- 1 waterway(s)
- 7 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=160158089
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-11 10:03:53+00:00): These roads don't show on imagery from 11-30 And the buildings are still there.
Reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160161837
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-11 10:04:00+00:00): Hi chillguy,

Thank you for your private message.

I can revert these changes. Please note that this will also undo your subsequent changeset.

Would you like me to proceed with this?
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-11 10:25:12+00:00): Ok, the answers/comments seem to have just overlapped ...
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-12-11 10:36:34+00:00): oops
mavl (2024-12-11 13:17:59+00:00): Здравствуйте. Добавленная этим пакетом правок заправка уже обозначена:  
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/326199339
pitscheplatsch (2024-12-11 10:46:05+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.

Is this a duplicate of the following mapped beach: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1085798765

Thanks.
JeroenHoek (2024-12-11 10:10:57+00:00): Zou je iets duidelijker kunnen zijn dan 'Tag update'?

Als je een building-waarde wijzigt, probeer dan niet naar het generieke 'yes' te gaan, maar kies iets wat beter past ('industrial' bijvoorbeeld).
Ivar-- (2024-12-11 10:43:59+00:00): Hoi Jeroen!

Gekozen voor deze tekst omdat ik hier niet meer dan alleen een tag heb aangepast. Pas ik meer aan, dan zal ik dat zeker vermelden. 

Maar voor nu zag zelf hier niet de noodzaak om meer dat te vermelden. Ik zal je feedback mee nemen.

building=industrial had hier inderdaad ook gekund. Voor nu gekozen voor de standaard optie om de foute weg te halen.
JeroenHoek (2024-12-11 13:07:11+00:00): Nee de wijziging is klein, maar alleen 'Tag update' zegt niets over wat je changeset doet. Voor andere mappers is het wel fijn als dat uit de comment duidelijk is. Dus bijvoorbeeld 'Gebouw is geen huis' of 'Incorrecte building-tag aangepast'.
Jakka (2024-12-11 09:46:30+00:00): étrange ici WalOnMap montre Place Sainte-Sévère
https://geoportail.wallonie.be/walonmap#SHARE=28FC58EE6559A3C1E0630AB6A49DE4C3
delportemichel (2024-12-11 10:20:09+00:00): https://m.moovitapp.com/belgium-1682/poi/Voie%20du%20Vieux%20Ch%C3%AAne/t/fr?tll=50.541968_5.886331&ref=11&poiType=Street&customerId=4908&af_sub8=%2Findex%2Ffr%2Ftransport_en_commun-Voie_du_Vieux_Ch%25C3%25AAne-Belgium-street_22052634-1682%3Futm_source%3Dchatgpt.com&af_sub9=map&m_override=true
eggie (2024-12-11 10:00:57+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback: We zetten in OSM niet nogmaals een adres op een gebouwomtrek. Er zijn hier al adresnodes
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-11 10:02:35+00:00): Ik heb het adres weer verwijderd en de adresnodes wat uit elkaar gehaald.

MVG
eggie
HellMap (2024-12-11 17:04:53+00:00): Sveiki vēlreiz,

Ortofoto šis https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12411822762 izskatās pēc garenā "hump" ātrumvaļņa. Gribēju pārliecināties, vai te uzlikts cits vai arī šis bija domāts. Pie reizes varbūt varētu arī precizēt šo https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12411822756 "mini_bumps". Ortofoto tā vēl nav, bet Latvijā tādi ir ļoti reti (ja vispār ir) - iespējams bija domāts kas cits? https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:traffic_calming#By_causing_vertical_deviation

Par šīm divām ātruma zīmēm - 70 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/53242948 un 50 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12411822749 -  šie ātruma nav pielikti pašam ceļam https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/251542509. Ta kā gandrīz visi navigatori un datu lietotāji izmanto vērtības no paša ceļa, būtu svarīgāk norādīt tos vispirms ceļam un tad arī zīmes, ja ir vēlme.

Pieminēšu vēl, ka šādus gabaliņus https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341751896 dalīt nav vērts. Ātruma zīmes protams nebūs uzstādītas uzreiz krustojuma vidū un lielos krustojumos ir arī ar lielāku atkāpi. Praksē OSM šādi nekartē un zīmi ceļa sākumā attiecina uz šo ceļa gabalu no krustojuma. Citādi gandrīz visiem krustojumiem, kur ir zīme, sanāktu šādi darīt.

