piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MrMoehritz (2024-02-01 21:55:16+00:00): Hi MrShuzo, willkommen bei OSM. Schöner erster Edit!
danieldegroot2 (2023-09-17 12:35:22+00:00): Hey Nona,

What is the reason for removing this debris node? Here there does look to be some debris, and the imagery quality looks to be okay.
It also seems the road above it has been damaged as well.

As far as I understand you removed others because they were possibly based on bad imagery quality.

Regards,

Daniel
nona mostafa (2023-09-18 11:30:07+00:00): Hello danieldegroot2;
Thank you for reaching out, I used the latest image Maxar "SecureWatch Imagery 2023-09-13" to remove this barrier as it didn't appear now in the image.
Best regards
nona mostafa
felipeeugenio (2023-09-17 13:06:24+00:00): Hola. Estos cambios de nombres a las calles son en base a qué? Entendemos que a veces en la señalética de las calles está de una manera y los nombres que tenemos de la base del SII tienen otras, pero hay cambios que hizo que no son ni el uno ni el otro. A veces pasa, en el caso de calles con números, es que agregamos el disponible a nivel de cartelería y dejamos el resto como nombre alternativo (alt_name=), pero por favos no borrar nombres. En el SII su Calle Cuatro está como Cuatro en algunas ocasiones y Avenida Cuatro en otras. Y de lo que yo conozco de esa zona, hay varias calles que están con el numeral en los letreros. Solo para saber.
saludos
rhtb0 (2023-09-18 08:43:18+00:00): 이름 칸에는 해당 지물의 명칭만 적어 넣어야 합니다. 범주, 유형, 설명, 주소, 참고 사항과 같은 부가 정보를 포함해서는 안 됩니다.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Ko:%EC%9D%B4%EB%A6%84
user_21296759 (2024-04-11 08:58:58+00:00): Street name: "Avinguda de la Repúblia Catalana" don't exist!

The real name is: "Avinguda Joan Carles l"  you can chek in google maps
onion42 (2024-04-11 11:23:54+00:00): Hi Jared, and welcome to OSM! :)

I didn't change the name, you have to discuss it in this changeset with the user lanxana:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/138023352

If you click on "view history" at the bottom here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32470574
You get to this page where you can see who changed what:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32470574/history

Btw Google Maps is not a valid source, it is copyright protected and it can be outdated too.
user_21296759 (2024-04-11 11:46:34+00:00): Good morning,

I'm sorry for addressing the wrong person, but thank you very much for showing me how to do it, I'm still a bit lost hehe....

I have already written to "lanxana", waiting for him to correct it. 

I'm sorry for the inconvenience, 

Thank you very much,
olo81 (2023-12-22 23:08:58+00:00): nie rozdzielamy drogi w miejscu przejścia dla pieszych  z wyspą, dodajemy do takiego przejścia tagowanie 
crossing:island=yes

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:crossing:island
streckenkundler (2023-09-19 14:22:58+00:00): Hei,

Frage: wenn vom Knotenpunkt 40 ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4881717590) nach Süden zum Knotenpunkt 41 und Osten zum Knotenpunkt 45 die Straßenabschnitte echte Einbahnstaßen sind, wo verlaufen  denn da nun die Radrouten lang? Siehe https://www.knooppuntnet.nl/en/analysis/network/7801259/facts

Danke,

Sven
Nakaner (2023-09-24 14:49:37+00:00): Hallo Sven,

wo die Routen entlang gehen, kann ich dir nicht sagen. Ich bin nur mit einer Fahrraddemo von Wolfsburg nach Berlin durch den Ort durchgefahren und habe die Verkehrszeichen, die meine GoPro fotografierte, auf die OSM-Datenbank angewendet. Die Bilder habe ich soeben zu Mapillary hochgeladen und werden dort demnächst auftauchen.

Es ist nicht absehbar, wann ich jemals wieder dorthin komme.

