piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Protoxenus (2025-07-14 15:22:47+00:00): Hi, 
bei der Angabe der Telefonnummer wird das internationale Format verwendet:
+ 49 381 ...
anstelle von
0381....
Gruß Protoxenus
Stefan Ribeiro (2025-07-18 23:08:15+00:00): Habe nun Telefonnummern auf internationales Format geändert, hoffe ich habe nichts vergessen.
User5848 (2025-04-20 18:48:44+00:00): Teşekkür ederim.
habi (2025-04-22 19:32:29+00:00): Das sah eher wie "landuse=residential + residential=trailer_park" (siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:building%3Dstatic_caravan) aus, ich hab' das so geändert :)
eggie (2025-04-20 18:44:53+00:00): Dag Jon,

Het zijn de accesstags die de routering regelen.... Het verkeersbord regelt niet de routering. 
Dus toevoegen wie hier niet mogen komen in geval een C9.
Ik zie in de wiki dat die onvolledig is.
Eigenlijk valt al het langzaam verkeer eronder incl ruiters. 
MVG
eggie
User5848 (2025-04-20 18:49:00+00:00): Teşekkür ederim.
NeisBot (2025-05-17 15:10:26+00:00): Hi Enjoister, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 99% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

PS: I have also sent this message through the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=165208236
NeisReview (2025-05-18 09:54:05+00:00): #golf #mapping
os-emmer (2025-05-03 16:48:58+00:00): Hello Trust! Yet Verify,
you added a camera here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12770827961
I have noticed that manufacturer=Unknown and manufacturer:wikidata=Unknown got used by you and others in the USA. Please do not add tags if you do not know the value. Just skip them.
What editor/instructions did you use for adding the camera?
User5848 (2025-04-20 18:49:21+00:00): Teşekkür ederim.
Joopvdl (2025-04-29 10:50:51+00:00): Why did you remove the busway tag from the center running lane for busses?

According to the wiki the tag should be used:
"The highway=busway tag indicates a dedicated, separate way for the use of public transport buses."

According to the wiki the "highway=service" tag should only be used in specific locations:
"A short service road that leads away from the main carriageway to a bus system administration, operations facility (e.g., bus terminal, bus garage, etc.). "

Due to the fact that this is a separated, dedicated lane for 1.75 miles I would argue that the "highway=busway" is the only correct tag in this situation and I'm curious why you removed that tag.
Joseph R P (2025-04-29 21:46:51+00:00): I realized I confused the highway=busway tag with the deprecated service=busway tag and concluded that being the reason for the lack of rendering/routing in OSMCarto, and also further connected the dots with some other busways I've seen being tagged with the highway=service + bus=designated scheme, so I switched them to the one I'm more used to seeing and under the belief that it was the replacement for the deprecated tag. Turns out the other tagging scheme for busways is plain incorrect too, so I've restored the traditional busway tags here.
Tomas Straupis (2025-04-20 19:20:19+00:00): Tikrai taip turi būti? Unclassified yra aukštesnės klasifikacijos nei residential. T.y. anksčiau buvusi klasifikacija rodė, kad čia yra pravažiuojamasis kelias, t.y. juo važiuoja ne tik čia esančių namų gyventojai. T.y. jei norim iš Saločių g. į Pasvalio g. peršokti, bet nenorime važiuoti pro centre esantį žiedą, tai galime per P. Kalpoko g. pravažiuoti.
User5848 (2025-04-20 18:56:47+00:00): Teşekkür ederim. (Robota bağladım ama neyse 😅)
silversurfer83 (2025-04-21 08:43:39+00:00): Moin :)

also das "highway=service" musst du schon dran lassen, wenn dort Einsatzkräfte entlang sollen ;)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165209337
silversurfer83 (2025-05-11 16:46:38+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/166117536
user_5359 (2025-04-21 10:19:21+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/685842571.
aaccess = no
access = permissive
What is the correct access value?
Carlos Brys (2025-04-21 13:13:32+00:00): What do you think is the correct label ?
It is a road that goes to an aboriginal community and access without permission is not allowed.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/14OR8oytLA2Wf1CR3E8u1OOjDMHj8-2Xb/view?usp=sharing
user_5359 (2025-04-21 13:30:24+00:00): The correction made by mueschel without asking is correct, I would add a noexit=yes according to the meaning of the sign.
mueschel (2025-04-21 13:34:42+00:00): That's not access=permissive - that means that someone tolerates people accessing the way without asking, but has can revoke this right at any time.

access=private would be appropriate - someone decides on a case-by-case basis who is allowed to enter.
Carlos Brys (2025-04-21 13:51:42+00:00): I updated the label to access=private
Jrachi (2025-11-19 09:09:21+00:00): Ciao.
Nella Centrale Cavallero
Hai messo 
building=industrial
landuse=industrial

Che non ha nessun senso.
landuse su usa per un area usata per uno scopo.
building si applica su un edificio.
Visto che quello che è mappato è un edificio, toglierei il landuse per applicarlo all'area della centrale, solitamente è la parte di terreno delimitata da una recinzione.

