piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Hawaiianblue (2024-02-05 20:31:35+00:00): It's not "yes" according the user manual. Only motor vehicles are allowed access. You can't walk, cycle or ride a horse into the site. According the the User manual, Ferry terminals (of which Eurotunnel is) should be set to "permissive" and toll=yes. Permissive does not mean 'by permission' it means anyone is allowed in (after paying the toll) but the site owner can remove their permission at any point. It's not controversial, it's just accurate. Otherwise there wouldn't be the option for 'Permissive'.
trigpoint (2024-02-05 20:36:09+00:00): Hi
What is the User Manual of which you speak?

In OSM we have a wiki, but that is intended to document how we map, not dictate how we should map.

That tagging you are changing has been in place for a very long time, so is probably not broken.

Cheers Phil
vng_me (2024-02-05 20:37:27+00:00): All the Eurotunnel service roads are already mapped as foot=no, bicycle=no, horse=no, etc. access=no is strange.

What value do your changes give?

I ask on osm-gb community, they are also agree that =permissive is odd here.
Hawaiianblue (2024-02-05 20:40:41+00:00): Wiki or what ever you want to call it, is the defacto user manual for editing OSM. Legally the access is permissive. That's just a fact. And a map should represent facts, not personal interpretations of what it should be.
Hawaiianblue (2024-02-05 20:41:35+00:00): Access to "All=no" because there is only access for motor vehicles, which is set to Permissive.
Hawaiianblue (2024-02-05 20:42:16+00:00): I'm unsubscribing from the conversation  now. Because the access is by law and any other sensible definition permissive.
SK53 (2024-02-05 21:10:47+00:00): Please do not unsubscribe from this conversation. 

If you fail to discuss this all these edits may be reverted. Consider that OSM is nearly 20 years old, and infrastructure like the Channel Tunnel will have received attention over many years to make sure it is compatible with various routing services. It is therefore unlikely that existing tagging was very far wrong. 

I'm concerned that your changes will break numerous downstream applications which rely on OSM data for routing. This is why such changes need to be discussed.

Jerry aka SK53
trigpoint (2024-02-06 10:54:55+00:00): The problem we now have is that routing is seriously broken and is now using a service entrance, rather than the actual check in.

Whilst motor_vehicle=permissive may be true, not tagging everything inside that area as permissive is bound to cause problems, also not leaving the primary route as easy as possible for routers is bound to cause problems.

The wiki is intended to document mapping practices and not dictate. As SK53 says, OSM is 20 years old. Have we been doing it wrong for all that  time? I don't think so.

These changes need to be reverted so that we can get back to a working  point in time.

Phil
vng_me (2024-02-16 19:37:14+00:00): What are the next steps here?
And here? https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147054398
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 11:14:26+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147130498
Herwescheluc (2024-02-07 10:12:59+00:00): I take my hat off to you and leave you my sincerest congratulations! - Andreas
mini-me (2024-02-07 12:14:48+00:00): Садоводство в городе "Дачи №1"? Что-то тут явно не так...
SomeoneElse (2025-03-13 15:44:48+00:00): Hello,
I'm guessing that https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1246468471/history might have been a Boots Opticians once, but is now a pet shop?
Best Regards,
Andy
mini-me (2024-02-07 12:06:27+00:00): У городского округа должен быть admin_level=6
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:admin%20level?uselang=ru
Почему поменяли?
martinst (2024-02-06 06:44:59+00:00): War das Verschieben von 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/328653544 
ein Versehen?
culipabe (2024-02-08 11:37:59+00:00): Hallo Lorenz123,
bitte beachte, dass recycling:glass für Spezialgläser, die keine Glasgefäße sind, vorgesehen ist: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:amenity%3Drecycling#Materialien
In Weilheim-Schongau werden diese Gläser nicht an den Wertstoffinseln gesammelt: https://www.eva-abfallentsorgung.de/Service-Center/Abfallentsorgung/Entsorgungssuche
NorthCrab_upload (2024-02-05 20:11:25+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Głowackiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389251997

"Jazy":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389252124
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1225041997

