piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Dodko (2026-04-01 08:40:08+00:00): Keď budeš volať hasičov čo im povieš tá budova bez adresy?
Normálne ak má budova pridelenú adresu treba ju pridať.
anirud (2026-04-01 09:41:12+00:00): Je mnoho budov bez akéhokoľvek čísla - tam ako zavoláš hasičov? Pochybujem, že niekto vie súpisné číslo svojej garáže alebo odľahlej stavby, keď bude volať požiarnikov.

A za ďalšie, je zvláštne, keď jeden dom má adresu "A. Hlinku 323/43, Báhoň", a hneď vedľa stojaci dom má adresu "Báhoň 324" (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/60983397) - je vôbec správne uvádzať názov ulice pre budovu bez o.č., aj keď leží na tej ulici?
Dodko (2026-04-01 10:47:34+00:00): Budova nemala názov ulice ten si pridal ty pred 6. dňami.

Keď budove pridelil obecný úrad adresu a je v OSM zapísaná nevidím žiaden dôvod ju z OSM vymazať aj keď sa ti zdá že je nepotrebná.

Objednáš si stavebný materiál, dopravca dá adresu do navigácie a zloží ti tam kam potrebuješ. Bez adresy ho ako znaviguješ kde má prísť?

Nové pravidlá sú ak obec pridelí adrese ulicu musí prideliť aj orientačné číslo. V minulosti mohli byť pomenované ulice a adresa mohla mať len súpisné bez orientačného.

Ak voláš hasičov nadiktuješ číslo najbližšej budovy a nemusíš strácať čas vysvetľovaním kde si a ako sa tam dostanú.

Vlastník budovy je povinný mať viditeľne označenú budovu tabuľkou so súpisným číslom a tabuľkou s orientačným číslom, ak je určené.
https://www.slov-lex.sk/ezbierky/pravne-predpisy/SK/ZZ/1990/369/20250401#paragraf-2c.odsek-4
anirud (2026-04-03 19:31:45+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180828020
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:36:43+00:00):  Partially reverted in changeset id:180495741
dp7 (2026-03-30 10:40:07+00:00): Ciao Luciano, benvenuto in Openstreetmap e grazie per il tuo contributo.
Devo però segnalarti alcuni problemi con le tue modifiche:
- è stata inserita una linea non definita, credo si tratti di un sentiero ma non è stato specificato;
- è stato inserito il numero 546 come nome di un sentiero preesistente : questo non è corretto, il nome e/o il numero vanno eventualmente definiti nella relazione, non nella highway.
Se hai bisogno di aiuto fammi sapere.
MappingMore (2026-03-27 08:58:35+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180491344
pwbriggs (2026-04-01 06:51:56+00:00): This looks good to me, except that abbreviated names should generally be expanded: "Ste" -> "Suite" and "Ct NE" -> "Court Northeast". This is because computers find it easier to abbreviate full names for display purposes, whereas it becomes much more ambiguous when a user of OpenStreetMap data wants the full name. "St" could be "Street" or "Saint," and so on. You get the idea.

But that's a minor bit of feedback. Thanks for the contribution; I really appreciate it.
domi_id (2026-03-28 10:19:50+00:00): Appreciate adding levels, but why did you move the buildings? Literally the last changeset for The Sessile says that features are aligned with GPS. But now, suspiciously, it aligns with Bing Maps Aerial.
JJ_P (2026-03-28 11:23:17+00:00): Hello! I didn't want to harm the location of the building, I was looking for a satellite image that would show the building more clearly in order to correct it and apply all building parts with floors.
domi_id (2026-03-29 13:09:46+00:00): Aerial and satellite imagery is often off by many meters, which is why it needs to be aligned with GPS traces: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_aerial_imagery.

If you don't have GPS traces for the location, you need to be extra careful and check if any features that you modify have been previously aligned, and use them to offset the imagery. I will move the buildings back to the correct location.
JJ_P (2026-03-30 05:24:09+00:00): I understand you. If you move buildings, can you not delete my building parts?
domi_id (2026-04-03 06:59:51+00:00): Of course :)
JJ_P (2026-04-03 07:06:22+00:00): Thank You! )
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-01 23:28:45+00:00): Reverted SEO spammer naming a building after one tenant (with no other descriptive tags)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183522208
EneaSuper (2026-03-26 12:48:06+00:00): Sorry, why did you rename the beach in Cyrillic?
gscholz (2026-05-03 06:27:20+00:00): Hi AlhassaneDiallo,
your recent cahngesets have left behind a lot of errors regarding overlappin and self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-9.57511&lat=11.14385&zoom=8&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-10.08292&lat=11.01447&zoom=8&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
eggie (2026-03-26 14:57:46+00:00): Dag Paul,

De rest van de constructiontagging ook verwijderd.

