piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Visaman (2025-04-11 09:23:35+00:00): They seem to render correctly now,- and not as solid blue lines. That was how they rendered.
PS:  look at,-
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/638948943#map=13/59.65972/6.46159
Visaman (2025-05-04 11:20:45+00:00): Here it is something wrong Gazer75.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/search?query=tafjord&zoom=13&minlon=11.128120422363281&minlat=61.71599354088629&maxlon=11.448612213134766&maxlat=61.789681098855084#map=14/62.23098/7.41959
eggie (2025-03-05 13:24:58+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Je hebt twee officiële adresnodes gewijzigd.
Kloppen die adressen niet meer.
Verder zie ik dat het gehele gebouw is verwijderd
Is hier geen gebouw meer.
name=Servicepunt doet niet in OSM.
Ook de aard van de instelling toevoegen.
office=??? 
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-03-05 13:35:38+00:00): Nummer 6 staat nu 2x in de data.
nr 3 is verdwenen. Bestaat dat nummer niet meer?
Je zou voor het servicepunt bv office=yes kunnen gebruiken. 
Mapse
eggie
eggie (2025-03-05 13:40:52+00:00): Ik heb office=yes toegevoegd

Evt anders amenity=docial_facility met social_facility =?

Zie https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:social_facility
eggie (2025-03-05 13:41:55+00:00): typo
amenity=social_facility
social_facility:for=mental_health
eggie (2025-03-05 13:27:06+00:00): Een  gebouwomtrek krijg niet nog eens het adres.
Er is al een adresnode.
MVG
eggie
Rembob (2025-03-05 13:30:12+00:00): Het gebouw heet op dit moment Het Amelink. 
Maar het is net zoals de andere villa binnen in dit zorgpark een Villa en ik wou daarom de naamwijziging doorvoeren naar Villa Amelink
eggie (2025-03-05 13:33:25+00:00): Oke, Dat had je al eerder gedaan.
Alle begin is moeilijk. Ik heb het adres verwijderd. 

Mapse
eggie
TinPetreković (2025-03-16 19:51:12+00:00): Tags removed on the easternmost end of the road: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163704098#map=14/39.98652/-75.21587
eggie (2025-03-05 13:28:07+00:00): Je hebt het hele gebouw verwijderd. Waarom?
Je commentaar is fietsenhok.

MVG
eggie
Rembob (2025-03-05 13:29:05+00:00): Hallo, 
Er is hier onlangs een fietshok bijgeplaatst, deze wou ik aan de kant bijmaken. het verwijderen van een gebouw was niet de bedoeling
eggie (2025-03-05 13:30:53+00:00): Ik heb je changeset teruggedraaid. Het fietsenhok zou je opnieuw kunnen intekenen.
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=163244284

MVG
eggie
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-18 03:03:29+00:00): DWG revert – undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165094217
DDD丶Samuel (2025-08-12 13:34:15+00:00): 您好，潍荣高速线潍莱段start_date应为2020-11-26，2023-12-09为莱荣段的开通时间
NieWnen (2025-03-06 16:59:21+00:00): Cześć,
jak coś w Warszawie i okolicach nie dajemy dodatkowych tagów na "linie/obszary peronowe" (te tagowane jako `highway=platform`).

Wynika to z tego, że tworzy to zbędne duplikaty tagów, tylko na różnych sąsiednich obiektach, przez co jest to potem ciężej utrzymywać – często tworzą się rozbieżności. Aplikacje prawdopodobnie też mogą wtedy pytać 2x co jest trochę stratą czasu dla mapującego.

