piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Frans S (2023-01-19 14:10:45+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most buildings 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
On this document you will find some hints and tricks which might help to improve 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/131439967
OSM_RogerWilco (2023-01-19 12:21:48+00:00): Moin lberges,

davon gibt es hier noch viele Fälle. Einige habe ich bereits bereinigt.
Ich habe jetzt noch die Adressen angepasst:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131464257

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
Xanadu_Contractor (2023-04-02 01:36:19+00:00): I have been informed by local mappers that I should not use dashes (-), as phones are more likely to process spaces correctly, and the guideline you cited explicitly states that spaces are the preferred format. Thusly, I will be reverting this change.
Kristjan ESPERANTO (2023-04-02 08:04:48+00:00): Thanks for the notice :-)
ratrun (2023-01-19 16:30:31+00:00): Hi,

can you please explain what you did here?

You have duplicated/tripplicated a lots of ways in a youple of huge changesets.
Please check all the errors at https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=13.94183&lat=4.80911&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=snap_points%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1
mueschel (2023-01-19 18:55:26+00:00): I'm reverting the full set of 420k objects, almost all of them are duplicates of existing ones.

Momha, please always check before uploading how many objects will be changed / added and if this fits with the work you actually did. And: never try to load any data from a file to OSM and upload it. Always use the integrated download dialogue.
mueschel (2023-05-01 15:40:04+00:00): Hi,
what does 'rami_fossi' mean? Found on 5 caves.
Gianfranco2014 (2023-05-02 07:09:08+00:00): Exactly where did you find it?
ivanbranco (2023-05-02 07:40:18+00:00): Vedi: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1urH
Gianfranco2014 (2023-05-02 08:34:11+00:00): Corretto era un errore, non so da cosa fosse stato causato.
snikers89 (2023-01-19 14:58:11+00:00): Zniknął cały las w Popowie chyba po Twoich zmianach
Mrksmlk (2023-01-19 20:38:30+00:00): Jeśli rzeczywiście stało się to po moich zmianach a starałem się poprawić granice Ośrodka Szkolenia Służby Więziennej w Popowie istnieje możliwość cofnięcia tego?
Mrksmlk (2023-01-19 21:11:24+00:00): Chyba udało mi się już naprawić problem. Dzięki za informację.
Będę starał się bardziej uważać na to co zmieniam.
snikers89 (2023-01-19 21:12:25+00:00): Widzę, że chyba udało się już naprawić/przywrócić. Dzięki za reakcję. ps. pewnie granica lasu była scalona z ośrodkiem i przypadkowe przerwanie jej sprawiło ten problem?
Kento Kei (2023-01-18 22:52:01+00:00): not doing this change to marked anymore, checked and its good I didn't change 'that' many, its somehow still unknown
Euskirchener (2023-01-19 06:08:59+00:00): Hello, I think we need to discuss these edits "Sanitize valid phone number related values according to E.123". Basically in my area mostly mobile phone numbers were affected. And there you changed the space/grouping. In my opinion to the wrong. Before: +49_123_456789 | After: +49_1234_56789. But 123 is the "Vorwahl" as we call it in germany which belongs to the provider (e.g. 0151 = Telekom). You took one part of the last part ("Durchwahl" = which is the individual number of the person) and attached it to the "Vorwahl" group. In my opinion this is not correct. I also found no evidence in E.123 to do it like that. Can you explain? See also https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorwahl_01_(Deutschland)
cEvLGWiQ (2023-01-19 07:15:33+00:00): Morning Euskirchener, thanks for your feedback!

I've went through the German's regulation on phone numbers, and this is indeed a caveat situation. German mobile numbers can have 3 or 4 digit prefix number (without the turntable 0). For example, the prefix could be 15xx, 16x, and or 17x.

If you look carefully at section 015 of the wikipedia page you've sent me, you'll see that it has being explained over there.