Ivo
rventura (2025-07-07 13:41:10+00:00): Bonjour, vous avez ajouté ou modifié les attributs `network`, `brand` (et les codes wikidata associés) de stations de vélos libre service en insérant IDEcycle.

Il semblerait que cet opérateur ne travaille que pour Pau. Est-ce une erreur de traitement ?
gscscnd (2025-04-22 19:49:28+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/124180684
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/732104455
Duplicated platform, please revert.
DeFra85 (2025-11-22 19:48:17+00:00): fixme="Für eine Ortsstraße fehlt hier der Ort. Falsche Straßenart" -> dann ändere doch einfach von highway=residential zu =unclassified
netjeff (2025-04-20 20:12:18+00:00): See more details in my https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/netjeff/diary/406603
colorful-corvid (2025-04-20 23:43:16+00:00): I disagree with deleting this feature. The boundary is a bit arbitrary, it's fair to say, but I had visited that area and assessed the vegetation, then used satellite imagery to mark boundaries. I can see you've marked some construction features on the east side, and I'm open to refining the geometry to reflect that development. As for being overly large, I'm not sure what issue you're running into, this isn't an exceptionally large feature, either by area or vertices, could you clarify? If I don't hear back from you I intend to revert this change.
tcarlisle (2025-04-21 01:08:25+00:00): Hi,

Thanks for reaching out—and I really do appreciate the time and thought you’ve put into mapping this area, especially having visited it in person and using satellite imagery to assess the vegetation. That kind of careful work is valuable and helps improve the quality of the map.

I wanted to explain more fully why I deleted the polygon and why I believe very large ground cover polygons can present challenges in OpenStreetMap, even when they aren’t extremely complex in terms of vertices or relationships.

There are a few reasons this approach can become problematic:

Editing Performance and Stability: When large polygons do have many relationships—whether now or in the future—they become harder for the editor to render and manage. I’ve run into slowdowns, errors, and rendering issues, especially when trying to work within large multipolygons that have lots of inner components.

Error Tracking: If there's an issue like an unclosed way or a small geometry error, it's much harder to find and fix in a large polygon with many relationships. The bigger and more complex the structure, the harder it is to debug.

Broad-Stroke Mapping: These large polygons tend to “paint with a broad brush.” Even if accurate in general, they often don’t reflect local variation and make it more difficult to add detailed features like parks, campgrounds, water bodies, or residential areas. These features can end up overlapping or needing to be added as inner polygons, which increases complexity.

Long-Term Maintenance: From experience—including work I did around Zion National Park—I've found that large polygons often need to be broken up as more detail gets added. I initially tried to keep large polygons in place, but the amount of relationships they accumulated made them hard to edit, prone to errors, and increasingly fragile over time.

Future Development: In this particular case, the area around St. George is going through ongoing and upcoming development. I expect more roads, buildings, parks, dams, and reservoirs to be mapped in the near future. Leaving a large polygon over the area makes detailed editing more difficult for those contributors.

Even though the polygon in question didn’t yet have inner relationships, I felt it was still contributing to the broader issue I’ve seen emerging in the region. I’ve noticed more large polygons like this popping up in the St. George area, and I believe addressing this pattern now will make it easier for contributors to add and maintain detail moving forward.

I’m absolutely not trying to dismiss your work—it’s clear you’ve put real effort into it. I just wanted to offer a full explanation of my thinking and experience with these kinds of issues. If you'd like, I’d be happy to collaborate on a revised approach to mapping ground cover in this area that balances broader context with local detail.

