piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-07 12:59:40+00:00): wycofanie edycji motywowanej błędnymi założeniami, wykonanej bez dyskusji na forum (patrz https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174287392 z "lol, nope, i ride a bike there and you were informed about it numerous times" które nie ma nic do rzeczy)

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174333168
dzamper (2025-11-07 15:21:23+00:00): na ileś-tam twoich revertów, których nie powinieneś był robić w ten sposób nawet jakbyśmy wszyscy w dyskusji potem uznali że masz rację, ja wycofałem tylko jeden z nich i tylko raz, a tak bardzo cię bolę że przytaczasz mnie w kółko jako przykład. lol

no właśnie, a to nawet nie była ani moja zmiana, ani twoja zmiana, tylko mój revert twojego reverta. więc tym bardziej o co chodzi

ewentualne pretensje proszę ewentualnie mieć do oryginalnego zmieniacza
dzamper (2025-11-07 15:25:05+00:00): jak ktoś zmienił zdanie i jest teraz przeciwny to może chociaż daj się wykazać revertem takiej osobie zamiast sobie ;) na razie mimo moich usilnych starań nie chciałeś takiej osoby wskazać więc nie jestem pewien czy faktycznie takie są
voltairovicz (2025-11-11 15:40:29+00:00): "jak jakieś nawigacje interpretują highway=trunk jako foot=no to jest to problem tych nawigacji, zgłoś to ich autorom" - czyli co, my możemy psuć i nie patrzeć na routingi, bo to problemy nawigacji, ktore były tworzone pod to jak wyglądał OSM przez wiele lat, a nie tego ze my robimy bałagan
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-11 16:24:50+00:00): "i nie patrzeć na routingi" - wyraźnie podałem "zgłoś to ich autorom", nie jest to ich ignorowanie

dodatkowo, psucie to było wadliwe stosowanie highway=trunk w Polsce
voltairovicz (2025-11-11 16:29:30+00:00): Czyli psuciem nie jest robienie krętej, wąskiej krajowki przez środek wsi trunkiem. Rozumiem :)
Glassman (2025-11-08 20:55:37+00:00): #TIP: square bldgs by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174312463
nitin PVT LTD (2025-11-22 09:03:02+00:00): E
Glassman (2025-11-08 20:55:59+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/174312630
itineris (2026-04-03 16:19:45+00:00): Szia!

Van valami hivatalos információd a Prédikálószék Erdőrezervátumon átvezető MTB útról?
Pár éve kisebb szerkesztői oda-vissza harc ment, hogy büntetnek-e érte, vagy szabadon használható.
Aztán lett belőle bb365:preferred is.
Most pedig az AMFK-ra hivatkozol.
A DINPI mit mond?

Üdv:
Ákos
BCNorwich (2025-11-07 06:28:56+00:00): Hi, Please be more careful in your mapping.

This highway duplicates existing highways and would not have many illogical tags, (highway, waterway, railway).

Thus, I've reverted it.

Regards Bernard.
btwhite92 (2025-11-09 16:23:59+00:00): Hi there,
We have largely moved away from using 'trunk' to denote expressway-grade construction in CA (and much of the US). Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/California/2022_Highway_Classification_Guidelines, especially the section on urban expressways.
Yushclay (2025-11-09 17:51:36+00:00): Oh, wow, that's helpful. Thanks for sharing the precedent.
silversurfer83 (2025-11-08 19:18:47+00:00): Hi there :)

welcome to OpenStreetMap

it looks like you're doing an assingment for a university class. Nice.

Here's a little tip: After creating a building use the "Q"-key to make the corners square. Maybe tell your classmates, too.

Happy mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174312906
CjMalone (2026-03-04 08:27:14+00:00): I find this a bit questionable, highway=services has always been a polygon. Same with highway=rest_area. highway=bus_stop and highway=stop have always been points.

I know this is an issue with some software (including osm2pgsql example config) but I don't think it's a data issue.
quincylvania (2026-03-04 21:37:55+00:00): Hi there, thanks for your note.

I've written more about this elsewhere, but basically I argue that this type of tagging is in-bounds as long as OSM lacks an area type. You and I know about these tags, but most people don't, and it raises the barrier to entry when every single OSM consumer needs to add a geometry exception for a couple niche values of a key.

In any case, I'm not the first person to apply this tagging pattern and it doesn't harm anything.
CjMalone (2026-03-04 21:48:03+00:00): JOSM actively complains about `area` being added to these so it does cause some confusion there.

I've argued services and rest_area should be added to osm2pgsql example configs to try and raise awareness there too. It didn't really go anywhere.
aharvey (2025-11-14 01:47:57+00:00): I see you added a new address for 11 Burrendong Pl at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13286395669/history but it already exists at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7066252214.