Please let me know if you have any other concern! ;)
Euskirchener (2023-01-19 12:35:04+00:00): Yeah I noticed that. It seems that 4-digit "Vorwahlen" only exist in the range with 15xx at the beginning of all 3 big german mobile networks. The other usual ranges here 16x and 17x only seem to be 3-digit. I am no expert of this. I was always used to 3-digit-grouping. It looks that 16x and 17x were also not affected by this in this edit. Okay, but now we are both aware of this. Bye!
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-27 06:03:09+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/277597356/history has access:motor_vehicle that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would using motor_vehicle access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:motor_vehicle ) be fitting at least equally well?
yopaseopor (2024-03-27 09:08:51+00:00): Thanks for the advice. I have fixed that. I don't remember why I have used this key in a unique place in my own city .
MxxCon (2023-01-19 04:13:05+00:00): E.123 explicitly states: "spaces should separate country code, area code and local number." so the previous format was correct as well.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131440871
Strubbl (2023-01-19 19:55:23+00:00): Hello cEvLGWiQ, i would be interested in reading the documentation of these mechanical edits you are currently doing in Germany.
Map-Peter (2023-01-19 21:07:39+00:00): Hello cEvLGWiQ,
 
for e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9319446795/history has now a mistake in contact:mobile=* there is _NO_ prefix in mobile-phone-no. ... I did no space character within the mobile-phone-nos. on purpose. 
 
Due to this CS there are not only a few of this mistakes now in my home town Neubrandenburg. :-(
 
see also: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131440708
cEvLGWiQ (2023-01-19 21:33:56+00:00): Hi all, I'm using Google's open sourced library (https://github.com/google/libphonenumber) used by Android's contacts etc. to parse, validate, and format a phone number.

@Map-Peter Could you elaborate the issue a bit further for the node that you've mentioned? Every (mobile) phone number has a prefix, '176' in the case of '+49 17687940097'. The formatted '+49 176 87940097' seems correct to me according to DE:Key:contact:* .

Take a look at this as well: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vorwahl_01_(Deutschland)
Strubbl (2023-01-19 22:21:08+00:00): Hi cEvLGWiQ, can you please elaborate your procedure. I would like to understand this and see the end-software you are using, too.
Strubbl (2023-01-19 22:24:41+00:00): I am stressing this, because there is the "Automated Edits code of conduct" 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Are you aware of this?
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2023-01-19 23:09:23+00:00): Stien krydser servicevejen uden at de er forbundet.
Romwriter (2023-01-19 09:31:28+00:00): Mechanischer Edit? Korrigiert: <https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131456039>, vgl. <https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:contact:*>
cEvLGWiQ (2023-01-19 10:35:02+00:00): Hi there, before I make further comments, could you confirm if I understood this correctly? <Durchwahl> would be the equivalent to English's phone number extension correct? (Eg. a company's landline with extensions to different people/extension)
Romwriter (2023-01-19 10:41:27+00:00): Sorry for writing in German, I just saw that all your recent edits were inside Germany. -- "Durchwahl" is "extension", correct. All the Bremen government phone numbers are +49 421 361-xxxxx with 421 for Bremen, 361 as subscriber number and xxxxx as four- or five-digit extension code.
cEvLGWiQ (2023-01-19 11:11:31+00:00): Great, thanks!

But those extension numbers aren't actually (technically correct) extension codes right? In the sense that a proper extension system would require you to first dial the landline number, wait for connection, then dial the extension code.

Rather the Bremen government have just arbitrarily reserved all phone numbers with the pattern '+49 421 361xxxxx' for governmental use only.

I've just tried dialing +49 421 361 and it wouldn't go through
Akkurator (2023-01-30 18:15:21+00:00): There is no "wait for connection" before dialling the extension. You just dial the whole number.
Without extension the line will just stay quiet waiting for you to dial the "Nebenstelle"/"Durchwahl".
Usually, extension 0 leads to the reception, main office, whatever.
You might want to try +49 421 361-0
kartler175 (2023-01-19 15:24:42+00:00): Bitte korrigieren:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/305810112
ticki_52 (2023-01-19 19:22:43+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis.  Node gelöscht und mapping gecheckt.
Rainero (2023-01-20 19:48:53+00:00): Hallo cEvLGWiQ,

mit 17364 geänderten Objekten in einem großen Gebiet ist dieser Änderungssatz ist doch ein automatisierter Edit. Wo wurde das angekündigt und diskutiert?
Im Forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56 und auf talk-DE habe ich nichts gefunden. Auf der Wikiseite für automatisierte Edits https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log steht auch nichts.  
Bist du dir des "Automated Edits Code of Conduct" bewusst?  
Bevor du weitermachst, kläre dein Vorgehen bitte mit der Community im Forum bzw. auf der Mailingliste talk-DE.  
Wenn dein Vorgehen nicht mit der Community abgestimmt war, sollte dieser Edit revertiert werden.