Soll ich die Straßenverkehrsbehörde mal fragen, warum sie die Einbahnstraßen entgegen der VwV-StVO nicht freigibt? Das ist alles Zone 30 und deutlich breiter als erforderlich.

Viele Grüße

Michael
streckenkundler (2023-09-24 17:04:41+00:00): Hei,

Ja, das wäre nicht schlecht. Ich kann ja parallel eine Meldung bei https://maerker.brandenburg.de/bb machen....
Das beträfe nun auch Wusterhausen/ Dosse: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=916391272459508Das kleine quadratische Schild mit Radwegweisung steht so, als wenn da die "Neue Poststraße" auch entgegengesetzt zugelassen ist...

Sven
streckenkundler (2023-09-24 19:38:49+00:00): Hei,

also Meldungen von mehreren Seiten sind immer gut! Ich habe über https://maerker.brandenburg.de/bb eben bei beiden Stellen eine Meldung losgelassen...

Sven
CurlingMan13 (2023-09-18 22:04:30+00:00): 'This changeset has been reverted.  Access tags should be used instead.  Read why "private" ways won'"'"'t be deleted here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property'

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141443650
CurlingMan13 (2023-09-18 22:04:31+00:00): 'This changeset has been reverted.  Access tags should be used instead.  Read why "private" ways won'"'"'t be deleted here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property'

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141443650
CurlingMan13 (2023-09-18 22:04:32+00:00): 'This changeset has been reverted.  Access tags should be used instead.  Read why "private" ways won'"'"'t be deleted here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property'

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141443650
vojtechzaboril (2024-06-01 19:40:44+00:00): Is this a official street name?
xigoi (2024-06-01 20:38:15+00:00): I did find it weird, but it was on an official-looking street sign. Someone should check.
xigoi (2024-10-22 15:15:20+00:00): Here is a photo of the sign: https://iili.io/2KJbg3B.jpg
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-22 15:20:18+00:00): Thanks a lot, I have already seen it as well. Its not an official name, but sign is sign, so I will not change the name tag.
V
Carto'Cité (2023-12-28 17:21:50+00:00): Bonjour cavejlam,
Merci pour ta contribution sur les aménagements cyclables. J'ai procédé à une correction de connexion à ce niveau (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11197662655) car tu ne t'étais pas accroché au chemin mais à la limite administrative. Est-ce que tu rappelles quelle est la signalétique sur cette nouvelle piste ? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208482004
Si tu as la possibilité de prendre des photos des aménagements pour les mettre dans Panoramax c'est vraiment super pour les partager ensuite facilement et en discuter 😀
Je suis à ta disposition si tu as des questions.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
Carto'Cité (2023-12-29 12:34:32+00:00): Bonjour cavejlam,
Est-ce que tu peux me confirmer que sur le terrain tu as bien observé une signalétique qui permet de passer ce chemin en piste cyclable ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/32877102
Sur Mapillary et Panoramax on voyait qu'il s'agissait bien d'un track avant. Est-ce qu'il y a vraiment un panneau C113 ou B22a qui a été installé ? Si c'est le cas il vaut mieux le préciser pour lever le doute et sinon il ne faut pas décrire le chemin comme une piste cyclable. Je le repasse en track en attendant ton retour 🙂
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
cavejlam (2023-12-29 14:10:33+00:00): Hello Charles,
Je ne me souviens pas exactement de la signalétique apposée (c'est sûr qu'il y en a une, a priori C113 mais peut-être C115 à verifier), mais le chemin a été recouvert d'un enrobé clair, avec logos vélos, ligne axiale et barrières anti voitures. Le chemin a véritablement été transformé en piste cyclable, pensée comme telle.
Carto'Cité (2023-12-30 07:45:47+00:00): Bonjour cavejlam,
Merci beaucoup pour ton retour. Je vais modifier les informations.
La pratique est de mettre en cycleway presque uniquement quand il y a un panneau C115 ou B22a (certain cas avec une séparation évidente des piétons peut aussi permettre de mettre un way en cycleway). L'éditeur iD a tendance à inviter à mettre du cycleway un peu trop souvent. Si le chemin est en C113 par exemple ou s'il est utilisable pour les piétons, un path sera plus approprié et des tags complémentaires tels que bicycle=designated, etc. permettront de préciser les informations de terrain. Si le chemin est assez large pour le passage de véhicule et s'il n'y a pas de « barrière » fixe pour les emplècher de passer, la tendance est à utiliser des highway=service/unclassified qui correspondent mieux à la réalité et de les compléter en fonction de la signalétique (B7b, C113) par des motor_vehicle=no, etc.
N’hésite pas si tu as des informations pour compléter. J'ai complété plein de voies vertes autour et tu le verras peut-être, j'ai ajouté plein de lien vers les photos Panoramax qui montrent les panneaux.
Je reste à ta disposition si tu as la moindre question ou remarque 🙂
Charles
Carto'Cité (2023-12-30 11:02:56+00:00): Bonjour cavejlam,
Pour information j'ai fait quelques modifications suite à tes contributions sur les aménagements cyclables dans ce secteur :
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208483540#map=19/48.86497/2.64279
J'ai ajouté les traversées cyclables et des précisions sur le partage avec les piétons. Pour le partage avec les piétons il y a au même endroit plusieurs méthodes différentes pour le décrire : sur un way mutualisé ou sur des way différents.
J'ai aussi ajouté des informations de signalétique quand j'ai pu l'observer sur Mapillary ou Panoramax.
Si tu as la moindre question n'hésite pas.
J'en profite pour te dire que je pense que iD n'est pas très adapté pour contribuer sur des thématiques complexes comme aménagements cyclables et qu'il vaut vraiment mieux utiliser JOSM et le rendu vélo dans cette situation.
Charles de Carto’Cité pour #CartoVeloIdF
Alexey Vazhnov (2024-05-31 23:03:03+00:00): Why did you remove tag smoothness=excellent for https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/161533806 ?
Alexey Vazhnov (2024-05-31 23:09:26+00:00): I've restored it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152101310
Marathon~plwiki (2024-07-17 15:41:43+00:00): I didn't, the edit was done using StreetComplete and I had no idea it would remove the tag
eggie (2023-09-19 10:49:03+00:00): Dag Jos,

