piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Paul Berry (2025-09-18 18:07:11+00:00): Just because the website isn't reachable doesn't mean the whole object should be deleted. Even if this means the business has stopped trading, the address tags still remain.
PlayGuide (2024-08-20 20:49:09+00:00): Bonjour,
Lors de ce changeset, vous avez supprimé le node/8711668366 qui représentait une aire de jeux :
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/8711668366
Pourtant, nous avions de belles photos sur notre annuaire Playguide (quoiqu'un peu brumeuses !) :
https://playguide.eu/app/playground/f14a531c-a675-4367-a69c-108530894c84
et les vues aériennes sont en concordance :
https://www.geoportail.gouv.fr/carte?c=4.0345958,45.9847135&z=19
Est-ce que ces modules (neufs en 2022) ont déjà disparu ?
Merci
Etienne, pour PlayGuide
MDe (2024-08-21 10:33:22+00:00): Merci pour le retour ; j'ai dû faire un peu trop de zèle car il y a eu de grosses modifs sur le terrain https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151645593 et même si j'étais sur place je n'ai pas pu tout noté ; désolé. J'ai restauré l'objet.
PlayGuide (2024-08-21 21:23:38+00:00): Super, merci pour vos réponse et action rapides !
Intrinsical (2024-05-21 20:05:14+00:00): also added some roads and a track, and tagged a few roads
eggie (2024-05-22 05:16:30+00:00): reverted own changeset by #151656067
Survey soon
Glassman (2024-05-22 17:05:54+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151645832
silversurfer83 (2024-05-22 16:17:59+00:00): Hi
wenn da KEIN Schild steht, dann sollte da auch kein "no" an die highway=path abschnitte. Wenn es, so wie ich es aus den Bildern vom Straßenniveau aus erkennen kann, ein simpler "Bürgersteig" ist, dann kann ist das in meinen Augen ein highway=footway + footway=sidewalk

Aber wie gesagt: So lange da keine Ge- und Verbote explizit beschildert sind, sollte da auch kein "no" an eines der Fortbewegungsmittel.

cheers
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151645841
archie (2024-05-21 20:22:14+00:00): This cs has been reverted. You are using Bing as bakground, which you have not justified before. You are constantly moving things to wrong position. Please edit more carefully.
archie (2024-05-21 20:38:58+00:00): Edit the outlines of things as they are. osm is a geografical database. Don't insert things (buildings, parking etc) at wrong positions. And do not move correctly inserted buildings to wrong positions.
Tourmatine (2024-05-21 21:14:22+00:00): I'm sorry. :/
archie (2024-05-21 21:25:21+00:00): Well your intention is good. Please take more care in your editing. The paths you are inserting e.g. often don't follow the correct route. And most important justify your background before editing as described here: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Using_aerial_imagery
Tourmatine (2024-05-21 21:32:17+00:00): Thank you, I will read that.
archie (2024-05-21 21:44:15+00:00): And do not connect highway with landuse by the same node. 
The outline of buildings follows the wall of buildings on the ground level and not the outline of the building's roof. 
Follow the outline of highways carefully, not sloppy-wise. 
Thanks!
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-22 04:09:06+00:00): Do not simulate holes by folding an area back upon itself leaving a little sliver.  Multipolygon relations should be used instead.

I cleaned it up for you.
Sanniu (2024-05-22 07:34:41+00:00): Hi, why you've removed https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/254049224? It is proposed line and will not have any indication on the ground.
Dindia (2024-05-22 17:22:41+00:00): The proposal is from 10 years ago, and I couldn't find any confirmation/source for it. There's no work currently happening or planned AFAIK. 

I think i saw it on mapy.cz , but I might be mistaken. In any case, I don't think it should stay.
mikimapbuilder (2024-05-22 07:29:19+00:00): Road was connected to a footway, not a main road, that is the reason for modification.
gscholz (2024-06-09 07:12:48+00:00): Hi igi77,
this changeset has created several errors regarding overlapping ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=7.68786&lat=45.07268&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151646701

As you may know, this kind of error irritates routing software and looks ugly on the maps. Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Frans S (2024-05-26 08:08:26+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. However, pay attention on objects which shows no roof. Might be a building under construction or just a walled yard.
Please be sure to follow the rooflines accurate.

Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151646735
NeisBot (2024-05-21 20:55:04+00:00): Hi ShadyMilk, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature's:
https://osm.org/way/404294944
https://osm.org/way/404295302

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:13:30+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151683960

The user deleted her/his own beach.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-21 06:12:47+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11401169813/history has shop = cbd that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
shop=cbd ? What kind of shop, if any is here? See also https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=cannabis - is shop=cannabis intentionally not used here?
Glassman (2024-05-22 17:06:58+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151647691
mcliquid (2024-05-22 06:54:29+00:00): Lebst du ein Jahr in der Zukunft? ;)
rene78 (2024-05-22 15:28:23+00:00): Zumindest meine Finger, wie's aussieht...
Danke für den Hinweis. Werde die Notiz korrigieren.
Frans S (2024-05-22 13:03:54+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151648596
user_5359 (2024-05-22 12:09:46+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1LRY. What is the mean of the tag a27 ?
Frans S (2024-05-22 09:16:18+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151649071
mcliquid (2024-05-22 06:56:56+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!
teknivil (2024-05-22 12:08:26+00:00): Sorry
Bendita Moreira (2024-05-22 00:18:38+00:00): You need to map building properly
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151649617
rohieb (2024-12-08 00:49:05+00:00): Hallo, ich möchte dich darauf hinweisen, dass ausschließlich historischen Streckenverläufe, zu denen vor Ort oder auf Luftbildern keine Anhaltspunkte mehr erkennbar sind, nicht der Fokus von OpenStreetMap sind, und dich bitten, in diesen Fällen keine railway=razed einzutragen. Siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:railway=razed . Die ehemaligen Werksgleise beim Heizkraftwerk Mitte habe ich wieder entfernt, weil der Bereich inzwischen überbaut bzw. neu gestaltet wurde.
NeisBot (2024-05-21 22:25:03+00:00): Hi Dexterity88, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1285365852

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
eggie (2024-05-22 05:50:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  Strandedits liggen momenteel onder een vergrootglas ivm met PokemonGo bijdragen.
Zie feedback boven. Ook de manier van intekenen is niet correct.
Hebben deze stranden werkelijk een Engelse naam?


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2024-05-22 09:22:05+00:00): No beach here
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1159893015391684&lat=52.342173304585&lng=4.9730829257297&z=17.09473724693705&x=0.5464094833335404&y=0.28667553623597897&zoom=0.2651975747932054&focus=photo
eggie (2024-05-22 09:56:03+00:00): reverted by changeset #151666615
Frans S (2024-05-22 09:14:33+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 

Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
Courtyards included . Map more accurate please.
a few bare ground areas mapped as building

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151649934
nerisden (2024-05-27 17:12:52+00:00): why did you add footways over existing roads? because of your changes we have overlapping roads
NeisBot (2024-05-21 22:40:03+00:00): Hi Dexterity88, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1285367761

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
eggie (2024-05-22 09:22:32+00:00): No beach here
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1159893015391684&lat=52.342173304585&lng=4.9730829257297&z=17.09473724693705&x=0.5464094833335404&y=0.28667553623597897&zoom=0.2651975747932054&focus=photo
eggie (2024-05-22 09:55:11+00:00): reverted by changeset #151666565
NeisBot (2024-05-21 22:55:03+00:00): Hi Goldbeetle69, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/800176332

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-22 10:47:49+00:00): Changeset reverted - please do not make fictional changes to OSM.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:03:41+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669206
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-10-24 11:51:27+00:00): zerkniesz na https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4469613 ?
SomeoneElse (2024-06-05 18:50:59+00:00): Hello DotK,

Please use changeset comments that other people will be able to understand.  Here you've written "#hotosm-project-16668 #wnah #mapnigeria #esc2023 #Map4Climate".  No-one knows what any of that means.- please use actual words to describe what you are mapping.
Best Regards,
Andy
Glassman (2024-05-22 17:05:11+00:00): We don't use descriptive names. landuse=recreation_ground is sufficient. Although this looks like a parking area to me. If so tag it as amenity=parking.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151651060
NeisBot (2024-05-21 23:40:02+00:00): Hi Goldbeetle69, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/753599916

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-22 10:49:34+00:00): Reverted, please do not make fictional changes to OSM.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:04:32+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669293
bxl-forever (2024-05-22 00:22:05+00:00): Hello,

I wish there was a better way to welcome you here, but I must inform you that we had to undo your edit.  You inadvertently re-tagged an existing address (Chaussée d'Etterbeek/Etterbeeksesteenweg 51) which you renumbered 13 and subsequently added tags about Caffeine.  Sorry but this is not a correct way to act on the map.  I took care to restore the proper address points and tagged Caffeine separately.

