piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:03+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
pitscheplatsch (2025-03-13 12:51:45+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163048408
rskedgell (2025-02-27 12:00:42+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163009296
eggie (2025-02-27 08:02:28+00:00): Dag Thomas,

De vraag is of dit niet een oneigenlijke tag is om de routering te beïnvloeden. Dit gaat niet over bv een vast paaltje. 

Wellicht eens neuzen op het forum over dit onderwerp.

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/emergency-yes-op-wegen/125607

MVG
eggie
Donut Master 🍩 (2025-02-27 18:09:47+00:00): Hello!                                                  I see you removed my edit I made, let me explain. So the way I added, heads to Rruga Bedri Xhomo. The two way line starts from Rruga Koco Brisku and ends at Rruga Bedri Xhomo. I've seen it myself. I know my explanation can't be understood that well, but that's how the road works.
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:58+00:00): Hi CherrylM, and thank you for your contributions to the OSM project!

I've noticed that over the past few hours, you've made several changesets with comments that might be unclear, difficult to understand, or consistently repetitive.

For collaboration within the OSM community, it’s helpful to provide comments that explain the changes you’ve made. This helps others follow your work more easily. You can find some useful tips for writing clear and effective changeset comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks for your attention to this.

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

#ClearComments
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-27 19:39:50+00:00): Wow, what a creative use of hashtags! I almost thought I was reading a social media post instead of an OSM changeset comment. If only there were a way to explain what exactly was mapped or edited—imagine how much easier it would be for others to follow along. But hey, who needs clarity when you can have an alphabet soup of project codes, right?
</ironie>

#hotosm
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 14:23:44+00:00): I must now apologize retrospectively for my previous comment. It was sent too quickly by me out of emotion, without taking enough time to think it over. I would be glad if you continued to actively contribute to the OSM project. 

#HappyMapping
rskedgell (2025-03-29 14:44:38+00:00): Again, please don't map for the renderer.

Lanes, without physical separation other than paint, are mapped as tags on the same way.

Carriageways with physical separation are mapped as separate ways.

Please read the articles linked below. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Busmiles.uk
rskedgell (2025-03-29 16:54:44+00:00): I've repaired High Street. You can have little idea how bitterly I resent wasting my time fixing damaging edits like yours.
user_10412612 (2025-03-29 17:15:09+00:00): Are you always this moody? Maybe you need to seek some fucking therapy before lecturing me over a layover. Oh and touch some grass while you're in therapy I hear grass is good for you! Twat
rskedgell (2025-03-29 17:25:58+00:00): You have been asked repeatedly and politely not to map for the renderer, but persist in making exceptionally poor edits which damage the OSM database.

Thank you for confirming that you do actually read changeset comments and have simply ignored them out in the past.
user_10412612 (2025-03-29 20:41:47+00:00): I ignored them because it was mainly you throwing your toys out the pram over a road layout. Like boo hoo.
rskedgell (2025-03-29 21:02:13+00:00): The problem is that almost every edit you have made has been incorrect and has had to be corrected by other mappers. OpenStreetMap has data consumers other than Busmiles.uk users, who rely on the data being correct and usable.
rskedgell (2025-03-29 23:40:35+00:00): For additional context, concerns raised in December 2023:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145632324
rskedgell (2025-02-27 11:35:43+00:00): No it isn't. Reverted in order to repair the dragged node in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163008425
rskedgell (2025-02-27 11:31:19+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163008253
rskedgell (2025-02-27 11:31:01+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163008253
rskedgell (2025-02-27 11:30:45+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163008253
rskedgell (2025-02-27 08:43:02+00:00): Hi Wendy and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I note that you have added a lot of foot=no access restrictions with the changeset comment "cars only".

Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless exp[licitly prohibited.

I will revert all of your incorrect changes in order to prevent your misunderstanding of the law from corrupting pedestrian routing services.
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:26:41+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:27:05+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:27:24+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:28:05+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:28:25+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
BCNorwich (2025-02-27 09:10:41+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your tag foot=no on a footpath is not logical. If it's a footpath then foot access is surely allowed in some form.

I see you've added tags like this on many footpaths. Could you =please correct these anomalies? Need help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.
BCNorwich (2025-03-01 19:10:53+00:00): No response so reverted.
BCNorwich (2025-03-01 19:13:06+00:00): Reverted to allow access to path in park
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:04+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
Steven J Potts (2025-02-27 17:13:16+00:00): Hey, I shorten the business description to reduce spam triggers, etc.

If something else triggered the spam alert, please let me know, and I will update it.

