piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Kovoschiz (2023-01-17 15:13:18+00:00): (sorry for the wide changeset)
Kovoschiz (2023-01-17 14:22:36+00:00): (Sorry for the wide changset)
ivanbranco (2023-02-02 11:35:56+00:00): Ciao Alfonso,

per favore non aggiungere descrizioni come nomi, "Sentiero" non è un nome proprio.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2973936409/

Qua la way che hai modificato fa un angolo strano, potresti verificare?

Grazie
adrianojbr (2023-01-19 23:27:27+00:00): Olá, Darqware!

Você conhece bem Papanduva?

Recentemente andei atualizando os nomes das ruas com base nas imagens de sobreposição do IBGE. Porém, essa camada está com alguns problemas de nomes de ruas repetidos.

A correção que você é, inclusive, coerente com a camada do IBGE. Porém, há esse trecho de rua que está com o nome repetido (sem o "Tenente): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/646629622/

Você sabe ou consegue descobrir qual o nome correto?

Abraço!
Darqware (2023-01-19 23:57:58+00:00): Boa noite meu caro, de acordo com uma lei a rua 24 foi nomeada como Antonio vicente gonçalves mas não esclarece se ela chega até a br.
LEI Nº 1375/1995
https://www.cmpapanduva.sc.gov.br/proposicoes/Leis-ordinarias/1995/2/0/5891.
Posteriormente teve a alteração da rua tenente ary rauen para tenente ernesto greinert. logo esse pedaço a qual mencionou ficou no "limbo", vou passar na rua amanhã e também verifico com a prefeitura.
adrianojbr (2023-01-23 21:47:43+00:00): Olá, Darqware!

Conseguiu ver o nome daquele trecho de via?

Talvez seja mais interessante deixar sem nome. Que acha?
Darqware (2023-01-23 22:03:24+00:00): Consegui, na rua tem placa com o nome Luiz Carlos Prestes, da Tenente Ernesto Greinert até a João Sonaglio,
Não tive tempo, mas vou passar no Correios pra ver com eles, a prefeitura tem mapa desatualizado e o rapaz nem sabia onde era.
adrianojbr (2023-01-24 12:16:43+00:00): Bom e ruim, pois já há uma rua paralela, imediatamente a oeste, com esse nome, a qual deve estar errada rsrs.
Darqware (2023-01-24 13:02:04+00:00): conversei com o rapaz dos correios, a rua se chama antonio vicente Gonçalves até a junção com a tenente Ernesto greinert seguindo com esse nome até a beira da BR na João sonaglio. 
realmente os nomes nas placas estão errados assim como o mapa da prefeitura desatualizado.
adrianojbr (2023-01-25 00:56:38+00:00): Corrigi o nome da via. Muito obrigado pela colaboração.

Abraço!
Palolo (2023-01-17 14:45:12+00:00): Thank you for your contributions to OSM in Tanzania, we appreciate the nice work.
Eduard Rene (2023-08-15 19:10:55+00:00): Thanks!
ivanbranco (2023-01-19 10:11:13+00:00): Ciao JanzoJanzo, benvenuto su OSM!

Un appunto, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/697800703/history
qua avevi aggiunto layer=1 a una way che intersecava degli edifici, ma così avevi indicato che il marciapiede si trovava sopra agli edifici, che non è vero. In questo caso andava sistemata la forma dell'edificio e del marciapiede per fare in modo che non si incrociassero piu' (come è in realtà). Buon mapping :)
JanzoJanzo (2023-01-24 15:34:00+00:00): Grazie! Sto imparando!
kuhni74 (2024-07-21 22:47:24+00:00): warum wurde bei der alten Lifttrasse https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1050336047 "man_made=cutline" entfernt
Linie29 (2024-08-07 07:51:31+00:00): Ich hab die cutline extra gemappt weil sie ja nur durch den Wald verläuft und nicht über die Wiesen bei den jeweiligen Stationen.
kuhni74 (2024-08-07 08:04:13+00:00): ah, danke, gefunden, alles klar!
amapanda ᚛ᚐᚋᚐᚅᚇᚐ᚜ 🏳️‍⚧️ (2023-07-03 13:26:33+00:00): Hi, you added ` diet:vegan=True` here, but the proper tag is `=yes` or `=only`. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key%3Adiet%3Avegan
PolarBergPotato (2023-07-03 13:32:16+00:00): Thanks for the info, I adjusted it accordingly.
eggie (2023-01-17 15:03:38+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Ook wegen die privé zijn kunnen gewoon op de kaart blijven mits ze de juiste tags hebben. Deze weg routeerde niet in OSM behalve voor bewoners. 
VR Twente rijdt met zijn hulpdienstvoertuigen (o.a. Brandweer) met OSM en alle wegen kunnen dan van belang zijn.  