Niestety edytor id proponuje dodawanie tagu `public_transport=platform`, co również warto zignorować, dlatego też część zmian z przystankami została cofnięta.
KhalidKashmiri (2025-03-07 21:03:06+00:00): Okej, zapamiętam. Czyli jak rozumiem mam nie traktować też innych sugestii edytora jako pewniki? Jest to może gdzieś zanotowane czy to raczej niepisana zasada?
NieWnen (2025-03-07 21:28:00+00:00): Niefajnie się na to odpowiada, bo to zależy :)

Jeśli chodzi o podpowiedzi edytora to z nimi jest różnie, wiec nie można zakładać, że zawsze w 100% przypadków podpowiada dobrze.
Z iD jest o tyle różnie, że czasem też lubi forsować niektóre tagowanie, które może nie jest błędne, ale też nie jest zawsze super potrzebne.
Np. capacity=1 na każde miejsce parkingowe. Czy crossing=marked, które spopularyzował ten edytor, a teraz się z niego wycofał na rzecz dodawania crossing:markings=yes :)

Z błędnych, to sytuacja sprzed kilku dni, to zaczął proponować, żeby automaty DPD miały proponowany tag `parcel_mail_in=no`, bo się okazało, że ktoś zmienił szablon na podstawie Węgier, a tam akurat ich automaty nie mają takiej funkcji :P

Także na ślepo nie klikać.

Jeśli chodzi o ten konkretny przypadek, to tagowanie transportu publicznego mocno może się różnić zależnie od regionu. Powoli się to ujednolica i "standard warszawski" się rozprzestrzenia po Polsce (choć nie wszystkim się podoba), ale nie zmienia to faktu, że iD nadal go nam psuje :P
W rożnych krajach jest różnie z tym tagowaniem.

Formalnie mamy kilka wątków na forum, ale sprowadza się głównie do jednego (choć co jakiś czas temat powraca w innym wydaniu): 

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/bus-ztm-warszawa/5105/32
KhalidKashmiri (2025-03-08 15:36:35+00:00): Rozumiem, dzięki wielkie za odpowiedź
pilvisus (2025-03-05 13:44:22+00:00): forgot to add source :,) (survey + Maa- ja Ruumiamet 2025)
opendcc (2025-04-04 02:10:14+00:00): reviewed
MxxCon (2025-03-06 22:06:30+00:00): Hello.
Please note this is not a proper way to map tress.
Please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree how to correctly map trees.
As such this edit will be reverted in full.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163246845
opendcc (2025-04-05 18:24:50+00:00): reverted
Lezurex (2025-03-05 15:25:09+00:00): Wo genau ist hier das Abbiegen markiert? Scheint auf einer Quartierstrasse eher fehl am Platz. Auch sollte das nicht auf der ganzen Länge getaggt werden, gibt ja noch andere Kreuzungen dazwischen.
mattfe (2025-03-05 15:29:16+00:00): Du hast recht. Hab's rückgängig gemacht. Sorry!
micheleOSM3 (2026-01-11 07:25:40+00:00): In OSM, the name=* tag must contain the current and official or commonly used name of the object.
“Ex casermetta” isn't a name; it's a historical description.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
Jrachi (2025-03-06 07:33:07+00:00): Ciao.
Vedo che hai cancellato una track indicandone la non esistenza e basandoti sulle ortofoto Bing.
Questa way è parte di una relazione di un percorso escursionistico a catasto nazionale (ECNP750) e l'editor ti ha sicuramente avvisato che la cancellazione coinvolgeva  una relazione.
Il rilevamento ufficiale è del 2016, e potrebbe anche avere qualche tratto con scarsa manutenzione che lo rendono poco visibile.
Ma sulle Bing (forse del 2022) vedo che comunque la strada è visibile.
Quindi mi chiedo se ti sei basato sulle immagini come scrivi sul changeset o se conosci la zona.
Per favore rispondi rapidamente perché se come dici tu la strada non esiste (o non è percorribile a piedi?) sarà necessario un cambiamento dei dati ufficiali.