Editor maakt denk ik van access=no > access=yes  
Dat laatste heb ik verwijderd, want dat is default.
MVG
eggie
silversurfer83 (2023-09-20 12:45:59+00:00): Moin Geilo

du hast hier ohne Angabe von Quellen Objekte ins Feld gezeichnet. Mir scheint, dass andere Mapper das nicht korrekt fanden weshalb die Objekte schon wieder von der Karte verschwunden sind.
Was genau hast du hier vor?

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141381919
Patr1k_P (2024-01-07 12:30:56+00:00): neviem podla coho to kreslis, ale ked uvadzas zdroj zbgis, malo by to cca sediet s katastr. vrstvou, mas to vsak vsetko posunute, toto som videl u teba uz viackrat

https://ibb.co/3zmfxRm

https://ibb.co/Dfth1HR


https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208487966/history

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208487984/history
Patr1k_P (2024-01-07 12:34:55+00:00): mal by si to kreslit podla tych zltych ciar, vyzera ako keby si to robil len tak narychlo
vlakos555 (2024-01-07 15:27:12+00:00): neviem kde je chyba. Ja to mám presne podľa žltých čiar, ktoré mi zobrazí vrstva Kataster - parcely. Mám ju tak, ako mi ju nastavil pred 2. rokmi Dodko. Netreba urobiť nejakú aktualizáciu ? Môžem ti poslať PrtScr do emailu.
Patr1k_P (2024-01-07 18:15:33+00:00): no to prvé som opravil v mojej sade, tak ti teraz ukazuje presne ale to druhé je posunuté.. nie žiadna aktualizácia netreba
aTarom (2023-09-17 14:17:49+00:00): Hola Mikel_ast, gracias por editar, revisando posibles errores en el tag "addr:housenumber", me encuentro con
"addr:housenumber"="e/n"
en
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/290222817/history
y
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/333173256/history
se puede tratar de
"nohousenumber"="yes"?
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:nohousenumber
es para tenerlo en cuenta en siguientes revisiones, gracias de nuevo por participar, saludos.
Mikel_ast (2023-09-17 14:31:47+00:00): Sí es correcto, no me acordaba como se indicaba cuando un edificio no tiene número asignado. Perdona
aTarom (2023-09-17 14:41:45+00:00): Nada que perdonar, siempre se aprende algo nuevo, ahora ya sé que en Bable es "ensin númberu"
Gracies
Mikel_ast (2023-09-17 14:55:17+00:00): Mejor "asturiano", "bable" es despreciativo ;)
aTarom (2023-09-17 15:01:51+00:00): Ostras de eso no sabía nada, lo siento, otra cosa aprendida, lo vi en la wikipedia , leí en diagonal y no miré más en profundidad, gracies :)
empty_child (2023-09-17 20:13:09+00:00): Hello,
Please, don't name drinking fountain as Drinking water fountain. Tags says itself about the object
Pacha Tchernof (2023-09-17 20:37:23+00:00): Hello, thank you for letting me know and for the fix. The edit was made through the OrganicMaps app, which interface led me to enter something.
empty_child (2023-09-17 20:44:20+00:00): I haven't checked, but if you haven't heard about Every Door, it's time
https://every-door.app
It has also some Georgian POIs from iD (but sometimes with outdated metadata)
Pacha Tchernof (2023-09-17 20:50:47+00:00): Thanks for the recommendation.
Frans S (2023-09-24 14:46:49+00:00): Hello. Thaks for mapping.
You marked several buildings as construction. In fact, what you see are walled courtyards. Can be mapped and tagged as barrier=wall.
Best regards aand keep mapping
user_5359 (2023-09-17 15:07:34+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Is the whole building a parking area or only the roof? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dparking. If the building has been disturbed and a parking lot has been reestablished on the vacated space, then the other building information should also be deleted.
EllenPRN (2023-09-17 22:54:38+00:00): Oops, probably just the roof - thanks for checking. I'm new to OSM and was just trying things out, switched it back and I'll be more careful before making future changes. Thanks!
