piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
elb000 (2025-09-20 08:30:36+00:00): Yes, there are two doors one next to the other with the two separate names as it they were two separate substations, one called “Biassa Rattazzi” and the other called “Rattazzi”
notmyproblem1 (2025-09-20 14:18:16+00:00): Cool, where did you get the data from?
notmyproblem1 (2025-09-20 14:18:55+00:00): and most importantly, do you have a message that says you can import?
elb000 (2025-09-20 14:37:41+00:00): Sorry but my first message wasn’t clear, all the names and ids I’ve added come from the plaques that are physically attached to the substation doors, so they’re freely accessible by anyone, I didn’t get them from any database but just by from going around by foot and noting them down
map per (2024-02-01 20:04:19+00:00): Wegen review_requested:
Die Änderung sieht gut aus, danke!
Strubbl (2024-01-03 10:02:54+00:00): Bitte aufhören. Deine Änderungen sind nicht korrekt. Lies vorher die Doku: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access
Röörikki (2024-01-03 17:22:40+00:00): Miksi olet piirtänyt uran ilman maankäyttöoikeutta? Poista laiton ura välittömästi!
Mikezzu (2024-01-03 17:55:10+00:00): Kyllä meillä on nyt luvat kunnossa.
Röörikki (2024-01-03 17:59:16+00:00): Voin 100% varmuudella sanoa tästäkin kohtaa, että tällähetkellä ainakaan ei ole! Poista välittömästi laiton, luvaton ura!
Cebderby (2024-01-03 13:16:42+00:00): Hello Crusaider and welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Please note that the imagery (in this case Bing) is not always well aligned.  In this case the Bing imagery is really quite bad - there is even a big step in it down the road near Uteby.  The Esri imagery is reasonable here, and you can use the local orthophoto imagery (Lantmäteriet) and the "OpenStreetMap GPS traces" (some GPS tracks available on the main roads to north and south) to confirm what is 'correct' - the existing mapping looks to be fine.  I've tidied things back to a consistent alignment.
Cebderby (Clive)
freeExec (2024-08-16 15:11:07+00:00): Подскажи, номера пятёрочек откуда взял, что-то они какие-то левые?
eggie (2024-01-03 10:47:36+00:00): Dag Reinier  

Dan teken je een los vlak  als een deken over alles heen met de tag
leisure=park 
name= Wil Merkiespark

De paden horen geen straatnaam te krijgen hier. Die kunnen er dus af. Ook de naam van het grasveld verwijderen.
Let er op dat je de paden niet verbindt met de landusevlakken.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-01-03 10:52:00+00:00): De paden heb ik losgemaakt van de landuse
eggie (2024-01-03 10:53:42+00:00): Hier een voorbeeld van een park met een losse deken met leisure=park name=.....
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/51.80522/4.66694
eggie (2024-01-03 13:46:27+00:00): Ike heb leisure park toegevoegd als vlak
wambacher (2024-01-04 14:30:35+00:00): Nett, dass du die Änderung einträgst. Allerdings reicht es nicht, wenn man den Eintrag ändert. Das Teil muss auch an den richtigen Platz verschoben werden.
Hab das mal gemacht, da das evtl. zu schwierig für dich ist.

Gruß
walter
pawel66031 (2024-01-10 11:32:17+00:00): Pytanie mam, odnośnie węzła 1234447003 i 1234447002 (usunięta). Ostatnio był remont drogi i między tymi drogami jest wysepka, która oddziela pasy (jednokierunkowe drogi są) i według mnie poprzednia wersja była odpowiednio oznaczona. Czy oznaczenie tych pasów powinno zostać oznaczone w taki sposób, jakie jest teraz? Też zaznaczam, że zdjęcie ortofotomapy jest w dniu, w którym zostało zedytowane,  nieaktualne i zmapowane zostały drogi na podstawie planów BDOT500. Pozdrawiam serdecznie
BáthoryPéter (2024-01-08 13:48:08+00:00): Szia!

Az úttesttől fizikailag nem elválasztott járdákat nem kell külön felrajzolni. Ha megnézed ezeket az utcákat, mindegyiken rajta van a sidewalk=both címke, az elég. Mivel ebben a módosításcsomagban csak járdákat szerkesztettél, ezt visszavontam.

A XI. kerületben elérhető egy szuper minőségű ortofotó, a Bing helyett ezt használd.

