piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Xvtn (2026-07-13 16:30:32+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for your contribution.
dmjab13 (2026-07-09 16:00:07+00:00): not sure i agree with this change- it leads to the secondary road?
Joseph R P (2026-07-09 21:18:35+00:00): Highway links are generally tagged to match the road of the greatest classification that they are connected to. Likewise, way/145047535 retains its trunk link tags despite it leading to a secondary road. See here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrunk_link
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 05:01:03+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
Is the added name real?
plot (1536639090), v2
Colbertson (2026-07-09 06:00:25+00:00): Ive reverted all these changes. Looks like typical schoolboy vandalism.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 06:03:51+00:00): Thanks @Colbertson
EvanSiroky (2026-07-09 04:43:52+00:00): Hello there. It looks like this changeset deleted 2 ways that were a part of country borders. I partially reverted this changeset and restored the 2 deleted ways in 185384468.
EvanSiroky (2026-07-09 04:44:25+00:00): See changest 185384468.
EvanSiroky (2026-07-09 04:44:58+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185384468, lol, I don't know how to link to changesets
Glassman (2026-07-09 22:38:36+00:00): #TIP: we discourage leaving personal information, even in the changeset comment. Unfortunately we can modify changeset comments.

Also, try to follow the roof outline when adding buildings.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/185369625
confusedbuffalo (2026-07-13 05:17:18+00:00): Hi, thanks for adding these.

Here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1536643463 you had put a single buildings as 12-16, but there only seem to be 4 houses. I've split it into 4 and left three without a housenumber, I wonder if there's a missing 13 and then it's 14, 15, 16?

Also, I've squared up some of the buildings (there's the q button to do that)
alpacasaurus (2026-07-13 11:30:17+00:00): Hi, yes there is no no. 13 on St Marys Way so that row goes 12, 14, 15, 16. I'll put the numbers in now. Thanks for notifying me of the squaring button too, I'll try to use it from now on
confusedbuffalo (2026-07-13 12:18:10+00:00): Great, thank you
eerib (2026-07-08 22:02:59+00:00): Dear PatG (socketpuppet account of user Shinsplints),

The reason this needs to be independently verified is because you have previously attempted to vandalize this trail in particular with a shifting rationale and on your main account you've previously attempted to vandalize other trails in the region using serious methods of deception including AI-generated images.

Please refer to the previous changeset discussions.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185354915

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185294073

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183803084

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/181102527

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180834367

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180561671

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176023407

Again, I am reminding you that I have not requested that your accounts be blocked because I remain hopeful that you can change your approach and become a constructive contributor to the project. I hope you will not disappoint that trust.

Thank you, eerib
PatGT (2026-07-10 18:01:22+00:00): what are you talking about?
PatGT (2026-07-12 22:49:45+00:00): Eerib

I am trying to comply with Open Street Maps policies. You are making false accusations and involving me in your conflicts with other OSM users.
 
You are confusing me with someone else.   I don't know you, since you are anonymous, from here or other platforms.

Your accusations make you seem unhinged. My edits reflect what's on the ground. 

We can agree to disagree, but we should do so respectfully. Wild unsubstantiated allegations are disrespectful. 

I too am a hiker in this area. You don't have the authority to say what trail is publicly shown on this site or not. This trail is very steep and a hazard for people to access. A friend injured themself here and I am attempting to prevent future incidents. 

Your irresponsible mapping is getting people injured. 

This trail is not on any map of this area so why does it need to be public on Open Street Map. 

Regarding your Comment;
I also wanted to ask about the history of edits to this trail. In changeset #180834367, you attempted to delete the trail on the basis that it did not exist, although the trail does exist. Later, in changeset #183803084, you indicated that the trail had been abandoned and replaced by a new trail, but the trail has not been abandoned and no replacement trail was constructed. Could you clarify why the rationale for your edits has changed over time and why this is the case?

The trail was covered. Therefor did not exist. On going back I found it had been uncovered. My friend and I hiked it and he got injured. This was probably why the trail was covered in the first place. There is a new trail to the creek that is less hazardous. 

Regards
Pat.
eerib (2026-07-13 05:21:45+00:00): Hello PatGT (socketpuppet account of user Shinsplints),

If you would like to discuss this further you can do so by emailing the Data Working Group (data@openstreetmap.org) and referencing Ticket #2026071110000275

Thank you, eerib
b-jazz (2026-07-13 21:33:44+00:00): Hey there HockeyPlayz,

I did some small edits to the tees you mapped in this change. It's not uncommon to find that people want to map something and then give it a name. So somebody will map a building, tell OSM it is a building, and then name it "Building".