My apologies. This was my first edit on OSM, so I am still learning. Thanks
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 14:50:44+00:00): Perfect. Thank you for your answer and your corrections!

#HappyMapping
BCNorwich (2025-03-01 19:15:21+00:00): remove foot=private
rskedgell (2025-02-27 10:00:43+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
rskedgell (2025-02-27 10:00:18+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect verifiable legal restrictions, which in the UK for foot=no requires a traffic order and a "pedestrians prohibited" sign (TSRGD diagram 625.1 - https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:UK_traffic_sign_625.1.svg ). There is no such thing as a "cars only restriction".

Pedestrians in the UK use highways by absolute right unless explicitly prohibited.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003949
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-07 06:13:43+00:00): DWG revert - poor quality mapping

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164617601
Herman Lee (2025-02-28 18:39:45+00:00): 暂时退回此修改集
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:57:08+00:00): Are you sure that you are not-conflating private ownership with a legal access prohibition for pedestrians here?

It is very unlikely that Strand Lane is "cars only" as there is no such restriction in the UK. It was already tagged motor_vehicle=private by another mapper.

As I have not been to Strand Lane since I was a student at KCL 30 years ago, I have added a note for someone to check this - https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4643776
GOwin (2025-02-28 03:59:59+00:00): Hello!

You might be interested to know that the pumping station building itself could be tagged as man_made=pumping_station, while the whole area representing the facility can be tagged as man_made=water_works
Ngawit Aman Daniw (2025-02-28 05:30:07+00:00): Thanks for the guidance, GOwin. I shall incorporate these suggestions on the entry.
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:30:38+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect legal restrictions, not matters of opinion.

Although walking along Blackfriars Underpass may not seem an attractive proposition, there are no signs explicitly prohibiting it and therefore no prohibition. Pedestrians are explicitly prohibited by signs at both ends of the Upper Thames Street tunnels, but not elsewhere on the A3211.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003434
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:14:31+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect legal restrictions, not matters of opinion.

Although walking along Blackfriars Underpass may not seem an attractive proposition, there are no signs explicitly prohibiting it and therefore no prohibition. Pedestrians are explicitly prohibited by signs at both ends of the Upper Thames Street tunnels, but not elsewhere on the A3211.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003434
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:14:08+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect legal restrictions, not matters of opinion.

Although walking along Blackfriars Underpass may not seem an attractive proposition, there are no signs explicitly prohibiting it and therefore no prohibition. Pedestrians are explicitly prohibited by signs at both ends of the Upper Thames Street tunnels, but not elsewhere on the A3211.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003434
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:13:46+00:00): Access restrictions in OpenStreetMap reflect legal restrictions, not matters of opinion.

Although walking along Blackfriars Underpass may not seem an attractive proposition, there are no signs explicitly prohibiting it and therefore no prohibition. Pedestrians are explicitly prohibited by signs at both ends of the Upper Thames Street tunnels, but not elsewhere on the A3211.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003434
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:00:33+00:00): There does not appear to be either a signed pedestrian prohibition here, or a gate. If the road is not a public highway (not maintainable at public expense), then ownership=private might apply - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:ownership%3Dprivate

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003055
rskedgell (2025-02-27 09:00:09+00:00): There does not appear to be either a signed pedestrian prohibition here, or a gate. If the road is not a public highway (not maintainable at public expense), then ownership=private might apply - see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:ownership%3Dprivate

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163003055
trigpoint (2025-03-03 21:40:43+00:00): Reverted in 163178856
trigpoint (2025-03-03 21:40:32+00:00): Reverted in 163178856
trigpoint (2025-03-03 21:40:18+00:00): Reverted in 163178856
trigpoint (2025-02-28 15:42:29+00:00): Hi Wendi
Phil from the Data Working Group here.
I am wondering what sources are you using for these edits?
Bessborough Gardens is a public park so tagging this path as private seems unlikely.
Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2025-03-03 21:40:09+00:00): Reverted in 163178856
rskedgell (2025-02-27 08:50:21+00:00): In what sense in Bessborough Gardens, which appears to be a public park operated by Westminster City Council, private?