üdv, Péter
hildgyorgy (2024-01-09 08:38:27+00:00): Szia Péter! Köszönöm a jelzést. Ezentúl figyelek erre is. Egyébként pl. a Lágymányosi utca Budafoki és Stoczek közötti szakaszán az északi oldalon is van egy keskeny zöldsáv, úgyhogy itt helyesnek gondolom a járda megrajzolását. Az igaz, hogy ezesetben az út címkéit is módosítanom kell. Még egyszer köszönöm, hogy felhívtad a figyelmemet erre. És a kerületi légfotó-infót is köszönöm! Üdv, Gyuri
BáthoryPéter (2024-01-09 09:09:10+00:00): Szia Gyuri!

Köszi a pozitív hozzáállást! Igen, ahol indokolt, ott nyugodtan rajzold vissza. Ha valahol csak rövid szakaszon van fizikai elválasztás, vagy jelentéktelenül kicsi, ott nem érdemes a különrajzolással vacakolni, nem ad hozzá sokat a végeredményhez – bár ez inkább magánvéleményem. Ha funkcionális oldalról nézed a kérdést, ahol az utca egyik oldaláról a másikra akadálytalanul át tudsz kelni, ott nem indokolt a külön járda.

Ha bármi kérdésed van, a magyar közösséget Matrix chaten, levelezőlistán, vagy Facebookon tudod elérni:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary

És még egy tipp: a módosításcsomagoknak adhatnál beszédesebb leírást, mint a "corrections". Nyugodtan lehet magyarul pár szóban összefoglalni, hogy mit miért módosítottál. Neked is könnyebb visszanézni, és mások is hamarabb átlátják.
hildgyorgy (2024-01-09 09:35:30+00:00): Szia Péter! Köszi a plusz infókat! A "corrections"-ra már mástól is megkaptam a magamét és joggal :) Mától mindent szépen megírok! Üdv, Gyuri
BáthoryPéter (2024-01-09 09:40:57+00:00): Majd' elfelejtettem, jövő hétfőn lesz a következő találkozónk, téged is várunk szeretettel:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Hungary/Tal%C3%A1lkoz%C3%B3k/Meetup_2024-01-15
hildgyorgy (2024-01-09 09:49:55+00:00): Köszönöm!
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-01 07:21:26+00:00): Is building:name for https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11181679476 really needed?

It is already specified by shop being within this building...

Have you even specified it manually? Or is it something that Every Door added on its own?
Celso Azevedo (2024-04-01 15:45:14+00:00): I don't remember adding it manually. This is what I see on Every Door: https://www.celsoazevedo.com/files/random/2024/everydoor.png

Essentially this is a supermarket called "Continente Modelo" that is on a building called "Edifício S. Lucas". Feel free to change something if needed.
map per (2024-03-20 16:18:35+00:00): REVERTED
archie (2024-01-03 12:19:40+00:00): Hej, a lot of thanks for your corrections!! 
Did you contact the new user and pointed out the problem for them?
Cebderby (2024-01-03 13:21:17+00:00): Hi archie,
Thanks, I hadn't done so (was assuming they would be Swedish but I see their changeset comments are all English and maybe editing from England too), so have commented at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145832552
Happy mapping,
Cebderby (Clive)
archie (2024-01-03 13:37:09+00:00): Thank you very much, Clive! More of these edits of yours! Greatly appreciated!
michel60 (2024-06-23 09:18:55+00:00): Radar https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11482487756
Ajout des 2 relations 
Visualisation des radars:
http://frink.bplaced.de/blitzer/#map=17/49.5271/0.721
Cordialement Michel
kapazao (2024-01-21 18:01:07+00:00): Please take in mind milestones and do not add highway references incorrectly after someone has checked it.
There is a route (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/16774416) that starts in the milestone.
Regards
Anton_Klebanovich (2024-01-22 06:24:20+00:00): Hello! Thanks for your feedback, I'll take that into account in the future.

¡Hola! Gracias por tus comentarios, lo tendré en cuenta en el futuro.
Langlaeufer (2024-01-03 20:02:40+00:00): Hi cave,
dort sind doch baulich Übergänge vorhanden (z.B. Pflasterung bis zum Straßenrand) , auch wenn der Bordstein vielleicht nicht abgesenkt ist, oder?
Grüße Langläufer
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145835701
cave2596 (2024-01-03 21:52:15+00:00): Hallo Langläufer,
als ich heute vor Ort war, habe ich mich über diese Überwege gewundert, da am Straßenrand nichts davon zu sehen war (hoher Bordstein, keine Markierungen o.ä.).
Wenn eine Pflasterung bis zum Straßenrand als Übergang ausreicht, müsste man in dieser Ecke meines Erachtens dutzende Übergänge einzeichnen, da ja schon z. B. Einfahrten bis zum Straßenrand gepflastert sind.
Außerdem erschloss sich für mich nicht, wieso die Überwege über die Plathnerstraße nördlicher und südlicher als die Fußwege der Leisewitzstraße sein sollen. 
Falls meine Änderung falsch war, darfst Du sie gerne zurücksetzen, dann lasse ich da in Zukunft die Finger davon. Ich konnte/kann das vor Ort nur nicht nachvollziehen.
Viele Grüße zurück und ein schönes Jahr 2024!
gscholz (2024-01-05 09:43:12+00:00): Hi Jrachi,
this changeset has created overlapping ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=routing&lon=7.61449&lat=45.27918&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.60&overlays=duplicated_edges%2Cunconnected_open_ends_1

