piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aseidel (2024-06-11 11:04:26+00:00): Liebe HelenaBey, 
am Weg "Am Eichenwald" wurden zwei Poller an der selben Position angelegt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11595484331; https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11967103705). Ich habe den zuletzt angelegten Poller wieder gelöscht.
Herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-09 17:30:36+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/223671076

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
notmyproblem1 (2026-03-12 11:08:56+00:00): ciao nilogian!
per favore, la prossima volta non mappare il civico insieme alla via (ora è l'indirizzo è Via Chiesa 8A, senza civico), ho aggiustato io

e poi per il numero di telefono, riusciresti ad usare il formato internazionale?
es: +39 323 456 789 (o +39 0123 465 789)

aggiusto io, tranquillo,

cia ciao

cs: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179751188
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-09 17:30:35+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, dodaj ją w addr:street. Jeśli nie, zamień addr:city na addr:place - tak oznaczamy adresy bez ulic.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11918410047

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
SomeoneElse (2024-06-09 19:13:55+00:00): Also includes Harrogate Ringway between Pannal Station and Yew Tree Lane, from survey 13/5/2024, ts0923b
VLD278 (2024-06-10 16:24:47+00:00): Hello! I noticed that you added foot tags to w525903796, a cycleway but the sidewalk is already mapped separately for this section. Since the sidewalk is mapped, it seems that the foot tags on the cycleway may not be necessary. Do you mind explaining why the foot=yes tag was added to the cycleway? Thank you.
spiregrain (2024-06-10 19:08:44+00:00): Hi there - thanks for getting in touch.   I missed the footway next to it (filtered out in JOSM perhaps) and so added the foot=yes to the cycle lane (which I could see on the aerial image).   I've fixed it in changeset #: 152512503.
VLD278 (2024-06-10 19:48:45+00:00): I see, thanks for making that update!
ika-chan! (2024-06-17 10:00:39+00:00):  Changesets 152465280, 152748257, 152411040 and 152418713 were reverted because it replaced ways with lower quality versions. I will do the repairs to the area shortly.
KiloThree (2024-06-09 21:06:29+00:00): This area I'd consider part of Davis, but the whole square is Davis not just this area. I don't think any other mapper had named or removed a name from this? To my knowledge this isn't named at all, at least not conspicuously. If you were to ask what single part of the square might be considered the Davis pedestrian area, I think most would answer the main plaza
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152466357
aaronesco (2024-06-09 18:28:30+00:00): Si alguien puede que revise mis cambios por si acaso hay algo mal, gracias
Étroger (2025-09-03 14:26:39+00:00): Je reconnais que la signalisation n'est pas claire, mais selon moi, il y a bien un contre-sens cyclable. Les arguments pour sont:
- il reste des marquages vélo au sol (même si certains sont partiellement effacés)
- à l'arrivée sur le carrefour au nord-est (Vaillant-Couturier, Marquigny...) on a un feu pour les cyclistes
- à l'entrée de la rue Raymond-Lefèbvre en venant de ce même carrefour, on a un panneau qui indique le contre-sens cyclable.

En revanche, il est vrai que, à l'autre extrémité (sud-est, carrefour avec Anjolvy), il y un sens interdit sans indication pour les vélos.

Pour moi la balance penche franchement pour le contre-sens cyclable.
adf10 (2025-09-04 19:53:28+00:00): J'avais effectivement fait la modification après m'être retrouvé face au panneau d'interdiction du carrefour Anjolvy. Si vous connaissez bien le lieu, n'hésitez pas à faire la correction.
Étroger (2025-09-05 16:47:49+00:00): D'accord. J'ai corrigé.
wambacher (2024-06-12 12:30:00+00:00): Moin, 
in diesen Eckhaus ist schon eine Bar ohne Namen eingetragen.
Gibt es hier wirklich zwei Bars oder gibt es hier nur eine (Luna Limetta)? und wenn ja, welchen Namen hat denn diese?
S3verin (2024-06-14 12:22:28+00:00): Moin, 
die alte Bar gibt es nicht mehr. Luna Limetta hat vie 2 Wocheb eröffnet.
wambacher (2024-06-14 18:43:05+00:00): Und warum hast du dann die alte Bar nicht gelöscht?

