piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
IraGersh (2024-05-21 12:22:10+00:00): Wow. So glad you restored it. Totally unintentional. Sorry.  Was only intending to look at it because of something I saw in the Random channel on US slack.  Is there a way with iD to see what one's changes? So far I've only been able to undo and put stuff back.
ablevi202 (2024-05-21 12:24:59+00:00): Yeah that happens, if you press g I think it'll highlight the changes you've made but it also previews everything that's been modified after you click save in the top right (though that's only really useful here if it's a small changeset)
IraGersh (2024-05-21 12:29:00+00:00): Does g stand for something?  or is there an function name I can search on as g is not intuitive.
IraGersh (2024-05-21 12:32:12+00:00): I see that g stands for 'Highlight unsaved edits'. Going to go through the iD help slowly.
MxxCon (2024-05-26 02:36:05+00:00): On the screen where you enter your changeset comment, if you scroll down it shows a list of all the objects you'll be changing.
IraGersh (2024-05-26 02:53:51+00:00): Thanks. Never thought to look here, but I will.
sjakobi (2025-01-15 02:11:29+00:00): Hi Jochen!

Du hast auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/24635831 und angrenzenden Wegstücken smoothness=impassable eingetragen. Auf Mapillary-Fotos von 2022 ist der Zustand zwar nicht mehr "good", aber impassable scheint doch übertrieben. Meintest du vielleicht "intermediate"?

Schöne Grüße,
Simon
sjakobi (2025-01-17 07:29:53+00:00): Ich habe per overpass-turbo jetzt noch andere Wege gefunden, auf denen du mysteriöserweise smoothness=impassable eingetragen hast. Z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/28894415. Benutzt du vielleicht einen Editor, bei dem man sich da leicht verklicken kann?!
JochenB (2025-01-17 12:39:09+00:00): Hallo Simon,

vielen Dank für deine Aufmerksamkeit und richtig, das muss falsch sein. 

Ich gehen davon aus, dass es "intermediate" richtig wäre. 

Ursache ist vermutlich, dass JOSM das Verhalten geändert hat. Gebe ich "i" ein kam eigentlich immer "intermediate", vermutlich kam hier "impassible" und ich habe es nicht gemerkt,

Bin auf Dienstreise und kann es erst am Wochenende fixen. Drum konnte ich auch noch nicht auf dienen Kommentar reagieren.

Ich bin froh, dass es Mapper wie dich gibt, die meinen Mist entdecken und mich auch noch sensibilisieren, dass ich hier besser hinschaue.
sjakobi (2025-01-18 14:53:58+00:00): Hi Jochen!

Schön, dass sich das geklärt hat! :)

Schönes Wochenende noch!
Simon
NieWnen (2024-05-21 18:36:27+00:00): Tutaj też brakuje przecięć z chodnikiem
NieWnen (2024-05-21 18:29:27+00:00): To nie są unclassified. Trzeba to koniecznie poprawić.

W dodatku nie przecinają się ze ścieżką, a jedno nie łączy się z główną drogą.
syntex (2024-05-27 13:51:16+00:00): Poprawiłem te zmiany.
aduxas (2024-05-21 19:39:34+00:00): Please remove this incorrect changeset.
StreetSurveyor (2024-05-21 19:44:50+00:00): I don’t agree that it’s incorrect.
aduxas (2024-05-21 20:25:22+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name
Do not use name=* if:

    The feature is unnamed in the real world. If it is of a type that is typically named, such as a street, use noname=yes to affirm that the omission of name=* is deliberate, rather than a problem to be fixed by another mapper.
GunGoose22 (2024-05-21 01:27:42+00:00): Hello, I have reverted this changeset, please do not remove pathways just because they are on private property. Instead please mark them as access=private. This is both to help emergency services, and to indicate to someone using a map app that it is indeed a private path.  The removal of the path also does not prevent someone from just adding it back in later on unaware that its private.