troglobiont (2023-09-18 09:41:03+00:00): Hallo Biedermann, 
dieser Weg ist noch in vielen Karten eingetragen (Kompass Karte, Basemap.at, https://maps.bev.gv.at/#/center/16.0171,47.5212/zoom/14.6 , etc)
Hier wäre es besser den Weg als abandoned:highway = path oder disused:highway = path zu markieren, anstatt ihn komplett zu löschen.
Damit wird er in keinen OSM-Karten mehr angedruckt und wird hoffentlich auch nicht für irgendwelche Routen verwendet, ist in der Datenbank aber noch als Linie mit der alten Beschreibung vorhanden. Sonst ist die Gefahr groß, dass Sofamapper den Weg wieder eintragen.
Biedermann (2023-09-18 11:05:35+00:00): O.k. Und wie kann ich das wieder rückgängig machen?
troglobiont (2023-09-18 13:10:15+00:00): http://revert.osmz.ru/
Nach dem Login musst du nur mehr die ID dieses Changesets ( 141384557 ) eingeben, dann macht er die Löschung rückgängig. Danach kannst du den Weg nochmal bearbeiten.
VA00 (2024-01-20 09:52:31+00:00): Skąd tu https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/29205885 zakaz jazdy rowerem?
CurlingMan13 (2023-09-18 22:15:17+00:00): I have already commented on multiple changesets regarding partially overlapping features, specifically the greens and fairways.  Please stop this practice.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141385764
qugeb (2024-06-16 07:59:14+00:00): Hallo, 
was für eine Art von Toilette ist denn das? Kann es sein, dass diese schon wieder weg ist? Siehe auch den Hinweis hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4230007
jaap de vries (2023-09-19 11:31:03+00:00): Je hebt de naam " de marlijn " toegevoegd voor het landgebruik. Op dit landgebruik landuse zijn 2 scholen en in bso actief. ik zal e.e.a. als lokaal bekende aanpassen.
Kogacarlo (2023-09-19 12:04:03+00:00): "Marlijn" is een naam en dient met een hoofdletter te worden geschreven.
Scout Jens (2025-06-19 09:10:19+00:00): die Postadresse von Unterstmatt ist 77815 Bühl
citrula (2023-09-18 21:17:15+00:00): Welcome to OSM!
Bart A (2023-10-06 18:51:35+00:00): Thanks very much! Excited to help out!
allen4names (2023-09-17 15:52:57+00:00): North Owen Avenue not North 20th Avenue.
Capello13 (2023-09-17 16:35:34+00:00): Bonjour,
Je pense qu'il est possible d'ajouter access=private qui est beaucoup plus utilisé que locked et sans doute mieux pris en compte par les algos de calcul d'itinéraires.
Xvtn (2023-12-14 15:50:54+00:00): Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your recent changes. Looks like someone fixed it already, but in the future it's best to avoid abbreviations in OSM tags, in addresses for example. I also added a more descriptive office=educational_institution tag. Thanks for your contributions!
eggie (2023-09-17 16:29:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 
Feedback.. Gebouwomtrekken krijgen geen adres. er zij al adresnodes.
MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-09-17 16:34:12+00:00): Het adres heb ik verwijderd.
MVG
eggie
literan (2023-09-18 17:28:41+00:00): поломал сразу кучу мультиполигонов этой правкой. Не надо так тяп-ляп править. Разбираться не буду, откачу все.
eggie (2023-09-17 16:35:23+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-09-17 16:38:06+00:00): Het adres heb ik aangevuld met de plaatsnaam
gr eggie
eggie (2023-09-17 16:31:57+00:00): Tip   Geef concreet aan wat je hebt aangepast.
MVG
eggie
JeroenHoek (2023-09-18 06:57:52+00:00): Deze parkeergarage is 's avonds en in het weekend toch publiek toegankelijk? Die access=customers op de ingang lijkt niet correct.
ottwiz (2023-09-17 18:40:55+00:00): OHH! Wrong changeset comment :) This is Dallas County, Arkansas, just i automatically chose I was mapping forest landcover
gscholz (2023-09-21 06:00:09+00:00): Hi one_half_3544,
this changeset has created several errors regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=78.24653&lat=42.37850&zoom=11&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=141389703

