piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
silversurfer83 (2024-04-11 01:59:54+00:00): I dare to disagree.
Without knowing what's on the ground how do you know there's not a vacant shop which is something absolutely worth mapping IMHO. There's a reason for the lifecycle prefixes.
Also: as long as the data isn't redacted or actually deleted in the database it's not really gone. You don't really save anything by "deleting" these nodes.
Friendly_Ghost (2024-04-11 02:47:02+00:00): A vacant shop isn't a shop so there wouldn't be anything to map there. 

What you save by deleting outdated objects is that you get them out of mappers' way. Otherwise we might as well implement a policy of stripping outdated objects of their tags and then leaving them around, which I suppose wouldn't bother any end users and would satisfy the "keep the history" guideline, but I have a strong suspicion that that idea would upset more than a few mappers.
osmuser63783 (2024-04-11 08:19:45+00:00): At least in my city the convention is essentially that a POI node represents a shopfront (though the nodes typically duplicate the address tags). When the shop closes, we mark it as disused. When it reopens, we update the tags.

While it's closed, StreetComplete, Every Door etc. will regularly ask their users if someone new has moved into the vacant unit, so keeping the node around is practically useful, it encourages resurveying.

If the building is demolished or the shop unit converted to residential, we of course delete the node.
pitfire (2024-04-11 10:22:09+00:00): Without regional review, the approach is not acceptable.
disused:shop is a clear indication that part of the building has teaching status and therefore no remodeling has taken place
silversurfer83 (2024-04-11 16:17:26+00:00): I do not think it to be a good idea to simply delete all those POIs without some kind of review or discussion.

Please undo the deletion part.
Friendly_Ghost (2024-04-11 16:25:53+00:00): osmuser, you mentioned address tags. I made sure to mark all closed POIs with address tags as disused. 

pitfire, where did you get that interpretation from?

silversurfer, the review has already been done by the mappers who have marked the POIs as closed.
Tjuro (2024-04-11 21:57:51+00:00): Good initiative, a while back I was searching for poi’s using OM, I found one walked a good 30 minutes to it only to find no shop there. The shop had a “closed” in French postfixed in an edit a few months back.
Filip009 (2024-04-10 06:07:18+00:00): Zdravím, ste si istý, že povrch tohto chodníka je drevo? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1271299957
joel56dt (2024-04-10 04:30:40+00:00): Hello, it looks like you changed the address but did not change the location of this node. You can either move this node to the correct location or delete this one and create another at the correct location.

Thanks,
Joel
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-10 14:17:45+00:00): Good building outlines.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149797445
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-09 23:30:23+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/180233155

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
mikimapbuilder (2024-04-10 06:32:56+00:00): Removed descriptive road name
PerpetualHiker (2024-04-10 23:54:32+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery; Mapillary.
nevw (2024-04-10 05:59:53+00:00): Hi, house owners names are not mapped on osm and the building shape should follow the outline of the roofline. You need to zoom in closer to map the building shape and press Q to square the corners. We who monitor others work are very fussy sometimes ☺️
nevw (2024-04-12 08:02:37+00:00): no response, fix shape, tags, name
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:04+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:24:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:24:58+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149801032 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15942].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:21+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:17+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800968 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15941].
AndresDuhour (2024-07-16 11:45:46+00:00): Buen día! quería hacerte una consulta sobre el cambio de categoría de la calle a primary. Estuve trabajando en la clasificación de rutas trunk y veía algunas cuestiones a mejorar en Mendoza respecto de las rutas primary, y quería consultar por tu conocimiento local. Me parece que la RP13 podría ser una alternativa mejor. Pero también haría falta pensar la conexión de este a oeste entre las autopistas o rutas trunk. Te agradezco el comentario. Saludos!
Pich14 (2024-07-16 22:56:06+00:00): Buenas, si te refieres a la Avenida General San Martín, le puse esa categoría de carretera primaria porque esa calle es una de las más importantes en el Gran Mendoza (si es que no es la más importante) por un hecho histórico-cultural. Con respecto a la RP13 (Boulogne Sur Mer), a mi consideración es una calle menor a San Martín en cuanto a importancia.