Paldies
kbargais (2024-12-11 18:23:34+00:00): Sveiks, 
Jā, tagad sapratu atšķirību par bump un hump. Izlabošu abus, otro uzlika tik šovasar.
Par 70 zīmēm un ceļiem, jā būšu piemirsis. 
Par mazajiem gabaliņiem ņemšu vērā paldies.
Labojumi iekš changeset #160179586.
Jordi MF (2024-12-11 23:50:19+00:00): Hola Ramon,

Gràcies per millora les dades d'OSM, però abans de moure un topònim damunt del punt que indica el mapa de l'IGN, assegura't que té sentit el canvi. Per exemple, les Hortes de Benitandús es van recol·locar just damunt del lloc on estan els terrenys de les hortes, però el mapa situa el topònim amunt, cap a dalt de la muntanya, al qual cosa no té cap sentit.

He tornat a situar les Hortes vora el riu, allà on actualment encara hi ha alguna horta cultivada.
eggie (2024-12-11 10:05:52+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback 
Je hebt de tagging van de administratieve grens verwijderd.
Waarom?
Ik draai deze changeset even terug.
Wanneer je bepaalde tagging niet begrijot kun je beter niet iets zomaar veranderen.

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-12-11 10:07:15+00:00): reverted by changeset #160161927
Mocht je nog vragen hebben stel ze gerust. 
MVG
eggie
Mirre85 (2024-12-11 10:13:46+00:00): Sorry dat ging perongeluk... ik wilde een kaart downloaden. Groet Mirre
eggie (2024-12-11 10:36:00+00:00): Oke.....   
No problem... Dit is de editor van OSM om kaarten te bewerken. 
Kaarten downloaden kan via andere sites.. beetje afhankelijk wat het doel is van je download. GPS?  Een bepaalde app? 



MVG
eggie
habi (2024-12-14 20:55:55+00:00): Ui, da ging etwas schief: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160159956

Ich habe mich heute gefragt, wieso die Wiesenstrasse so komisch durch den Liebefeldpark geht: https://pasteimg.com/image/screenshot-2024-12-14-at-215146.no8RX

Da das Kunstwerk schon vollständig als https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12613704 erfasst ist, werde ich deinen Änderungssatz aus Einfachheitsgründen grad komplett zurücksetzen, OK?
habi (2024-12-14 20:56:44+00:00): Revertiert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160291653
fortera_au (2024-12-12 01:12:26+00:00): Hi there and welcome to OSM! The only feedback I can give is that the name should be something that is signposted in person, is "elizabeth backway footpath" signed for this? If not, that should be removed, but everything else looks good on here from a quick look.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160160134
eggie (2024-12-11 12:26:33+00:00): Dag neel,

Lijkt me oke zo.

Hier een recentere foto.
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@52.29758,4.703726,18/?datastrip=20241102_PNEO-04

MVG
eggie
neel783dz (2024-12-11 12:46:13+00:00): Thank you eggie.
jbcharron (2024-12-11 19:39:12+00:00): Bonjour,

Pour information EDF n'est plus exploitant des postes électriques depuis plus de 15ans, le nouvel exploitant est Enedis

Bonne soirée
Jean-Baptiste
karr4s (2024-12-11 21:16:40+00:00): Bonjour. Je n'avais même pas remarqué que EDF avait été ajouté (au départ, je voulais juste ajouter l'abris-bus d'à côté mais je me suis loupé et, au lieu de supprimer le bâtiment, je me suis dit que je pourrais noter que c'est un poste électrique).

Je corrige de suite.
jbcharron (2024-12-12 08:38:28+00:00): Aucun soucis, j'essaie d'informer les utilisateurs pour faire baisser le nombre d'objets avec un exploitant incorrect même si EDF ou ERDF est toujours indiqué sur les portes des postes électriques
Bonne journée
Francesco Zanaboni (2024-12-11 09:55:10+00:00): changeset largo per via di alcune modifiche ad alcuni elettrodotti
Patchi (2024-12-12 06:56:44+00:00): Bonjour aPaloma,

Je ne suis pas tout à fait d'accord sur la modification de https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/229562940 et https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1005002995. Il s'agit de voies menant au parking de la gare. 

Or la page Wiki de service=parking_aisle est relativement claire sur ceci. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle
"[…] Road connects a parking lot or parking garage to a through street and serves as the entrance or exit of the lot or garage – use highway=service without service=* instead."
La page Wiki française pour le parking est aussi claire: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking
"[...] Les routes menant ou sortant d'un parking devraient être marquées en tant que highway=service".

L'ajout de service=parking_aisle pour ces 2 voies n'est donc pas tout à fait correct de mon point de vue, car nous n'avons pas à faire avec des voies de parking (une voie de parking est un chemin qu'emprunte les véhicules entre les rangées de places de parking).