Thanks again, and I appreciate you taking the time to follow up.
colorful-corvid (2025-04-29 22:21:35+00:00): I haven't heard back on this issue and am now reverting it. I am open to further discussion or communication.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165610951
rskedgell (2025-04-21 06:11:14+00:00): The paths were already tagged correctly with foot=private, so adding access=no was pointless. At least this changeset was mostly harmless, unlike your others.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/165221258
os-emmer (2025-06-21 21:38:20+00:00): Hi jeawrong,
you added some wikidata=* here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7849912297
Could you check the value for that? It should be a wikidata-ID.
sundew (2025-04-20 20:28:34+00:00): Ist leider die Changeset-Beschreibung vom vorherigen Changeset .. Es ist natürlich das Innenstadtgebiet von Harsefeld gemeint ..
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-03-17 20:04:18+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12770910783/history has shop = clearance that was added in this edit
shop=clearance ? Is it shop=variety_store ? If not, how it differs from shop=variety_store? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=variety_store
dafadllyn (2026-03-18 20:32:53+00:00): Hi Mateusz!
Stokomani is a clearance shop, that is, a shop that sells overstock, discontinued or liquidation brand-name merchandise at heavily discounted prices. This is different from a variety store, which sells cheap, rather low-quality, unbranded products, often at one or several fixed price points.
Best regards, Raphael
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-03-19 09:19:09+00:00): Are they selling some specific type of stuff or everything from fridges and toasters through smartphone and shoes to spices, windows, homewares and pens?
dafadllyn (2026-03-26 20:16:20+00:00): Please excuse my late reply.

Stokomani neither sells very specific items, nor does it sell everything. It mainly seems to sell clothes and shoes, beauty and health products, homeware, and toys.

There's another clearance shop chain in Switzerland called Otto's which has a broader range of products. In addition to the product categories sold by Stokomani, Otto's also sells food and drink, furniture, electronic devices, and larger home appliances (such as fridges or ovens).
Zatigem (2025-04-25 02:21:40+00:00): Hello cartoleo

Thank you for your contributions to OSM.
I guess this changeset is not directly from you (Street Complete ?) but is there any way you could publish the changes more locally please? I just saw 17 changeset like this from you the same day that are probably unrelated to my town... 

Thank you
Regards
cartoleo (2025-04-26 08:56:31+00:00): Hi,
I'm sorry about this! This comes indeed from StreetComplete, which groups contributions per type instead of per place.
There's also the fact that I prefer to send edits as a group instead of one by one, partly because I don't have internet access when I'm walking outside.
So for this changeset, I added info on shops in Paris and in Rennes and didn't upload my changes in one city before I went to the other.
I can try to be more local and publich smaller changesets.
And I'm also curious: how does this affect you? How do you see these changesets? 👀
Thanks,
Zatigem (2025-04-26 12:12:44+00:00): Hello cartoleo,

To check the recent changes in my town, I adjust the zoom on my town on Openstreetmap.org and I click on "history" so I can see the recent changes in my town. But i also see the changes if someone send a huge changeset and It surround my town by the square of changes by location.
See the wiki of OSM for more details
Thank you
cartoleo (2025-04-26 17:41:27+00:00): Oh I see, thank you very much for your explanation! I'll be more careful.
user_5359 (2025-04-21 10:27:30+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/node/12770962550. What is the mean of the tag 7x = 1/2016?
Andreas König (2025-04-21 18:40:31+00:00): Hi, 
i asked this myself editing (not creating) this tag. Please ask the user ho created it. Possibly the creator has some legit use for it eg. as a GPS reference point he checked 7 times ? It is not detrimental to anything so I decided not to remove this.
felipeeugenio (2025-04-20 22:40:09+00:00): Hola. Se puede pasar por esa extensión no pavimentada de Le Mans? se ve bastante precaria. Además, el nodo de noexit=yes sigue ahí.

saludos
BrunoTDG0000000 (2025-04-20 22:47:57+00:00): Pase ayer por ahí y ví que estaba esa extensión provisoria que curiosamente está cercada a los costados, desconozco si la irán a pavimentar en el futuro, aunque curiosamente en el tramo donde se encuentra el condominio “Jardines de Bellavista II” sólo un carril está pavimentado (lo que es comprensible, ya que justo al lado está una de las partes del humedal Las Quemas).
Lo del nodo fue error mío a la hora de editar.
BrunoTDG0000000 (2025-04-20 22:48:54+00:00): Aclaro que también ví pasar algunos autos por ahí, supongo que si se puede ya que tampoco hay barricadas que indiquen lo contrario.
felipeeugenio (2025-04-20 23:50:20+00:00): ok, lo dejo habilitado entonces.
gracias
Jwilso (2025-04-21 15:08:46+00:00): i am not sure this is a residential road, it is listed as a footpath on the cheshire west and chester definitve map and has a footpath sign where it meets village lane. It seems to be a footpath where the first portion is used for access to grove house and the bungalow as well
Nathan_A_RF (2025-04-21 15:48:43+00:00): I just changed it from the obviously wrong tertiary, so feel free to change to something more appropriate. Service road perhaps?
Jwilso (2025-04-21 21:51:37+00:00): I think tertiary is more appropiate, the updated speed limits are appreciated! I will update now
Jwilso (2025-04-21 21:52:08+00:00): - i meant service not tertiary sorry
NorthCrab_upload (2025-04-20 20:41:17+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy. Nazwa nadawana jest automatycznie, na podstawie wartości brand. Opcjonalnie, numer identyfikacyjny może być przekazany w polu ref.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12770983810