Además, la Avenida General San Martín conecta directamente con múltiples rutas y servicios esenciales, facilitando el acceso y la movilidad dentro de la ciudad. La RP13, aunque importante, no tiene el mismo nivel de conexión y relevancia en el tránsito diario y la estructura vial de la región. Existen vías como la Avenida Emilio Civit o Avenida Juan B. Justo que conectan directamente con la RP13, pero no tienen la misma influencia y flujo de tráfico que la Avenida General San Martín.

Entiendo que es fundamental considerar la conexión de este a oeste entre las autopistas o rutas trunk. En ese sentido, creo que podrían evaluarse otras opciones o mejoras en la infraestructura existente para lograr una mejor interconexión sin desmerecer la importancia de la Avenida General San Martín como una vía primaria.

Agradezco tus observaciones y estoy abierto a más sugerencias para mejorar la clasificación y la red vial en OpenStreetMap. Saludos!
AndresDuhour (2024-07-17 13:32:42+00:00): Buen día! Muchas gracias por la respuesta y la información. La intención del trabajo que estoy haciendo se tratar de contar con un criterio uniforme en todo el país. Claramente como vos decís hay que clasificar según la importancia, que es la convención de todo OSM: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Key:highway#Presunciones, donde la jerarquía de cada calle o ruta no tiene que ver con su infraestructura sino con su importancia en la red vial, vista en conjunto. Así que es importante para saber si la Avenida San Martín es más importante que la RP13. Luego escribo en un mensaje privado para consultar alguna otra cosa.
Saludos!
Andrés
mavl (2024-04-10 03:12:25+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800880 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15940].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:12:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800880 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15940].
emersonveenstra (2024-04-11 10:41:20+00:00): Hi there,

Roads like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/830222572#map=19/44.26648/-105.45795 don't seem to fit the definition of unclassified, could you explain a bit why you decided to change them all?
Mr Satterly (2024-04-11 16:39:23+00:00): Thanks for looking. I'd be happy if anyone would review this area. I've asked several times in the past with no luck. I read the wiki, forums, and browse other areas, but in the end I'm the only local editor in the region and have been so for many years. It says by consensus, but there is no consensus, just me unfortunately.

These are parts of the road where the city will put in the road up to the property line. In the county, the state does the same thing and those are helpful because it makes it much easier to turn around in one or park for a second as it's still a public road, or, at least a section.

My reasoning was they are a public road (or at least section), not residential or track, usable by a car (can park or turn around in), doesn't connect to anything important.

I try to keep granularity to somewhat a minimum to not map to extremes, but since these served a purpose I went ahead with it. There are occasionally junk cars with police warning notices to move the car or city workers park in them to do some sort of nearby work.

Many times ranchers and property owners do not finish a road, other times they will often become a subdivision and the road is finished.
emersonveenstra (2024-04-17 11:12:33+00:00): Sorry for the late response, and thanks for the explanation, it makes more sense now

Also yeah, the average in the US currently is about 1 mapper per 5,000 square miles, and outside of major cities it's probably 1 mapper per 8-10k square miles, so there's a lot of places where there's only one mapper, sadly
mavl (2024-04-10 03:12:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800880 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15940].
mavl (2024-04-10 03:12:27+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 149800880 where the changeset comment is: The changesets are reverted [DWG has the request to revert the changesets. Reason: vandalism - https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15940].
mcliquid (2024-04-10 11:06:43+00:00): Hi,

please note: 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!
真中あお (2024-04-11 00:52:05+00:00): Sorry, I caused this problem by misoperation. I was looking through the data around Paris to learn how to tag artworks, but I didn't notice that I had edited it.
不好意思 ，是我误操作导致了这个问题。我为了学习怎样标注艺术品，浏览了巴黎一带的数据，但没注意到自己编辑了这里。
真中あお (2024-04-11 01:18:03+00:00): I've undone the mis-edit. Still, I  apologize for leaving such a big box of changeset.
误编辑我已经撤销了，再次为留下了这么大一个框的变更集抱歉。
pitscheplatsch (2024-04-10 06:03:21+00:00): Hi JPirrello,

same again, may we know the reason behind removing all service ways in this area which have been mapped by a different contributor? Thanks.