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=145835804

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Jrachi (2024-01-05 10:49:49+00:00): Grazie della segnalazione.
Ho fatto un revert pesante e trovato una valanga di way duplicate.
Ho ricontrollato e mi sembra fosse l'unica rimasta...
Ivo
InsertUser (2024-01-03 14:17:27+00:00): Where was this mechanical edit discussed? 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct
whammo (2024-01-03 22:49:47+00:00): Hi InsertUser. I actually don't see this as a mechanical or automated edit because I reviewed each object. As you can see, I also made additional edits to other fields, including expanding abbreviations and adding wikidata tags that provide information demonstrating that these hotels are affiliated with the IHG hotel network. Are you concerned with the quality and/or results of the edits or the perceived lack of process?
skquinn (2024-01-07 22:46:55+00:00): It was probably assumed to be a mechanical edit just because of the size. If these were actually done by hand, you should be fine. Ordinarily I would object to the large bounding box but for an edit like this it's difficult to avoid without splitting into multiple changesets.
MxxCon (2024-01-08 23:40:15+00:00): Generally, location identifier shouldn't be in the hotel's name= tag, but rather moved into branch= tag.
Also I noticed you updated phone number formatting on some of them. Generally, they should be separated either only by spaces or only by - (dash), not mixed. I suggest you install phone number validator from https://github.com/watmildon/josm-validator-rules/tree/main/rules. It can automatically fix phone= and fax= tags.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145835811
bike'n'hike (2024-01-05 13:08:30+00:00): Hi thobrist,
thanks for your contributions! 
A building=house is less specifc then a building=detachted. So you removed information.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1233279106

Please revert it and see here for further information: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building%3Dhouse
eggie (2024-01-03 13:38:33+00:00): Welkom bij OSM..

Is het niet een beetje te vroeg om het tijdelijke restaurant nu al op de kaart te zetten?

MVG
eggie
Frans S (2024-01-21 18:17:09+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map more accurate and square the buildings you mapped.
Best regards and keep mapping
arjunaraoc (2024-01-07 10:45:38+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 improvements: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145985324
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145837255
dadavid (2024-03-19 18:07:19+00:00): Hi, 
ich habe den von dir eingetragenen POI wieder gelöscht, weil das ehem. AKW in OSM schon eingetragen war (osm.org/way/757913750). 

Weiterhin viel Spass beim Mappen :) 
Grüße
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-03 12:40:28+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236581736

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
JLZIMMERMANN (2024-03-07 12:08:56+00:00): J'ai ajusté les voies en tenant compte de la vue "Esri"
Tjuro (2024-01-04 19:15:13+00:00): 'Beste SCNC,

Ik heb deze changeset teruggedraaid, dit komt omdat je hier een voetgangers loopvlak hebt ingetekend die op veel vlakken niet aan de consensus van voetgangers loopvlakken voldoet.

Ik begrijp vanuit de changeset comment dat je dit vlak intekent op basis van de posities van borden. Hoewel ik dit kan begrijpen denk ik dat er een misverstand is over hoe en tot waar voetgangers loopvlakken getekend worden.

Het teken van een heel gebied als voetgangers loopvlak levert problemen op voor de navigatie. In dit geval lijkt het nu alsof voetgangers zomaar van de kade naar de stoep kunnen, terwijl hier eigenlijk een muur tussen zit.
Ook wordt er verwacht dat er geen obstakels in een voetgangers loopvlaken zitten, zoals stoepranden en bomen. Dit is bijvoorbeeld belangrijk voor de navigatie voor rolstoelgebruikers.

Het gebied wel een G07 zonering, maar die borden dienen alleen als indicatie gebruikt te worden, niet als absoluut voor het intekenen van vlakken.

En het fietspad wat door het gebied loopt is gesigneerd met G11, en hoort dus niet meegenomen te worden in het voetgangers loopvlak.

Veder heb je een aantal overige foutjes gemaakt, zo heb je over andere voetgangers loopvlakken getekend, heeft de “name” twee namen en heb je de service weg aan de tramrails geplakt.

