piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Minh Nguyen (2024-05-27 18:48:06+00:00): Some of these changes are reasonable, but I think the majority should be reverted, because the result is incoherent and unrecognizable. It looks good on a map but doesn’t reflect reality very well. Your expectation of secondary roads in this area may be based on traffic or development patterns found elsewhere but not here.

Most of the tertiary roads you reclassified are no more important for access than the other tertiary roads you didn’t reclassify, like East Kemper, Snider, and Pfeiffer. If you reclassify those roads too, there are few if any tertiary roads left. Meanwhile there’s no distinction left between these roads and others like Reed Hartman, Fields Ertel, and Tylersville that are more important for getting across this part of town.

In southwestern Ohio, the level of government that maintains a particular road is a good predictor of the road’s service area and importance to the transportation network. Our starting point has been that state, county, and township/municipal roads should occupy distinct classifications. You can therefore make out some patterns, like the section line roads in Butler County and the destination-named roads in Clermont County.

There are occasional exceptions. For promoting or demoting these individual roads, I suggest consulting an AADT map as a gut check. Otherwise, I think you should adjust your expectations to allow for more variability from metro area to metro area.
Joseph R P (2024-05-27 19:45:01+00:00): Which particular roads would you say are overclassified here?

I think shorter arterial roads that provide connections between major highways or high-traffic areas like commercial zones can be just as vital as major thoroughfares that stretch across the metro in their own regards. I also think it makes sense for some roads with lower traffic counts to be classified higher than some roads with higher traffic counts depending on the scenario. For example, Route 42 in this area is an objectively more important route than Snider Road through Mason is, but it sees less traffic than it. US 42 spans the northeastern Cincinnati area connecting multiple suburbs/towns in the area to each other while Snider mainly serves to connect other tertiary and secondary roads and the residential and industrial areas along it. I think Kemper, Snider, and Pfeiffer could be bumped up to secondary and Tylersville between I 75 and US 42 bumped up to primary. Looking back on my changes though, Butler-Warren Road is the only road which may have been overclassified in my opinion.
Minh Nguyen (2024-05-27 21:38:54+00:00): “Which particular roads would you say are overclassified here?”

I am not saying a particular road is overclassified. I’m saying you’re promoting roads haphazardly and inconsistently, resulting in a loss of information. Local consistency is more important than getting a random selection of streets right by a personal impression. I’ll try to give you some context because I hope you’ll at least stick around long enough to finish the job. In fairness, changeset 148744892 turned out better, so I’m struggling to understand what went wrong here.

In Ohio, by design, state-maintained roads numbered under 100 generally run along principal arterial roads, although some segments of these routes have been bypassed. Three-digit state routes are supposed to be less important, but this system has fallen apart in the Cincinnati area because ODOT ran out of two-digit numbers. U.S. 42 and U.S. 22 are obvious primary roads. (They would even be trunk roads, but they’ve been bypassed by the Interstates.)

Butler, central Hamilton, and western Warren counties have laid out a grid of collector streets along section lines. In the remaining areas, the counties have laid out collector streets in more haphazard fashion, often naming each street after its endpoints. These county roads are generally useful for travel across a township, but not across the county.

However, a select few county roads are maintained as crosstown connections, such as Tylersville, Fields Ertel, East Kemper (east of Montgomery), and Glendale Milford (ditto). Similarly, Reed Hartman is a high-capacity traffic reliever for I-71. These arterial roads need to be classified higher than collector streets, but lower than the state-maintained intercity roads.

It makes sense to classify these crosstown roads similarly to the three-digit state routes, which have a similarly sized service area. Note that service area does not always correspond to length. Lebanon/Columbia may appear to form a “crosstown” connection between Loveland and Mason, but that’s a relatively unimportant connection.

I have just described three classification values lower than trunk. You can decide what to call these three values, and then help me update https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ohio/Map_features#Road_classifications
Joseph R P (2024-05-27 23:13:54+00:00): Despite what my edits come across as, they weren't implemented haphazardly as I had identified the places and other roads they'd the roads I worked on would connect to and looked at AADT data, rather than going in and changing roads based on first impressions. You could say I half-assed upgrading the roads under the regard that I only upgraded some of the roads and left some other nearby ones untouched, but it's a gradual process which I've been making across the area which I had previously done with around Hamilton, Middletown, Forest Park, and closer to the downtown area of Cincinnati.

Regarding the road classification hierarchy, major intercity roads regardless of who maintains them are better candidates for being upgraded to trunk if their purpose is to connect other cities. The way I see it collector roads should be tertiary, major collectors/minor arterials should be secondary, and major arterials should be primary. In my opinion, however, this should be regardless of how the road is signed or maintained, what the functional classification is, etc., because that ultimately isn't always consistent with how roads are used for travelling.