"Generała Bema":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389443186

"Lelewela":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389444227

"Krasickiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389444438
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/389444475

"Żwirki i Wigury":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/982337623
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/982337626
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/982337627

"Generała Dąbrowskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1099908359

"Generała Pułaskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1099908360

"Ignacego Paderewskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1229828895

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mex (2024-02-06 09:05:16+00:00): whilst deleting the object is not incorrect as the building is still visible on the satalite layers using the lifecycle tags might be better to prevent it being re-added. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:demolished:*
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147107770
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:31:14+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112160
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:30:17+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112162
Glassman (2024-02-06 17:12:15+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/147108553
fortera_au (2024-02-07 00:29:31+00:00): Hi, can you provide any further details on this change? You've done one that spans two continents with no description of what you've actually changed.
surveyor54 (2024-10-28 09:15:19+00:00): Hi die_Lou,
Frage, ist hier wirklich ein Parkplatz? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11589639268
Ich kann mich nicht erinnern?

Gruß surveyor54
streckenkundler (2024-02-05 20:52:52+00:00): Auch hier fehlt die Quellenangabe... "amtl. Bebauungsplan" ist nichtssagend!
opendcc (2024-02-06 16:32:51+00:00): Das ist schon ok - Daten wurde versehentlich gelöscht  - siehe History.
NieWnen (2024-02-06 19:25:27+00:00): Proszę nie duplikuj tych samych obszarów na sobie. To nic nie zmienia, a jest błędem. Wystarczy pojedynczy obszar natural=wood.

Postaraj się o lepszą precyzję w rysowaniu chodnika – o ile faktycznie tam jakikolwiek istnieje, bo żadnego tam nie widzę – wtedy nie dodajemy. 
Na ten moment przecina płoty/prywatne działki.

Nie dodawaj proszę parków, tam gdzie ich nie ma.
eggie (2024-02-05 21:43:35+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
Marek-M (2024-02-06 19:59:24+00:00): Po pierwsze - chodnik bez połączenia z układem drogowym jest nieprawidłowy.

Po drugie - na zdjęciu satelitarnym tego chodnika nie widać - jeżeli coś nie istnieje, to nie może być w OpenStreetMap
Maps1GIS (2024-02-05 20:55:13+00:00): Comment is "Added service road to the east of бул. Велики Преслав #adt".
Nakaner (2024-02-06 12:51:57+00:00): Hallo,

was möchtest du hier mit enforcment=traffic_signals ausdrücken? Dass der Zug aus dem Auto ein Blechknäuel macht, wenn man trotz geschlossener Schranken über den Bahnübergang fährt?

Viele Grüße

Michael
marcel strassner (2024-02-10 18:25:46+00:00): Ich habe deine Anmerkung zum Anlass genommen die Rotlicht-Überwachung, die es an dieser Stelle gibt, von den Gleisen auf die Brücke zu versetzen, dort wo das Gerät steht.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-26 13:43:04+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11589839968/history has width = 0 that was added in this edit
how something exist and have width=0?
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:34:12+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112184
bkil (2024-02-05 21:53:20+00:00): Ha nincs kitáblázva, lehet highway=service és akkor névtelen maradhat.
bkil (2024-02-05 21:59:16+00:00): https://wiki.osm.org/Hungary/Fontos_szempontok#highway=service
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:34:31+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112191
mcliquid (2024-02-06 07:11:54+00:00): Hi,

please note: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:

• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)