Bonne continuation,

Patchi.
ratrun (2024-12-13 06:10:09+00:00): Hello,
I care about routing connectivity and found your detailed edits are containing a lot of connectivity issues. Here is one typical example of a way you created: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341763693#map=19/33.177024/131.539318
As you are not connecting your new ways to the residential highway nearby, automatic connectivity checkers such as OSM Routing view https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OSM_Inspector/Views/Routing detect a lot of errors in your edits.
Please connect the ways to the existing road network.
Another more minor issue is the amount of nodes you are creating the end of the  ways. These multiple nodes are superfluous.

Thanks,
ratrun
zstadler (2025-11-21 07:09:42+00:00): See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172060156#c1515009
ilias_ (2025-01-05 04:22:03+00:00): Reverted - Please discuss with the community before making such huge edits

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/161009053
habi (2024-12-12 21:32:49+00:00): Ciao Nino
Das Schild ist wahnsinnig hübsch, aber du hast es als https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:craft%3Dsignmaker erfasst, was ein "Schilder- und Lichtreklamehersteller" ist.
Ich würde das evtl. sogar als https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dartwork erfassen, zusammen mit `historic=yes`.
Gruss,
Habi

PS: Der Name is so ziemlich sicher auch nicht ganz korrekt :)
zuicz (2024-12-11 11:13:11+00:00): nie dodajemy zatok przystankowych jako osobnej linii, jeżeli nie jest ona fizycznie rozdzielona od głównej jezdni (jak np. jest to na Katowice AWF, Nowy Bytom Osiedle Kaufhaus)
zuicz (2024-12-11 11:15:10+00:00): a dobra, to barteQ dodał
adamos (2024-12-11 12:17:58+00:00): Po prostu naprawiam relaciji linii autobusowych na istniejących liniach
eggie (2024-12-11 10:41:48+00:00): Dag BMnkrt

Hier is iets verkeerd gegaan. Ik heb het lijnelement verwijderd.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=160162995

Vergeet svp niet om commentaar bij je uploads toe te voegen.
MVG
eggie
DP24PH (2026-06-27 16:10:24+00:00): WARNING! The footway close to FCIE Junction is illegal by law due to safety risks, whereas NO pedestrian crossings are allowed on 3x4 highway configuration. We have it took down for compliance to local laws.
SonghuaRiver (2026-06-30 12:10:56+00:00): Hi DP24PH,
Thank you for reaching out and removing the footway. Have a nice day!
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:16:57+00:00): Пожалуйста, соблюдайте правила комментирования ваших пакетов правок: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
eggie (2024-12-11 10:53:24+00:00): Svp commentaar toevoegen bij je uploads.
MVG
eggie
kitsee (2024-12-11 16:44:04+00:00): Hi there Nathan,
I've noticed you just a few change sets recently altering junctions like this and I don't feel like there is a justification for simplifying junctions like this. it seems like you simply deleting detail for no benefit.
Nathan_A_RF (2024-12-11 16:49:26+00:00): If you're referring to the road splitting at traffic islands at junctions, it is unnecessary complex geometry when the island can be represented by a tagged node. For more complex layouts or very large islands it makes sense to split the road, however in locations like this it's not worth it in my view.
kitsee (2024-12-11 17:01:03+00:00): simply tagging a node is meant to be a faster simpler less detailed method. You should always strive for greater detail on osm as time allows, this is what it means to micromap. you should not go around deleting high detail mapping just because it does not fit your lower standard. this is a smaller example but some of changes you've made to junctions in some of your recent changesets is rather worrysome. please also remember everything you are delete, someone spent time creating.
Nathan_A_RF (2024-12-11 17:22:14+00:00): One of my recent big edits was removing a dual carriageway that didn't exist, that's not a "lower standard", that's making the geometry fit the road layout.
kitsee (2024-12-11 18:08:44+00:00): If your refer to the one my Llantrisant then I need to double check it but they have be constructing a duel carriage way in that area. It may not be on imergry yet
kitsee (2024-12-12 00:44:36+00:00): ah you're refering to Crumlin, i agree with your change in Crumlin it is fine. I was refering to the few junctions you've deleted similar to this one around the A4119. some I agree they didn't represent the junction accurately but others, there was nothing wrong with them, they're only crime was not matching your standard.   this is out of context so i'll make another comment on that changeset
JudeKriwald (2024-12-11 10:59:09+00:00): Worth adding that these ways used to be a logging road but fell into disrepair during the civil war. Now there are hundreds of fallen trees and collapsed bridges. Not even passable with a motorbike.
aTarom (2024-12-12 12:09:15+00:00): Hi, please check this way in Sydney
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341779402/history
Raquel-garcia-import (2024-12-13 07:13:33+00:00): When i try to delete it, i can't find the road. It is like it doesn't exist
ratrun (2024-12-13 06:32:07+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM,