For the most part, I understand the road hierarchy, but I'm also not understanding whether I should revert this back to how it was before like you mentioned in the first comment or "stick around to finish the job" by continuing to work upon it and upgrade the now under-classified roads.
Minh Nguyen (2024-05-28 05:32:42+00:00): I suggested reverting and trying again, not just returning to the status quo. But if you’d rather finish the job, then you’d upgrade the rest of the tertiary roads to secondary, for consistency with the ones you’ve already upgraded. Unfortunately, you’ll have buried the important crosstown routes among the more local highway feeders, and we’d have fewer tertiary roads left.

Indeed, the level of government doesn’t necessarily guarantee a certain level of importance. But the designated routes are a useful starting point that you seem to be ignoring. Maybe that’s because of the situation in other states that you’re more familiar with? Multiple times you’ve claimed to consider “how roads are used for traveling”. How do you know? Is it possible that you guessed, and that you guessed wrong, as you did in downtown Cincinnati in 2022? [1]

Here are some specific examples of changes I would expect to see. If you disagree, please explain why:

* Lebanon/Columbia should be the same classification as adjoining segments of West Loveland, McKinney, East Kemper, etc. My name is all over this road in Mapillary, but this is a contrived route with plenty of alternatives.

* Camargo and Loveland Madeira south of Remington should be lower than Remington. This is a scenic route, albeit one that sometimes gets overrun by overflow from I-71 and Montgomery.

* Reed Hartman should be higher than most of the other roads we’ve discussed. It’s a traffic reliever for I-71, an almost unique role in the region.

* Snider should be the same as Cox and lower than Tylersville, Mason Montgomery, and Fields Ertel. The traffic counts on these streets aren’t even close.

* Terra Firma Drive should be unclassified. It’s just an access road for a couple of strip malls.

* Bridle Creek/Stillpass should be residential. Not every through street is a collector road. These are unstriped, have kids playing in them [2], and stop for other residential streets.

These changes imply other changes, but we can start here. I can make these changes myself if you prefer, but you know my inclination will be to address these discrepancies by demoting rather than promoting.

[1] https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C7Q912JDT/p1651888896479239
[2] https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11938871750
Messinian (2024-05-15 06:06:53+00:00): Seriously? You really need to find someone else to harass.  Adding my user name to your changesets with “junk removal” is completely inappropriate.  I’m really getting tired of this.  There have been very few edits in this county since the TIGER import so the vast majority of my edits are improvements. There are a lot of things that need fixing in this county, and I am not fixing every tag and every item I touch in a changeset. 
Some of the “junk” you removed were perfectly valid ways. The driveway you deleted IS visible. It may not be their primary driveway, but it’s there.  Just because it’s not how you would map it, doesn’t mean you can delete it.  Map what’s on the ground .

Your adjustments to the roads are mostly tiny adjustments that make zero difference, especially compared to what was there before. 

If you spent as much energy on actually mapping areas that haven’t been touched in years instead of chasing my changesets, you could have improved the map a whole lot more than what you’ve done. 

Your comments are insulting and harassing.  Are my edits always perfect? No.  Are yours? I’m sure if I inspected all of your edits the way you seem to be stalking mine, I would find “junk” to remove.  

99% of my edits are improvements to the map. Get over yourself.  If you have issues with my edits politely ask me to fix it  or just go ahead and report them.  I’d be happy to have this discussion with the data working group. 

I’m not sure what your issue is with me and I really don’t care, but you need to leave me alone.
DUGA (2024-05-15 13:30:28+00:00): > 99% of my edits are improvements to the map. 

Are you saying you use the 1% to damage the map? I assume no, but let me know if you disagree.

> Some of the “junk” you removed were perfectly valid ways. 

Yes, I removed that, and you can add it back. Not a big deal, the main one being removed is the non existent connector.

> Your adjustments to the roads are mostly tiny adjustments that make zero difference, especially compared to what was there before.

They make a big difference in higher zoom levels. You are describing an issue very common in those career GIS professionals, that you do not care much about details when it is out of your scope.

> If you spent as much energy on actually mapping areas that haven’t been touched in years instead of chasing my changesets, you could have improved the map a whole lot more than what you’ve done.

Yes, I have been doing this for years. Thanks for reminding me, you can check HDYC for the stats. Most of the TIGER cleanup of Susquehanna county is done by myself.

> Your comments are insulting and harassing.

Society works in a way that you can’t like everyone, and on the Internet it is amplified because we don’t know each other. Here at OSM I don’t use profanity to attack any person, I never have such attention as well. I don’t think the comment is harassing, considering the last time you disconnected the river for days, your name should have been mentioned already. If you don’t want to be mentioned, just map with no major issues.