Please make sure you always have a fresh copy of OSM data before uploading something; if you edit a local copy of outdated data it will result in some data corruption.  Thanks.
felipeeugenio (2024-05-27 13:19:25+00:00): Estimado. borraste las tranqueras de cuajo. por favor cuidado con estas ediciones
emersonveenstra (2024-05-22 11:17:28+00:00): Hi there,

You created https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1285380913 with no tags, could you please go back and tag it? Thanks!
bxl-forever (2024-05-22 00:19:35+00:00): No postcodes on addresses in Belgium, please!
bxl-forever (2024-05-22 00:26:01+00:00): Please do not upload the same data multiple times.  Caffeine is already on the map (node 11923788002), no need to create duplicates.
ooosssay (2024-05-22 00:24:05+00:00): Fix*
YomanNH (2024-05-22 09:30:47+00:00): Cześć,
jeśli droga/ścieżka jest w budowie, to jeszcze trzeba z niej usunąć np. bicycle=designated i foot=designated. Bez tego nawigacje chcą prowadzić po takich drogach. A najlepiej dodać też access=no :)
Metzor (2024-05-22 04:38:38+00:00): Hi BlueCrabRedCrab,

Friendly reminder: 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!
Taya_S (2024-05-22 04:48:59+00:00): This changeset seems to have added a whole nonexistant railyard
Metzor (2024-05-22 05:01:49+00:00): He seems to like semi-existing festures ;-)

Revert edit that deleted disused railways that still meet critera of being included
Geschlossen vor etwa 11 Stunden · #151641519
0

revert edit that deleted disused railways that still meet critera of being included
Geschlossen vor etwa 11 Stunden · #151641488
0

Revert edits that removed disused railway of which track is still clearly in place.
Geschlossen vor etwa 11 Stunden · #151639898
0

Add back disused West End Branch, which was removed for unknown reasons when there is still track and embankment.
Geschlossen vor etwa 12 Stunden · #151639447
0

...
teknivil (2024-05-22 12:07:46+00:00): Sorry.
Some of the disused railways got deleted for no reason so I added them back.
halloschorle (2024-05-22 12:10:20+00:00): What are you doing here? The Changeset ist nearly over the whole world!

Please, read the rules!
Metzor (2024-05-22 13:13:55+00:00): Hallo halloschorle,

Bitte bewahre doch einen höflichen Umgangston. Er wurde darauf hingewiesen und hat sich bereits (knapp 3min vor deiner Nachricht) entschuldigt. Vermutlich hast du das nicht mehr gesehen. Für mich ist deine Nachricht eine Spur zu aggressiv, aber Geschmäcker sind verschieden.

Happy mapping everyone!
Metzor
halloschorle (2024-05-22 13:32:32+00:00): Hallo Metzor,

Sorry wenn das zu harsch rüber gekommen sein sollte, das ist im Englischen ja eh immer so eine Sache. In anderen Sprachen noch schlimmer teilweise. 
Es sollte eigentlich kein Motzen sondern ein Hinweis sein. 

Ich dachte ich hätte die Höflichkeit gewahrt indem ich "please" geschrieben hatte. 

Viele Grüße
halloschorle
IonicBond (2024-05-22 01:00:31+00:00): Oh it was me that mislabelled it😧
Fixed now though lmao
Glassman (2024-05-22 17:07:43+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151652495
une abeille (2024-05-23 14:03:15+00:00): This changeset introduced geometry errors to two ways. I have fixed this.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151725163
Glassman (2024-05-22 17:08:43+00:00): #TIP: we spell out street names in OSM the reason is that software has a hard time unabbreviating.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151652644
NeisBot (2024-05-22 01:30:03+00:00): Hi chicoaldeota, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/node/11923910439

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:04:53+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669928
nevw (2024-05-22 03:56:31+00:00): Hi, the name tag is not for repeating the address which is already tagged. The name tag is for the name of the business.
SCibich (2024-05-22 03:59:28+00:00): This is a site under development, I am not permitted to state the name of the business at this stage.
nevw (2024-05-22 04:15:23+00:00): Thanks, I understand.
I have reverted my changeset
 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11923904846
The address should be reinstated as the name shortly.
NeisBot (2024-05-22 01:35:02+00:00): Hi chicoaldeota, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/node/11923910298

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:05:11+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669928
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:31:03+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151971320
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:32:02+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!
Gescriey (2024-05-22 17:18:47+00:00): StreetSurveyor, these are dirt/gravel access/service roads.  They don't appear to be open to the public for vehicle use, but they definitely are "roads" not "paths".
StreetSurveyor (2024-05-22 21:54:58+00:00): Seems like abandoned railway still might be the most appropriate.
Gescriey (2024-05-23 00:55:01+00:00): Path is definitely more appropriate than that, since there is at least a traversible way there.  I think the Salem and Lowell Railroad should at least be left as path, but way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1049704534, and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9206025 are access roads for the water department.
NeisBot (2024-05-22 01:50:04+00:00): Hi Goldbeetle69, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1220017933

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-22 10:51:21+00:00): Reverted - please do not make incorrect changes to OSM.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151652988
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-22 17:05:42+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151669377
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:30:41+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151971305
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-29 05:31:57+00:00): Please don't add fictional map elements. Thank you!