Dokumentacja paczkomatów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
charles chilufya (2025-04-20 22:22:07+00:00): Check your spelling We can not have capital inside the string "PrIvate? tags are good in small letters.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165212098
gurglypipe (2025-04-20 22:27:46+00:00): What string are you referring to? I have no idea what you’re talking about, sorry.
Andrea Musuruane (2025-04-21 08:08:01+00:00): Ciao. Decathlon è già mappato. Tu hai inserito il tag addr:* e name su una telecamera di sicurezza. Converrai con me che la cosa non ha molto senso. Per favore, correggi. Grazie, Andrea
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165212422
Hufkratzer (2025-04-21 19:55:14+00:00): Hi,
you have removed building=yes from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1361161344 although this is probably a building. You have added leisure=horse_riding to it instead although this tag is not for buildings but for complete riding centres; maybe you should move this tag to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/296536235, compare
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/How_to_map_a#Riding_centre_(equestrian)
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/35225515 (example)
https://www.facebook.com/lowfoldequestriancentre/
kidneyspr (2025-04-27 21:49:02+00:00): ¿Qué fuente usas para asignar estas direcciones?

Los números de casa en la Calle Las Flores (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/22097181) no coinciden con los datos del CRIM. Además de no coincidir, ni siquiera siguen el mismo orden de enumeración. En esa misma calle creaste también algunos nodos donde no hay viviendas, según las imágenes de Bing.
streckenkundler (2025-04-20 21:27:15+00:00): ...das wollte ich so nicht... Fehlklick...

beabsichtigter Kommentar: fee=08:00-18:00 ergänzt.

beabsichtigte Quelle: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4719304
DD1GJ (2025-04-20 21:49:43+00:00): Hallo orfeltorfel,

ein interessanter Linienverlauf, aber im Gegensatz zu der Strecke von 1900 ist da absolut nichts mehr zu sehen. OpenStreetMap ist ein Projekt der Gegenwart und von historischen Dingen sollten noch gewisse Merkmale sichtbar sein. "Altlasten" wie diese erschweren die Pflege der aktuellen Daten. Verwende dafür bitte https://www.openhistoricalmap.org

Ich habe daher dien Änderungssatz zurückgesetzt

Viele Grüße, Joachim
mstrbrid (2025-05-03 13:14:06+00:00): Hi ndm, why have you split this building into 4? As far as I can see it's a single building with four units contained, so would be best retained as a single building with multiple entrances and the various businesses mapped to single nodes within the area of the building. If, in the future, someone updates a change to the building (e.g name=*), they'd now have to change all four instances instead of just the one.
ndm (2025-05-03 19:16:19+00:00): Thanks for explaining your mapping style.

I added 3 items to the map to improve it -- whilst retaining the 1 item that was previously mapped.

There are others that are equally valid.

I map the area that each business occupies (or the best approximation).
This has a number of advantages:
- it's easier to update than POIs
    - POIs are just some random location -- not even the centre of the item
    - it's more difficult to delete a POI, since you can never really be sure that it's really gone, or did you just miss surveying it.
- There is an intrinsic relationship that can be used to determine the importance (based on area) that can be used by renderers.

In this specific case, I expect the building units to have different numbers (at least). You's issue that changing > 1 item is difficult can be solved -- at least in JOSM, you just hold shift when selecting to have multiple objects.

So, I hope you can see why items have been mapped in this changeset.