• keep changes within the same country

• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
kogutowicz-mano (2024-02-06 20:44:33+00:00): Don't worry. This does not occur too often. :-)
I hunted a certain kind of tagging errors in Hungary. And the search resulted a few tree with name=Ginko Biloba abroad too. It would be cumbersome not to fix them in the same pass.
Anyway thanks for the notice.
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:35:16+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112194
SomeoneElse (2024-02-12 20:43:10+00:00): Has the Magnet really reopened? It was aboutto be demolished when I last saw it....
dsp (2024-02-12 22:05:40+00:00): No, I thought I'd changed the building to having now been demolished. It's definitely a pile of rubble now! Apologies if I've screwed up the change, it's definitely gone!
SomeoneElse (2024-02-12 22:13:30+00:00): I blame iD's presets :)
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:35:37+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112203
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:36:02+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112207
bkil (2024-02-07 17:56:54+00:00): Köszönjük a közreműködést. Felhívjuk a figyelmet, hogy a házszám, lakcím és postacím formátuma speciális bontást igényelhet https://wiki.osm.org/Hungary/Jel%C3%B6l%C3%A9si_p%C3%A9ld%C3%A1k#Javasolt_c%C3%ADm_elemek
Polarbear (2025-08-14 09:28:41+00:00): Hi kjon, du hast hier dankenswerterweise neue Hausnummern erfasst und in jeder Node angegeben:
source = Geoportal Berlin / Hauskoordinaten

Nun gibt es diesen Layer schon lange nicht mehr und im Geoportal/Adressen sind die Nummer noch gar nicht drin. 
Was war denn nun deine wirkliche Quelle?
kjon (2025-08-16 11:03:16+00:00): Hallo Polarbear,
öffne doch bitte mal iD und wechsle auf die Hintergrundansicht "Berlin/Geoportal ALKIS". Das habe ich vor einem Jahr auch gemacht und die dort hinterlegten Hausnummern in OSM ergänzt. Der Rest (source=* Tags an Knoten und Änderungssatz) wird von iD automatisch gesetzt, weil ich bei der Bearbeitung die entsprechende Hintergrundansicht ausgewählt habe. LG kjon
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:36:52+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147112209
b-holdet (2024-08-11 06:01:37+00:00): Bemærk at building=manor er ikke er beskrevet i wikien
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:building

I stedet bør denne kombination ifølge wiken benyttes:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:historic%3Dmanor

building=yes
historic=manor
name=*
Andrea Musuruane (2024-02-06 08:12:05+00:00): Ciao. C'e' un problema in questo edit. Non ci possono essere due ref:mise. Ciao, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147112009
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:31:03+00:00): reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147108172
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:30:24+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147108194
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:34:06+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147110275
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:34:38+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147110596
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:35:23+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147110675
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:35:45+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147110900
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:36:09+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147110910
pitscheplatsch (2024-02-06 19:36:58+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/147111079
NorthCrab_upload (2024-02-05 23:10:14+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/172168363
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1246714626

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
WieKo68 (2024-06-10 20:03:28+00:00): poprawione
emersonveenstra (2024-02-21 12:55:02+00:00): Hi there,

I see you're adding "multi-use=yes" to some of these paths. Is that meant to be a tag to say that it can be used as both a walking trail and cross country trail, or does it mean something else?
Finnster (2024-02-21 17:16:56+00:00): Hi,

That's correct, for these trails the allowed uses include: skiing, fat-biking, snowshoeing, walking, running, on-leash dogs, etc. 

It is worth noting that the ski conditions are best preserved when walkers/runners stick to the side of the trail (and not on the classic tracks if there are any). So best to keep that in mind, particularly on sections shared with the main ski trails.

Thanks!
emersonveenstra (2024-02-21 17:36:00+00:00): Thanks!
I'm just curious about what value you think that tag adds, given that those individual activities are already tagged as allowed (from bicycle=yes, dog=yes, piste:type=nordic, highway=path, etc) and "multi-use" would be less specific than those individual ones. It doesn't seem like there's a purpose to having it there, unless i'm missing something?
Finnster (2024-02-21 22:29:54+00:00): You're right, it is unnecessary/redundant. I have updated the tags on those trails.
ChehrehBargi (2024-04-30 17:03:39+00:00): Hello
Dear BaghdadiMapper
loc_name means Ivan Madain in Arabic and the local expression of Iraq and loc_name:fa means Ivan Madain in Persian and famous in Iran. Adding local name to other languages is not against osm rules. A location in any language can be displayed on the map even if it is not translated into that language on a sign on the ground.
Pontius (2024-02-06 16:51:32+00:00): There seems to be conflicting information. The 2022 TIGER overlay labels it Kingsley Court, but McLean county GIS calls it Kingsley Street. 
https://mcleangis.maps.arcgis.com/apps/webappviewer/index.html?id=541971ad75f248c38c9bc6ffcd3a7516
kb9ysc (2024-02-06 19:35:43+00:00): Agreed.  The street sign does not indicate Kingsley Court:  https://maps.app.goo.gl/fdTmDABuGWExf6N88  -  (I work for the Town of Normal Engineering & Public Works--  I'd trust McGIS over the TIGER overlay)
Syl (2024-02-17 09:49:49+00:00): J'ai annulé ce groupe de modifications, voir https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/ajouter-le-trace-de-communes-disparues/21113
emersonveenstra (2024-02-06 15:10:29+00:00): Hi there,

