piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MassCartog (2025-11-08 21:08:49+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. The rhe features you removed in this changeset are valid. Please don’t remove valid OSM data.

You have a new account and might not be aware, on OSM, we do not remove features if they exist on the ground. If it exists on the ground, it is valid data regardless of a feature being public or private, designated or informal/illegal/unauthorized. Even decommissioned trails should not be removed until they no longer exist. Removing features that exist is actually considered vandalism.

It's clear that these features still exist on the ground. Not being public access areas is an invalid reason to remove data from OSM. So this edit is incorrect and damaging to valid OSM data.

The correct way to handle this is to use OSM's tagging system. access=private, or access=no would be appropriate if they are closed to the public. Once this is done, services that do use OSM data will reflect that and specify their access.

Please read this for more info:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won't_delete_roads_on_private_property

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
eggie (2025-11-08 20:14:40+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback Ik zie op de laatste sat foto geen woning hier.
Ook in het Kadaster is het gebouw niet bekend. 
https://bagviewer.kadaster.nl/lvbag/bag-viewer/?searchQuery=Lytse+Buorren+18&objectId=0051200001249862&theme=BRT+Achtergrond&geometry.x=176847.6065475665&geometry.y=549271.4904612196&zoomlevel=14.360000000000001
Wat was je bedoeling?
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-11-08 20:16:48+00:00): Gebouwen worden periodiek geïmporteerd vanuit de BAG. Er is niets te vinden.
Ook op de laatste sat foto is niets te zien?
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@52.93003,5.711364,19/?datastrip=20250906_SVNEO-01

MVG
eggie
Ondřej Lopatka (2026-01-13 09:30:16+00:00): Dobrý den Karle. Vidím že jste přidával novou stezku miličínska do mapy, ale přidal jste ji nevhodným způsobem. Cením váš zájem zlepšovat společně OpenStreetMap, ale i pro to máme nějaké zásady. Stezka kterou jste zanesl do mapy má charakter cyklostezky, tedy druhu cesty, po kterém mají promárně jezdit cyklisté. vložil jste ji mimo jiné ale i na úseky, kde již existuje stávající komunikace, takže teď máme na některých úsecích duplicitní cestu. Pokud se jedná o konceptový okruh, například jako turistické trasy nebo naučné stezky či cyklotrasy (a tady je rozdíl stezka a trasa), ty se značí do mapy pomocí relací, spojujících již existující cesty do jednoho celku. Pokud došlo při vytvoření tohoto okruhu i ke stavbě nových cyklostezek, ty by měly být do mapy přidány, ale pouze v tom rozsahu, kterém byly zbudovány. Můžu vás poprosit, pokud máte podklady k této stezce, abyste mi je poslal, nebo přidal odkaz sem do diskuze, abych mohl opravit stezku podle standardů OSM? Pokud vás zajímá více o tom jak značíme relace, nebo jak se značí cesty, doporučuji podívat se do dokumentace na wiki.openstreetmap.org nebo se můžete zeptat na rady jiných mapperů, odkazy na komunikační kanály naleznete na https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Beginners_Guide_1.6
kareltrefil (2026-01-14 10:56:00+00:00): Dobrý den,
máte pravdu, jedná se o trasu po stávajících cestách. K žádné výstavbě fyzické stezky nedošlo. Mohl bych Vám nějakým způsobem poslat pdf soubor s podklady o trase? 
Děkuji.
Ondřej Lopatka (2026-01-14 13:54:15+00:00): Ano, můžete mi to poslat mailem? ondrejlop1@gmail.com já na to kouknu a opravím to.
Ondřej Lopatka (2026-02-08 15:11:05+00:00): Opraveno viz changeset/178225970
user_5359 (2025-11-09 09:16:25+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/708675635. You add the tag Седмог = јула (7. July) but which language did you mean?
Branko Kokanovic (2025-11-10 11:31:00+00:00): I see it is already fixed, but it was human error in copy/paste. Thanks (and if you see any other - please let me know!)
user_5359 (2025-11-11 09:35:12+00:00): Hello! Can you please explain the key ref:US-WA:letsmap? If I understand correctly, this is a local mapping project, right? Is there a web source for this?
tobych (2025-11-14 00:46:53+00:00): Hi. I was expecting to hear from someone about this. Yes, it's a local mapping project. We'll be using this for authority control. I've just added a row to the "Extensions" section of the Key:ref article on the OSM Wiki, with the following text:

> A unique identifier for features on Bainbridge Island, Washington, United States, that while of local importance are not significant enough be included in Wikidata.