especially way 1159347521 seems to be affected here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1159347521#map=13/42.3597/78.2321

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
one_half_3544 (2023-09-21 11:35:26+00:00): Thanks for noticing! Way 1159347521 geometry was restored
gscholz (2023-09-23 09:11:30+00:00): Thanks for your quick response.
Guido
mohsen670 (2023-09-19 15:40:57+00:00): #Snapp missing roads
mtmail (2023-09-19 12:32:11+00:00): Can you check the house number of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208523108 ? There's is a house number in the addr:postcode field so unclear which of the two numbers is the correct one.
bdentremont (2023-09-19 23:05:01+00:00): Yes, the number in the postcode field was in fact the correct house number and is now fixed.

Good catch!
Pikse (2024-02-24 10:48:21+00:00): Why country border was separated from Gauja centerline here and in related changesets?

Country border no longer accurately follows the border provided on Estonian Land Board (Maa-amet) maps. In OSM editors you can check this using e.g. Maa-amet Basic Map, or the following custom imagery: http://tiles.maaamet.ee/tm/tms/1.0.0/kaart@GMC/{z}/{x}/{-y}.png

I didn't find the official border description at the moment but presumably the border is supposed to follow river centerline, and Maa-amet maps are correct. Last time that I check this in OSM, a year ago or so, river centerline along the border was also mapped fairly accurately.