So I've unnamed "Tee #1" and put a `ref=1` tag on the two tees so that map consumers will know that it is the first tee. No need for you to go back. Just letting you know in case you do further editing.

Thanks.

P.S. Are you doing Happy Gilmore drives at your local course with a username like that?
rajdhani (2026-07-09 11:09:40+00:00): Partially Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185400661
FajrAl (2026-07-20 03:51:30+00:00): You need to use vector data that contains coordinate rather than raster format. Furthermore, the previous boundary was established under the latest 2017 agreement with the UN Council. In this instance, you are editing the Indonesia–Malaysia border without providing any verifiable sources. I previously invited you to the Singapore Community's Telegram group to discuss this, but you have been avoiding the discussion.
MassCartog (2026-07-08 23:46:12+00:00): Hi welcome to OSM. Next please just update the feature type rather than removing the feature. Thanks
MassCartog (2026-07-08 23:48:25+00:00): oh sorry, looks like you created the feature in the first place, thought you might have removed someone else's work.
eggie (2026-07-09 11:06:54+00:00): Dag Kebabbi,

Het was alleen wel een adresnode. Die kun je beter intact laten.
Ik zet het adres weer terug.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-07-09 11:08:27+00:00): Oke, maar geen BAG import adresnode. Het is oke zo.

MVG
eggie
eerib (2026-07-08 22:04:00+00:00): Discussion available in

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185369911

and

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185354915

and

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185294073
Frans S (2026-07-09 15:11:38+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please do not connect buildings together with their nodes. Each building needs to be mapped as an individual building.
Check the instructions on project 55381>
quote :
Be careful to not let buildings overlap each other or other mapped features like roads. If an overlap occurs and you see this message in the iD editor do not select 'Tag this as higher/lower' instead select 'Ignore this issue' and move the building you are mapping to ensure it does not overlap with the other mapped object.
end of quote.
Best regards
MaestroKissaki (2026-07-10 03:24:25+00:00): No entiendo bien lo escrito, tampoco se como consultar el "proyecto 55381" no soy de foros es algo que no me ayuda. puedo entender que no pegue paredes con paredes pero cuando si lo estan? tratare de mapear como "creo" que me esta indicando. pero no es que este seugo
Frans S (2026-07-10 09:20:02+00:00): Hola. Gracias por tu comentario.
Efectivamente, nosotros, los miembros de la organización Humanitaria OpenStreetMap, estamos trabajando a fondo para cartografiar la zona afectada por el terremoto. Esto incluye también áreas que ya han sido cartografiadas.
Los validadores, yo y varios compañeros, comprobamos que los objetos cartografiados no contengan errores, por ejemplo, nodos de edificios vinculados a carreteras, edificios superpuestos o bloques de pisos situados incorrectamente.
Esto se hace de forma visual y con la herramienta de validación de JOSM.
A continuación, se corrigen los problemas detectados.
Y sí, es molesto que se introduzcan cambios en tu trabajo. Pero todo ello se hace con la mejor intención.

El objetivo principal es poder poner a disposición de las organizaciones de ayuda mapas actualizados lo antes posible.

Un saludo cordial. 
Frans S

Traducción realizada con la versión gratuita del traductor DeepL.com
jayaddison (2026-07-08 23:06:09+00:00): Thank you Chris!
felipeeugenio (2026-07-09 14:57:37+00:00): Hola. Cuando a una ciclovía le agregas sidewalk= están diciendo que la ciclovía tiene vereda. Lo que no tiene sentido.
Si la ciclovía tiene un segmento, segregado o no= para peatones, se le debe agregar foot=designated + segregated=yes/no.

por favor dibujar ciclovías de acuerdo a está guía, que es muy didáctica: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bicycle


Saludos y por favor cualquier duda puedes preguntar en el chat.
lambalicious (2026-07-10 17:37:49+00:00): Así veo. Se me escapó cuando estaba tratando de aplicar los cambios que tenía que eliminar algunas etiquetas de lo que previamente era dos ways que fui anotando y copiando. 