I spotted your edits as they are of low quality. These tertiary roads you are creating do not seem right. According to your change-set comment you are using Bing images as source. But I do not spot any ways on the locations where you created these new tertiary highways. Please describe the motivation of these edits and correct the data you entered.

thanks

ratrun
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:16:48+00:00): Пожалуйста, соблюдайте правила комментирования ваших пакетов правок: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
lipuma (2024-12-11 18:29:57+00:00): Hi Leo, ik heb geen kennis van deze zaak, maar klopt het dat 'Mr' soms met kleine letters en soms met een hoofdletter wordt geschreven? En dat 'Filet' soms met 2 L'en en soms met 1 wordt geschreven?

Het viel me alleen op. Ik bedoel niks negatiefs! ;-)

Groetjes en mapse,
lipuma
Leo Slager (2024-12-11 22:40:49+00:00): Dank voor de tip. Ik zal het eens vergelijken met hun website.
Dan lijkt Mr. Fillet de juiste naam te zijn.
Rukkhadevata (2024-12-17 15:26:15+00:00): Hello! According to Chinese tagging guidelines (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Zh-hans:%E4%B8%AD%E5%9B%BD%E6%A0%87%E6%B3%A8%E6%8C%87%E5%8D%97#%E5%90%8D%E7%A7%B0%E4%B8%8E%E5%90%8D%E8%AF%8D), names of automonous counties should not use names that are not commonly used by local, so I restored their names.
woodpeck_repair (2024-12-19 17:14:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 160403614 where the changeset comment is: revert various abandoned/razed railway edits
maraf24 (2025-10-06 19:40:55+00:00): Czy budowa tej stacji już się zakończyła? Wg note miało to się stać już rok temu.
tomzyl (2025-10-06 20:51:58+00:00): Dzięki za przypominajkę. Stan aktualny jest taki, że dopiero czerwiec/lipiec była w całości odpalana stacja. Nowszych wiesci brak, co może świadczyć, że PSE jeszcze nie odebrało obiektu.
aTarom (2024-12-11 16:03:17+00:00): Hola, gracias por editar, las etiquetas:
"via_id"
"cuadrícula_id"
se suben por error?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341779552/history
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341779551/history
Saludos
Bienson (2024-12-12 00:41:28+00:00): Hi,

Das Gelände um https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1332727479 wurde umgebaut (siehe NRW iDOP), vorher war es korrekt. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1341779633 wurde abgerissen.
pkn (2024-12-12 10:38:10+00:00): Hi Bienson,
sorry. Das hatte ich übersehen. Ich hatte mit den Luftbildern von 2023 abgeglichen. Ist korrigiert.
Es wäre hilfreich, bei z.B. abgerissenen Gebäuden, das Objekt nicht einfach zu löschen, sondern den Lebenszyklus-Präfix https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lebenszyklus-Pr%C3%A4fix zu verwenden. Das fällt beim Editieren dann sofort auf.

Beispiel: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/493919837

Gruß
Peter
AndyB_66 (2024-12-12 08:16:37+00:00): Пожалуйста, соблюдайте правила комментирования ваших пакетов правок: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Good_changeset_comments
Szymson (2024-12-11 17:31:20+00:00): Warto nadmienić, że na razie        
  nie będzie możliwości zawracania na rondzie:
https://www.metropolitalna-zadanie1.pl/2024/12/11/wprowadzenie-czasowej-organizacji-ruchu-wg-projektu-omt-1-17-23-w-dniu-18-12-2024-r-ul-lotnicza-miszewo/
Więc te ogryzki:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1338813915
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1338813916
Pozostaną zamknięte
Marek-M (2024-12-11 19:08:46+00:00): Super, dzięki za informację. Na FB Gminy Żukowo nie było takich informacji.
mos_next_door (2024-12-11 13:32:36+00:00): Весь полигон с кустарником удалять явно не стоило. Подрезать - может быть. Восстановите или я откачу правку?
mavl (2025-05-13 15:08:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:07:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].
mavl (2025-05-13 15:08:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 166207855, 166207980, 166207904, 166207831 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: poor mapping, road removal - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/17614].