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
JPirrello (2024-04-10 13:25:47+00:00): this parking lot was combined into other lot.

The bus and taxi drop off entry lane was relocated to the side of the lot closest to International Drive and uses the same entry/exit point.
ConradWard (2024-04-14 23:02:14+00:00): Hello AntiCompositeNumber,
I think you accidentally did the opposite of what you said you were doing in the forum. The larger cities of NH (Nashua, Concord, Portsmouth, etc) are all still towns while you switched Franklin to a city. I do agree with your forum post, though.
Thanks,
-Conrad
AntiCompositeNumber (2024-04-14 23:05:16+00:00): Whoops, forgot a invert. I will fix it.
AntiCompositeNumber (2024-04-14 23:11:13+00:00): Done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150012719
ConradWard (2024-04-15 00:17:45+00:00): Awesome!
pitscheplatsch (2024-04-10 06:02:36+00:00): Hi JPirrello,

may we know the reason behind removing all service ways in this area which have been mapped by a different contributor? Thanks.

https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=149800749#16/28.4117/-81.4639

---
Detected by #SuspiciousOpenStreetMap
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-suspicious
JPirrello (2024-04-10 13:24:21+00:00): Parking Lot was recently repaved, restriped and access points chnaged.  OSM is not accurate
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-04-10 08:38:55+00:00): relation 17451701 is missing "to" member after Auto check. I will fix it. Thank you for your contribution.
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-04-10 08:39:56+00:00): https://imgur.com/a/F1MjZQi
mavl (2024-04-10 03:12:27+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 149799923, 149799940, 149800127, 149800130, 149800131, 149800132.
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 19:23:04+00:00): Hello,
These have both been fixed now, but there was a problem with the revert attempt in this changeset.
3 different accounts were used to vandalise these relations at the same time, and any revert needs to revert the effects of all accounts at the same time, otherwise it won't work..
When dealing with only a few objects as here it's perhaps easiest to go "object by object" and pick a known clean one to revert back to,  which is what I did with the GPSS pipeline in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149830461 .
Cheers,
Andy
mavl (2024-04-10 03:19:22+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 149799851, 149799856, 149799857, 149799858, 149799859, 149799860, 149799861, 149799863, 149799864, 149799866, 149799867, 149799868, 149799869, 149799875, 149799876, 149799878, 149799879, 149799880, 149799881, 149799882, 149799883, 149799884.
mavl (2024-04-10 03:25:06+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 149799711, 149799752, 149799753, 149799756, 149799757, 149799758, 149799760, 149799763, 149799764, 149799765, 149799766, 149799768, 149799770, 149799771, 149799773, 149799775, 149799776, 149799777.
AndersAndersson (2024-04-10 04:55:41+00:00): It is still issues with this relation:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12189102
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 17:18:08+00:00): Not sure what happened, but lots of extra things were still in the relation here. I've restored https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/12189102 back to the pre-vandalism version.  It might be worth logging a bug against whatever it was that managed to introduce the extraneous stuff in here?
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 19:12:59+00:00): Ah - I see you're ahead of me and have fixed a number of subsequent ones with level0 :)
arjunaraoc (2024-04-10 05:26:12+00:00): Hello Harsha1999. Can you share the basis for modifying residential areas? The earlier ones seem to be more accurate. Yours seem to  be  more like a simplification of geometry which can be done through a program if required.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149801613
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 19:24:01+00:00): (just for info) this looks OK to me too now, thanks!
map per (2024-04-20 09:59:29+00:00): Hallo CommanderStorm,

ich hab die Geometrieänderung am MI zurückgesetzt, weil das Gebäude im Erdgeschoss nicht exakt rechtwinklig ist, sondern an einigen Stellen dreieckige "Erweiterungen" hat.