> you need to leave me alone.

I would like to do that when you start to map with no major issues, you are doing better and hopefully you will graduate from the list when the bad habits from your GIS career go away.
Messinian (2024-05-15 16:11:40+00:00): First, I’m not a GIS professional and never was. I was a global vice president and chief exploration geologist for a supermajor international oil company. I also spent many years in charge of quality assurance of geoscience technical evaluations.

I edit at very high zoom level.  And I stand by my edits. you are harassing me and it needs to stop. As I have said before, I’m happy to fix any errors if you would like to politely point them out.

You seem to believe I’m mapping randomly and carelessly. I am not. When you move a node less than a meter you are well within the margin of error of any of the data available on openstreetmap.  You are playing in the weeds.

As I said before, please feel free to report me to whoever you would like. I’d be happy to have that discussion.
woodpeck (2024-05-16 11:18:21+00:00): Just to understand this better, is the "connector" of which DUGA says it is the "main thing that has been removed" this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/147099265/history? Because that one has never been touched by user Messinian...?
woodpeck (2024-05-16 11:24:59+00:00): Better visualisation here https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=151163703&zoom=18&lat=41.92986&lon=-76.11647&layers=B000000TTTFT
DUGA (2024-05-16 14:50:06+00:00): It is this one.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1268317809/history
Messinian (2024-05-17 07:53:15+00:00): Woodpeck, my comment about something that was indeed visible was about a driveway. I agree the connector link is debatable. I’d have to check, but I may have just renamed a way that was already there. But those items are only ancillary to my original comments.
neoLithos (2024-11-05 06:04:07+00:00): Hey Erdorbit.
Ich habe eine kurze Frage: Warum hast du die ganzen Wohngebiete zusammengefasst?
Der Mapper "roschitom" hat alle Gebiete nach dem Mapping-Schema area-highway auseinander genommen - in Absprache mit allen Mappern der Region.
Viele Grüße, Neo.
joost schouppe (2024-05-15 07:18:23+00:00): Mja, ik had die Note laten liggen omdat het niet op het Wegenregister staat. Ben er onlangs nog gepasseerd, en er zijn geen straatnaambordjes zichtbaar vanop publiek terrein. Dus waar het op gebaseerd is, is me niet zo duidelijk...
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 02:42:20+00:00): Interesting. Thank you for mapping. The changeset comment is very clear. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151164190
kmpoppe (2025-04-07 05:35:26+00:00): Hi SpaceTracer,

why did you change these relations? The website clearly shows that those seem to be passenger and freight transporting routes, and even though they might have tourism-use, they don't feel like an attraction?!

Please elaborate

Thanks! Kai
SpaceTracer (2025-04-09 20:21:43+00:00): Hello kmpoppe,
Thanks for reaching out! I had initially updated this relation to attraction=boat_ride, as I interpreted the Pitcairn Island tourism website to indicate this as a cruise ship. However, upon closer review, it does mention that the vessel is used for freight and passengers can disembark for short stays on the island. I can restore the tagging to its original state of route=ferry.
I appreciate your insight, and hope you have a nice day!
trigpoint (2024-05-13 12:03:37+00:00): Hi, please do not tag for the renderer.
In OSM the name tag is for actual names, in this case the name of the stadium, the object mapped in OSM is Elland Road Stadium. Any other information belongs in other tags, such as operator.

Cheers Phil
JayBupp (2024-05-10 21:20:15+00:00): Please reverse this edit. I AM not certain about this building as it is outside of the cemetery bounds.
MapMenMan (2025-07-01 23:18:28+00:00): What does this "bond=english_bond" tag mean? I have found no mention of it on the forums or wiki
b-unicycling (2025-07-03 09:00:39+00:00): It refers to the way the courses of bricks are laid, see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brickwork#Load-bearing_bonds and https://studio.youtube.com/video/hyTK9leLhD8/edit.
Baloo Uriza (2024-06-14 13:11:00+00:00): Values should be seperated by ; and not just a space when there's multiple values...
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151165345
bgleb (2024-05-10 21:43:49+00:00): For reviewers: Please focus on the specified junction (geometry + correct tagging of roads)
NeisBot (2024-05-11 04:05:40+00:00): Hi Marca2, welcome to OpenStreetMap!