Ivo
RobertoPisa (2025-03-06 09:03:03+00:00): Ciao.
Sono stato a fare ieri il giro dell'Incoronata e volevo proprio fare quel sentiero. Scendendo dalla Cappella ho cercato attentamente, ovviamente con un gps, ma non c'era la ben che minima traccia di qualcosa.
Allora ho percorso il sentiero un pochino più a sud-ovest che porta a Tetto Masuè e ho cercato l'attacco alto della traccia che ho cancellato. Assolutamente inesistente.
Comunque, non mi sono basato su cartografia Bing, ma sono stato sul posto basandomi con i miei occhi.
Roberto
Jrachi (2025-03-06 10:56:41+00:00): Ok. Capisco.
Eri a piedi? Sei un esperto escursionista? Non ti perdi solo per l'erba alta?
Non è un sentiero ma una strada sterrata che conduce a fondi agricoli.
Mi è già capitato di andare a verificare di persona le cancellazioni e in due casi era un sentiero visibile ma inadatto alle bici, e la terza volta era poco visibile l'inizio a causa dell'erba alta.
In tutti i casi la cancellazione di un breve tratto di sentiero non era necessaria ma si utilizza il tag trail_visibility.
Qui parliamo di 1.5 km di strada!
Ho controllato i dati a disposizione ed essendo stato rilevato da un professionista, e non un rilevatore CAI, il percorso non sia completamente affidabile.
Se riesci ad indicarmi meglio quale tratto non hai trovato te ne sarei grato.
Per il futuro ti consiglio di non cancellare interamente le way che sono parte di una relazione.
Potresti, ad esempio tagliare il tratto che hai cercato di seguire, se track mettere path e aggiungere un trail_visibility e/o una nota sul problema.

Ivo
RobertoPisa (2025-03-06 11:48:26+00:00): Ero a piedi e mi ritengo esperto. Ho 40 anni di esperienza come capogita sulle montagne italiane ed estere. Ho usato il gps da circa 30 anni. Non mi spaventa l'erba alta. Ho fatto sentieri che bisognava accovacciarsi e strisciare. In questo caso non iniziava proprio, non dico una strada, ma neanche un sentierino. In più salendo, poco sotto Tetto Masuè ho cercato attentamente questa fantomatica strada dall'alto; anche qui nessuna esile traccia.
Per cui non è che mi sono perso lungo la strada, ma non ne ho potuto fare nemmeno un metro.
Ho deciso di cancellarla non a cuor leggero, ma per evitare che altri escursionisti perdessero tempo inutilmente.
Comunque ti ringrazio dei consigli.
Roberto
RobertoPisa (2025-03-06 12:10:06+00:00): Io abito a Cuneo. Se ti va ti accompagno volentieri a fare una verifica insieme.
Roberto
Jrachi (2025-03-06 12:14:18+00:00): Ti ringrazio molto della risposta!
Sono alquanto lontano da Cuneo.
Segnalo il problema alla SOSEC e ti farò sapere.

Ancora grazie.
Ivo
somehundred (2025-03-05 16:51:51+00:00): Atkal šajā relācijā[1] biedru lomas saliktas ačgārni. Šobrīd tās vajag apmainīt vietām, citādi sanāk, ka zāles atrodas iekš celtnes.

Ātri var izveidot multipoligonu, turot Shift, klišķinot uz abiem elementiem un pēc tam spiest c.

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18785332
eggie (2025-03-05 15:33:32+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback   Het is niet de bedoeling om wegen of paden te verwijderen die in het 'veld' gewoon bestaan. Wel kun je de juiste accesstags toevoegen.
Ik heb de verwijdering teruggedraaid. 
Ik heb voorlopig access=permissive toegevoegd.
Hoe staat hier aangegeven dat alleen bewoners er mogen komen?