Consulta, ¿de la página entiendo entonces que OSM tiene un concepto de vía de auto con ciclovía pero no de acera con ciclovía? En la página sólo pone conceptos de mapear ciclovías en vías para autos, y tengo dos casos en Temuco donde está puesta la ciclovía como parte de la infraestructura de la acera (Hochstetter y Zenteno) en vez de la acera como parte de la ciclovía (Rudecindo Ortega).
felipeeugenio (2026-07-10 22:58:27+00:00): Hola. Si claro que se puede agregar la ciclovía a la calle misma. en el link que te mandé hay varios casos.
jtracey (2026-07-12 13:47:07+00:00): It looks like you're tagging things as driveways that aren't driveways in the OSM sense (a common error for American mappers, where "driveway" is a more general term). As a rule of thumb, unless it's a pipestem, driveways don't serve other ways, including parking aisles, etc.

Check the wiki for more info: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:service=driveway
MappingMore (2026-07-12 14:43:45+00:00): Partially Revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185375406
RandomThighsEnjoyer (2026-07-08 23:38:30+00:00): description in note umgewandelt. 
Weitere aktuelle / nützliche Infos zur Schule hier:

https://apps.schulministerium.nrw.de/BiPo/SchuleSuchen/pages/schulsuche/schule_information_seite.xhtml?schulnummer=109733
confusedbuffalo (2026-07-19 09:03:06+00:00): Hi, just wondering what your source is for these changes? For example, are there really 10000 students at this school? https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13998709935
deneben (2026-07-10 14:50:55+00:00): Hello ID9!
I want to make sure that you entered in the correct surface for way/1529522730. You tagged it as asphalt, though on the latest Bing imagery it looks to be made of concrete. Just verifying that it is indeed asphalt; thanks :)
ID9 (2026-07-15 01:24:21+00:00): Thanks for the note - I was out for a walk and working through tasks on StreetComplete, so I can't remember exactly what I saw. I've removed that surface tag out of an abundance of caution and will recheck it next time I'm in the area.
Libya-truth (2026-07-09 11:43:10+00:00): All Amazigh (Tifinagh) names you removed have been restored. Tifinagh ⵜⵉⴼⵉⵏⴰⵖ is the indigenous script of Libya — not vandalism, not "Moroccan Tamazight." It belongs to all Amazigh people across North Africa.

Stop reverting indigenous language names from a country you have no connection to.
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 13:12:42+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185402240
VLD0251 (2026-07-09 09:26:43+00:00): Please avoid reverting changes immediately. Several inconsistencies have already been pointed out to you, and on OpenStreetMap, mapping decisions are reached through consensus with local contributors. Before making any further reverts, I kindly ask that you start a discussion with the original mapper or with the Libyan community.
Libya-truth (2026-07-09 11:43:02+00:00): Where are you from, Peter? And from which country? Because your mass revert of indigenous Amazigh (Tifinagh) names across Libya looks like it carries an agenda. You call Tifinagh "vandalism" — but Tifinagh is the native script of Libya, older than Arabic, spoken by millions of Libyan Amazigh people. This is not vandalism, this is indigenous language representation.

You removed Tifinagh from the name tag of 39+ elements across Libya — from Tripoli to Kufra, from Sirte to Ghat — and called it "data quality improvements." Who gave you the authority to decide that an indigenous people's language is not quality data?

The name:ber tags you left untouched prove these are real, documented Amazigh names. Removing their visibility from the main name tag while keeping the subtag is not "restoring standards" — it is suppressing indigenous languages.

Libya's Amazigh people have the right to see their language on the map of their own country. Your interference in this matter, especially as someone who appears to have no connection to Libya, is political — not cartographic.

All changes have been restored.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-07-10 07:32:21+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/20919
Libya-truth (2026-07-10 09:01:07+00:00): Hallo Fizzie-DWG

Thank you
GOwin (2026-07-09 02:56:33+00:00): 👋 Hello, Totor. I can see that you've been contributing regularly with Vespucci.  🤩

So, what's your favorite feature for this editor?
Totor (2026-07-09 05:05:17+00:00): I like that it gives full access to the tags, but can still also be used in an assisted way. It is very complete and allows complex editing. I have to admit it was a little hard to get used to at the start. ^_^
I mostly use it only on the go, when I do not have access to Josm, mainly because it is the first mobile editor I discovered...
This time I tried out StreetComplete. Very convenient to add details while riding a taxi...
I accidentally removed the marking from a pedestrian crossing. (I always got "Does this crossing have a central island", but here I replied "no" to "is the crossing marked".)
Since I could not find how to undo my change, I used Vespucci.
GOwin (2026-07-09 05:30:02+00:00): Yeah, it seems that folks who enjoy using JOSM tend to like Vespucci, too. 😇

If you're looking for a tool for undoing your edits, try using https://revert.monicz.dev with your OSM account.