Viele Grüße,
Rainer
cEvLGWiQ (2023-01-21 11:11:55+00:00): Hi Rainer, yes I was aware of the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct, but was not explicitly aware of the fact that DIN 5008 was different from the rest of most of the world (E.123).

The way of how Key:phone page was formulated gives the impression that E.123 and DIN-5008 were interchangeable, and it wasn't until I saw (dug up) this page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Key:contact:*#Internal_phone_extension_number that I realised that there was a minor difference.

The edits I applied was simply formatted the phone numbers according to E.123, and left out invalid (simply just wrong) phone numbers untouched. No 'real' damage was done to the data, they are all still reachable to the same people before the edit.

Given the difference of going from DIN 5008 to E.123 is one way only (because of the removal of '-' when it comes to DiD), I could revert my changes later today if you would like that?
Rainero (2023-01-21 12:57:00+00:00): thank you for the quick answer.
If you reset the change record yourself, it would be best. I would do it otherwise.
After that, I would kindly ask you to follow the process for automated edits and discuss the changes that you want to make with the community first, create the wiki page under https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Category:Automated_edits_log to describe what is done and how and also link to it in the change sets. So other mappers are aware of the changes and can contribute information about cases where your proces might not apply or help to review the results.  

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)

Bye,  
Rainer
Map47 (2023-01-20 13:35:51+00:00): Ciao,
Mi permetto di segnalarti i problemi rilevati da OSMI in merito ai tuoi recenti inserimenti di dati.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=9.66926&lat=45.84349&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.20&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
Tra le altre cose hai creato la relazione https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/14962927 per delimitare/unire aree che non risultano omogenee utilizzando le etichette:
landuse=religious
name=Ghiaia
type=multipolygon
Immagino che le aree, ragruppate insieme,non abbiano niente di religioso e il loro nome non sia Ghiaia.
Ritengo pertanto sia più appropiato l'uso di:
surface=fine_gravel
escludendo, naturalmente dalla relazione, le areee con superficie di tipo diverso.
Le regole per la creazione dei multipoligoni le trovi quì https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon
OSMI segnala anche che il perimetro della relazione non è chiuso e ci sono sovrapposizini di aree.
Per evitare questi inconvenienti è opportuno non ignorare gli avvertimenti dell'editor in fase di caricamento dei dati.
In loco hai anche creato una relazione che ragruppate tutte le aree pedonali (marciapiedi), non compredo la motivazione di questa scelta, che oltre tutto, rende difficile la modifica/manutezione visto l'estesione e il numero dei membri.
ovruni (2023-01-19 00:54:01+00:00): Hola TuAmigoElEditor, en este conjunto de cambios se menciona a Esri Clarity como imagen usada para el trazado de esta carretera, sin embargo no se aprecia esta vía desde la imagen, desde que fuente se puede ver esta geometría de la carretera?
Saludos
TuAmigoElEditor (2023-01-19 02:46:02+00:00): Imagen satelital de g00gl3. incluso hay   Vista streetview del 2022 de la zona.
ovruni (2023-01-19 02:55:31+00:00): Hola, en OSM no podemos usar las imágenes de google (ni tampoco la satelital ni la de streetview), ya que estas poseen derechos de autor que son incompatibles con la licencia de OSM. Debo de suponer que otras vías que no cuentan con fuentes en el conjunto de cambios y que no se pueden visualizar desde las imágenes indicadas también fueron agregadas de la misma manera?
Saludos
CurlingMan13 (2023-01-19 07:25:14+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  In the future, can you be more specific with your changeset comments?  For example - what did you do?
DressyPear4 (2023-01-20 02:16:51+00:00): Demoliram todas essas casas para instalar a praça?
Tem algum link noticiando? Ou alguma foto do projeto?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131442234
silversurfer83 (2023-01-19 16:41:07+00:00): Hallo,