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-03-05 15:58:18+00:00): Wanneer er een bordje staat met art 461 wvs kun je permissive evt aanpassen naar private.
Gr eggie
Luzandro (2025-03-06 12:30:40+00:00): Hallo,

die Abbiegebeschränkungen, wie diese hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/18785335 sind zum einen unvollständig, denn sie müssten aus mindestens 3 Elementen mit den Rollen from, via, to bestehen (von wo, über welchen Punkt bzw. welche Wege, wohin).
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Relation:restriction

Zum anderen sind sie hier unnötig, da die Beschränkungen schon implizit durch die Einbahnen bestehen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163248239
aw_LT (2025-03-05 16:18:31+00:00): Nachdem der Klara-Pölt-Weg nicht explizit als Rad- und Fußweg ausgeschildert ist, habe ich es auf hw=residential bzw. service (Nordteil) geändert mit den dementsprechenden access-Tags.

Fraglich ist, was man mit dem umgebenden hw=pedestrian im Südteil macht?
IvicaBanovac (2025-03-06 13:25:51+00:00): Reverted because of wrong tags #OptimoRoute

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163285571
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-03-23 10:16:10+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 163979213 where the changeset comment is: Following on from https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163963906 , and see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/about-mapping-features-with-computer-vision/127790 - reverting some 'AI detected swimming pools', some of dubious quality.
eggie (2025-03-05 15:45:18+00:00): Dag Purrie... Je fietspad zat geplakt op de toegangsweg. Dat noemen we duplicated ways en dat routeert niet. Ik heb het opgelost.
MVG
eggie
hatul (2026-03-31 07:02:25+00:00): שלום דודי, למה מחקת את עין צייוואנת?
בבקשה להיזהר בעריכות.
zstadler (2026-03-31 09:37:26+00:00): המעיין שוחזר
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180663821
user_18023081 (2025-03-06 00:29:51+00:00): Please keep changesets local
Superadlen (2025-03-06 09:02:54+00:00): merci .. saha remdanek
Hajar-El (2025-03-06 12:36:43+00:00): Saha Remdanek aussi. Merci!
eggie (2025-03-05 16:04:55+00:00): Hoi...
Tip.. probeer svp op de bestaande adresnode bij te taggen.

Mvg
eggie
JJIglesias (2025-03-05 17:24:33+00:00): Has montado un area de natural=wood sobre areas que ya tienen micro mapeo de landuse.

Por favor no vuelvas a hacer eso. Tu edición va a ser revertida (borrada)

Gracias
JJIglesias (2025-03-05 17:36:15+00:00): No necesitamos simplemente poner manchones verdes (o cualquier color) sobre el mapa, eso ya lo podíamos haber hecho hace decadas. El concepto de natural=wood y landuse=XXX estan en la wiki.openstreetmap.org, te sugiero q los leas, para que tengas clara la idea.

Gracias
Enock4seth (2025-08-16 21:39:57+00:00): Hi, watch what you are uploading to OSM and be careful not to mess up useful existing features
NeisReview (2025-03-06 05:54:50+00:00): #NoTags

Hi, welcome to OSM.

I've reviewed your latest map edits and it seems that this changeset you created includes nodes and ways without any tags. Could there have been an issue during the mapping process?

Looking forward to your response.

Thank you!
WerthervonGoethe (2025-03-13 11:30:58+00:00): The connection crashed with the app. I didn't though it would upload the changeset. 
Sorry for the circumstances.
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-13 12:15:47+00:00): Thanks for your reply.

Can you add some tags to your mapped ways?
divaddivag (2025-03-17 05:50:56+00:00): Bonjour globeskater14,