This might be more at home in the "Special uses" section, or even "Authority control". I've not been on any of the OSM forums or Slack channels recently, but if you can recommend a venue for me to discuss this, I'd love to get others' thoughts.

Just as Wikidata does, we'll be linking the other way also, to OSM entity IDs, but this a fallback. It's a fallback that might well be utterly unnecessary. I guess really I'm concerned about features being removed or replaced and us losing the connection, but we'll have enough bots watching for this as part of our QA, and it's only a small island, I think we'll be okay.
user_5359 (2025-11-14 09:05:38+00:00): First of all, thank you for the explanation. And thank you for the documentation in the wiki. 
However, the website, which is currently still empty, is not particularly helpful in a discussion.
The problem with Wikidata is not unknown: see https://taginfo.osm.org/search?q=%3Amissing .
Local figures (e.g. mayors) who do not make it into Wikimedia because they are too insignificant are nevertheless given to streets.
One petition, however: remain open to discussion instead of threatening edit wars via bots.
tobych (2025-11-14 10:14:07+00:00): Sure, the website's empty, which is why I'm explaining things at length here.

I'm not threatening anything, not least an edit war. You seem to have read considerable malintent into my message, when none was meant.

I'll annotate what I wrote above, in case it helps.

I guess really I'm concerned about features [entities, in OSM-speak; such as a house] being removed [from the OSM dataset] or replaced [i.e.  the way or relation (with the ID we referene from our database) being replaced, rather than the geometry] and us losing the connection [from our database to OSM entities via the entity ID], but we'll have enough bots [as in: automated processes watching for changes and letting us know; I'm already pulling minutely changes from the planet replication service) watching for this [things being deleted or replaced], so we as part of our QA, and it's only a small island, I think we'll be okay [loading the island extract into PostgreSQL using osm2pgsql takes just over 9 seconds].
qstep (2025-11-08 20:46:21+00:00): Itt a Szántó Kovács János utca páratlan oldala felmérés alapján készült? A rendezési tervben 1-13-ig vannak számok: https://or.njt.hu/download/1868/resources/EJR_31172605-SZ-2m_Szab_lyoz_si_terv_-_belter_let_-_m_dos_t_s.pdf

Illetve ezt igazolja a G betűs cég 2024-es utcaképe is.
rempshaener (2025-12-24 14:52:02+00:00): Hallo,
mit Verweis auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176333326:

Am Beispiel www.openstreetmap.org/node/1626462952
Die Fußgängerampel ist mit allem drum und dran fertig erfasst.
Die zusätzlichen Objekte https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13289701604 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13289701605 ergeben keinen Sinn. Sie richten sich auch nicht an Fußgänger, sondern an den übrigen Verkehr.
Mehr dazu unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:highway=traffic%20signals?uselang=de#Fu%C3%9Fg%C3%A4ngerampeln
Würdest du das bitte anpassen? Und ggf. auch an anderen Stellen?

Viele Grüße
adrgru (2025-12-24 21:06:04+00:00): Hallo rempshaener,

ich bin inzwischen nicht mehr in Jena und bin daher dort auch nicht mehr aktiv.

Ich hatte die Positionen der Fußgängerampeln (Signale/Knöpfe) separat erfasst, da es sich um physisch getrennte Objekte handelt: zwei Fußgängerampeln auf beiden Seiten plus die Querung selbst. Laut Wiki-Seite Tag:crossing=traffic_signals: "a traffic light (highway=traffic_signals) can be on a nearby node", was genau diesem Mapping entspricht.