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-01-17 15:09:42+00:00): De weg staat weer terug nu met access=private ipv destination.   Het stukje op het erf heb ik opengelaten.
Een weg kan beter op de kaart blijven want anders tekent een andere mapper de weg weer in, maar dan wellicht zonder de juiste toegangstags.

Het zal hier niet routeren voor regulier verkeer. 
MVG
eggie
JarnoG (2023-01-17 15:40:00+00:00): Ik heb het laatste stukje ook weer verwijderd. Er lopen steeds wandelaars over ons erf. Deze willen wij hier niet. Weg mag zichtbaar blijven zolang deze maar niet door routeapps wordt herkend als wandelpad. Veiligheidsdiensten kunnen en gaan niet over dit pad.
VictorIE (2023-01-19 06:08:52+00:00): Thanks! https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15328079
Rico557 (2023-01-18 11:02:31+00:00): Здравствуйте, спасибо за Ваш вклад в OpenStreetMap. 
1. Рекомендую ознакомится с https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:natural%3Dtree всё-таки имя и описание таксона разные вещи.
2. Вы удалили лавочки, их уже что-ли нет на местности?
4004 (2023-01-22 23:45:37+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131379080 а, я смотрю ответа нет? продублирую в лс
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:00:58+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
Frans S (2023-01-18 10:27:24+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
Your changesets are reviewed by a Global Validator, at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not that accurate and in according to the HOT/ OSM quality standards.
Please pay attention to next points:
a: Buildings are not accurate drawn. You often draw a rectangular building where it should be a round building.
The standard tagging of a building for HOTOSM projects is building=yes.  Why call them a commercial building?  In the middle of nowhere !
Please improve your mapping skills



Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131385346
Morten Lange (2023-05-23 11:18:31+00:00): Frábært að þú uppfærir hjólaleiðir. 
Vantar etv tenging sunnanfrá eftir Smárahvammsveg? 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132808922#map=18/64.09789/-21.89044&layers=C
Spurning kemur eftir ábending í fb-hópnum Samgönguhjólreiðar.
Tómas Ingi (2023-05-23 11:23:53+00:00): Það má vel vera; ég hef ekki getað uppfært þetta frá því síðasta sumar þar sem ég bý erlendis einmitt núna. Ég kem til landsins í byrjun júní og ætla að taka allar nýframkvæmdir á höfuðborgarsvæðinu í gegn - ef þú vilt uppfæra fyrir þann tíma þá er það líka velkomið :)
Morten Lange (2023-05-23 15:34:17+00:00): Gott að heyra :-) 
Ég bý líka erlendis (Fluttur 2017) og er ekki með ferð til Íslands á planinu, því miður.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:01:26+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
kechan_tagfix (2023-01-17 15:33:36+00:00): this is not vandalism. for the 17 minutes it existed, it was a private driveway.
Allison P (2023-01-17 20:07:04+00:00): That would make the revert of useful additions vandalism...
kechan_tagfix (2023-01-18 20:53:27+00:00): hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
kechan_tagfix (2023-01-18 20:56:43+00:00): ok, makes sense,
gurglypipe (2023-01-17 15:44:53+00:00): Hi, how did you measure the position of the summit? Is this edit just based on looking at the default satellite imagery, or is it based on GPS measurements?

