piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
citrula (2023-11-21 03:23:22+00:00): Hi Nerdigans, welcome to OSM! It looks like you are duplicating the POIs that already exist in your changesets - sometimes the stores are tagged on the building area instead of a single point. Either is acceptable in most cases, but we can't have both! Please let me know if you need assistance in correcting this or have any other questions. Happy mapping!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144262383
Mammi71 (2023-11-20 21:01:50+00:00): Hallo Frauke,
jetzt haste aber ganz schön viel Lagerfläche südlich der Junkersstraße übersehen. auch wenn (nur teilweise) ein Zaun zwischen Junkersstr. und Lagerfläche steht.
Außerdem würde ich die Adresse nicht ausschließlich an der umzäunten Fläche festmachen, die Parkplätze, Verwaltungssitz und Besucherzentrum gehören sicher auch dazu.
Mammi71 (2023-11-20 21:06:40+00:00): Haus Nr. 8 is dasVerwaltungsgebäude lt NRW Liegenschaftskataster (als Hintergrund)
FraukeLeo (2023-11-21 01:01:19+00:00): Die habe ich nicht "übersehen", sondern wegen unklarer Grenze absichtlich ausgelassen. Hab ich doch im Forum geschrieben. Klar, man kann die Gebäude an der Westgrenze mit reinnehmen. Dass ich das ganze noch nicht als endgültige Lösung sehe, habe ich auch im Forum geschrieben. Mir kommts aber besser vor als ein Node auf der grünen Wiese, buchstäblich.
eggie (2023-11-20 22:56:19+00:00): Dag concurrentie.. Meestal zijn fietsers uitgezonderd van oneway=yes Hier ook?
Dan toevoegen oneway:bicycle=no
gscholz (2023-11-24 08:12:09+00:00): Hi BankruptBunny,
your recent changesets have left behind a huge amount of errors in the OSM database regarding duplicate nodes and self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=95.48763&lat=22.29552&zoom=7&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=144262605

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-11-20 20:58:26+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 67616336, 67616632, 67622037, 67622217, 67622596, 67887257, 67888478, 67901602, 68214633, 68231767, 68426207, 69905793, 69905820, 70215780, 76552402, 76722953, 76723186.
eggie (2023-11-21 08:01:59+00:00): Dag JASMein.. Dan maak je van building=parking  building:part=parking
Dan is je foutmelding weg.
MVG
eggie
Mahdi Nameghi (2023-11-22 06:59:39+00:00): Hi
In this revert some main roads deleted.
for exmaple this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/69997349
or this:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/546674552
SomeoneElse (2023-11-22 11:11:07+00:00): In the case of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/69997349/history , version 19 was redacted because that changeset used Google as a source.  See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google et al.
dadavid (2023-11-20 21:44:21+00:00): zusätzlich fehlerhaftes addr:street statt addr:place tagging aufgefallen. Ursprünglicher Mapper ist kontaktiert.
user_5359 (2023-11-21 08:57:14+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/node/2419768938/history. What is the mean of the tag opening_hours1=Su-Th 10:00-04:00, Fr,Sa 10:00-05:00 ? This entry is a contradiction to the key opening_hours.

Helló! Kérem, nézze meg a https://www.osm.org/node/2419768938/history oldalt. Mit jelent a tag opening_hours1=Su-Th 10:00-04:00, Fr,Sa 10:00-05:00 ? Ez a bejegyzés ellentmondásban van a kulcs opening_hours.
infeeeee (2023-11-21 09:02:16+00:00): Fixed: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144277716
silversurfer83 (2023-11-28 20:29:52+00:00): Hi :)

du hast darum gebeten, dass sich jemand diese Änderung ansieht. Von deinem Kommentar (der wegen Zeichenbegrenzung abgeschnitten ist) und den vorhandenen Straßenbildern ausgehend würde ich sagen, dass das passt, was du da getan hast.