Ich hatte es in Jena-Burgau bereits so vorgefunden (z.B. changeset/113891271 von 2021) und diesen Ansatz dann weiter angewendet. Soweit ich die Diskussionen im Forum verstehe (z.B. "Ampelgesteuerter Fußgängerüberweg - wie viele Ampeln mappen?" und "Fußgängerampel wie eintragen?"), gibt es hierzu keinen Konsens in der deutschen OSM-Community - beide Ansätze sind im Einsatz.

Da ich nicht mehr vor Ort bin, könnt ihr gerne anpassen, was euch für Jena am sinnvollsten erscheint.

Frohe Weihnachten und viele Grüße

Adrian
rempshaener (2025-12-25 08:42:19+00:00): Hallo,

schade, dass die Orientierung an Bestehendem ausnahmsweise nicht geklappt hat. Das ist eigentlich ein gutes Vorgehen und klappt in der Regel auch. Hier ist es dann etwas zu exotisch.
Zum Wiki: In der deutschen Version ist es etwas klarer, dort steht „In der Nähe kann auf einem weiteren Punkt eine Ampel (highway=) für den Straßenverkehr eingetragen werden.“
Und das ist der Punkt: die highway=traffic_signals gehören auf die Straße, nicht an den Überweg.
Das ist auch logisch aufeinander aufgebaut: In Fällen, in den straßenbegleitende Wege nicht separat erfasst sind, gäbe es gar keine Möglichkeit, highway=traffic_signals abseits der Straße zu setzen.
In den Diskussionen geht es überwiegend um etwas anderes, nämlich freistehende Fußgängerampeln und die Frage, ob alles auf einen gemeinsamen Node gehört oder ob es geteilt wird: 1x Fußgänger, 2x Straßenverkehr.
Im konkreten Fall geht es aber um nur einen Kreuzungszweig, an dem jetzt 4x getaggt ist: 1x Straßenverkehr, 3x Fußgänger, wovon 2 Fußgängerampeln  gar keine Fußgängerampeln sind.
Wie immer bei OSM ist vieles im Fluss, zuletzt zum Beispiel hier: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/separates-mappen-von-ampeln-fur-fussganger/138620
Aber auch dort:
- Beschrieben wird die Halteposition, d. h. kerb dürfte nicht separat erfasst sein.
- Dort wird ausdrücklich ein neues Tag traffic_signals=pedestrian „erfunden“. Das bewegt sich dann aber im Namensraum highway=crossing + crossing=traffic_signals, nicht highway=traffic_signals
- Das ergibt am Fußgängerüberweg dann 2 Nodes, nicht 3.

Ich schaue mal, ob ich es aus der Ferne anpasse.
Frohe Festtage, viele Grüße
bxl-forever (2025-11-09 09:05:40+00:00): Hello,

Good work for the roads.  However, when you split a road in JOSM, make sure you have downloaded its parent relations first, so that they can be updated too.

I noticed that this edit invalided a large number of bus relations because of that.  Relations that were not in your JOSM download will still refer to the old sequence of ways and will have gaps.

Hope this helps.
Thibault Rommel (2025-11-09 17:42:56+00:00): I'm sorry for that, I'll make sure to keep that in mind, thanks.
Negreheb (2025-11-10 10:23:59+00:00): Servus, du hast einen review angefordert. 

Aaccess=no ist leider falsch, weil no ist nur, wenn wirklich NIEMAND gehen darf und kann. Hier sollte access=private oder access=forestry gesetzt werden.
Infos dazu findest du unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:access%3Dforestry 

Und, der name sollte auch weg, das wird durch den access=forestry schon ausgesagt, dass es ein Forstweg ist. Und die gelöschten Werte (highway=track und tracktype=grade2) sollten bestehen bleiben - weil der Weg ist ja noch da. 