https://www.westminster.gov.uk/parks-and-open-spaces/bessborough-gardens
trigpoint (2025-03-03 21:39:58+00:00): Reverted in 163178856
pitscheplatsch (2025-02-28 18:17:16+00:00): Is that #spam?
Mevess (2025-02-27 21:34:58+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour vos contributions !
Vous avez ajouté le tag amenity=parking au parking payant de la gare, mais avez aussi supprimé le précédent tag building=parking.
Les deux sont justes, le premier sert à identifier le parking en lui-même, et l'autre à renseigner le bâtiment
Bonne carto,
Mevess
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163001977
AntoineL29 (2025-03-03 09:07:18+00:00): Bonjour, merci de la précision.
UT93 (2025-11-19 16:00:28+00:00): Dem Weg https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/178267673 das "building=civic" zu entfernen, war wohl nicht gerade die beste Idee, da es grundsätzlich immer noch ein Gebäude ist. Meinst nicht, es wäre schlauer gewesen, die meisten deiner Änderungen, statt dem Gebäude, dem Areal zuzuweisen (welches du ja leider gelöscht hast!)
Nebenbei, was ist das für eine eigenartige Quellangabe, ein Jobinserat?
Fijord (2025-11-21 09:31:43+00:00): Vielen Dank für deine Information. Ich habe es wieder ergänzt.
Kann es sein, dass die Vorlage im JOSM es entfernt hat?
joost schouppe (2025-03-04 10:09:23+00:00): Ik heb deze even voor je gedelete:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1363277441
Je hebt hier wellicht willen tags copy-pasten maar in de plaats per ongeluk een stukje wegsegment gecopy-paste
NorthCrab_upload (2025-02-27 08:50:46+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nieprawidłowa wartość addr:postcode.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/729745051

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:06+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam
NeisRevert (2025-03-13 12:50:50+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/163569119
eggie (2025-02-27 09:16:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
feedback:
Probeer de wegen los te houden van de landuse. Plakken kun je voorkomen door de linker alttoets te gebruiken tijdens bewerken.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
sajadkavyar (2025-02-27 09:05:45+00:00): فوقالعادست کارش
دسمریزاد داره خدایی
sajadkavyar (2025-02-27 09:05:59+00:00): من که ازش راضیم
sajadkavyar (2025-02-27 09:06:17+00:00): حرفه ای حرفه ای خدایی
geisthugo123 (2025-03-24 00:03:36+00:00): Vielen Dank für den Edit.
Nehm am besten dann bei solchen Wegen auch grundlegend den access=no tag raus.
Mit der aktuellen Version verbietet der weg zum Beispiel noch Pferde und er wird auch auf der Standard Karten UI fälschlicherweise noch rosa dargestellt.
Dann kann man sich zudem auch die Tags bicycle=yes und foot=yes sparen.
vg
geisthugo123 (2025-03-24 00:09:55+00:00): Habe den Weg jetzt umgetaggt in
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164009728
geisthugo123 (2025-03-24 00:10:49+00:00): Auf jeden Fall vielen Dank für die access umtaggings, die du bisher gemacht hast. Leider ein sehr lästiges Altproblem in OSM
ayxis (2025-03-11 14:31:13+00:00): Hi m13-team!
Ich habe gesehen, dass du hier viele gute Änderungen an der Teststrecke vornimmst. Die "Autobahn" und "Bundesstraßen", die Audi hier gebaut hat, um Tests durchzuführen sind allerdings keine echten Autobahnen/Bundesstraßen und sollten entsprechend auch nicht so getaggt werden. Schau mal hier, wie andere Teststrecken bisher getaggt wurden:

Opels großes Testcenter: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6579082

Porsche: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/223723209

BMW: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29061556
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/115967924

Mercedes: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/36961269

VW: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/36961269

Der bisherige Konsens, bis auf wenige Ausnahmen, scheint highway=service zu sein. Wenn du findest, dass das Tagging mit service nicht den Ansprüchen genügt, kannst auch sehr gerne die Community unter https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de kontaktieren und eine Diskussion für ein neues Tagging anstoßen :)

Viele Grüße
ayxis
m13-team (2025-03-12 09:35:47+00:00): Hallo ayxis,

vielen Dank für die Rückmeldung. Ok, ich werde dies entsprechend berücksichtigen.

Kannst Du mir sagen, wann die eingepflegten Daten verfügbar sein werden? Verfügbar im Sinne von Apps, welche die Daten für das Geotagging verwenden, um beispielsweise Schadstellen exakt zu lokalisieren.

Wie würdest Du Fahrbahnen anlegen, wenn Du 6 Fahrspuren in eine Richtung hast (Einbahnstraße)? Eine Geospur mit 6 Fahrstreifen oder 6 einzelne Fahrstreifen?