Grüße
silversurfer83
muchichka_s (2023-11-20 23:18:05+00:00): I am asking you very much not to make reverts. Not because we don't need to revert bad changes, but  often you do it wrong and every your changeset has to be checked manually. I already spent a lot of time to fix after your previous changes

For example see:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142836423
SomeoneElse (2023-11-29 20:07:40+00:00): @Barroszt I agree with @muchichka_s .  Your previous block was only revoked subject to you NOT making edits like this, hence https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15429 .
gscholz (2023-11-29 06:57:21+00:00): 

Hi BankruptBunny,
your recent changesets have left behind a huge amount of errors in the OSM database regarding duplicate nodes:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=95.48763&lat=22.29552&zoom=7&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=144264127

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
habi (2023-11-22 08:52:33+00:00): Hey MappSurfer

Bitte stoppe deine Edits in OpenStreetMap, bis aufkommende Fragen und Kommentare geklärt sind.

Ich habe dich schon mehrmals auf Unklarheiten (und evtl. Fehler) hingewiesen, du machst aber kommentarlos so weiter.

Hier hast du mehrere Gebäude mit `addr:province=Kanton Bern` und `addr:suburb=Lorraine` hinzugefügt. Sowohl province und suburb sind *nicht* Bestandteile der postalischen Adresse in der Schweiz und sollten auch *nicht* erfasst werden.

Kannst du bitte an der Diskussion teilnehmen?

Gruss,
habi
MappSurfer (2023-11-24 12:03:43+00:00): Hallo habi
Ja, sie sind nicht Bestandteil der postalischen Adresse, da hast hast du vollkommen Recht. Ich bin aber fälschlicherweise davon ausgegangen, dass das Quartier und so weiter, welche nicht Teil der postalischen Adresse sind, auch eingetragen werden sollten. Jetzt habe ich aber entdeckt, dass der Link am unteren Rand jedes Werkzeuges zu den Erklärungsseiten von OpenStreetMap führt. Die hat (wie könnte es auch anders sein) natürlich deine Aussage bestätigt.

Und dass ich bisher nicht an den Diskussionen teilgenommen habe, tut mir auch Leid, ich habe mich bisher mehr auf das Erstellen bzw. Ergänzen konzentriert.

In Zukunft werde ich aber mehr die Kommentare lesen/kommentieren.
Ausserdem werde ich bei neuen Werkzeugen auch immer zuerst die Onlineartikel dazu lesen.

Liebe Grüssen
MappSurfer
Monchinho (2023-11-22 10:47:31+00:00): Ola! Vexo que engadiches un sendeiro pero aparece como paralelo a outro case igual. Non sei se poderías revisar se está duplicado ou é que hai dous sendeiros exactamente iguais. Tamén indicar que nome e descrición son diferentes, un sendeiro non se pode chamar "SENDERO", non sei se ten algún nome esa ruta máis específico. Saúdos.
Jordi MF (2023-11-21 00:35:31+00:00): Por favor, Adrii, revisa la toponimia oficial de la Acadèmia Valenciana de la Llengua i revisa los anteriores comentarios. La AVL indica que 'el Tossal Redó' debe de escribirse con artículo inicial. Los estudios toponímicos que realiza la AVL son más recientes, con encuestas a personas locales y se tienen en cuenta criterios etimológicos y ortográficos. Por lo tanto, son una fuente bastante fiable ybde la que tenemos permiso.

Sigues sin indicar tus fuentes. Por favor, revisa lo que te he comentado.
rainerU (2023-11-22 17:04:45+00:00): Du hast mit diesem CS einige natural=tree_row gelöscht, z.B. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/616792247/history . Wie du auf Mapillary sehen kannst, stehen dort tatsächlich Bäume, wenn auch noch nicht besonders große. Bitte respektiere die Arbeit lokaler Mapper und lösche solche Objekte nicht.

Ich bitte dich auch, die CS mit aussagekräftigen Kommentaren zu versehen und nicht mit Späßchen à la "Heidewitzka! LG Olaf ".
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144265892
Olaf der Mapper (2023-11-22 20:30:01+00:00): Was mir nicht gefallen hat war, dass die Lücke jeweils zwischen den (wirklich sehr putzigen kleinen) Bäumen ebenfalls als tree_row gemappt war. Das ist nicht als Respektlosigkeit fehlzudeuten, sondern rührt aus meinem innigsten Verständnis, jeden Tag aufs Neue für Verbesserungen des OSM-Kartenmaterials zu sorgen.