It's quite easy to make mistakes on mobile, but this should make rollbacks easy.

Yep, StreetComplete really helps with quick edits, but I personally prefer the SCEE version, same banana with a different sauce, for experienced mappers: https://github.com/Helium314/SCEE
GOwin (2026-07-09 05:52:04+00:00): By the way, Totor, I wonder if you are interested in helping verify some stream names in Cebu?

https://maproulette.org/virtual/6401

The tasks should be visible on Vespucci, JOSM (tho the Maproulette plugin is wonky right now), or RapiD: https://rapideditor.org/edit#map=18.28/10.27945/123.86531&maproulette=55827
Famlam (2026-07-09 17:17:11+00:00): way 1536669493
Typo voor website?
A67-A67 (2026-07-10 10:00:59+00:00): Bedankt. Ik heb het verbeterd
b-jazz (2026-07-09 01:08:29+00:00): Hello DJH,

I just wanted to give you a heads up that I'm planning on reverting most(all?) of the changes you've done to this course. There are a ton of problems and it would be easier to remove your changes and start from scratch than try to fix them all up.

I understand you put effort into this, so I wanted to work with you and give you advanced warning.

Some of the problems:
* the areas you drew for things like roughs are extremely minimal and blocky and aren't following natural landscape.
* your roughs often cross over other elements like fairways and cart paths.
* you are using natural=wood to define a single tree or two. you should be placing single trees in those cases.
* sometimes your natural=wood extends far beyond the visible area that trees are in.

If you have issues with the reverting of these changes, please let me know in the next 24 hours. Thanks.
DJH06 (2026-07-09 14:17:27+00:00): Hey b-jazz,
Thanks for letting me know, and for keeping the maps accurate, I appreciate it. Since the mapping was 14 years old and this is my home course, I figured I'd try updating it, but I clearly made some mistakes along the way and I'm fine with the corrections.
If possible, I'd love to keep the green and bunker edits, since the greens were previously mapped as fairways (which wasn't accurate) and no bunkers existed at all. I should have been more careful with the rough, and I wasn't aware there was a way to tag individual trees rather than using natural=wood so good to know for next time. Any mapping best practices you'd recommend? Going forward I'll make sure to turn on the audit toggle before saving changes. Thanks again for the patience with a new contributor.
b-jazz (2026-07-09 16:14:10+00:00): Thanks for understanding. I've gone through and removed most/all of the roughs and single trees that were marked as wood. You might want to look at the golf course mapping wiki at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course. That's a good start with a lot of subsections to explore.

As for mapping out roughs, I'm typically against doing it because they  rarely have well defined borders. But that's just me.
BCNorwich (2026-07-11 05:59:53+00:00): Way: 1536672446 was removed as it duplicated existing highways and could disrupt routing.
BCNorwich (2026-07-11 06:07:48+00:00): Way: 1536672440 was removed as it duplicated existing highways and could disrupt routing.
BCNorwich (2026-07-11 06:10:24+00:00): Way: 1536672438 was removed as it duplicated existing highways and could disrupt routing.
BCNorwich (2026-07-12 05:53:03+00:00): Way: 1536672452 was removed as it duplicated existing highways and could disrupt routing.
nileshbarawkar (2026-07-22 06:26:50+00:00): Hi
ニュースモティハリ
(w1116248673) Could you please confirm that why construction status has been removed ? is this road now open ?
Thanks.
b-jazz (2026-07-10 14:50:07+00:00): I reverted the changes made that overlap other golf features. Please reach out to me.
Comino (2026-07-09 05:45:03+00:00): Hi,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Use the "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read: https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants#tagging-guidance
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Happy mapping,