MVG
eggie
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:47:28+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180577025
arjunaraoc (2026-03-27 01:31:55+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180450776
007Transformer (2026-03-30 11:26:09+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180624839
rajdhani (2026-03-30 00:36:47+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:180607554
felipeeugenio (2026-03-26 12:49:11+00:00): Hola. Buenos días.
Pasaste un camino de track a path. Por path no pueden andar vehículos 4 ruedas, por track si. Estás seguro del cambio?
Como norma general, te pedimos por favor tomar contacto con la comunidad en el chat en el link en mi Bio para hacer este tipo de cambios.

gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180451387
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-22 14:27:10+00:00): Cleaned up name=* in changeset 184434889

https://osm.org/changeset/184434889
VictorIE (2026-03-28 17:31:17+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1493067529/ 

Just be careful to not connect power lines to non-power features. :)

Separately, if you look at the 
Esri World Imagery for here, you can be much more precise with the road layout.
MFlamm (2026-03-26 14:49:32+00:00): Hello!
Thank you for your interest in mapping bicycle related tags. 
However, please be extra careful with using the tag "bicycle=no", because it will completely block routing algorithms. 
In this changeset, your edit will degrade routing from north-east to south-west on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285135175 because this segment of Rte de Bois-Brûlé only has a dedicated cycleway in one direction. 

Furthermore, can you please explain what added value you see in adding a "bicycle=no" on all road segments with dedicated cycleways?
IanBennett (2026-03-26 15:51:48+00:00): Hi - Indeed - you are correct that there is a short section of road where the bicycle path joins the road to allow space for a bus stop. (I have just gone out to check!)

Swiss law requires cyclists to use bicycle paths where they exist and on certain roads prohibits cycling (e.g. busy intersections, major roads, etc.) usually sign posted.  Since many cycling applications (Komoot, Strava, Wandrer, etc.) make use of OSM data for route planning and as an avid cyclist, I believe it is important to ensure that these applications maximize routing on bicycle paths (where available) and do not encourage cyclists to use the road. By going out and cycling around my local commune (Grand-Saconnex), I am hoping to have the cycling information as accurate as possible.  If this goes against the general practice with OSM, then I will avoid "bicycle=no" unless explicitly prohibited - or where it simply does not make sense (e.g. at the airport when boarding a plane!). 

Please advise how I remove/correct this edit.  I will be more careful in future.
MFlamm (2026-03-26 16:19:17+00:00): Thank you for your explanation. 

I will correct the tagging of that segment, as I noticed another problematic tag (cycleway:both=separate). 

As "bicycle=no" blocks routing, it is usually sufficient to put that tag on segments near dangerous intersections. Routers will then avoid routing on the whole length of the road... This way of doing  is also more error-friendly, as yet noticed for that segment ;-)

Since several years, I have been systematically maintaining bicycle related data in Geneva in order to optimise routing. So I guess (and I hope :-) that you will notice only a limited number of improvements to be made.
Don't hesitate to mail me if you have a doubt about a specific place, because mapping for routing is quite tricky.

That being said, I am fully aware that the area of Rte de Ferney is currently undergoing severe roadworks and that the cycling conditions will evolve a lot in the upcoming months. Would you agree to help me on specific issues?
IanBennett (2026-03-26 16:52:40+00:00): I'll be more than happy to help out - and may just notify you of anomalies I find - rather than update OSM directly.  The Rte de Ferney is extremely fluid and will remain so until the tram line is extended to Ferney Voltaire (scheduled end-2028) and there is little point attempting to keep up with all the changes.  The one exception is the segment from Rte des Morillions to Av de l'Ariana that will remain closed to all traffic until the tramway is complete and after that will only be opened to pedestrians and cyclists.
MFlamm (2026-03-26 17:13:11+00:00): Thanks, let's do it this way if you prefer. 

I will try to keep up the map when major and lasting changes occur due to the tram construction. My main source is this official website (https://www.ge.ch/blog/tram-nations/avis-travaux-info-mobilite-lancement-travaux-chantier-du-tram-nations-26-08-2025), but I also visit the area occasionally (last time on this tuesday). I started to map the tram construction this morning and I have some additional efforts ahead ;-)