LG Olaf
Jordi MF (2023-11-21 00:37:56+00:00): ¿Por qué has añadido dos topónimos diferentes en un mismo nodo para la Vibra y el Tossal Redó?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11359326875
Jakka (2023-11-21 10:36:51+00:00): attention le nom est en nl et c'est afficher comme "Parking Ostende P1" pense pas.
silversurfer83 (2023-11-21 07:38:49+00:00): Und ich schon wieder, sorry :)

vorneweg: Der Detailgrad deiner Arbeit ist gut. Steckt viel Zeit drin. Ich kommentiere auch nicht, um dich zu ärgern oder so sondern um dich auf Kleinigkeiten hinzuweisen, die deine Arbeit noch besser machen können. Ich hoffe, du nimmst es auch so auf.

Hier hast du eine Reihe Poller erfasst 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11365294625
Die stehen zwar jetzt schön in der Datenbank und tauchen auf den Karten auf, haben jedoch erstmal keinen Einfluss auf den Weg (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/164234314), den sie doch sicher von Autos freihalten sollen.
Damit also auch Navis verstehen, dass hier ein Poller steht, sollte einer auch mit dem Weg verbunden sein, also als Punkt auf dem Weg sitzen.
Details, wie üblich, im Wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:barrier%3Dbollard

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144266171
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-11-21 06:25:24+00:00): Thanks for fixes, happy to see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Mateusz_Konieczny/unusual_shop_values/Australia being useful!
Lagerland (2026-07-15 10:59:13+00:00): Hi Spaghetti Monster. I was curious why reviewed this changeset was marked as Bad.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144266254
edvac (2023-11-21 00:16:56+00:00): Les 3 points d'intérêt à Lonjamuzi, pas avenue de la Victoire.
bxl-forever (2023-11-21 08:24:15+00:00): Hello,
Nice try but "Parking" is not to be repeated in the name.  Also, Brussels is a bilingual territory, forcing monolingual name is not accepted.
We fixed your edit.
redd (2023-11-26 21:04:35+00:00): danke!
AllotmentCyclist (2023-11-30 10:21:50+00:00): Hi, I noticed you have edited the busway along through DIP and you marked it as designated for bikes - but you have not included anything for pedestrians? The road is walked by lots of people and there is nothing to indicate anything against this. Was this deliberate or just an oversite?
CycleStreets (2023-11-30 11:30:54+00:00): Sounds like this is an oversight. Can you give an example of a specific way? We included foot=yes or left existing foot tags in place, so am not sure which way/ways you meant. Happy to correct any mistakes.
AllotmentCyclist (2023-11-30 11:41:36+00:00): I think there is only one way which you have marked as a "Busway" . This one
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/235913817/history
AllotmentCyclist (2023-11-30 11:44:37+00:00): In fact the section to the south of that is just the same, but you didn't change that from Service Road so it still routes correctly. w280743201
CycleStreets (2023-11-30 13:12:38+00:00): > I think there is only one way which you have marked as a "Busway" . This one
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/235913817/history

If you look at the history there, you can see we haven't changed the tagging at all. The only change to that way will be that we joined on the cycleway coming from the north, i.e. added a node. It was already set as busway and bicycle=designated beforehand.

I suggest you add foot=yes if you are concerned that walk routing engines wouldn't imply that highway=busway assumes sidewalk=yes.
Cebderby (2023-11-30 16:19:37+00:00): Looks from the history that the way was fine at vsn 17, and the problems have arisen by it being changed wrongly to highway=cycleway and then (by the same user) to =busway, both of which are wrong (busway does exclude all but bus).  I'll put it back as it was to highway=service, foot=yes, bicycle=yes and the bollard (and way through it) can have motor_vehicle=permit to block everyone else.
AllotmentCyclist (2023-11-30 17:02:22+00:00): Thanks Cebderby, it looks fine now.

CycleStreets - sorry I mistakenly thought it was you that changed it to Busway - I see now it was in fact  Ste_Nova. Anyway all looks good after Cebderby's intervention.
CycleStreets (2023-11-30 23:10:47+00:00): Great, thanks both for all your attention on this. No worries, AllotmentCyclist - it's great that you spotted the earlier problem anyway!
bxl-forever (2023-11-21 08:24:27+00:00): Please use the Dutch name as the primary name for amenities in Flanders.
arjunaraoc (2024-01-09 14:09:00+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).