Viele Grüße
map per
Zyll kwon (2024-04-11 23:29:41+00:00): Itu
Road–Runner (2024-04-23 22:33:21+00:00): Wie es scheint hast du anstatt Adressen zu ergänzen, ständig fälschlicherweise Ferienwohnungen erstellt. Wenn du weitere Bearbeitungen via Organic Maps machen willst, würde ich dich bitten, etwas sorgfältiger zu arbeiten und dich hier etwas einzulesen: https://www.openstreetmap.org/help.

Ich werde alle verdächtigen Edits nun zurücksetzen.
---
It seems that instead of adding addresses, you have been falsely constantly adding vacation rentals. If you want to make further edits via Organic Maps, I would ask you to work a little more carefully and read up on it here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/help.

I will now reset all suspicious edits.
Dimitar155 (2024-04-10 12:09:38+00:00): Здравей Алена,

Ген. Паренсов м/у Иван Шишман и 6-ти септември е затворена за всички МПС, освен за автомобили на МВР.

Поздрави,
Митко
StC (2024-04-28 20:18:27+00:00): Bonjour,

ce changeset a cassé un itinéraire du réseau pédestre du Pays de Cassel. Je m'occupe de la réparation.
Max-Kritic (2024-04-29 06:44:29+00:00): Ok. J'avais pas vu.
StC (2024-04-29 07:21:47+00:00): Le cas échéant, l'outil knooppuntnet.nl est précieux pour détecter les problèmes sur les réseaux (fonction Analysis) et les itinéraires linéaires (fonction Monitor)
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-30 15:16:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 152041031, 152040999, 152041007, 152041053, 152041069 where the changeset comment is: revert changes by self-deleted user Harsha1999 after community complaints, DWG ticket #2024041110000024
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-30 15:16:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 152041031, 152040999, 152041007, 152041053, 152041069 where the changeset comment is: revert changes by self-deleted user Harsha1999 after community complaints, DWG ticket #2024041110000024
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-30 15:16:46+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 152041031, 152040999, 152041007, 152041053, 152041069 where the changeset comment is: revert changes by self-deleted user Harsha1999 after community complaints, DWG ticket #2024041110000024
miluethi (2024-04-11 14:47:26+00:00): Hi Kubotas, please shape buildings exactly to building size and don't included fenced in area around the building. Thank you, Michael
miluethi (2024-04-11 14:34:29+00:00): Hi CD_Edwin, please create a shape for each building and don't combine several buildings in on. Thank you
Frans S (2024-05-01 10:17:28+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
The default tag for buildings - building=yes
Please square also each building !
Best regards
Timmy_Tesseract (2024-04-13 11:02:36+00:00): Good evening. If you want to specify on which side a highway cutting is located you can use cutting=left/right/both. No need to use description tag.
pesec (2024-04-10 07:24:59+00:00): Доброго дня.
не нужно добавлять не существующие объекты. На данном участке единое дорожное пространство и все необходимые для маршрутинга данные внесены.
infeeeee (2024-04-10 19:26:13+00:00): Szia!

Tényleg ez a neve az útnak? Ki van ez táblázva, vagy ez csak valami vicces, nem hivatalos név?

Ha kérdésed merülne fel, a magyar szerkesztő közösség elérhetőségeit megtalálod ezen az oldalon: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Közösség

További jó térképezést!
urbalazs (2024-04-11 05:44:04+00:00): Szerintem ez egy trap street lesz: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trap_street
A G térképén kívül máshol nincs róla szó, a fővárosi közterületnév-jegyzékben sem szerepel.
infeeeee (2024-04-11 19:41:55+00:00): Az oka a névnek szerintem nem trap street, azért azok nem ennyire frekventált helyen vannak, inkább Hanlon borotvája érvényesülhet itt is:

„Sose tulajdonítsd rosszindulatnak azt, amire az ostobaság is elégséges magyarázat.”

Gmapsra lehet hülyeségeket felvinni, ott nincs ilyen kontroll mint  itt osm-en, forrást se kérdezi meg pl. Google-t ismerve kizártnak tartom, hogy minden egyes kérést manuálisan ellenőrizzenek. 

Név valószínűleg tényleg onnan jön, leszedem.