Could you explain a bit more about what A1 and A2 are? Right now, nothing can understand what it is since there's no other tags attached to it
clmgostate (2024-02-06 17:39:31+00:00): I have updated these to Guideposts
DavidFactChex (2024-06-26 21:58:14+00:00): Um, why did this changeset delete roads and create new ones with same names? Also, the source "DWG issue" is dubious.
Fizzie-DWG (2024-06-26 22:37:05+00:00): If I remember correctly, when the CS that created a number of fictitious roads, & also incorrectly extended other valid roads, was reverted, it deleted the good roads as well, so I had to remap them. & that source is my way of saying that it refers to a problem that has been raised to the Data Working Group.
blackboxlogic (2024-02-06 17:34:38+00:00): In case the original editor sees this. These names would be great in a "name:aaq" tag to specify the language.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147114294
Syl (2024-02-17 09:49:39+00:00): J'ai annulé ce groupe de modifications, voir https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/ajouter-le-trace-de-communes-disparues/21113
NorthCrab_upload (2024-02-06 01:24:54+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Różana":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590338032
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590338033

"Juliana Krzewickiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590338097

"Park Miejski":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590338583

"Fabryczna":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339264
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339265
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339266
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339324

"Kardynała Stefana Wyszyńskiego":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339286
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339287
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339288
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339289
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590339290

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
G_P_J (2024-02-06 09:55:44+00:00): Poprawione.
bicyclett (2024-04-26 09:34:20+00:00): Hi,
du hast den Radweg mit access=no getagged. War das ein Versehen oder ist der Weg tatsächlich gerade gesperrt/nicht zugänglich?
tordans (2024-09-10 18:09:15+00:00): Hallo bicyclett, wir haben das gerade gemeinsam im Meetup für das Radnetz Brandenburg (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Brandenburg/Kampagne_Radnetz) angeschaut und das Tagging optimiert in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/156452437

Danke für den Hinweis
Xvtn (2024-02-06 15:08:51+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great! Only issue I can see is that the end of the path at Cimarron Drive (This node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11590408454) shouldn't be tagged turning circle. (There is already a valid one placed just to the north.) Let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks for your contributions!
tastrax (2024-02-06 02:13:02+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 .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
opendcc (2024-02-06 10:00:00+00:00): Trotzdem ist das immer noch nicht der EIGENNAME des Gebäudes.
silversurfer83 (2024-02-06 13:29:54+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Namen#name_ist_nur_der_Name

Diesen Abschnitt (und den gesamten Artikel trotzdem) bitte genau lesen. Das ist es, worauf opendcc hinaus will.

Ansonsten liefert das Wiki unter
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:How_to_map_a
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Map_Features
gute Übersichten, was wie erfasst wird.

Wie schon privat geschrieben sind Quellenangaben angemessen und antworten hier in der Diskussion erwünscht.