Ik hoop dat we kunnen kijken hoe we in dit gebied tot een compromis kunnen komen.


Met vriendelijke groet,

Tjuro
'

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145894381
Supaplex (2024-01-05 10:55:00+00:00): 為何要移除武陵高中的地址與維基媒體連結呢？
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145838386
little_maper (2024-01-14 07:45:51+00:00): Hello Kai2z;
I noticed you changed the naming for Street 77 to Ameen Street,
In addition, you changed the ref from 34 to 77.
Examples:
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1224370052
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/4192611
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/4074950
Also, these segments missing ref tags:
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/753834669
https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/753834671
Could you please provide us with the source that you used to change these names and refs for these streets?
Regards
little_maper
desertivy (2024-01-14 16:53:36+00:00): Hi little_maper

My changes for this street are based on this map by the Mayoralty of Baghdad:

https://web.archive.org/web/20240110201616/https://api.amanatbaghdad.gov.iq/images/bfeea80c-715b-4b12-b176-66ffc5a16434.jpg

And also individual neighborhood maps along side Ameen Street, that specifiy the road name and number, like neighborhood: 706 ,759,777 and others.

I added ref tag to the bridge
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/146251530#map=19/33.31940/44.48334

also do not try to edit streets based on the Mayoralty map, its not so accurate, if I didn't have the neighborhood maps i wouldn't have edited the street.

Regards
little_maper (2024-01-15 07:42:51+00:00): Hello Kai2z;
Thank you for providing this resource.
Regards
little_maper
James Derrick (2024-02-19 11:45:58+00:00): Hi Niels,
Can I ask why believe these two locations are not caravan sites please?

From the basis of *many* ground surveys, these sites contain no permanent customer buildings, such as tourism=chalet.

They instead house static caravans with wheels which are moved every few years as pitch rentals are updated.

I can see the utility of adding an extra tags like permanent_camping=yes 
static_caravans=yes, but not chalet as these are permanent features.

Can I invite you to engage with the UK community at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk please? 
There are *many* UK sites with the same tourism=caravan_site tagging (operator=Havon, operator=Parkdean Resorts UK Limited, and many more) and discussion is always best before mass edits.

Happy Mapping,

James
James Derrick (2024-02-19 12:56:29+00:00): Apologies - wrong link for Talk-GB:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/

Happy Mapping,

James
James Derrick (2024-02-22 16:31:35+00:00): Hi Niels,
Two community discussion threads on this subject may interest you:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-May/030407.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2024-February/031142.html

In summary, these large sites offer a wide range of services from day-passes to attractions, pitches for caravans/ tents/ motorhomes making one overall tag like tourism=caravan_site or tourism=chalet meaningless, especially without specific activity tags.

 I'm leaning towards adding specific usage tags, and tourism=holiday_park (more neutral across several activities):
tourism=holiday_park
caravans=x
tents=x
motorhome_stopover=x
static_caravans=x
permanent_camping=x
internet_access=wlan
landuse=commercial	(belt-and braces)

This approach gives the specific services for data-consumers. The local community discussion is continuing, so edits will wait for more of a consensus.
Happy Mapping,

James
Niels Elgaard Larsen (2024-02-28 19:32:09+00:00): Hi, James
I now after some traveling got to read your GB discussions. and they seem to cover a lot of the issues, I have been considering.

holiday_park seems fine.

And I am Danish.
James Derrick (2024-02-28 20:19:39+00:00): Hej Niels,
A useful discussion with the UK community and research exposed problems with the obvious tagging, and that it wasn't actually useful - something I didn't know.

I hope the changes help - and might be useful across countries.
Tak,

James
mga_geo (2024-01-05 06:43:21+00:00): Bonjour et bonne année,
Je viens de remettre dans l'ordre les ways de la relation pour avoir une continuité du tracé.
Pour ces opérations sur les relations route=bus, il est plus simple d'utiliser JOSM avec le plugin "PT assistant".
Marc
eggie (2024-01-03 13:36:18+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback  De info heb ik verplaatst naar de adresnode.
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
DUGA (2024-01-25 04:30:36+00:00): Apparently low quality with unknown technology involved (like AI), please draw things better.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236592272#map=19/39.54231/-79.23443
NorthCrab_upload (2024-01-03 13:30:31+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/node/11482728167

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
syntex (2024-06-21 21:36:14+00:00): Dlaczego skasowałeś nazwę KRRIT z obszaru?
Vaidotas (2024-06-10 15:39:29+00:00): Ar tikrai verta papildomai žymėti stotelių pavėsines atskiru pastatu ir amenity=shelter žyma? Ant to pačio stotelės taško galima uždėti shelter=yes. Mažiau darbo :)