Satellite imagery can be (and is) misaligned in places and can’t be relied on for accurate positioning of things to nearer than about 2m.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Align_aerial_imagery_before_tracing
bxl-forever (2023-01-17 16:33:26+00:00): Hello,

Would you be so kind as to explain what this changeset—and all similar changeset you have been massively introducing in tne past hours—is about?

It looks like you are trying to get rid of the fixme tag as much as possible.

The fixme here is really clear: the building outline could not be established so far because the official government data (AIV Flanders GRB for this territory) was not yet available when the user drew the building:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/985995287/history

I don't think redrawing a building in iD by using aerial imagery does any good to the building shape.  It just makes it worse, in fact, because without this tag we can no longer query the database ourselves to find all buildings requiring a check.  (We have an active community of mappers in Belgium, who regularly review such objects as soon as we get government data updates.)

Are we missing something here?
thechad81578 (2023-01-25 15:22:09+00:00): My apologies. As I was trying to edit in the area, all the fixme messages kept popping up because the buildings were either too close to each other or they were overlapping each other. I was mostly just trying solve a few fixme issues while I was adding field-verified info a Belgian friend had passed along to me.
Baloo Uriza (2024-11-01 20:42:23+00:00): Don't forget to update or remove source:maxspeed when updating maxspeed.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/131386321
eggie (2023-01-17 16:06:48+00:00): Toch jammer dat u de weg hebt verwijderd. 
Hulpdiensten maken wel degelijk gebruik van privewegen als ergens een calamiteit is.
De weg is nauwelijks te zien als track met access private..
Andere mappers tekenen zo n weg weer gewoon in en dan zonder accesstags.
De routeerde niet voor wandelaars.
In OSM is het gewoon toegestaan om wegen toe te voegen. Er over wandelen is iets iets anders.
Mvg
Eggie

Mvg
Eggie
Gonéo (2023-01-21 21:33:21+00:00): Attention, le chemin forestier est rattaché au à la surface landuse. Il devrait être attaché au chemin des vignes. Je vous laisse faire la correction ?
Chalard (2023-01-22 13:16:32+00:00): Merci pour l’info. 
Je viens de faire la modification
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-09 04:35:21+00:00): Removed SEO spam POI with promotional and malformed tags that doesn't exist on the ground near the given location in a residential area, in changeset 183855430

https://osm.org/changeset/183855430
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-02-07 08:10:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 132181774, 132186175 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some unsourced changes to OSM.  See https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/6844 and the links from there.
maraf24 (2023-01-23 10:16:21+00:00): Ten rok to z orto odczytałeś? :P
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:01:37+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
SekeRob (2023-01-18 07:13:49+00:00): Hi,

Correzzione trace duplicato nel 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131408205

ciao
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:01:51+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
BCNorwich (2023-01-22 20:07:04+00:00): Hi, It looks like there are quite a few problems of duplicated sections of highways. Please see here:- https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=-0.74236&lat=51.64749&zoom=14&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges%2Cduplicated_edges_areas

Could you have a look at remedies, please? Need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard
Roshmaps (2023-01-23 08:54:38+00:00): Hi Bernard, thank you for flagging this up - that is a fantastic tool that I didn't know existed! Will definitely be using this to review my future mapping sessions. Best wishes, 
Roisin
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:02:02+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:02:23+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:02:33+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
DaveF (2023-01-24 14:16:19+00:00): Hi

Are you sure this is a public footpath? It doesn't have a PROW reference.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132923329

Please don't use highway=path. It was created by people who didn't understand the highway hierarchy. Use 'footway' instead. 

There's no requirement to explicitly add motor_vehicle=no etc as 'footway' automatically excludes modes other than walking.

Have these paths been removed?
https://snipboard.io/4tAoUz.jpg

Bottom of path:
https://snipboard.io/zrcu4M.jpg

On the path looking down at Serpentine Lake
https://snipboard.io/cw20DE.jpg

At top of path looking back at car park:
https://snipboard.io/L0q7K2.jpg
DaveF (2023-01-24 15:05:03+00:00): Hello again
When amending footways please don't miss out steps & bridges.