Please see the wiki page linked below
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151605257
jb54osm (2024-05-21 09:42:45+00:00): Hi,

All Dutch adresses are from the official registry (Kadaster). So you can not just pick an adress and make changes to its adress-contents or location, or delete an adress!!
Cigkoftem was already present in OSM.
I have corrected the situation.
NeisBot (2024-05-21 00:45:03+00:00): Hi Coradinl, 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/1285016826

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:28:10+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151614428
NeisBot (2024-05-21 00:45:04+00:00): Hi Coradinl, 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/1285016870

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:27:52+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151614428
DorneyLake123 (2024-05-21 00:48:17+00:00): huge box because of this farmland area that needs deleting semi-urgently

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/260734489
NeisBot (2024-05-21 01:55:03+00:00): Hi The crucible, welcome to OSM!

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

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/node/11921050671

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
The crucible (2024-05-21 03:11:22+00:00): Yeah sorry, my kids play Pokémon go, and being in a rural area in the middle of nebraska, we don't have beaches and they wanted a new Pokémon that only shows up in a beach biome. I heard a few Italians put beaches around them using openstreetmap. All I wanted to do is help my kids with there game.
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-21 07:40:18+00:00): Hi The crucible,

Thank you for your honest reply here.

I will have to remove this beach as it is inaccurate and OSM isn't a tool just for Pokemon GO, however there is a beach here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/816034081 which *should* in theory, should trigger a beach biome for your kids. Might make for a fun weekend trip.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:27:33+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151614319
NeisBot (2024-05-21 02:10:03+00:00): Hi KeodeVL, 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/1285028932

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

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-21 06:03:34+00:00): Please do not add fictional features to the map. They will be removed.
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-21 17:27:06+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151610274
WoodWoseWulf (2024-05-21 06:03:03+00:00): Hello, KeodeVL, please do not add fictional features to the map. They will be removed.
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:29:29+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

But square the buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q" - they will look professionally done.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151605743
Supaplex (2024-05-21 03:40:42+00:00): 請問是整塊
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/777210709
都建築物嗎?如果不是，請依據建築實際範圍另行繪製建築輪廓
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151605768
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:29:55+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good. But square the buildings
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151605861
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:31:36+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

Try to better match the roof line to the building outline then square it by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151605900
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:32:22+00:00): This 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.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151606029
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:34:17+00:00): Please square the building. also use the appropriate tag for the feature such as amenity=animal_boarding. Can you fix this edit?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151606029
Robin Zyx (2024-05-22 20:36:05+00:00): How do you decide between an alt_name and an honourary_name, and what's the difference if any? The other end of this block has signage saying Norman Rockwell Place and nothing saying Odessa Stewart Street, but OSM lists both names there.

I'm wondering because there's a spot down in the 60s where the alternative signage needs to be fixed but I can't figure out the best choice for doing so.
IraGersh (2024-05-22 21:28:37+00:00): The short answer is I don't know.
I assumed both names are honorary.

Here's the long answer.
This was a discussion between @MxxCon and myself after I put a second alt_name for the piece of W103 that's closest to Broadway. @mmxCon said they'd conflict.  I set the Norman Rockwell name as honorary_name as @MxxCon said it was possible and at least wouldn't conflict.  Unfortunately, the honorary_name is not searchable whereas alt_name is.  I went to the other end of the block to verify the Odessa Stewart Street sign and as I do lately, I try to attach a Mapillary image to anything I tag so there is justification.
Robin Zyx (2024-05-22 22:08:10+00:00): Okay, sounds like you have no better idea than I do. I guess I'll have to do some more research. I had found a document on the city website listing all the street names and alternates a month ago when I was trying to research the situation in the West 60s. But there was no clarity in it about how official they are (does the city use them when referring to street work? does the post office honor them so that they be used in addresses?  etc.).

I'd never heard of Odessa Stewart  Street until I saw your edit. I had been aware of the Norman Rockwell naming for some time.
IraGersh (2024-05-22 22:40:50+00:00): You know more than I.  I'd never heard of either street naming.  I just tried Google Maps - no clue.  311 app - no clue. Acastus Photon app recognized it as West 103rd Street. I'd guess NYC doesn't use it. Would the US Post Office use it?  I don't know.
Robin Zyx (2024-05-22 22:54:55+00:00): I may have learned about the Rockwell naming when I was looking up why the building at # 210 has a plaque about him. Turns out his family lived in that location (obv. torn down and replaced by current building) for a couple years when he was born. The kids at the high school across Amsterdam learned about him and did a project about 8 years ago to get the city to co-name the street, and succeeded.