Man konkrečiai užkliuvo, kaip dabar tokios stotelės piešiamos standartiniame žemėlapyje: shelter gauna pirmenybę, ir nesimato pačios stotelės, o kai priartinus galiausiai pasimato stotelė - nepiešiamas jos pavadinimas.
Litawor (2024-06-11 08:46:54+00:00): Galbūt tikrai neverta žymėti tų pavėsinių. Nesitikėjau, kad jos užstos pačią stotelę. Jei vaizdas nepagerės, galima bus jas ištrinti, neprieštarausiu.
Ali dasmy (2025-08-27 17:08:51+00:00): گمبوعه بزرگ
map per (2024-03-20 19:11:06+00:00): Hallo drellinger,

die Form der Brückenfläche (1) hat hier keine Ähnlichkeit mit den echten Brücken. In Wirklichkeit sind das zwei Brücken und beide Brücken haben keien komischen Ecken.

Viele Grüße
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1236598123/history
drlellinger (2024-03-20 19:17:09+00:00): Hi,
ich muss gestehen dass ich die Form nur aufgrund der Luftbildaufnahmen gemacht habe und dass es nur eine Brücke sei hab ich aus einer betrunkenen Nacht auf der Alten Utting so in Erinnerung. Ich werd schauen was ich machen kann um dem so nahe wie möglich zu kommen.
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-01-03 17:43:19+00:00): Geoloogi puiestee doesn't seem to be a real name or at least an official one. Where is it taken from?
rahwakunstnik (2024-01-04 14:11:42+00:00): I live there and I know EXACTLY what people call this place and some others as well. Please stop riding on my back this is osm not google maps! Google maps also has some roads that don't actually exist, maybe you go, wise up and correct there too. Sygic maps would also need to correct the roads in my home area, what is happening there is horrible!
OSM I try to correct / add / fix something, as it is, but immediately someone flies on the back and starts bullying!
I don't need to answer, add, for example, some place that is not yet on the map!

Sucess!
qqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqqq (2024-01-04 17:36:42+00:00): No need for such hostility. One of the important practices in OSM is verifiability. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Verifiability

We are all working together on one project.

If you truly believe that this name is useful and not used by a small handful of people, then at the very least we should add source:name=local_knowledge for other mappers to understand what's going on here, which I'll do right away.
Pikse (2024-01-04 19:02:13+00:00): I wouldn't accept local knowledge as a source in this particular case, considering 1) it's a sort of joky name, 2) it's hard to see why even local people would name such a short driveway, and 3) user making the edit is not quite reliable as before they have made edits like that in changeset/109640748.

If more solid source can be found for this kind of unofficial name then I'd rather use some other tag like loc_name=* for it, as name=* tag for roads normally holds official name.

Road names in Google Maps indeed often are unreliable but that's Google's problem. We can build more reliable map data here.

I notice bunch of other dubious driveway names have been added in this area, e.g. name for way/163744356 is likely name of the farm/cadastral unit not road name, and name for way/1175422960 is likely just made up. I think all such names should be removed.
rahwakunstnik (2024-01-04 19:40:37+00:00): What's funny about the name here? If there is such a name on the way! But someone will change the data added according to the paper map..! What do you come to nag, I've spent a lot of time here to make the map more accurate!
What the dubious names? Why are you arrogant here? As you can see now, the bullies have moved here and the osm service has gone to the bottom!
rahwakunstnik (2024-01-04 20:03:57+00:00): You and a friend are hostile, I add data but someone comes and argues, deletes the right things, changes, even though I added the right name, etc. It seems that no one wants to work here anymore, only to tinker with others.. If my heart gets lighter, change or delete my already completely pohhui, but leave the details of my former home farm alone!
And yet, in the old days, these roads were called so, if you don't know anything, then don't speak up! I'm not going to go on a map of Kuressaare or London because I can't change anything there, you're not a local person anyway – so go to your region! And then we're talking about collaboration 😟
mapperue (2024-03-06 09:54:53+00:00): Hi,
you add to this area:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/49601038
tag industrial=knaves_beech_industrial_estate.
It would be preferable to use a tag that is already documented on OSM Wiki.
What type of industry is there?
CjMalone (2024-03-06 09:57:52+00:00): It should have been name
CjMalone (2024-03-06 20:45:18+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148286690

Thank you
Tommybara (2024-06-13 23:56:13+00:00): Construction of this expressway hasn’t even begun yet. What’s the reason for keep setting it to “construction”?