I don't quite get what exactly was supposed to be improved here, and what sources did you use. In changeset tags above you refer to external map layers that don't even include the country border. It looks as if you used some outdated map for country border, which is especially evident around river meanders like the one in this location:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/#map=18/57.60102/26.27293
Pikse (2024-02-25 09:42:27+00:00): I now see you made the country border follow LGIA data, as shown e.g. here:
https://vietvardi.lgia.gov.lv/vv/mv_lgiamap5n?p_x=635898&p_y=386533&p_id=95586

Though, I would still consider it unlikely that the actual border is described as a set of coordinates that follow all these old river bends (their former shape) rather than it being described simply to follow the river centerline. Unless you have the exact border description in hand that suggests otherwise, I would consider the LGIA data outdated or less accurate, and I would restore the country border as provided on Maa-amet maps.

Also, as long as the border exactly follows the river centerline, I believe it is reasonable to keep this data conflated in OSM.
Pikse (2024-04-09 14:12:18+00:00): As there has been no response I went forward and restored country border along river centerline.
Treisijs (2024-05-31 12:40:38+00:00): Main stream of river changes over time. That means - river main flow is not same as border.
Treisijs (2024-05-31 12:45:50+00:00): There are cadastral map in Latvia, where can see actualy border line between countries. I create border from there.
Pikse (2024-06-01 16:40:34+00:00): If border is defined to follow the river, which is likely the case, then as river changes the border changes, too. This is reflected on maps by Maa-amet, also e.g. here: https://xgis.maaamet.ee/xgis2/page/link/xCT0U7DM

I see that LGIA distributes somewhat conflicting data but this data is likely oudated, as argued above. To be entirely sure we should check from official border description. Do you happen do know where to find it?
Treisijs (2024-09-04 16:00:12+00:00): If border is defined to follow the river, which is likely the case, then as river changes the border changes, too. {{need reference}} Then I can take a shovel and artificially change the flow of the river, but that certainly doesn't mean the country border automatically changes either.
Pikse (2024-09-09 08:49:15+00:00): Well, this "take a shovel" scenario is only theoretical, and if parties signing a boundary treaty use natural objects to define the border then they probably do so in good faith that neither party takes a shovel later on.

It definitely isn't uncommon to use natural objects when defining borders. E.g. the border (temporary control line) between Estonia and Russia is defined by two types of border sections: orographic sections that are defined by natural objects, and cartographic sections that are defined by coordinates[1].

I still haven't found the document that includes the exact description of Estonia-Latvia border, but I did find a treaty between Estonia and Latvia declaring that "in boundary bodies of water the country border will be defined along their centerline (along the main fairway)"[2].

As for our contradicting map sources, it's fairly easy to come up with a probable explanation on why LGIA data deviates from the actual border, as outlined above. If on the other hand Maa-amet data was inaccurate then how do you explain this? Current Maa-amet data corresponds to this treaty quote.

[1] https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/113012015015
[2] https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/13061244
Hufkratzer (2023-09-17 23:04:36+00:00): Hi,
du hast https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208526583 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1208526584
als Reitanlagen (leisure=horse_riding) getaggt; aber im Luftbild sehen die eher wie Reitplätze aus (welche wahrscheinlich beide zu einer Reitanlage gehören);  vgl. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:leisure=horse_riding und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/157997673
Reitplätze werden normalerweise mit leisure=pitch + sport=equestrian getaggt; das kann man in JOSM mit dem Preset für sport=equestrian machen.
kintetsu (2023-10-02 09:18:42+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, wieder etwas gelernt ;-)
kam leider erst heute dazu, das zu ändern.
christian26 (2023-11-05 11:55:02+00:00): Este es un barrio nuevo
Sandal man (2023-09-19 04:52:09+00:00): Hello,
Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing :-)
But please make smalle change sets, this helps others in tracking changes. 
Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset

Thank you.