Google says the Odessa Steward naming happened in 2011. http://www.nycstreets.info/honorStreeta7d6.html?b=M&letter=O
Robin Zyx (2024-05-22 23:01:14+00:00): As an example of a co-name I'd never heard of until last year but which the city uses to some extent, the corner of Broadway and 116th is "Barnard Way". I first saw that used by NYC DOT in announcing neighborhood street resurfacing.
IraGersh (2024-05-22 23:10:34+00:00): Same Barnard as the college. https://barnard.edu/news/founders-day-barnards-125th-anniversary-party
Robin Zyx (2024-05-22 23:42:51+00:00): This is in the OSM Wiki indicates a known issue but not yet settled.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/New_York_City#Honorary_Street_Names

The text there was only added this past February, so I guess it's still evolving.
IraGersh (2024-05-23 00:03:57+00:00): Interesting.  I'll have to try the memorial_name tag and find out if its searchable.
MxxCon (2024-05-26 02:57:54+00:00): Ira, the issue with that edit was that name:<lang>= is supposed to be a translation of name= tag into that language.
What you had was "name=West 103rd Street" and  "name:en=Norman Rockwell Place", which is most definitely not a translation.

Since in NYC sometimes we have multiple names for the same street, for example 6th Ave can referred to Ave of Americas and other similar situations, and sometimes the city assigns these dedication names, such as "Odessa Steward Street", we needed more tags to distinguish them. Hence the honorary_name=* tag.
Keep in mind that not all dedication names are for dead people, so memorial_name=* is might not be applicable in all situations.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151606045
IraGersh (2024-05-26 03:29:48+00:00): Gotcha!
Glassman (2024-05-22 16:35:06+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/151606103
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:26:15+00:00): Hello vishvesh mahalle
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed connectivity from the highway at the location node 11946925482
node 7855569811
way 1288239031
node 6430767785
node 11946925481 and added bridge=yes and layer=1
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
NeisBot (2024-05-23 09:56:27+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151713922
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-23 09:56:42+00:00): #vandalism
Byenin (2024-07-18 08:18:25+00:00): Hello DipaleeShirsath@123
Thank you for mapping!
I reverted your data because, as per aerial imagery, the building is visible and needs to be moved to a footprint. The task will be resolved.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Jarrardi (2024-06-01 00:11:03+00:00): Post-survey update: It is legal to go around (south of) the fenced-off area through the woods, but the terrain is forbidding, there is no path, and the vegitation is difficult. I would not call it feasible, much less a route.
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:25:35+00:00): Hello ShubhamShinde
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed connectivity from the highway at the location: node 11947046299 and connected node the residential way to the primary way as per aerial imagery.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
felipeeugenio (2024-05-21 16:20:05+00:00): Hola Francisco, por favor los tildes. 
Hay que ponerlos. En casi ningún nombre usaste tildes
f_husni (2024-11-28 03:14:56+00:00): Hello, i have checked this way/324427860 and this way still can access for 4W. you can check by satelite imagery or street level imagery.
Byenin (2024-07-02 14:25:11+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at this location: node 11921419170.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 10:51:16+00:00): Hello ShubhamShinde
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you, here you connected residential way wrongly as there is a bridge in reality, needed to add the bridge tag to the way 1289343359,
way 1289343358
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:50:30+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at this location: node 11921312627
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 14:11:08+00:00): Hello vishvesh mahalle
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you, here you need to add the tunnel tag way 1283566662
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping
Tommybara (2024-05-25 00:52:57+00:00): Mấy cái node tên đô thị chỉ để đúng tên của thành phố/thị xã/thị trấn đó thôi. Node "Cần Thơ" đâu có để "Thành phố Cần Thơ" đâu, thì bạn sửa thành "Thành phố Vĩnh Long" làm gì để cho nó cá biệt vậy?