Have these two PROWs refs been removed from BathNES's database & has the route been officially realigned?
https://snipboard.io/8t5ibN.jpg

Is there a reason you've split this into an individual way?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132923306

Has this PROW been officially realigned?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132923334

What's wrong with this footway?
https://snipboard.io/yDwmHs.jpg
DaveF (2023-01-24 15:44:34+00:00): Please do not attached ways going under bridges to those bridges. They are at different levels.
Do not unnecessarily split ways.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10562962454

You've duplicated a stile node.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10562962483/history

Do not split ways unless there is a difference in tags
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132923321

You've created 3 spurious/duplicating kissing gates & unnecessarily split an access land polygon
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10562962486/history#map=19/51.36692/-2.34257

Similar here
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10562962471

and here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10562962474

Do you have a reason why this changeset shouldn't be reverted?
DaveF (2023-01-25 16:34:53+00:00): Hi
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/549011487
Please don't add additional footways directly to stiles etc as it means routers will assume a walker has to cross the stile to walk around the field, which is obviously incorrect.
NorthCrab (2023-01-20 10:04:46+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/15321884
Zauważyłem teraz tą relację. Pomysł dobry tylko błędne jest natomiast to, że utworzyłeś jeden długi ciąg ścieżki który nakłada istniejące do tej pory ścieżki. Powinieneś go usunąć i dodać istniejące już kawałki ścieżek jako members tej relacji.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-29 07:02:44+00:00): Reverted by DWG as vandalism: changeset 131830410
NorthCrab (2023-01-20 09:58:47+00:00): "fixes problems"

Coś poszło nie tak bo po twojej zmianie wysypało błędami i 2 ścieżki się na siebie nakładają.

https://i.imgur.com/iRYH7vp.png

Tak patrzę na historię edycji tego szlaku, dlaczego usunąłeś z niego informacje?

https://i.imgur.com/TreLLVf.png
NorthCrab (2023-01-20 10:05:29+00:00): Już znalazłem odpowiedź do mojego 2-go pytania - https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131387988.
itineris (2023-03-15 13:37:58+00:00): Szia!

Igazán alapos munkát végeztél. A kerítéseket négyszer is sikerült egymásra rajzolnod.
Leszedtem a felesleget, de kérlek, legközelebb jobban figyelj!

A másik pedig hogy a Fő utca mentén az biztosan nem egyetlen nagy egybefüggő kerítés, hanem ahány ház, annyi különálló. Jó lenne így is berajzolni őket, mert akkor lehet pl. különböző magasságot, anyagot megadni nekik.

Köszönöm:
Ákos
bkil (2023-03-15 14:41:31+00:00): ITineris: Az OSM-ben is érvényesül a YAGNI fogalma. Az OSM kerítés a publikus átjárhatóság hiányának feltüntetésére lett kitalálva, amit aztán egyesek elkezdtek abuzálni az egyéni porták bekerítésére. Teljesen jó absztrakciónak tartom, hogy amíg az ember ideje (és adatforrása) nem teszi lehetővé, addig csak az utcafront legyen megjelölve. Ez a legfontosabb mint átjárhatatlanság szempontjából, mind a járda és a közterületi növényzet vezetése miatt.
itineris (2023-03-15 14:56:50+00:00): Itt a fő probléma az utcafronti kerítések sima többszörözése volt, nem a körbekerítésekből adódó duplázódás.

Egyébként egyetértünk. Attól, hogy van valahol jó minőségű ortofotó, nem kell okvetlenül az utcára merőleges kerítéseket is mind berajzolni. Itthon úgyis az az alapértelmezett, hogy csak az utcákon tudsz eljutni A-ból B-be, a telkeken át nem.
ESándor (2023-03-16 17:17:40+00:00): Szia Ákos!
Köszönöm a javításokat! Sajnos volt egy kis technikai probléma a szék és a monitor között ;-)
A kerítés definiciókat átnézem. Majd teszek bele töréspontokat.
Vannak még képeim Szigetcsépről.
Sándor
Dimitar155 (2024-09-07 20:45:30+00:00): Здравей Termininja,

Пречиствателната станция (https://www.osm.org/way/1132937365) какво пречиства? Питейна или отпадъчна вода?