Wenn du mal direkt reden willst, oder noch fragen hast, meld dich gern einfach. Entweder hier oder per PN :)

Lg Stefan
Youness_ss (2025-11-08 20:54:03+00:00): The motorway number "A31" was written in small banners on the right, these banners indicate the motorway number, and the kilometer point.
You can see it by clicking on the link: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mBUteP3WE10
Youness_ss (2025-11-08 20:59:02+00:00): If you see the banner, you can see A31 with yellow color, the yellow numbers refers to the motorway number.
BAGgeraar (2025-12-09 16:03:09+00:00): Deze wegen hebben nu tracktype=5. Moet dat tracktype=grade5 zijn?
multimodaal (2025-12-09 20:21:25+00:00): Hoi, je hebt helemaal gelijk, bedankt voor je opmerkzaamheid! Zal het corrigeren zodra ik weer achter de computer zit. Groeten
Yog Sot (2025-11-08 22:47:43+00:00): czemu chodnik ma nieodstępność way 509223880 ?
Ama18 (2025-11-09 16:37:35+00:00): Zagrodzony przez budowę. Dostępny jest tylko narożnik z Przemysłowej na potrzeby przejścia
felipeeugenio (2025-11-09 14:53:43+00:00): Hola. ¿Qué es esto específicamente?

por favor no hacer ediciones con información privada.
Saludos
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174394275
nave88 (2025-11-09 20:23:43+00:00): Hola Felipe,

This "changeset" was created when I added the following touristic apartment, that looks correct to me:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13289767501

I think you mean that the "tags" of the "changeset" are strange. I did not know it. I usually use the "iD editor" with my desktop computer, but this time I used my CoMaps app with my smartphone.

In my opinion the CoMaps app should create "changesets" with standard "tags" like: created_by, changeset_count, locale, source. 

Therefore, I think it is a bug in CoMaps and I will open a request to fix it.

Do you agree with my understanding?
felipeeugenio (2025-11-10 16:06:37+00:00): Hello. I was just asking what that was. Because sometimes people add their house like an apartment.

Regards
nave88 (2025-11-10 18:49:57+00:00): I confirm that it is a touristic apartment available online. Sorry for the confusion, and thank you for asking.
nona mostafa (2025-11-09 13:37:10+00:00): Hi Youness_ss,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap,
I noticed that you've changed the classification for those roads:
openstreetmap.org/way/584244878
openstreetmap.org/way/397644528
openstreetmap.org/way/662733334
openstreetmap.org/way/590865550
openstreetmap.org/way/683540109
openstreetmap.org/way/217563536
The best approach here is for the methods to remain secondary and not direct links.. Therefore, it is preferable to revert to the previous classification as it is more logical for road classifications on this site.
Could you please make those adjustments?
Greetings
nona mostafa
Youness_ss (2025-11-09 18:08:55+00:00): For me, trunk link type is more logical than secondary, because these roads lead you to a trunk road, But thank you for your note
ilias_ (2025-11-10 02:28:57+00:00): I don't really have an opinion here, but @nona mostafa, instead of just saying "The best approach here is for the methods to remain secondary and not direct links.. Therefore, it is preferable to revert to the previous classification as it is more logical for road classifications on this site", could you give some arguments for this position? Who said it's the best approach? Is there a written rule on the wiki somewhere? Please share with us.
nona mostafa (2025-11-10 08:37:02+00:00): Hi everyone,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap.
I believe the conditions of these segments correspond to a frontage road. You can refer to the OSM documentation here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Frontage_road
If you have a different perspective, I would appreciate it if you could share it along with your sources.
Best regards,
nona mostafa
Youness_ss (2025-11-10 10:10:11+00:00): Thank you for your informations
ilias_ (2025-11-10 18:00:14+00:00): Thank you @nona mostafa, I agree that these aren't really links, but just side roads. If Youness doesn't have any objections (as I see he only answered "Thank you for your informations"), please go ahead with reverting the edits. Thank you.
Youness_ss (2025-11-10 19:35:35+00:00): @ilias_ you're happy now?
ilias_ (2025-11-10 19:43:09+00:00): @Youness_ss

I mean, sure I'm happy, but you really don't have to talk like that. Despite your lack of manners, thank you for your collaboration, Younes!
ivanbranco (2026-03-14 14:35:43+00:00): Hi Yog Sot,