Đề nghị bạn xem xét kỹ lưỡng khi chỉnh sửa.
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:51:48+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and adjusted the alignment of residential way: node 2843418294.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:50:12+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at these location: node 11921418885.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-02 14:22:05+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed tunnel=yes and layer=-1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at these location: node 9165144952
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:51:06+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at this location: node 7798537347 and node 7798537352.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
フーヴァー　リー (2025-11-04 09:47:45+00:00): building=apartments需要建筑逐个框出来，不能直接这样画的
Byenin (2024-07-02 14:24:45+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed duplicate way from unclassified way node 6354160228
to node 9645535242 and aligned the secondary way 591188905 as per aerial imagery.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 14:10:29+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you, here you missed deleting the duplicate residential way 930960062.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:52:09+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed duplicated way from unclassified way: node 6354160228
to node 9645535242 and aligned the secondary way 591188905 as per aerial imagery
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:34:14+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed tunnel =yes and layer=-1 from residential way and added the node to the secondary way at this location: node 9603071213, node 325729941
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Komadinovic Vanja (2024-05-26 21:10:09+00:00): Just wanted to double check is https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/279176421 duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/54106930  ?
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:35:37+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at these location node 10260865519
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 17:49:31+00:00): Hello rakshe00
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from tertiary way and added the node to the trunk way at these location: nodes 11947763202 and node 11947763201
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:35:06+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed connectivity from tertiary way and removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from tertiary way. Adjusted the alignment of tertiary way at the location node 11947411646 node 11947411647 node 11921431087
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 14:10:50+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you here you need to extend the tunnel tag node 11921451596
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 09:49:50+00:00): Hello nilam920
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you, here you missed to run the validation before submitting for that here getting validation error node way 831699373
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-02 14:17:52+00:00): Hello POOJAGAWARI
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed bridge =yes and layer=1 from tertiary way way 1285069739 and added bridge= yes layer=1 to the motorway way 1288331572 and way 1288331575
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 10:49:12+00:00): Hello Prajaktakhilari
Thank you for mapping!
Here the layer tag has to be removed from the way 1289089935.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 09:28:45+00:00): Hello Prajaktakhilari
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you here you missed to run the validation before submitting for that here getting validation error node 7764892317.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
TrickyFoxy (2024-05-27 18:38:16+00:00): Reverted

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151913995
BR_pebble (2024-07-18 12:20:20+00:00): Hello Yashraj Shelke
Thank you for mapping!
I have added missing building 18.6076797, 74.0066105;
18.6076565, 74.0062795;
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-02 14:18:24+00:00): Hello aartipawar
Thank you for mapping!
I have removed tunnel =yes and layer=-1 from residential way and added the node to the residential way at these location node 9165144952
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Murrumbidgee (2024-07-02 10:50:05+00:00): Hello Prajaktakhilari
Thank you for mapping!
I have done fixes for you here you missed cleaning the validation way 409415521
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
silversurfer83 (2024-05-21 07:00:20+00:00): Moin luk323 :)

bitte nicht. Es ist relativ breiter Konsens, dass wir kombinierte Rad- Fußwege als highway=path erfassen.
Siehe auch hier: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway%3Dpath

Machst du das bitte rückgängig?

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151610164
luk323 (2024-05-22 09:24:07+00:00): Okay, danke für die Info
user_21183540 (2024-05-28 14:21:29+00:00): This edit had changed the building boundary to include the entrace of the metro station and a highway. Hence, I have reverted it.
Byenin (2024-07-02 08:26:44+00:00): Hello vaishnavi2003
Thank you for mapping!
I have fixed the incorrect data at these location: node 11946925481, added bridge=yes and layer=1.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!
Byenin (2024-07-18 08:18:58+00:00): Hello DipaleeShirsath@123
Thank you for mapping!
I reverted your data because, as per aerial imagery, the building is visible and needs to be aligned with the geometry as per aerial imagery. Then the task will be resolved.
Please inspect your task carefully before closing.
Happy Mapping!