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/1281840662

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 (2024-05-11 14:34:28+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151179454
tastrax (2024-05-11 08:43:12+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 

To get the + symbol on a mobile device numeric keypad you may need to do a LONG press on the zero.
I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
ivanbranco (2024-05-11 10:25:18+00:00): Hi Marca2, please do not add fictional elements to the database. I reverted all your changesets. If you wish to contribute in a serious way, this read could be a start: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tips_for_new_(Pokemon_Go)_mappers
SuborbitalPigeon (2024-05-18 20:45:23+00:00): Thanks again!
TrickyFoxy (2024-05-11 08:11:23+00:00): 👋 3=1 What did you mean by that?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11895924011
Tiwi (2024-05-11 10:49:42+00:00): sorry that’s a typo, just corrected it.
Sometimes, when I copy a lantern and change the ref number from ref=1 I’m „correcting“ it to 3=1 instead of ref=3

Thanks for seeing it
Tiwi
ElliottPlack (2024-07-11 03:25:39+00:00): Aaron! I love to see that you're back mapping. How are you doing? I'd love to catch up sometime. -Elliott
NorthCrab_upload (2024-05-10 23:20:24+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/250785880
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1032032192

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
merylstreet (2024-05-11 00:45:56+00:00): Bonjour ErnestoLaPomme,
J'ai vu que vous avez utilisé complete-tes-commerces, attention toutes les recommendations sur le site ne sont pas bonnes, il faut vérifier que cela ait du sens. Ici le numéro Siret est pour une SCI et non pour un magasin de vêtements. Vous pouvez cliquer sur le numéro de Siret pour voir la catégorie.
Bonne continuation :)
ErnestoLaPomme (2024-05-11 01:25:20+00:00): Oh zut ! je vérifie mes modifications de suite
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 08:06:55+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151167139
Allison P (2024-05-19 18:34:51+00:00): I don't think you should add addresses to the POI inside supermarkets, since they don't have their own addresses. Not only that, the addresses in ATP don't even match the store's address in many cases. Here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9646713142 the street is South Federal Way.

I have already cleaned up several other POI because of this.
whammo (2024-05-20 00:31:07+00:00): Yeah, there may be a way to use the `branch` values to find and remove some of the Starbucks within other stores. I'll look into it!
whammo (2024-05-20 00:32:14+00:00): * I should say, remove the address tags, not the nodes themselves.
whammo (2024-05-20 10:24:48+00:00): Ok, should be fixed here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151571627. The regex I used on the branch tag was "^(Target|Safeway|Kroger|Albertsons|Harris Teeter|Hy-Vee|Vons|Fred Meyer|King Sooper|Giant|Ralphs|Fry's|Jewel|Macy's|Smith's|Dillons|Pavilions).*"
tguen (2024-05-25 01:14:30+00:00): This changeset replaced valid URLs with  broken URLs for the website tag. Please fix.
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405047953/
whammo (2024-05-25 01:21:02+00:00): Hi tguen. Unless I'm misunderstanding, the website value on that way appears to be the same before and after my edit, so I don't think I touched it.
tguen (2024-05-25 01:28:21+00:00): It's slightly different, check the zip code at the end. The old one was 9 digits, new one is 5. Does the link work for you?
whammo (2024-05-27 15:21:38+00:00): You're right. Neither link works on mobile for some reason, but the old one appears to work on "desktop view" on my phone. I'll investigate when I'm back at my computer this week.
whammo (2024-06-20 01:45:42+00:00): FYI, just fixed the `website` tag here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152920594. I was half hoping that they would reinstate the `/store/{ref}` url pattern that GMaps also relies on, but it looks like we're stuck with all the junk at the end of the url.
Kai Johnson (2024-07-14 21:55:49+00:00): Looks like something went wrong with addr:city and addr:state for https://osm.org/node/5668621306. I see this is a pretty big changeset, but maybe you want to make sure all the other imported data was good?
whammo (2024-07-16 02:37:56+00:00): It looks like the full raw address string from ATP my tools had to parse was `9150 A Alcosta Blvd, Country Club Village S.C., San Ramon, CA 94583`, and it read S.C. as South Carolina :( Most Starbucks POIs don't have that place name in their address string, and even fewer abbreviate "shopping center" like that, but I will double check the handful of nodes I see that appear to be similar. Thanks!
Kai Johnson (2024-07-16 16:09:26+00:00): I'm glad you figured out what happened!
Allison P (2024-07-31 00:59:32+00:00): How did openstreetmap.org/node/4589464902 get conflated with a location in South Carolina?
PcMouse1 (2024-05-13 04:15:39+00:00): accidentally reused old changeet comment
phoenixsaigon1698 (2024-05-11 01:05:42+00:00): https://tuoitre.vn/tin-tuc-sang-11-5-dieu-chinh-di-lai-o-nut-giao-an-phu-ngan-hang-tang-vay-no-qua-trai-phieu-20240510200753626.htm
source TuoiTre.vn
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 08:05:00+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151168525
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:22:51+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:18:40+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-11 08:02:29+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comments. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151168714
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:17:12+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601