Check my update: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146068531
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144267431
whammo (2023-12-02 23:17:25+00:00): Hi Chris, thanks for contributing to OSM! Please be sure you're not adding info from Google Maps, because the GM's license is not compatible with OSM (you can read more here https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Google)
ovruni (2023-11-21 07:03:20+00:00): Aquí el conjunto de cambios tenía que decir: Agregando y alineando edificios, estacionamiento, barreras, corrección de nodo duplicado, indoor mapping, entradas, dividiendo vía.
Baloo Uriza (2024-11-22 18:00:27+00:00): Not "S", but "South".  We don't abbreviate because it's easy to generate abbreviations if desired but hard to expand abbreviations.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144267785
arjunaraoc (2024-01-09 14:06:29+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144268053
arjunaraoc (2024-01-09 14:05:49+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).
Check my update: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146068425
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144268669
arjunaraoc (2023-12-07 12:12:52+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia). Please upload your edits in smaller area chunks for easy review
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144269328
ratrun (2024-09-22 04:25:23+00:00): Hi,

I'm analyzing unrealistic long ferry duration's. For https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1101437576#map=15/20.96992/105.91142 you entered 30 hours. Did you mean 30 minutes, which is still even long for these 450 meters or 30 seconds?
ratrun (2024-09-22 04:28:27+00:00): Just noticed: The same error is here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1102373766

thanks!
jptolosa (2023-11-21 06:14:24+00:00): Hello,
in this changeset you have retagged some ways as "track" that are really "paths" created by muleteers and impassable for four-wheeled vehicles. Also you have retagged as track a section of an "unclassified" highway and breaking the link with some hamlets.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144269805
felipeeugenio (2023-11-21 11:08:23+00:00): Tomas, please feel free to continue mapping, but the editions you made show us that you are not understanding that while mapping is easy to do, it requires some research and contacting the local community. We don´t mind correcting things from mappers who are beginners, but you have had assistance from us, and the path/track difference has been already explained to you.
regarding other classifications, please do research in the wiki, not other editions from Europe that are clearly wrong just because they match what you have done.
And please join the local community for assistance from other mappers, it is very exhausting to have to look at every edition you make.
Sorry for the warning, but as the community grows we just can´t afford to look behind someone´s every edition every day.

regards
supsup (2023-11-21 11:18:16+00:00): Which is the unclassified one? I cannot find it in this changeset. I remember doing that change and yes, indeed, that should be reversed. It was late and I did not look up the tag properly, sorry. In my mind track=dirt road and I parsed unclassified as "fixme". We do not have these in my country I think. As for the paths>tracks, some of them I walked (so i know there are a lot of misclassifications of routes, I think it mainly comes from all/most GPT trails were imported as paths back in the day), some of them I did just according to satellite, but I am quite confident in those maybe with the exception of this one: https://www.openstreetmap.org/edit?editor=id&way=462881429#map=18/-36.49390/-71.18605 but it still looks more like a track to me.

Which are the tracks that you think are not tracks?
felipeeugenio (2023-11-21 11:46:45+00:00): Hello Tomas. JP corrected your edition already so it is probable that you can no longer find some roads now. JP will explain you later the specific roads. 

But it caught my attention some of your comments: This is the third time you have received explanations of the difference between path and track.

So we just don't simply understand what "paths>tracks" means and the remark "In my mind". The is no "in my mind" here. there is the wiki.

Once again: tracks can support a 4-wheel vehicle, but paths do not. Of course, most of the tracks and paths are unpaved (or dirt)

unclassified is a British concept (OSM is full of British concepts) But we must learn them and not drag whole editions because of what is available in your country and your mind.

regards
supsup (2023-11-21 11:49:31+00:00): Felipe,
my main goal is to improve the maps along the GPT (I assume you know what that is). These were imported into OSM some years ago and are not always necessarily physical parts, also the mapping keeps evolving as more and more people walk it. It was imported into OSM as paths so especially with paths under relation "GPT", there is a high chance they are misclassified. That is why I might be too liberal with these, but I do survey them carefully, when not sure comparing different satelites and also Google Earth.