Nun, jetzt isse weg.
S3verin (2024-06-18 13:07:01+00:00): Achso, das war mein erster Beitrag zu OpenStreetMap und ich hatte das einfach nicht auf dem Schirm.
wambacher (2024-06-18 23:18:22+00:00): nicht so schlimm, mer haben ja alle mal klein angefangen
HirschKauz (2024-06-10 10:50:46+00:00): Hallo und herzlich Willkommen bei Openstreetmap :-) 
Kleiner Tipp: Für geschlossene shop=* oder amenity=* gibt es den sogenannten Prefix "disused:" aus shop=bakery wird dann disused:shop=bakery. und aus "name=Bäckermüller" machen wir dann "old_name=Bäckermüller". Die Kontaktdaten können alle weg. 
Lies auch gerne hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:disused:* 
Grüße und weiterhin viel Spaß
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152467905
Josef73 (2026-07-05 14:37:09+00:00): Guten Tag, wie sind die Öffungszeiten vom Hokkaido Sushi & Nudel (4968558906), v10 ? Hier sind nur Schließzeiten dokumentiert.
GUFSZ (2024-09-04 06:05:20+00:00): Würdest Du endlich mal damit anfangen, deine Erkenntnis bezüglich wie man so etwas wie Relation: Kesselbach/Ehrenbach <-> Niederauroff  taggt auch umzusetzen. Ich fand ja schon frech, dass Du mich gebeten hast, das aufzuräumen, was Du isher immer wieder falsch gemacht hast. Aber dann den Fehler weiterzumachen, ist dumm oder unverschämt.
NeisBot (2024-06-09 19:24:25+00:00): Hi Point_Blank, 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/1290734398

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 (2024-06-11 15:18:33+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/152524755
SomeoneElse (2024-06-09 20:48:42+00:00): I've also split the Leeds and Bradford ones into separate routes here.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/8148367 is Harrogate, with a bit of a gap in it.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5352963 is Leeds, which has the one signpost of any of the three.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17696422 is Bradford (the one one).
Where there was a mismatch between "named ways" and the relation I've gone with named ways, because the adder of the named ways matched routes on the ground where it was verifiable (e.g. in Harrogate on the Ringway).
However, https://www.dalesway.org/link_routes.htm is vague enough that several alternatives may be "correct".
SomeoneElse (2024-06-09 20:50:27+00:00): That should be "... Bradford (the new one). ..." of course.
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-11 15:19:03+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/152524804
tastrax (2024-06-11 11:17:00+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, +61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features 

To get the + symbol on a mobile device numeric keypad you may need to do a LONG press on the zero.
I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-09 19:56:07+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 152355518, 152355900, 152356103, 152356209, 152356278, 152356496, 152361782, 152362025, 152362569, 152362822, 152363041, 152390957.
eggie (2024-06-09 20:33:08+00:00): Welkom bij OSM..

Je info heb ik samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode.
MVG
eggie
akimapbuilder (2024-06-10 10:28:39+00:00): When adding building, try to follow building footprints and match the geometry. Cheers!
Hufkratzer (2024-06-10 19:45:10+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1290754254 sieht auf den Luftbildern nicht aus wie eine Reitanlage (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure=horse_riding). Eigentlich kann ich auf den Luftbildern da gar nichts erkennen, aber vermutlich wolltest du einen  Reitplatz mappen, denn es hat so ungefähr die typische Größe von einem Dressurplatz (20 x 40 m). Reitplätze werden in OSM normalerweise mit leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian getaggt, wie z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263514557.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-23 23:50:18+00:00): You're not allowed to use Google
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-23 23:50:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-23 23:54:24+00:00): You also removed boundary=administrative tag from Portland relation
Cookie Guru (2024-06-24 06:53:55+00:00): Apologies for removing the boundary; I'm not sure how that happened.

With regard to Google's TOS, I suggest you read that again.  Nothing in the TOS prohibits viewing images to confirm a path's surface and using that data elsewhere.
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-24 08:11:21+00:00): OSM data falls under content. No creating content from StreetView
Cookie Guru (2024-06-24 08:18:00+00:00): No content was created based off the data in street view.  It was only used as verification that these segments--like their siblings--are paved
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-24 08:27:51+00:00): You used Google data to create OSM data. That's not allowed. Full stop. No exceptions.
Cookie Guru (2024-06-24 08:37:46+00:00): No Google data was used in the making of this edit.  If you feel otherwise, please paste the offending data in its entirety.  All of Google's data remains in their custody and has not been reproduced in any shape or format
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-24 09:19:15+00:00): Streetview is google data. Streetview was used. Why is this so hard to understand? You will be banned if you continue.
Cookie Guru (2024-06-24 17:52:21+00:00): Ignore OSM for a moment.  Imagine you look at street view and notice some natural features.  You tell your friend "this would be a good place to go running."  By your definition, that is content generation.  Your definition is asinine and not consistent with the terms and conditions defined by Google
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-24 20:39:24+00:00): Feel free to test Googles lawyers on your own time. Don't involve OSM. There is longstanding precedent that you cant use Google as a source for OSM data.
Cookie Guru (2024-06-25 08:06:05+00:00): The situation is significantly more nuanced than you understand.  It is clear you have not fully read and understood the T&C.  Please go back and re-read them in its entirety.  Quoting five words does not indicate that you have read the 2,600 the terms contain.