Поздрави,
Митко
Termininja (2024-09-29 13:30:03+00:00): Здравей. За отпадни води е.
maraf24 (2023-01-20 19:39:23+00:00): Na podjazdach pod dom nie ma ograniczeń prędkości. Teren prywatny.
Nie ma to też praktycznego znaczenia.
bartgron (2023-01-20 22:30:25+00:00): Jednak jest to teren zabudowany więc chyba z takiej racji obowiązuje 50 wszędzie gdzie nie ma innego oznakowania
NorthCrab (2023-01-21 04:21:22+00:00): Uważam że 50 nie szkodzi ale jak już robisz tego typu mapowanie to proszę dodaj source:maxspeed=PL:urban aby można było to łatwo w przyszłości zmienić.
bartgron (2023-01-21 06:01:00+00:00): Oki dzięki
maraf24 (2023-01-21 10:27:53+00:00): Domyślne ograniczenia prędkości w terenie zabudowanym dotyczą dróg publicznych.
NorthCrab (2023-01-21 10:30:08+00:00): Dasz jakieś źródło tego? Dotyczy to też dróg wewnętrznych i stref ruchu które nie są drogami publicznymi więc na pewno jest więcej do tej historii niż się może wydawać.
maraf24 (2023-01-21 10:49:13+00:00): Dotyczy to dróg, na których obowiazuje kodeks drogowy.
Szczegóły są w kodeksie.
NorthCrab (2023-01-21 10:51:00+00:00): To nie jest poprawne podanie źródła, to tak jakbym ja powiedział szczegóły są w internecie :)
maraf24 (2023-01-21 13:04:10+00:00): Nie rozumiem. Do czego chcesz źródło? Ja niczego tu nie edytowałem.
A podawanie źródła spoczywa na edytującym.
bartgron (2023-01-21 14:06:19+00:00): Ale to wy między sobą się kłócicie xD zaraz podeślę coś
NorthCrab (2023-01-21 15:15:35+00:00): @maraf24 źródło twojej argumentacji, bo takie mówienie zasad na słowo to nie za bardzo uznaje, "Dotyczy to dróg, na których obowiazuje kodeks drogowy. Szczegóły są w kodeksie." chodzi o to gdzie dokładnie to jest w kodeksie abym mógł zweryfikować twoją rację.
Yunkers (2023-01-21 15:51:00+00:00): Maraf ma rację. Od tego istnieje znak 'strefa ruchu" https://pl.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strefa_ruchu
Jeśli tego nie ma, to nie obowiązują zasady ruchu drogowego. Przepisy z kodeksu są podlinkowane w artykule z wiki.
maraf24 (2023-01-21 17:11:43+00:00): W każdej ustawie należy przeczytać sam początek. Jest tam zwykle określone, gdzie ustawa obowiązuje i kogo. Oraz zdefiniowane różne terminy. Bywa, że w kilku ustawach ten sam termin ma kilka różniących się definicji. Nie można czytać samych paragrafow bez tej wiedzy. Bo kończy się to np. tym, że przepisy dotyczące terenu zabudowanego stosuje się do wszystkich dróg.
HellMap (2023-01-19 12:43:03+00:00): Привет!

Я заметил, что вы удалили трамвайные остановки и места остановок для маршрута, который в настоящее время не работает. Однако физически они все еще существуют, просто они не используются, поэтому их не следует удалять. Например, `public_transport=platform` или `public_transport=stop_position` по-прежнему существуют, даже если там не ходят трамваи. Там есть и другие теги, такие как `lit` или `bench`. Для самих остановок можно использовать `disused:railway=tram_stop`. Сами маршруты уже помечены как `disused:route=tram`, например https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11322566.

Я восстановил остановки и добавил теги `disused`, пока трамваи снова не ходят. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/131464954 

Дайте мне знать, если я неправильно понял ваши намерения. Кажется, кое-где новые временные автобусные остановки там же, где раньше были трамвайные? Например, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10563110694.