Cheers, Michael
Yunan973 (2026-04-01 17:12:23+00:00): Bonjour,

dans une relation multipolygone, outer c'est pour l'extérieur (le périmètre), inner pour l'intérieur (les zones exclues), pas le contraire.
J'ai corrigé.
isithran (2026-04-02 03:05:50+00:00): Bonjour Yunan973,
Toutes mes excuses pour la confusion, je le note pour la suite.
Merci pour la correction effectuée, je regarde ce que je dois changer pour mes changements appliqués sur le téléport de la Papeno'o, en Polynésie.
NeisBot (2026-03-26 12:42:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1370853916 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Gold buyer"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-04-03 16:33:17+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180821402
(Restore previous tags. No changes)
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:39:52+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:180575893
eggie (2026-03-26 14:45:28+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
iandees (2026-03-26 13:29:21+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13679959668 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180454060, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:37:28+00:00):  Partially reverted in changeset id:180573377
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:28:53+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180490643
Michael Collins (2026-04-09 20:19:46+00:00): I know the Esri World Imagery is difficult to interpret. It is sometimes helpful to look at some other imagery for context. Many of the buildings in this changeset were rectangular, when it is clear from other imagery that they are round huts. It's safer to guess that buildings in these settlements are round, rather than square. Also, there were buildings placed where no buildings exist. In particular, a few were placed in drainages, where it wouldn't be a good idea to place a structure due to the possibility of flooding. So, you might want to look more closely before placing a building in a drainage.
iandees (2026-03-26 13:29:26+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13679907888 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180454064, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
NeisBot (2026-03-26 13:03:41+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 25 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/85053507 v5 | 13 crossings
https://osm.org/way/85054310 v5 | 12 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/986873805 v3

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=180452952
iandees (2026-03-26 13:29:30+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/986873805 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180454069, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:27:21+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180489001
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-01 14:30:59+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180489001
NeisBot (2026-03-26 13:03:42+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 33 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/397146311 v16 | 11 crossings
https://osm.org/way/85060842 v24 | 9 crossings
https://osm.org/way/85050941 v8 | 8 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/986875641 v4
https://osm.org/node/986877909 v7

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=180452969
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:24:33+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180486236
pitscheplatsch (2026-04-01 14:29:20+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180486236
Henry572 (2026-03-27 07:20:49+00:00): Hallo Markus Reuter,
sieht gut aus, danke für die Aktualisierung. Nur eine kleine Anmerkung zu den Öffnungszeiten: Streng genommen müsste man ein Semikolon statt Komma schreiben, aber weil hier das Komma verschiedene Tage trennt, kommt es in dem Fall aufs Gleiche raus.
Viele Grüße,
Hendrik
kingkingHK (2026-03-27 06:07:09+00:00): Really?
Kovoschiz (2026-03-27 08:01:11+00:00): @kingkingHK You should realize from "123"
Kovoschiz (2026-03-27 08:01:34+00:00): Don't upload personal-use or test edits. This is considered vandalism.
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:38:11+00:00):  Partially reverted in changeset id:180573677
Ltrlg (2026-04-18 20:33:31+00:00): Est-ce vraiment nécessaire de créer un tronçon de route de 65 cm (way/1493078721) ? Quand bien même la séparation entre communes serait pertinente (ce dont je doute), il n’y a aucune chance que le nom porté ait été reconnu par la commune dans laquelle il se trouve, par conséquent ça ne peut pas être considéré comme une correction.
mw014 (2026-04-20 12:07:11+00:00): Question compliquée je pense ,si je comprends bien les choses; j'ai peut-être surcorrigé...
En théorie ce nom de voie n'existe pas dans les limites cadastrales de cette commune (bref la raison d'être de pifodrome),
mais dans la pratique, créer ces petits tronçons de route pour corriger fait très usine à gaz, et complique la maintenance pour peu de gains réel oui...
L'objectif n'est pas d'améliorer la carte sur ces changesets mais plutôt d'éliminer les mauvaises données envoyées aux outils qui permettent d'améliorer la carte (typiquement pifomètre)
Mon approche ou compréhension du sujet n'est peut-être pas la bonne? merci du correctif
Ltrlg (2026-04-20 15:52:07+00:00): En l’occurrence, si Pifo* signale un problème ici, c’est Pifo* qu’il faut corriger à mon avis. Il est généralement considéré comme une mauvaise pratique d’attacher les voiries aux limites communales, qui ont parfois des formes bizarres pour des raisons historiques (et ne passent pas nécessairement précisément au milieu des rues qui devraient les définir¹). C’est donc normal que certains highway=* dépassent un peu de la limite pour en rejoindre un autre. Cependant, il est important pour certaines applications (guidage GPS par exemple) que le linéaire des voiries corresponde raisonnablement à la vision qu’une personne normale aurait. Un bon outil de détection de problèmes devrait être capable d’ignorer une petite proportion de voie dépassant les limites communales strictes.