Next, please review how the Street View product works.  Does anything in there say "paved"?  Of course not.  The imagery does not contain that data.  Nor can we conclusively decide that this way is indeed paved from an image alone.  For that we need to combine with other sources, such as the local transportation authority, to confirm the different surfaces that they use for protected bikeways.  In this case, that is Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT), and PBOT uses green-tinted concrete to denote pathways used exclusively for cyclists.  None of that data is contained in any Google product.

If this changeset had used Google's imagery to infer the shape of the lane to create or edit it, you would be right, that is a clear cut violation of the terms.  However no data from any Google product has been directly used to create this changeset.  Your blanket statements of "anything that says Google is not allowed" is misleading and misinformed.

Finally, you have exhibited a gross misunderstanding of how the terms are applied.  If a contributor violates the terms, OSM is not a party to the violation.  Further, this is not a "test" of the lawyers.  This is real map data that your fellow humans depend on.
SomeoneElse (2024-06-26 11:12:40+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16310
Ahmedawniy (2024-06-09 20:41:59+00:00): شركة اطياب الوادي للاستصلاح الزراعي
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-10 22:22:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152518019 where the changeset comment is: revert edits made by an account created to circumvent https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16130
aTarom (2024-06-10 06:43:06+00:00): Hola, bienvenido, se ha creado una parada de autobús en medio de un bosque, lo retiro, si necesitas ayuda con los primeros pasos, pregunta lo que necesites y entre todos te ayudamos, saludos
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-10 22:22:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152518019 where the changeset comment is: revert edits made by an account created to circumvent https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16130
Khidistavi (2024-06-10 12:39:38+00:00): Reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152495650
woodpeck_repair (2024-06-10 22:22:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152518019 where the changeset comment is: revert edits made by an account created to circumvent https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/16130
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-10 22:02:56+00:00): This changeset disconnected and deleted highway ramps. Please be careful
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152472268
MaxMagnar (2024-06-12 18:46:34+00:00): The changeset I made include the removal of the highwey ramps. Bing Satellite map and BDOrtho IGN are not updated. The highway ramp modifications were effective since 2023. You can see it on Google Maps (satellite images are updated).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152472268
tyfi (2024-06-09 21:52:53+00:00): This changeset also upgraded way #1286318982 from tertiary_link to tertiary. Yes, it's technically a connector road, but it's functionally an extension of KK in my opinion. There's not even a stop sign for traffic on KK or this connector.
ceyu (2024-06-10 14:43:14+00:00): Hallo,

Existiert das Büro in Schiefling wirklich nicht mehr? Auf der Website ist die Adresse des Vereins noch an einer Adresse in Schiefling: https://www.bergwanderfuehrer-kaernten.at/kontakt/

Außerdem gibt es keine Details für den neuen Verein https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11967776239 . Welcher Verein ist dort?

LG ceyu
Kugelbaum (2024-06-10 07:03:21+00:00): What is your source of the new way 1014629003? Noting it has nothing to do with the old way which is now 1290771308 and has a fixme that suggests you weren't on the ground.

If you do have actually been there, please don't forget to close the notes.
SHARCRASH (2024-06-11 18:37:37+00:00): It was already in OSM but your deleted it even though it still exists, is clearly visible and accessible now.
Kugelbaum (2024-06-11 19:54:49+00:00): The new way 1014629003 you added, wasn't mapped when I was there in Jan, I have my old cache.
You didn't answer my question, did you recently survey the area or not? There's still plenty of notes around you're contesting.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-09 22:21:36+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2755174285
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6745521456
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2755187545
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11967812318
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2755193418
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2755205282
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/268585237
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/382740834
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/268384781
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/924572202
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/268962918
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/429047633

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-04 22:40:11+00:00): naprawione
Khidistavi (2024-06-10 12:39:55+00:00): Reverted https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152495650
emersonveenstra (2024-06-12 12:32:42+00:00): Hi there,

Looks like you mistakenly added the name of the path as the surface tag here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/578679619

Could you please fix this? Thanks!
Trail_Caretaker (2024-06-12 19:24:22+00:00): Yes, it is fixed.
CurlingMan13 (2024-06-11 22:00:24+00:00): Welcome to OSM!