I don't believe we should duplicate it as that leads to ambiguity and it's best to place it at the residence. The routing engine can resolve which street it's accessed from based on the mapped driveway.
aharvey (2025-11-14 01:48:57+00:00): 2. I'm not sure how you can tell the surface=paved, at least for me looking at the imagery it's not clear and there's no street level imagery here. I think best to leave off the surface until it can be surveyed on the ground.
aharvey (2025-11-14 01:49:52+00:00): 3. You've changed the geometry of the driveway, in a way that no longer matches the aerial imagery, you've moved it to run through trees and garages, apparently based on the Land Parcels alone.
aharvey (2025-11-14 01:51:16+00:00): 4. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1445927361/history "abandoned:" is best suited where there's evidence that it was once a driveway which is now no longer used. If you simply want to make it clear to future mappers that this is no a driveway since they might assume that from the lot boundaries, then best to use the "not:" prefix.
aharvey (2025-11-14 01:59:57+00:00): I've fixed 1, 2 and 3. I've left 4 since I checked the historical 1982 imagery which shows it's possible there was once a driveway there, but still in general "not:" would be better when just trying to indicate this to other mappers.
Comino (2025-11-07 07:33:03+00:00): Hi,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Use the "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read: https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants#tagging-guidance
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Happy mapping,

Edwin Comino
https://btcmap.org/tagger/6794624
Frans S (2025-11-12 14:52:25+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
Your changesets are reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
Issues found on your mappings
A: Inaccurate mapping. 
B: Overlapping buildings.
C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped it as 1 building.
D: Connecting Nodes to other features.

E: Buildings not squared or rounded.

High building(s) incorrect mapped. 
Check this footage how to map high buildings

https://youtu.be/dsfUcslLtVc?si=yH6eWDbsb_ILAVb9
 Or See par 20 chapter About Buildings


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
Frans S (2025-11-11 15:52:44+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map more accurate and follow the rooflines. Square each rectangular building and move multistorey buildings to their footprint.
Check this out please

On this task, the high-rise buildings are often incorrect mapped.
You can see both one or more side walls and the roof. The Imagery is taken under a certain angle, so you can see more .
Often all visible walls and roofs are mapped as 1 building.
The correct way is to map the roofline and move the whole object on their footprint.
See this video.
https://youtu.be/dsfUcslLtVc?si=bEHwRl1sxDI_GA0H

Best regards
Negreheb (2025-11-10 10:16:37+00:00): Servus, du hast einen review gewünscht. Jetzt auf Anhiebt sieht das schonmal gut aus :) 
Prinzipiell kannst du noch mehr eintragen, wenn du möchtest, eine Info findest du im Wiki unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:emergency%3Dfire_hydrant :)

Wenn du fragen hast, lass es mich gern wissen. 

Lg Stefan
这里没有鱼 (2025-11-07 03:57:13+00:00): 别胡来，不要随意添加错误数据
Frans S (2025-12-01 14:12:55+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please check this video
Mapping buildings with a few floors, start watching from 1 minute. 
https://youtu.be/Tpi-BTMVo1M
Gregory Peony (2025-11-08 20:15:46+00:00): Hello, my intention is to improve your understanding. Many of the footprints you mapped here (especially those in the North) do not represent buildings. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174315460
Baloo Uriza (2025-12-02 16:17:43+00:00): Please don't remove names from sidewalks.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174316240
Dark_Valor (2025-12-07 19:31:57+00:00): I asked before beginning his on the Help Community if the duplicate names should be present.  I was told no.  Why should I leave the duplicate name on sidewalks and cycle paths?
Baloo Uriza (2025-12-07 22:55:02+00:00): If you hadn't tuned out of the thread immediately, you'd have noticed that the general majority landed on there's no reason to remove them, and they are useful for data consumers.
habi (2025-11-07 09:46:43+00:00): Please, when you "fix some issues", don't do that in the same changeset in the west of the United States and in South East of Europe.
This makes reviewing of such changesets extremely cumbersome.
OSM-Arno (2026-06-07 13:22:48+00:00): Roadworks are taking place on Route 19. The traffic flow has already changed several times.

The current speed limit is 50 km/h in some sections.

Due to your changes, the routing on the maps is no longer working correctly. The side roads, e.g., to Gryt, are accessible as usual. Perhaps the changes could be reverted, and only the roadworks should be noted. The current completion date is October 1, 2026.
OSM-Arno (2026-06-08 15:25:59+00:00): Between Broby and Knislinge, the road does not have two separate carriageways. This is actually incorrect and means that permitted turns are not valid. Perhaps this should be changed as well. I could do that too – remove the roadworks and turn the road into a single carriageway with two lanes. Just like any other country road.
007Transformer (2026-06-12 04:45:44+00:00): Hello
OSM-Arno,
Thank you for reaching out to describe the situation on the ground. I have made the corrections based on your suggestions. Please let me know if it is accurate now.
OSM-Arno (2026-06-12 10:25:48+00:00): Hi Transformer,
thanks for your answer.
I drove that route between M2591 and Broby on Wednesday .