Edwin Comino
BTC Map
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 05:02:44+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM.
Is the added highway real?
Ampunbukor Variasi mobil dan motor (1432766590), v2
FajrAl (2026-07-09 12:41:57+00:00): Thank you for spotting this, Pascal. It should be building
pitscheplatsch (2026-07-09 13:04:45+00:00): Thanks for fixing, Fajar.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185405780
themi97 (2026-07-13 16:13:14+00:00): Why have you downgraded the road to primary? This is a motorway. I will revert your changes.
MountSneffels (2026-07-14 06:16:50+00:00): Hello themi97, I reclassified these ways since it seemed like an abrupt transition from motorway into primary ways, but I see now that the OSM wiki page for Cyprus [https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cyprus#%22A%22_Roads_(Motorways)] states that roads with the “A” ref tag should be classified as motorways.
Thank you for correcting that.
Based on those guidelines, it seems [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1506900132], [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1506900131], [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526481084], [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1526471207], and [https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1506900123] should also be classified as motorway instead of trunk. Do you know if these sections of the highway have a lower 80 km/h speed limit?
DetectiveConan (2026-07-09 06:25:36+00:00): source: http://www.hn-unis.com/nd.jsp?id=320
BCNorwich (2026-07-11 05:48:12+00:00): Way: 1536672453 is duplicating an existing highway, thus disrupting routing.
BCNorwich (2026-07-11 05:55:34+00:00): Way: 1536672449 is duplicating an existing highway, thus disrupting routing.

Both are removed.
MassCartog (2026-07-09 15:02:44+00:00): Hello, welcome to OSM. 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.

It's clear that these features still exist on the ground. Removing valid data so apps that happen to use OSM data render how you like is incorrect and actually considered vandalism.

If a feature is tagged as the incorrect, for example a driveway tagged as service road, feel free to update these tags to the correct type. (change it to driveway)

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
dzamper (2026-07-10 17:07:30+00:00): Czy „Fundacja Elim Zabrze” to serio sklep mięsny? Bo nazwa nazwą ale typ obiektu został :)
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-07-09 20:46:49+00:00): https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/propozycja-obnizenia-kategorii-drogi-krajowej-65-elk-goldap/145154
willkmis (2026-07-09 12:24:55+00:00): The name of the city is definitely just Washington, just like the name of Cleveland is not Cleveland, OH. Reverting this
willkmis (2026-07-09 12:55:54+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185406122
FajrAl (2026-07-10 14:04:37+00:00): Data bangunan ini bersumber dari mana? Apakah hasil digitasi sendiri? Mengapa tidak mengunduh data areanya terlebih dahulu di JOSM? Akibatnya, banyak bangunan yang menjadi ganda (rangkap) dan tumpang tindih!
nevw (2026-07-09 04:34:29+00:00): Hi, I assume Services Australia occupy areas within the shopping centre so I have removed the Services Australia tags from the shopping centre building and left the two points tagged with Services Australia tags. I am about to remap the building because one of the SA areas appear to be in a separate building. Do SA occupy two separate areas here... one in the main shopping centre near BigW and another area in a separate smaller building across the other side of the car park?
prajkee88 (2026-07-09 04:38:46+00:00): I actually key in location based on SA official website. Here are SA's official address 
8 Sudbury Road
Mirrabooka WA 6061

https://findus.servicesaustralia.gov.au/?locationid=557713&submittopage=locatorprofile.asp&log=1
prajkee88 (2026-07-09 04:39:38+00:00): Location as per google maps
https://share.google/VE3HrOQjMeJCZrtKq
nevw (2026-07-09 04:49:59+00:00): Thanks, I am redrawing the building and adjusting tagging. Can you check if all seems ok later thanks.
nevw (2026-07-09 04:58:02+00:00): I'll take the SA point within the shopping centre main building as it seems SA only occupy 8 Sudbury Road building./
nevw (2026-07-09 05:05:33+00:00): Finished area now. Car parks need a bit of fiddling but I'll leave that to others. It should render ok by tomorrow, though you might need to clear your browser cache. Cheers.
旧加卷 (2026-07-10 05:22:15+00:00): 你好
请不要使用描述名称，土地用途不要改成建筑物，一段道路不要标两遍，不要对整个运动区域添加 leisure=pitch 标签。
literan (2026-07-09 19:03:47+00:00): а это точно адрес дома, а не номер участка? как-то сомнительно выглядит, по деревне Юрлово
Ozon OSM14 (2026-07-10 07:03:01+00:00): Здравствуйте. В кадастре указано именно как строение 1.