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13289771282

I guess that building=storage on this tree is an error? or does it have some meaning? I also noticed you used wikidata/wikipedia instead of species:wikidata/species:wikipedia

thanks and good mapping!
Enock4seth (2025-11-08 23:21:28+00:00): Thanks for fixing :)
Anas masuris (2025-11-11 15:32:13+00:00): Hej, bardzo fajnie, że dodajesz relacje IC/TLK. Bardzo sobie to cenię :)

Jedna/dwie uwagi:
* nazwy nie powinny być pisane wersalikami (czyli zamiast WYCZÓŁKOWSKI -> Wyczółkowski)
* przy dodawaniu peronów do relacji proszę zaznaczać obiekty, które faktycznie są peronami. Na myśli mam to, że część peronów jest oznaczona jako mulitpoligony, czyli relacje (np. https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/17708855). W przeciwnym wypadku do relacji wpadają obrysy peronów, które de facto nimi nie są

A tak to jeszcze raz dzięki za IC/TLK :)
Fizzie-DWG (2025-11-09 00:14:41+00:00): Hi, & welcome to OSM! When you finish mapping houses, or anything else square / rectangular, please hit for Q key, which will square of the corners, rather than leaving them with angled walls! Please also make sure that you map to the actual outline of the house, not just a vaguely similar shape. Thanks!
bartgron (2025-11-26 20:38:15+00:00): Usunięto:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175171548#map=15/52.71152/21.89033
tomhukins (2025-12-03 11:24:59+00:00): Thank you for all your helpful work improving the map.

I see you have added lots of names to OSM from OS OpenData StreetView.  In several areas I know well, StreetView uses names that nobody uses or sometimes exist in the wrong place.

I encourage you to add names from StreetView where you know they are used today, but suggest avoiding adding names without checking that they make sense in the real world.
matty817 (2025-12-03 12:05:54+00:00): Thanks. I haven't been completely indiscriminate here, but I'll be more careful in the future, particularly as someone else has raised similar concerns.
Cookie Guru (2025-11-12 04:57:40+00:00): I see neither highway=service nor surface tagged on ways 1448502407 and 1448502405
Cookie Guru (2025-11-12 04:58:29+00:00): Should they match 301191511?  What's your source for bicycles=no?
lukobe (2025-11-12 21:41:55+00:00): Sorry, which one is 301191511
lukobe (2025-11-12 21:42:08+00:00): Those are paths so shouldn't be highway=service, correct?
Cookie Guru (2025-11-12 21:49:19+00:00): openstreetmap.org/way/301191511
lukobe (2025-11-12 21:53:04+00:00): oh strange. if I added bicycles=no that was inadvertent. removed.
Yog Sot (2025-11-08 22:48:24+00:00): nope
eggie (2025-11-09 06:30:44+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Feedback Hier lijkt iets verkeerd gegaan. Je hebt een een grasveld dwars door de stad getrokken.
Wat bedoel je Etappe 1 OSP geupload  ?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=174395999

Mocht je aan wandelrouterelaties beginnen vraag dan eerst hulp op het forum van OSM of plaats een opmerking op de kaart. Met editor iD kun je geen routes bewerken. Dat kan alleen met editor josm.

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-11-09 06:36:05+00:00): reverted by changeset #174403601

Vraag even hulp op het forum en leg daar je bedoeling uit. Dan krijg je wel tips.
Begin met iets simpels en niet met routes. 
MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-11-09 07:20:50+00:00): Wanneer je routes wilt gebruiken en evt uploaden naar je GPS kan dat met deze tool.
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#route?id=8499974&type=relation&map=16.0/51.5047/3.8964

Dat kan niet in de editor van OSM.
eggie (2025-11-09 06:39:41+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
Feedback: Wat is je bedoeling? Staat er werkelijk een windturbine in deze achtertuin? En heeft die ook een naam? 
Dat laatste hoort zeker niet in OSM thuis. 
Dus niet name= gebruiken voor beschrijvingen. name=bankje name=huis name=windturbine 

MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2025-11-09 06:43:31+00:00): name even aangepast naar note.
Vraag me af of het object in OSM thuis hoort.
MVG
eggie
FlorenKr (2025-11-09 10:00:47+00:00): Bedankt voor het antwoord! Dit is mn kleine hobbyprojectje maar hoeft zeker niet op de map hoor, wou een beetje experimenteren met de software :)
eggie (2025-11-09 10:30:41+00:00): Oke.. je kunt het zelf verwijderen. Ook een leuke oefening 😀
eggie (2025-11-09 18:27:42+00:00): Verwijderd
pwbriggs (2025-11-12 05:39:24+00:00): Thanks for these edits, they look good as far as I'm familiar with camera tagging. Out of curiosity, what does a SOAP camera stand for? I've never heard that acronym.