¹ de plus, OSM ne fait pas forcément passer le filaire au centre d’une rue, par exemple si des parking=lane sont cartographiés comme surfaces.
mw014 (2026-04-20 20:40:26+00:00): Alors là, c'est un sujet qui va largement au-delà de mes connaissances !
Et je découvre que c'est débatu dans le topic "pour-corriger-les-rues-a-cheval-voici-pifodrome"...
Pire que ça, en bon débutant il me semble avoir parfois légèrement modifié une limite administrative pour la lier à la route 🤦
C'est dommage car Pifo* a clairement été une porte d'entrée pour OSM en tant que débutant
Je vais oublier Pifodrome pour l'instant
mw014 (2026-04-20 20:55:16+00:00): "pour-corriger-les-rues-a-cheval-voici-pifodrome":https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/pour-corriger-les-rues-a-cheval-voici-pifodrome/28388
Kugelbaum (2026-04-25 07:41:14+00:00): Hi,

Could you please stop adding test data on live openstreetmap?
demon_box (2026-03-26 18:21:28+00:00): Ciao LiDaGiu, ti segnalo che in Italia il civico identifica il punto di accesso (entrata) e NON l'intero edificio. Infatti un edificio può avere più entrate e di conseguenza più numeri civici. 
Quindi hai 2 opzioni: 
1. Se conosci esattamente la posizione (entrata) del civico che stai mappando metti tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su un nodo del perimetro dell'edificio (aggiungendo anche il tag entrance sullo stesso nodo);
2. Se invece non hai questa informazione così precisa devi mettere tutti i tags dell'indirizzo su nodo adiacente ma STACCATO dal poligono dell'edificio.
Ho già proceduto con le correzioni del caso. 
Grazie e BuonMapping!
dankarran (2026-03-26 17:22:23+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap!

If you're keen on adding paths around Douglas - I've added some notes in places where I think there's probably a path but don't know for sure. Feel free to add them if you know, or comment on the note and I can add them from aerial imagery.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=14/54.16944/-4.47822&layers=N
bartgron (2026-03-27 21:23:25+00:00): Zestaw zmian został wycofany z powodu błędów.
Pozdrawiam
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:48:57+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180577717
Wildsharky (2026-04-01 14:41:51+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180576391
NeisBot (2026-03-26 13:36:17+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your changesets and noticed that the cumulative count of your recent edits (4 changesets) shows that 406 of your last 436 changes were deletions. This is quite an unusual proportion, so I wanted to check with you.

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

#DeletionsCheck #Cumulative
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious?uid=22938279
pitscheplatsch (2026-03-26 18:22:37+00:00): Hallo Wapiti_Ann, 

wieso wurden zahlreiche Hauszufahrten in diesem Changeset gelöscht, welche von anderen Mitgliedern gemappt wurden?

In den Satellitenbildern sind alle meine Stichproben zu sehen.

Danke und Grüße
iandees (2026-03-26 14:29:53+00:00): Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/986871880 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180456779, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
eggie (2026-03-26 14:55:44+00:00): Dag Crielie. Er was al een adresnode. Daar heb ik de info mee samengevoegd.
MVG
eggie
retony (2026-05-15 09:59:52+00:00): Hi... there were deleted several existing path's in this changeset, please revise your changes! Thank you.
Belle Haven Mapper (2026-04-04 04:16:37+00:00): Do you have a source for biking being prohibited on the sections of Fort Hunt Road and Marina Drive you listed here?
gscscnd (2026-03-26 15:42:35+00:00): Od kiedy to wszystko jest zelektryfikowane?
GinaroZ (2026-04-05 15:24:38+00:00): If the Tesco is not complete then the shop=supermarket should not yet be added :)
ajmat (2026-03-28 15:51:31+00:00): Partially Revert of 180451377
Fredrik Bore (2026-04-05 18:43:53+00:00): Why were new nodes created for some of the most popular mountains in the world? For instance, the K2 node was moved from the actual peak to a random point on the border, and a new node was created for K2. Related changeset 180455073
bxl-forever (2026-03-26 14:36:21+00:00): Hello.

I regret to inform you that both ICHEC and Chez Tom were already on the map.  We had to undo your edit.  (Some tags for the restaurant were useful and I transferred them to the existing POI.)

If you want to add information to the map, always make sure to check what data exists prior to editing.  To do so in Every Door, you must tap the screen to refresh data on a given location, and you will see the information known to the database.

Thanks in avance.
dcapillae (2026-03-26 14:16:39+00:00): Hola.

¿En qué consisten estos cambios? El nombre de la línea no ha cambiado.
dcapillae (2026-03-26 14:21:38+00:00): Entiendo que lo que ha querido hacer es mapear el recorrido de la línea durante la Semana Santa.

Si es ese el caso, las relaciones se eliminarán, ya que no mapeamos objetos o eventos de naturaleza temporal. Véase guía de buenas prácticas: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features