I am aware of the distinction between track and path (it is actually quite crucial for me). Around Planchon, it was clearly a mistake, thanks for notifying me about it previously. Around this changeset, I am curious where you think I got it wrong. Where I was changing things to track, I either walked it (and met cars there) or I was quite confident there is a track clearly visible on satelite. Basically I have some GPX tracks and lot of notes with GPS coordinates about things that were wrong/missing along the route. Some streams I noted needed to be added in this area were added in the meantime - thank you for that! When adding these, when I notice something that looks to me missing/wrong, I try to add it correct it.

How exactly does joining the community works? I am not sure how that would work in practice? I can ask when I am unsure about something, sure (but where?).

For the unclassified tag, that was a mistake, sorry. I refer to the wiki all the time, actually, this time I did not but it is an exception and I will be more diligent about it.
supsup (2023-11-21 12:00:22+00:00): It is a second time, not third time. First time was around Planchon and as I said, that was a mistake, probably caused by inadvertedly pressing CTRL+SHIT+V or something like that.

When I wrote "track= dirt road", the "road" part is crucial. Indeed, track needs to be passable by cars, I know that. So it is not about surface, it is about the width, mainly. I know this because I do not like to walk on ways that can be used with cars so indeed this distinction is quite crucial for me.

Yes, I did two mistakes, one around Planchon was inadvert, the one with unclassified was my negligence. The other changes to tracks, unless it was something like Planochon again, were honest assessment of satelites.
supsup (2023-11-21 12:20:03+00:00): Like this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/462881463#map=19/-36.08633/-70.90279 - I think ti is a track. I walked it, if I remember correctly and I see it both on Bing (where it is obscured by trees)  and much better on Google earth. Plus at least the part (from the police station nearby) to this building is a track: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1184893051

Is that one of the reverts?
supsup (2023-11-21 12:28:28+00:00): Then there is this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/462881584

Yeah, I can see that the eastern part of this (from the crossroad about the middle of the way) is not track. I must have by mistake editied the whole way before splitting it. I will fix that.
supsup (2023-11-21 12:48:20+00:00): Then there is this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/953326462

It is tagged as service, which I think is wrong, this should be track, no? Service is used just for short ways, usualy on premise, like a private driveway or something like that (my interpretation of https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=service ).
felipeeugenio (2023-11-21 12:51:22+00:00): Hello Tomas. please join the local community in the link https://t.me/OSMcl
you have to download telegram first. which is an app very similar to whatsapp. See you there.
supsup (2023-11-21 13:01:13+00:00): I have Telegram and I joined the channel. What now?
felipeeugenio (2023-11-21 13:22:43+00:00): There you can ask questions all you want.
regards
supsup (2023-11-21 13:46:30+00:00): Well, I do not understand why to spam 222 people about it.

I think I found the unclassified thing here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144272582#map=19/-36.67490/-71.28972

Ok. Having walked that route and reading the OSM wiki, I still think a track for all that route would be more appropriate as I would not really see El Roble as community, it is more just a police station, but I will yield to you, I am not going to bleed over it.

I would still be interested in the paths I misclassified as tracks.
supsup (2023-11-21 14:10:09+00:00): Ok, so I fixed the three issues (I think just the middle one was caused by me) I mentioned above. I did small edits, you can review them if you want.

I still do not know which paths you think I misclassified as tracks and would still be curious to know.

However, it seems all these long comments were just because of  changeset https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/1442

I guess a simple message in the vein of "respect the way that tag is used here" would have been enough.

I will continue editing all the way to Vilarrica, if I come across something I do not understand, I will ask, but please assume I act in good faith. With hundreds or by now maybe thousands of edits, mistakes are going to split, that is human. That is why these maps are open, so mistakes can be corrected. I encounter plenty of mistakes (like classifying lakes as ponds, for example).

I will be glad if you review the changes - Would you prefer smaller uploads? Or would you prefer any other change in the way I go about it? I am still not sure what you want me to do except of joining that telegram channel, which I did.
felipeeugenio (2023-11-21 14:39:27+00:00): The chat is for that kind of spam... i created a mini chat with JP and me if you want it to get more private...

and please do smaller uploads. thanks.

and yes, we think you are operating in good faith. regards