Wenn etwas unklar ist, bitte fragen. Ich kann von mir behaupten, dass ich gerne behilflich bin :)

Grüße
silversurfer83
silversurfer83 (2024-02-06 13:37:27+00:00): Und für alle Interessierten:

Im Forum gibt es zwei ausführliche Diskussionen, wie Bauhöfe zu taggen sind. Spoiler: Ist nicht ganz klar 😅

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/whats-better-building-yard-maintenance-yard-or-something-else/105378

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bauhof-strassenmeisterei-autobahnmeisterei-wie-taggen/94631
opendcc (2024-02-06 14:43:53+00:00): Nachdem Bauhöfe ja in jeder Gemeinde existieren, sollte man diese Diskutiererei zu einem Ende führen und ein eindeutiges Tagging finden - für den gesamten Bauhof. Definitiv falsch ist aber das simple Nametagging von Gebäuden - wobei in der History des Mappers hier schon diverse andersartige Bauten (Altenheime, Bahnhöfe, ..) zu Bauhöfen mutierten. Daher sollte man diese flächendeckenden Änderungen entweder überprüfen (fast alle Gemeinde verlinken den Bauhof auf der Gemeindeseite) oder reverten.
woodpeck (2024-02-07 14:58:25+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15668 um den Mapper auf die Sache aufmerksam zu machen
hans-juergen koesters (2024-12-22 11:54:03+00:00): werde keine neuen Einträge mehr ausführen,
hans-juergen koesters (2024-12-22 11:55:33+00:00): möchte mich entschuldigen!!!!
hans-juergen koesters (2024-12-22 11:56:39+00:00): Bitte um Freigabe für normales aufrufen!
silversurfer83 (2024-12-22 13:49:17+00:00): Hallo hans-juergen,

alles nur halb so schlimm. Es ging primär darum, dass wir versucht haben dir zu helfen. Wir sind über alle Beiträge, die den Richtlinien entsprechen froh und dankbar. Daher möchte auch niemand, dass du hier nicht mehr beiträgst.

Die Datenbank, die als OpenStreetMap bekannt ist, wird von millionen Menschen genutzt und daher sind wir bemüht diesen auch konsistente Daten zu liefern.

Die Objekte in OSM sind aufgeteilt in Punkte (nodes), miteinander verbundene Punkte (ways), und miteinander Verknüpfte Objekte (Relationen). Diese Objekte bekommen von uns Eigenschaften (tags) in der Form "Schlüssel=Wert" (ein einfaches Gebäude wäre also "building=yes").

Das alles ist dann in unserem Wiki unter wiki.openstreetmap.org dokumentiert und wenn es Schwierigkeiten gibt sind praktisch 24/7 Menschen irgendwo online, die bereit sind zu helfen. Zu finden sind wir zum Beispiel im Forum unter c.osm.org

Ach ja: Du bist auch nicht mehr gesperrt. Diese war nur dazu da deine Aufmerksamkeit zu erhalten.

happy mapping
silversurfer83
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-03-31 06:00:48+00:00): Tak jak w https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144486546:



Jakie jest źródło /podstawa dla tej edycji?

Patrz np. https://warszawa.wyborcza.pl/warszawa/7,54420,25028308,amfiteatr-na-bemowie-nie-nosi-juz-imienia-michaela-jacksona.html
Sajeevini sivajothy (2024-05-24 14:23:04+00:00): his app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.#OMGuru#OSMCha

Please Verify the satellite Imagery before You Confirm Any Feature. Between this road, there is a Wall. But you Joined that with another road. How did you Confirm this As a Service Road? Are you a local Person?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147115724
LakeTopozero (2024-05-28 13:56:18+00:00): Hello Sajeevini sivajothy, thanks for reaching out!

The cited Mapillary imagery shows a vehicle making a turn around the perimeter of the gas station (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=581186980888461) and an exit can be seen in another image (https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1035358830963394). The way the gas station poles are positioned also suggests there's a service road here. In addition, this service road provides a way for vehicles to exit the amenity as there is a painted “out” arrow sign in ground level imagery. If you have any sources indicating that a wall prevents vehicles from traveling around the gas station, I would be happy to update this. 

Best regards!
jacobwhall (2024-02-23 06:15:37+00:00): This looks great, thanks for your contribution and welcome to the sidewalks project! You correctly tagged unmarked/marked/signaled crossings, and added many surface tags. I know how long that stuff can take :D

If you're ever interested in connecting with other mappers in Richmond, we'd love to have you at MapRVA, a biweekly meetup. Feel free to message me for details or find us online.
user_14538650 (2024-02-06 03:12:51+00:00): Thank you so much!