Vous avez rajouté des highway=cycleway par dessus un grand nombre de tronçons déjà existants ce qui est contraire au schéma de données d'OpenStreetMap, qui ne fonctionne pas par 'couche': tous les modes de transport coexistent et de façon hiérarchisée. Dans OSM, un tracé 'highway=cycleway' correspond à un cheminement en site propre et réservé à l'usage exclusif des cyclistes. En France ils sont accompagnés de panneaux B22 ou C113 voire signalé par de simples marquages au sol. Ailleurs, la 'cyclabilité' peut prendre d'autre formes observables sur le terrain tels que les voie verte (panneau C115), des restrictions de circulation (interdiction aux véhicules motorisés comme ici) ou le long itinéraires balisés qui sont modélisés sous forme de relations (https://cycling.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=12.0/49.2779/-0.6698). Par contre, la 'cyclabilité' perçue n'a pas sa place dans OSM. Les applications vélo, outils GPS ou rendus cartographiques basés sur OSM exploitent différemment ces informations et il est donc essentiel d'adhérer au schéma de tags pour ce qui doit rentrer dans la base de données. Pour des besoins personnels de visualisation, il est préférable de se tourner vers d'autres solutions logiciels. 
Il y a beaucoup de subtilités pour représenter convenablement l'infra vélo dans OSM!  Si vous souhaitez vous investir sur cette thématique, le mieux serait de vous rapprocher du groupe de contributeurs locaux qui se réunit tous les mois à la Maison du Vélo ou par visio. Plus d'infos sur le forum: https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/le-groupe-de-caen/20941

Bien à vous, David
NeisBot (2025-03-05 16:12:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2025-03-14 15:41:55+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163615413
habi (2025-03-05 20:01:38+00:00): Hey!
Wenn der Optiker nicht mehr da ist, würde ich das mit einem sog. "lifecycle prefix" erfassen, also `disused:shop=optician`.
Gruss, Habi
habi (2025-03-05 20:02:04+00:00): PS: bin hier wegen https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4652214
rbircher (2025-03-05 20:23:44+00:00): Hallo

Ok, ich dachte, dass es ok. ist, wenn man die Inhalte aus dem Eintrag lässt, und nur die Adresse stehen lässt. Ich meine es kann da ja auch was ganz anderes reinkommen.. Und die Information was es war, ist ja in der History.

Gibt es einen Grund, weshalb das anders gehandhabt wird, nur für mein Verständniss.

Gruss Raphael
habi (2025-03-05 20:52:32+00:00): Ciao Raphael
Die Adresse ist ja zusätzlich noch beim Gebäude selbst erfasst: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/775615958

Wenn du den Laden (shop=optician) als ehemaligen Laden (disused:shop=optician) erfasst, eben anhand https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Lebenszyklus-Präfix dann ist klar, dass da kein Optiker mehr ist, sondern eben ein Laden zur Vermietung.
So wie jetzt (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7455190517/history/3) werden Menschen die nach Optikern suchen immer noch hierhin geleitet...

Ich habe das in https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5399012747 angepasst.

Gruss,
habi
s777n (2025-03-10 10:19:43+00:00): Имя предназначено для собственных имен. Например "Александровский дворец" или "Магнит". А вот местные названия, номера домов или типы объектов например "Продуктовый" или "Вентшахта" добавлять не нужно. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Названия

Если вы не уверены какой тег использовать то стоит воспользоваться поисковиком. Вы добавили вентшахту как "Офис компании которая занимается кондиционерами" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:craft%3Dhvac вместо "Вентиляционной шахты" https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made=ventilation_shaft

Не забывайте соединять дороги\тропинку с остальной дорожной сетью

Исправлено
Tjuro (2025-06-09 12:14:40+00:00): Beste IBT3032,

Spelen met namen onder andere dingen zoals () "" | - etc. Word niet gewaardeerd. Ook het toevoegen van beschrijvende termen zoals concertgebouw etc. is schadelijk voor de datakwaliteit.

Gelieve dit niet meer te doen

Met vriendelijke groet,

Tjuro
NieWnen (2025-03-06 17:00:06+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/135770011

Co się tutaj stało? Może plebania powinna zostać dodana na punkt? 