It's not quite finished yet, but it looks like everything will be changed to two separate lanes. The barriers between the lanes are missing in some sections, but they're already marked on the surface. All right and left turns were usable now. Traffic was temporarily regulated by traffic at two points (could change daily) but you can drive the entire route in both directions . 
The road between Knislinge and Broby is ready => No traffic lights, no oneway.
The indirect left turns (spanish turns) could be setup later when satellite images are available. Anilla parking is accessible from both lanes. M2115 and all other directions also.
For routing purposes, the most important thing is that the road is fully usable in both directions and that all turns are possible in both directions. Whether there is a separate lane or a spanish-style junction for this is more of a detail. At the moment the problem with OSM navigation is that it bypasses everything in that area because turns are not possible or parts are marked as one-way roads.
OSM-Arno (2026-06-12 11:02:26+00:00): Your changes look good. Saw them in the editor now....
I also removed the one way restrictions and corrected some turns:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184011305
For routing should be ok now. 
Think we have to wait for some new sattelite images......
Have nice day!
007Transformer (2026-06-16 08:03:30+00:00): Thank you for confirming. I’m glad that it’s all in order and is reflecting the situation on the ground accurately. 
I’ll be happy to monitor the situation together as newer resources become available. 
Happy mapping!
OSM-Arno (2026-06-16 10:24:36+00:00): Thanks too!
rarad74 (2025-11-07 08:00:38+00:00): Hi. All the street names in romania must be added with Strada in front of the name. Please read the wiki documentation. Thank you.
WanakaLake (2025-11-11 08:48:23+00:00): Hello rarad74, thank you for your guidance! I have reviewed the wiki and understand now that streets in Romania should include the “Strada” prefix. Moving forward I will make sure all street names in Romania include this prefix.
Thanks again, and happy mapping!
YomanNH (2025-11-07 19:58:02+00:00): Yog Sot wycofał Twoje zmiany: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174348915
grzegorz75jan (2025-11-08 05:11:00+00:00): Prawdopodobnie przynajmniej częściowo rozumiem patrząc na podkłady bo ta droga wygląda na wrysowaną tak od siekiery i poklejona z linią lasu ale skoro już cofał to wypadało coś napisać. 

Biorąc pod uwagę lata istnienia konta i ilość edycji to można się było szarpnąć by najpierw napisać komentarz a w przypadku braku odpowiedzi dopiero wtedy cofać.
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:42:32+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 186321525 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - New Zealand
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:42:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 186321525 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - New Zealand
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:37:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
vasony (2025-11-14 21:25:48+00:00): Szia!

Mire alapoztad ezt a sok random lakó pihenő övezetet? Egyet néztem meg, az nem felelt meg a valóságnak.

Tamás
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:35:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:36:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
Pragya Joshi (2025-11-07 07:26:02+00:00): Do not leave features untagged. Thank you for mapping.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174319514
Glassman (2025-11-08 20:57:39+00:00): Can you also add a tag to describe what each building of Midstate Co-op does?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174319525
MassCartog (2025-11-07 14:02:28+00:00): Hi welcome to OSM. I see you removed some trails. Its unclear from your comment, I understand these are Unofficial trails, but do they actually exist on the ground? Would someone on the ground think these are trails from looking at them?
afregistry (2025-11-08 02:42:08+00:00): Thanks! 
So not really. At times, it may appear there are trails (for example, this time of year) but it's actually firebreaks that are put in the fall before prescribed burns done for ecological restoration. These totally don't exist 10 months out of the year.
MassCartog (2025-11-09 02:24:50+00:00): Okay! Thanks for the reply, There's no problem removing trails that don't exist, like you say these don't. But removing real but "Unofficial" trails is not correct. But sounds like that does not apply here. Thanks!
afregistry (2025-11-09 16:41:28+00:00): Thank you for yours! I'm new to contributing to OSM, but thought I could be helpful since I do restoration in the work and see many trails firsthand. 
What about small animal trails that get formed? Occasionally I have seen people begin to use these ephemeral trails, walking them in (and doing significantly more damage than the animals woulds), and then marking them on trail apps. These are not permanent trails by any means, not just unofficial ones.
MassCartog (2025-11-09 19:33:27+00:00): I would not personally add animal trails unless its clear to me that a lot of people were also using them as well. A good way to figure that out is using Strava's heatmap. And if you are unsure why a trail exists in OSM, sometimes you can reach out to the person that added it, maybe they had a good reason.
afregistry (2025-11-10 04:14:26+00:00): Great suggestions! Thank you, I look forward to future contributions on this invaluable resource.
K12230LF (2025-12-02 10:22:15+00:00): Bonjour, 
Par rapport aux panneaux de signalisation routière, il y a un syntaxe que vous pouvez retrouver ici : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Signalisation_routi%C3%A8re_en_France