Du schreibst zwar, dass die Filiale dauerhaft geschlossen ist, jedoch gibst du nicht an, warum und woher du deine Information hast.
Es wäre wirklich hilfreich, wenn du in Zukunft eine vertändliche Quellenangabe machen würdest.
Je nach Situation vor Ort wäre mir die Nutzung der lifecylce prefixes wesentlich lieber (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix). Wenn vor Ort nämlich noch leere Bankräume vorhanden sind, die anderweitig geschäftlich genutzt werden können ist ein stumpfes Löschen des Nodes sehr unschön.
Hier in der Gegend gibt es zwei Beispiele: WaldBank in Berndorf: Filiale ersatzlos geschlossen und die Räumlichkeiten so umgebaut, dass sie nun zum umschließenden Wohngebäude gehören. Keine Hinweise mehr auf eine Bankfiliale. Node gelöscht.
Sparkasse Strother Straße Korbach: Räume noch vorhanden und nutzbar, also disused:amenity=bank und Geldautomat noch vorhanden also amenity=atm.

Bitte in Zukunft beachten, danke.

silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131442405
user_10241830 (2023-01-21 13:23:59+00:00): Hallo,

auch in diesem Fall gibt es einen Zeitungsartikel: https://www.hna.de/lokales/willingen-upland-ort317386/waldecker-bank-schliesst-geschaeftsstelle-in-usseln-90957877.html

In der alten Filiale steht immer noch ein Geldautomat. Solange der dort steht machen lifecycle-prefixes m. E. keinen Sinn, denn dann wird z. B. von StreetComplete gefragt "Ist inzwischen ein anderes Geschäft eingezogen?". Nur solange der Geldautomat noch in den alten Räumlichkeiten der Bank steht kann definitiv kein anderes Geschäft in die Bankfiliale einziehen. Man könnte allenfalls dann darüber nachdenken wenn auch der Geldautomat verschwindet - ist bislang noch nicht der Fall.
silversurfer83 (2023-01-21 13:32:35+00:00): Moin,

halte hier die Argumentation für eine Sichtweise, die ich akzeptieren kann.

Ein Argument was ich nicht nachvollziehen kann: "Mimimi, SC nervt alle halbe Jahre wegen dem Geschäft"
Technik ist halt nicht perfekt, aber deshalb sehe ich nicht ein, ein shop=vacant (oder ähnlich) einfach zu löschen.

Mein Hinweis auf die Quellenangabe bleibt und auch meine Bitte um großzügigere Nutzung der lifecycle prefixes
silversurfer83 (2023-01-19 16:41:41+00:00): gleicher Kommentar wie bei der anderen Filiale
Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131442481
emersonveenstra (2023-01-27 19:33:21+00:00): This garage has its nodes tagged as building=garage, can you please fix that? Thanks! https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1133340565
pitscheplatsch (2023-01-19 18:04:52+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131477476
Oussama DJAKNOUN (2023-01-19 18:14:06+00:00): *added (I noticed it yet)
emersonveenstra (2023-01-21 20:27:26+00:00): Hi,

You added these houses and tagged every node as building=house. this is incorrect, the points need to have no tags. Would you please fix this? Thanks!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:37:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
nevw (2023-01-19 11:10:11+00:00): I think this should be drawn as two separate houses
emersonveenstra (2023-01-21 14:11:02+00:00): Hi,

Please fix this, you drew a bridge connecting to nothing and drew a new road called Barry Street overtop of the already existing Barry Street. I would try to help but I have no idea what you're trying to do
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:14:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:53:26+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:07:24+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:57:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:42:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:56:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
emersonveenstra (2023-01-21 20:47:22+00:00): hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1133346182 does not have any tags, please fix this, thanks!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:39:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:52:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:16:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:38:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:12:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:08:03+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:36:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-01-27 16:10:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 131779437, 131779414, 131779448, 131779428, 131779443, 131779417, 131779421, 131775334, 131779434 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some undiscussed imports.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6789 ; which was ignored and the imports moved to another account, hence this revert