Спасибо
Hufkratzer (2023-01-18 23:59:40+00:00): Hi,
Isn't https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132938856 a riding arena? You have tagged it as a riding centre (tag leisure=horse_riding). Riding arenas should be tagged leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian (iD-preset Horse Riding Arena).

Don't be confused by a lot of mistagged riding arenas in your region, like
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/696446221/history 
and
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/698045694/historhttps://www.openstreetmap.org/way/698045694/history
These are old; since last May this mapper uses the correct preset for riding arenas.

See also
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=horse_riding
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure=pitch#Riding_arena
no details provided here (2023-01-19 09:02:11+00:00): Big thanks for the advice - I couldn't find that exact code and apologise for using an approximation. Physical access was difficult and I hoped to revisit.  Please amend as your experience takes you and forgive this newbie.
kuhni74 (2023-01-25 14:43:13+00:00): the southern part of the "Kleinbahn" building (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/244852352) is still there, and according to https://swietelsky.immo/de/Projekte/Wien/Wien/Gatterederstrasse-2-4_p_1238, it will remain there, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3147326
kuhni74 (2023-01-25 14:57:17+00:00): I reduced the building outline to what still stands there
VictorIE (2024-05-02 20:15:33+00:00): Hi,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/120570715/history#map=16/51.8875/-8.5320

Why have you changed the name of Rossa Avenue to Melbourn Road. This is NOT Melbourn Road, never has been.

https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=51.885311%7E-8.531088&lvl=17.0&v=2&sV=1&pi=-1.4&style=x&mo=om.1&dir=44.7
Sandal man (2024-01-06 09:47:36+00:00): Hola, ¿puedes echarle un vistazo a esto? Creo que cometiste un error.
¿También es un poco extraño referirse a todos estos como edificios?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1132941680
Saludos
colargol (2023-03-06 17:43:16+00:00): Bonjour Kalepom, pourrais-tu me dire quelle source tu as utilisée pour ce changeset ? 
Bonne soirée, Jérôme
Kalepom (2023-03-08 11:22:33+00:00): Salut Colargol,
Habituellement je regarde les imageries Mapillary ou Bing Streetside, mais ça ne s'est pas affiché dans le sources du changeset, comme c'est le cas normalement :/
colargol (2023-03-08 20:38:45+00:00): Ah d'accord, merci pour ta réponse. Je travaille sur les arceaux à vélo et j'étais intrigué par ta modification.
Bonne soirée, Jérôme
Kalepom (2023-03-08 20:44:15+00:00): Si tu parles de la zone de stationnement pour trotinettes que j'ai dessinée, il y a eu une discussion sur le forum fr récemment https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/emplacements-parking-trottinettes-electriques-sur-lyon/8726
mueschel (2023-01-18 11:17:43+00:00): Reminder:

you added some tags here that are not used in any other place. Please make sure you only use those tags that are described in the Wiki or are available as presets in your editor. Everything else is unlikely to be understood by any software and other mappers.
Pipeton (2023-01-31 19:00:47+00:00): Hola, ¿por qué eliminaste la Urbanización Los Flamencos?
alex_lofi (2023-01-31 19:26:24+00:00): Hola, recuerdo que borré bastantes elementos que daban error en el validador o que directamente estaban mal y no se ajustaban a nada; debería haber otro changeset parecido a este.
No he conseguido encontrar dónde estaba la Urbanización, si me mandas un id intento recuperarla, o si puedes hazlo tú, es muy probable que se tratase de un error por mi parte.
Un saludo.
Pipeton (2023-01-31 21:28:50+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/328515934
Era esta. Hasta dónde yo sé estaba bien, pero ya ni idea.
alex_lofi (2023-02-01 08:56:38+00:00): Hola, lo he restaurado, perdona por haberlo borrado; creo que al unir varias zonas residanciales perdió el nombre, debería haber prestado más atención.
Un saludo.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-01-20 06:38:49+00:00): DWG issue. User wasn't aware of the massive problems they were causing. Agreed to all edits being reverted & promises to be much more careful in future: Changeset: 131494098