Par rapport à la syntaxe pour les vélos notamment, vous pouvez également retrouver cette page qui est précieuse : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bicycle

J'ai effectué quelques ajustements du coup sur vos panneaux et sur le trottoir Rue Stiegelmann
K12230LF (2025-12-02 14:25:50+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour votre message.
Le fait qu'il y ait une syntaxe permet aux applications utilisant la base de données OpenStreetMap de pouvoir réutiliser les données renseignées.
Sans cela, pas de réutilisation possible et c'est bien dommage car on a tous une connaissance de son terrain local.

Inscrivez-vous sur le forum ( https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/ ) avec votre même compte OpenStreetMap et posez des questions dès que vous avez un doute sur la façon de transcrire telle ou telle information sur le terrain.

Bonne cartographie :)
K12230LF (2025-12-02 14:47:34+00:00): Puis-je vous conseiller également d'essayer l'application StreetComplete qui vous permettra d'ajouter des informations sur votre quartier sans avoir forcément besoin de connaître la syntaxe ? En effet c'est l'application qui traduit l'information à votre place : https://streetcomplete.app/

Et lorsque vous avez un doute, soit laisser une note, soit solliciter de l'aide sur le forum
Titi72 T (2025-12-02 14:56:33+00:00): Merci pour votre retour !
En effet, tout à fait d'accord, et c'est tellement évident, que la syntaxe serve pour les gens du grand public et leurs différentes applications. C'est le but.

Pour mon inscription (en "double"), il me semble que je l'avais déjà faite dès mon arrivée en tant que novice, car j'avais échangé quelques messages privés (messagerie) avec deux trois contributeurs sympas, qui m'ont "accueilli" au départ, avec quelques bons conseils... Je suis donc déjà "inscrit en double" pour pouvoir accéder à la messagerie, et si c'est le même compte que pour le forum, donc c'est bon.
Merci, vos liens me sont très précieux, car très détaillés (syntaxe pistes cyclables vélo), excellentes infos qui peuvent même me servir dans mes activités du Comité Vélo dans lequel je suis membre :-)
Bonne semaine.
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:36:37+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:36:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
Glassman (2025-11-08 20:57:57+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/174319952
oruk09 (2025-11-18 00:36:31+00:00): I can't see the forest right now
Smokin' Billy (2025-11-19 09:51:54+00:00): I fixed the forest. 
森林を修正しました。
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174850637
SekeRob (2025-12-15 14:36:51+00:00): Hi,

Could you please revisit the relation of this building as member of the island outline, If at all it has to have the 'inner' role, but it being a building I think it should not be part of the Relation: Korčula (6114785) relation.

ciao
FroschForscher (2025-11-08 11:02:56+00:00): Hallo Minotus befindet sich ein Restaurant in dem Haus oder heißt das Haus "Gasthaus zum tänzelnden Klopfer"? Wenn sich ein Restaurant in dem Haus befindet sollte diese Information hinzugefügt werden.

FroschForscher
woodpeck_repair (2026-07-24 22:38:33+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 186321238, 186320991, 186321014, 186321023, 186321172, 186321185, 186321214, 186321231, 186321009, 186320999, 186321226, 186321212, 186321183, 186321032, 186321156, 186321202, 186321188, 186321193, 186321207, 186320994, 186321004, 186321218, 186321196 where the changeset comment is: revert airport edits by user olehz - Australia
SomeoneElse (2025-11-09 14:21:14+00:00): Hello,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.  Please don't add tracking links to OSM.  As you will have noticed they get removed pretty quickly.
Untruths in changeset comments ("Added more information abou the store ") is also not appreciated.
FroschForscher (2025-11-08 11:03:54+00:00): Ist das leisure=park mit reingerutscht oder war das Absicht?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174321215
rainerU (2025-11-08 11:16:32+00:00): Ja, sorry, das war ein Versehen. Ich wollte ausdrücken, dass es sich um eine im Bau befindliche Parkanlage handelt, also etwas wie:  

leisure=construction
construction=park

Habe dann aber gesehen, dass diese Tag-Kombination nicht üblich ist. 

Ich lösche das.
FroschForscher (2025-11-08 12:35:09+00:00): =construction,construction= ist nur bei highway,railway,building üblich, für leisure und andere ist es üblich construction:leisure zu nutzen. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:construction

> Für andere Merkmale, wie leisure=* sollte ein Lebenszyklus-Präfix verwendet werden: construction:leisure=playground.