All of us in the OpenStreetMap community are very grateful for the time and effort you've put into improving the map for its dozens and hundreds of practical uses. Thank you for contributing to OpenStreetMap. 

Always feel free to ask for advice or clarifications, we're here to help support one another.
tealcattail (2025-11-12 16:21:06+00:00): Hi pwbriggs, thanks for looking through these edits and for the welcome! Stay Out of Area of Prostitution (SOAP) is a WA local government word and these cameras were installed recently for those purposes.
gurglypipe (2025-11-09 17:14:13+00:00): Hiya, I’ve had to revert this changeset (as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174427110) because you deleted part of the Roman road, and part of Inglewood Road too. (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/531471908)

The change you seemed to be intending to make – turning the footpath near QEGS into a cyclepath – seems unexpected to me too. Has this path recently been upgraded? It’s not shown as a current or planned cycle route on the LCWIP for Penrith (https://www.westmorlandandfurness.gov.uk/parking-streets-and-transport/active-travel/local-cycling-and-walking-infrastructure-plans-lcwips#Penrith).

There are some weak traces for it on Strava Heatmap (https://www.strava.com/maps/global-heatmap?sport=RideLike&style=hybrid&terrain=false&labels=true&poi=true&cPhotos=true&gColor=blue&gOpacity=100#16.2/54.65709/-2.75596) but that doesn’t mean it’s a legal cycle route.

What’s your source? :)
DD1GJ (2025-11-09 00:16:12+00:00): The items you deleted are not superfluous. You have destroyed the work of other contributors. Therefore, all your changes and deletions have been reverted.

Удаленные тобой элементы не являются лишними. Ты уничтожил работу других участников. Поэтому все твои изменения и удаления были отменены.
eggie (2025-11-09 06:52:54+00:00): ele is de hoogte boven NAP. Klopt dat wel?
Leuk hobbyproject, maar hoort het in OSM thuis?
Gr eggie
rarad74 (2025-11-09 09:59:46+00:00): Salut. Drumurile private pot fi marcate ca si private si se poate pune si nod cu poarta/bariera de acces. Astfel nimeni nu va fi rutat pe acea strada. Nu este necesar sa stergi drumul/strada. De aceea exista tag-uri de acces unde se poate pune accesul ca privat sau interzis complet. O zi buna.
Dimitar155 (2025-11-09 16:24:07+00:00): Този вид подстанции май се води "улично шкафче". Прилича на сграда, но е сглобен в завод и се поставя с кран. Ето един подобен - https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=pfbid0sgqNGX77SMfqGg5SASdbXXMeJah8aXX3eawSVacd4HLvvzPHWwiaixFLXZW8Unaol&id=100084354603715.

За идея за тагването му може да видиш този PR -  https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/1543/files
Fraxi (2025-11-09 17:18:59+00:00): Това означава масово ретагване. Виж какво сме си писали на 12.11.2024(ако го пазиш). Не е като соц трафопост, но е по-голямо от обикновен ул. шкаф. Такъв има и пред 142-ро. После може да видя втория линк.
Fraxi (2025-11-09 17:34:21+00:00): Видях го. Еми малко прилича на https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:10kV_trafo_kiosk.jpg, но е по-дълго. Като това от твоя фейсбук линк е.
Между другото, не е по темата, но до него северно, имаше и може би нещо като контейнер(нещо свързано с отпадъци е), но като че ли беше задвижвано с ток и работеше.
Иначе за тези подстанции, може би е добре да изчакаме какъвто консенсус се постигне от github pull-a?