Do not partially overlap areas.  Please review the below webpage before making further edits.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=for%20golf%20vehicule.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152473044
SomeoneElse (2024-06-10 00:42:43+00:00): Also some streams from survey and OS OpenData
ivanbranco (2024-08-23 09:12:48+00:00): Hi JLOSM,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1290776707/

is the natural=* value supposed to be alt_name here? could you take a look? thanks and good mapping!
JLOSM (2024-08-25 05:23:09+00:00): Así es, tal cual lo mencionaste.
Ya otro editor había realizado la corrección,y dejo un fixme, el cual, dado que ya no hacia falta, lo retire.
Frans S (2024-06-17 12:59:51+00:00): Hello, Thanks for mapping.
Please map buildings separate. Don't cluster buildings on a yard.
Best regards
noneck (2024-08-07 17:41:57+00:00): I'm wondering when did you see these benches. Are they there when the dome is on? With the dome off, they are not located on the courts.
DB2024 (2024-11-22 21:00:49+00:00): Thank you for the comment. These benches were present underneath the dome during a mapping session in March 2024.
fredlenoir (2025-10-24 13:07:31+00:00): bonjour, la ville considère ce chemin comme aménagé pour vélo > hihway = cycleway + foot:yes ?
richardwallis1996 (2024-07-04 18:58:52+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/237491442

Are you sure this is a 'designated' cycle route? I've walked this section of the towpath and it isn't even paved. Cycling is likely allowed here, but not designated. I believe bicycle=yes would be more appropriate.
TheSwavu (2024-06-10 03:18:27+00:00): Sorry Warin,

I had to revert this changeset to successfully revert the other ones.

You'll need to redo your other fixes again.

Apologies.
Warin61 (2024-06-10 07:39:22+00:00): No worries! And no need to apologise.
Venefilyn (2024-06-10 10:58:13+00:00): Looks good! One thing to add with destroyed buildings it's better to remove it completely
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152474504
AndersAndersson (2024-06-12 12:01:56+00:00): It is not better to remove it completely.
Someone else will then draw the building once again in an endless loop, until most of the aerial photos are updated.
Venefilyn (2024-06-12 12:04:00+00:00): In this case to me it clearly looks removed on aerial imagery
Venefilyn (2024-06-12 12:04:07+00:00): Or rather, in ruins
AndersAndersson (2024-06-12 12:12:04+00:00): In 3 of 4 avaliable aerial photos the building is there and in the most recent photo there is something there, that could be interpreted as a building. Or ruins. Depending on what your expect to se when you look at it.
There is no harm i leaving the way with a note-tag about a teared down building it until the aerial photo are updated.
suchAnight (2024-08-12 21:23:17+00:00): Hello ftrebien,
I noticed that you have been maintaining the data in Brazil regarding the recent flooding. Some ways still have “access=no” tags, although resources suggest they may be re-opened. Would you be able to review if some of these highways are operational again?

In Porto Alegre, these segments (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1290803224 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/217019027) appear to have vehicles traveling northbound along them in Esri World Imagery. Strava and OSM GPS traces seem to indicate activity, although it is unclear if these are recent enough to be sure. Would you be able to confirm?   

In Rio Grande, this section (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1282909022) shows vehicles in Esri World Imagery. There are also Strava traces and vehicle activity in OSM GPS traces.

This secondary (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/383948277) still has an access=no tag, but I am curious if there is still flood impact. It is currently preventing access into the village of Ivorá (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/415523739#map=19/-29.51968/-53.58045).

I also noticed in the city of Lajeado, Brazil (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/415523794), there are still several highway features with access=no due to the flooding. For example, the highway from (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/231850841 to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/174413636) and (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1103144134 to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/734839507). There are additional segments in the city that could be evaluated, including (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/210303909 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/841426923), in addition to some smaller segments (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/847210943 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/790231078), which indicates that there is currently no access for cars to use those main roads in this region and may be not up to date.

Thank you for maintaining the roads that have been impacted by the flood. Your time and input would be much appreciated in reviewing these areas! 
Have a nice day!
ftrebien (2024-08-14 16:55:51+00:00): I've unblocked the ways that I could confirm to be ok. Most of the ~1k ways still blocked in Rio Grande do Sul (down from ~6.5k at the flood's peak) are probably open now with varying degrees of trafficability (some of the unpaved may be are prone to getting bogged down due to new soft soil), but to ensure verifiability (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability), one should not map (block or unblock) ways based only on assumptions. I was unblocking them as I found local photos or aerial footage, since word of mouth (even by authorities) has always been quite unreliable/imprecise here. It may be "safe" (few negative practical consequences in the case of a wrong assumption) to unblock local ways (residential, unclassified, tertiary) where the main ways (secondary, primary, trunk) are known to be ok already. I would be conservative near the river around Lajeado downstream to Vila Mariante which was the most affected area. While we do have an official sources for the conditions of federal and state roads (reliable but often with up to 1km of imprecision), few municipalities are reporting the state of their municipal roads and streets in the detail we need.

The flood took place in early May 2024. What is the date of the GPS traces and the recent Esri World Imagery you mentioned? Can I have a look? I think Strava does not report the date of its data, right?