Na pewno trzeba ten obiekt poprawić, bo teraz jest trochę Monastery (?)/Cerkwi, a trochę plebani w tagach.
cronoser (2025-03-12 17:29:49+00:00): Hola, 
se corrigió la relación, ya que es bosque o plantación forestal, no tierra de labranza.
Un saludo
GumerGP (2025-03-13 07:10:33+00:00): Muchas gracias por haber hecho la correccion. Un saludo
Layft Greater (2025-03-15 00:30:50+00:00): shop=bookmaker

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5230982336/
literan (2025-03-05 18:10:48+00:00): но зачем тег education=kindergarten убирать?
Nekoatthegates (2025-03-05 17:57:27+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery; Bing Streetside.
cronoser (2025-03-06 18:44:28+00:00): hola, he corregido esta edición, porque no se trata de tierra de labranza lo que has cambiado, sino bosque maderero. 
Está revertido en esta edición https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163296994
Un saludo
NeisBot (2025-03-05 16:48:41+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was flagged because your added description contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment
NeisReview (2025-03-14 15:41:25+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163615398
Swic (2025-12-10 16:46:36+00:00): Salut,
Je ne comprends pas la nature de ces relations. Sauf erreur de ma part, il n'existe pas d'itinéraire cyclable sur l'ensemble de ces chemins. 
Bonne soirée !
MacDony (2025-12-11 06:15:52+00:00): Bonjour Swic,
Je ne gère pas les itinéraires cyclables,
je modifie la géométrie des segments.
Si un itinéraire a pris mon nom, c'est que j'ai modifié son profil à un endroit, surement.
Si j'ai cassé un itinéraire ou autre, ne pas hésiter à corriger.
Bonne journée,
Denis
citrula (2025-03-06 20:52:26+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contribution.
Crossings can be tricky - in this case they look good, but I would use a separate object for each direction of the crossing, instead of one long one. Also, there should be a highway=crossing node at the intersection of the northbound side of Murphy Road.
I went ahead and fixed this for you, which you can review here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163301693
citrula (2025-03-06 20:55:00+00:00): Also, the bicycle parking should only be represented by one object (the node or the way). I deleted the node.
mueschel (2025-03-07 11:03:42+00:00): Hi,
something went wrong here. All these objects don't have any valid tag. 
Also: Please don't forget to add meaningful changeset comments to your edits!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-07-28 11:09:10+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12639013444/history has fixme:type = Academia de Inglés that was added in this edit
that would be amenity=language_school - right? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dlanguage_school
NeisBot (2025-03-05 17:15:38+00:00): Hi CoRo67, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 90% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 21 highway(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=163252978
CoRo67 (2025-03-05 17:22:07+00:00): Hello, the deletions were intentional. I deleted private roads, they are not highways.

Thanks,
Colton
woodpeck (2025-03-05 17:57:19+00:00): Dear CoRo67, OpenStreetMap has policies and rules too. Where those of your employer and those of OpenStreetMap contradict, you cannot automatically assume that those of your employer have priority. 

When something is a private path/track/trail but clearly exists on the ground, we usually mark this with an "access=private" tag (or sometimes also "access=no" as you have done in some cases). We do not delete something outright that exists on the ground, like for example that part of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/508134677 that extends into the watershed. 

Your local knowledge is welcome and we would love to enlist your help in documenting which paths actually do not exist on the ground (as in: when I go there I don't see a path), or which paths may exist but be forbidden to use. However this changeset clearly violates our rules at least in some places and hence I am reverting your changes for the time being.

If you would like to discuss this issue and ultimately find out how changes can be made that reflect your policies without violating ours, the US community forum at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/us/78 would be a good start!
CoRo67 (2025-03-05 18:09:52+00:00): If the best I can do on my end is to label these roads as no access or private access I am okay with that. As the owners and managers of the property we should be able to choose what the public sees, especially when we have chronic issues of folks trespassing into areas with prehistoric cultural sites and sensitive habitat for endangered species, both of which have federal and state protections. It is my responsibility to protect these areas.