If you still consider that there is a problem, then there is a third potential mechanism which is to use "indoor mapping" to map each business as a notional room inside the building. It means that the building can be one area, while business are areas internally. I find rendering isn't so great -- but it does keep the advantages of area mapping, together with the ultra-pure-semantic approach of keeping the building as a single entity.
mstrbrid (2025-05-06 11:38:11+00:00): Hi ndm, thanks for your explanation. It seems to me that you're conflating the physical occurrence of a structure (represented by building=*) with the activity / current use of the building. I don't think that it's a question of differing styles; the original proposal for the building=* tag clarifies this precise situation: see §Sub-divided buildings? in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Talk:Buildings. Here the distinct offices / shops can be mapped separately as office=* areas without a building=* tag. After your changes, by amending the  original building=* way to just represent the name=Civitanivi part, it reads as if the other 3 parts were demolished and reconstructed with only this part retained. The alternative of using the Simple 3D Buildings method (not indoor tagging) would still retain a way for the entire building with the role=outline.
felipeeugenio (2025-04-20 23:41:07+00:00): Hola Camilo. Si bien hay carteles que dicen "Local..." hace casi 10 años, la vedad es que no conozco z nadie que le diga así a la calle. (Vivo a unas cuadras se podría decir) además, en otras cuadras aparece sin el "Local.." Pienso que es mejor dejarlo como alt_name.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165213244
felipeeugenio (2025-04-20 23:46:17+00:00): Vi en Mapillary, y en otras esquinas está sin el "Local..."
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165213244
felipeeugenio (2025-04-20 23:14:55+00:00): Algo de esto existe realmente?
pitfire (2025-04-21 04:18:55+00:00): Hallo ocrho,
wurde der „Weg: 22764896“ so radikal geändert, dass es jetzt „unclassified „ rechtfertigt?
Von der Mozartstraße aus gib es Poller und ein motor_vehicle:conditional=no @ (Mo-Fr *)
traffic_sign=DE:260,1042-33[Mo-Fr *] 
und Zeichen 357-51
Sackgasse; für Fußgänger durchlässige.
Von der Blücherstraße aus ist es ein Gitterzaun mit Tor und einer separaten Fußgängerpassage.
Möglicherweise ist zur Erreichung Siedlungsziel (Sackgasse, Privatgrund, Schulgelände) highway=service die bessere Wahl. 
Gruß pitfire
ocrho (2025-04-21 09:18:58+00:00): Hallo pitfire, vielen Dank für den konstruktiven freundlichen Hinweis. Ich habe die Korrektur durchgeführt:

(1) Jetzt Tor als Feuerwehrzufahrt.
 
(2) Fußweg ergänzt Nicht-Hunde.

(3) Jetzt "Zufahrtsweg für Rettungskräfte": Durch Editor-
Bug wurde Zufahrtsweg nicht übernommen, habe da mehrfach hin- und hergewechselt zwischen verschiedenen Typen der Zufahrtswege und am Ende auf zwei Spuren ergänzt ohne zu bemerken, dass dann der Typ auf Nebenstraße wechselt).
yrtimiD (2025-04-22 12:16:10+00:00): ברוכים הבאים!
אז חסר לנו מיפוי של חנייה כאן?
עומר5544 (2025-04-22 12:43:10+00:00): הדרכים שהצעתי הם התוואי המעודכן של החנייה.
yrtimiD (2025-04-23 14:38:41+00:00): חנייה זה בדר כלל שטח ולא כביש ודורש סימון של חנייה
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Parking

אם מדובר על חנייה בצידי הכביש, אז תיוג כזה:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:parking%3Dstreet_side

לפי הסימון הנוכחי - יש סתם דרך.
עומר5544 (2025-04-23 15:26:57+00:00): שלום ותודה על הערתך.
הדרך שהוספתי אינה "סתם דרך", כלשונך, אלא מקטע מרוצף שנבנה כפתרון למצוקת החניות ומשמש כחניון.
yrtimiD (2025-04-24 13:50:34+00:00): הכוונה של הייתה שכול עוד אין תיוג של חנייה - זה רק כביש. 
העם השטח מלבני שאפשר לראות כאן זה החנייה המדוברת?
https://www.bing.com/maps?&cp=31.935734~34.89969&lvl=20.93&style=h&pi=0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027
עומר5544 (2025-04-24 20:58:44+00:00): תודה על ההסבר. 
בנוגע לשטח המלבני, אז לא. המקום עבר שינוי והוא כרגע נראה כמו כביש עם חניות משני הצדדים. אני מדבר גם על הכביש ששירטטתי במקום ה"מלבן" וגם על המקטע הארוך יותר שמקשר בין שבט אשר לשבט זבולון. שניהם בנויים ככביש, מרוצף עם חניות משני הצצדים. מטרת הכביש כולו הינה חנייה.