Vielen Dank im Voraus.
Mit freundlichen Grüßen
M13
ayxis (2025-03-12 10:38:57+00:00): Hi M13,

die Datenbank in OSM ist sofort aktualisiert, sobald du eine Änderung machst. Damit deine Änderung in einer App ankommt muss der Betreiber der App den "neuen" Stand der OSM-Datenbank herunterladen und verarbeiten. Wann das passiert entscheidet der Betreiber der App. Am besten wendest du dich an den Support der entsprechenden App. Erfahrungsgemäß haben die meisten Apps eine Aktualisierungsrate von 1-2mal pro Woche.

Wenn Fahrspuren nicht baulich getrennt sind (Leitplanke, Graben, Grünfläche,...), wird die Fahrbahn als ein einziges Element erfasst. Eine Fahrbahn mit 6 Fahrspuren, die nicht baulich getrennt sind, wäre eine Linie mit dem Tag lanes=6. 
Hier findest du genauere Infos zur Erfassung von Fahrspuren:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:lanes

Bei Unsicherheiten und Fragen kannst du dich ansonsten auch jederzeit an das Forum wenden, da freuen sich immer alle über Neuzugänge :)
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/

Viele Grüße und happy mapping!
ayxis
Herman Lee (2025-02-28 18:39:50+00:00): 暂时退回此修改集
カシオペア (2025-02-27 14:03:52+00:00): Were these changes really necessary? I spent a lot of time making this area, and now all the detail is pretty much gone. Also what is the reason for deleting some of the forest areas?
wermak (2025-04-16 10:19:56+00:00): Hallo hadhuey,  

surface=concrete:lanes war schon immer tracktype=grade1, ist eine feste Fahrbahn, bei der in der Mitte ein Stück fehlt.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4690078

Schöne Grüße
ilias_ (2025-02-27 15:22:25+00:00): Hi Aya Samir, did you remove toll=yes from the Autoroute? It's a paid motorway, what made you change it?
Aya Samir (2025-03-02 09:46:29+00:00): Hi ilias_ ;
I removed the toll tag from some segments like:
way 486885259
way 154190805
and left it in some other segments like:
way 608738670
way 152576203
In the Autoroute according to Wiki OSM policy.
A toll tag is placed on the segments that are only crossed by payment at the gates.
Here is a link: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:toll
Regards
Aya Samir
ilias_ (2025-03-02 13:46:00+00:00): Hi Aya Samir,
I think you misunderstood the wiki page. This tag is used for any road that has no escape, and that is paid. It could be free to enter but then you HAVE to pay at one point (like way 486885259, which is free to enter but still HAS to be paid at the toll booth at node 1544967384). It could also be that you first go through the toll booth and then continue using it.

In any case, all motorways of Morocco are paid, except the one I know of which is the A3 autoroute, which is free to use (you can "escape" the payment) but only until this point: https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=16/33.39037/-7.61868).

It's better to revert your changesets on this Autoroute because now it looks like it's free to use, and it is not.
ilias_ (2025-03-02 14:28:17+00:00): An example of a paid autoroute you removed toll=yes from: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/163005340

Autoroute A1 from El Jadida to Casablanca is paid, there are toll booths at every interchange, and you CANNOT use it without paying at some point. You cannot escape the payment. That is what is meant by the wiki.
Aya Samir (2025-03-03 12:47:16+00:00): Hi, Ilias;
Thanks for sharing that with me,
I already left toll tag in all segments which are located in the actual tollbooth. to let users know that they must pay before crossing those segments like "way 152579349, way 1096502841, way 732809531, way 732809530, way 1095899102, way 1102855718"
Of course, if you have a different perspective or any suggestions, I’d appreciate hearing your thoughts!
Thanks again for your help.
Aya Samir
ilias_ (2025-03-03 17:50:48+00:00): Please take a look at this discussion: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/need-help-settling-disagreement-over-toll-yes/126826

Everyone agrees that any road for which a toll has to be paid has toll=yes. A toll has to be paid for the autoroute. Then it should include toll=yes, like it did for many years now. It's not only the small parts next to the toll booth, it's the whole road. And it's logical. Just ask yourself one question: do I *HAVE* to pay to be on this road and I can't escape the payment? If yes then toll=yes, if not then nothing.
Aya Samir (2025-03-04 10:14:10+00:00): Hi, Ilias;
Thanks for your contribution to Osm
We revert the toll tag in the autoroute, thanks again for your help.
regard
Aya Samir
NeisBot (2025-02-27 17:01:07+00:00): Hello, thank you for your contribution.

I noticed that some of the tags and descriptions you've used appear to be related to #SEO #spam. I recommend reading the following page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Spam

Could you please confirm if your map edits here were intentional?

#MapWithoutSpam #TagSmartNotSpam