piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2023-11-15 22:43:30+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 144068452, 144068465, 144068484, 144068499, 144068507, 144068511, 144068519, 144068530, 144068540, 144068554, 144068561, 144068571, 144068577, 144068587, 144068596, 144068608, 144068613, 144068620, 144068637, 144068642, 144068648, 144068661, 144068670, 144068674, 144068685, 144068690, 144068694, 144068709, 144068717, 144068723, 144068749, 144068765, 144068778, 144068784, 144068794, 144068801, 144068810, 144068817, 144068827, 144068838, 144068848, 144068859, 144068871, 144068879, 144068885, 144068893, 144068907, 144068919, 144068931, 144068943, 144068952, 144068961, 144068968, 144068977, 144068987, 144068992, 144069000, 144069009, 144069016, 144069020, 144069029, 144069039, 144069047, 144069055.
emersonveenstra (2023-11-16 00:07:07+00:00): Hi,

Please make sure that your changeset comments are accurate, this changeset did not do anything related to sidewalks or residential zone footprints
Lejun (2023-11-17 12:30:51+00:00): Rarement vu des contributions aussi exhaustives, bienvenue sur OpenStreetMap ! Tu penses faire d'autres contributions à l'avenir ?
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-21 05:25:21+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15405
emersonveenstra (2023-11-16 12:50:02+00:00): Hi there,

could you please go back to the drive through lanes like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1223966454 and double check that they're all going in the right direction? Thanks!
seattlefyi (2023-11-16 00:06:46+00:00): Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the change! Upon review, not sure what your changeset comment means. Does that backyard building no longer exist, or was it drawn incorrectly? It looked pretty reasonable, though shifted.
seattlefyi (2023-11-16 00:08:00+00:00): The aerial imagery does look shifted from the data in this area, so if drawing new buildings or reviewing the existing ones, would suggest first aligning the imagery with the existing buildings ('B' button in the iD editor to open the panel, then dragging on the gray box at the bottom to align) so everything is at least consistent in the immediate area. Thanks!
woodpeck (2023-11-16 00:20:01+00:00): Hola kokoadict, in this changeset you have deleted something like 100 buildings. Checking aerial imagery it looks like the buildings are still there. Why did you delete them - have these buildings been destroyed?
kokoadict (2023-11-16 00:38:33+00:00): Hey, those buildings were wrong shaped, I remade it, should be up now
kokoadict (2023-11-16 00:39:31+00:00): I live in the area and im making a 3d view of the town, im using GIS in blender to do that, but i need the buildings to be made nice
kokoadict (2023-11-16 00:52:04+00:00): Also, there is no castle in "La redondela" that was prob a joke from someone
woodpeck (2023-11-16 01:09:23+00:00): Always good to include a comment about something like that in the changeset description so that people know it wasn't an accident ;)
kokoadict (2023-11-16 01:15:03+00:00): Oh, my bad, i was using JOSM and the comment section was totally passed by me, im sorry
jeslop (2023-11-16 12:56:44+00:00): Hola kokoadict. 

En esta edición te has cargado, entre otras cosas, un centro escolar. Por favor, en sucesivas ediciones procura tener un poco más de cuidado. Ya he recuperado el colegio.

Dale un vistazo a https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Gu%C3%ADa_de_principiantes

Y tienes una guía para empezar en https://learnosm.org/es/beginner/
citrula (2023-11-16 03:11:38+00:00): You can press "Q" in iD to square the corners of the buildings you are mapping. The building area should represent the footprint of the building rather than just the roof shape from aerial imagery.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144073333
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-29 17:22:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11353109560/history has bicycle_parking = stand that was added in this edit
bicycle_parking=stands was probably intended here, right? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:bicycle_parking

note that if we have a single stand it is still bicycle_parking=stands
Dimacn (2023-11-18 17:05:16+00:00): Вы удалили реально существующие здания и объекты. Вы использовали снимки Bing, которые довольно старые. Используйте снимки Esri, они новее и там эти здания есть.
Glassman (2023-11-16 22:16:00+00:00): #TIP: A tag describing the business is needed. If it is a gallery then tag it tourism=gallery. The wiki at wiki.openstreetmap.org can help find the right tag if it isn't a gallery. Let me know if you need help.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144075322
adiatmad (2024-02-27 06:19:40+00:00): Hi, just seeking clarification. What does the layer=* tag signify on the highway?

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1223991926
aharvey (2023-12-05 01:49:49+00:00): Thanks for using the abandoned tagging prefix along with access=no. I can see there has been a lot of edit warring going on here, with trails being added, deleted, re-added, re-deleted. By having the way exist in OSM and tagged in this way hopefully we can prevent the edit warring, and clearly document the current status of what actually exists, while preventing most maps misrepresenting the trail as open/available for use.
UndueMarmot (2023-11-16 03:03:49+00:00): To note, this is largely continuous with District 2 of the Bacoor City Council, with some exceptions.

Formerly "Bacoor East", D2 comprises Molino I-VII, and QR W/C/E, but also includes Mambog I-IV. (Mambog V was merged into II in the merger plebiscite.) My classmate from Mambog wouldn't consider himself as from Molino, unless he lived at the edge of the brgy boundary (Princeton Heights subd along Blvd).

Residents of eastern SN3 (Green Valley and neighboring subds) also put "Molino" in their addresses, but their City Councilors come from District 1.
橘ヒカリ (2023-11-17 15:28:33+00:00): railway=station 应该只是放在车站那个点上的。
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144075891
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2023-11-17 15:38:06+00:00): 寄，没注意到这个就没修
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/301638280/history
不过好在锅不在我
不过建议还是看一下，之前有maps.me团队的azakh-world把node都移除了放在面上了
https://osmcha.org/changesets/112142747/
期待回复
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2023-11-17 15:41:12+00:00): BTW, 北京在面要素上带地铁站标签的真不少
https://imgur.com/a/J8flmWM
可以查查看：
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Dyp
citrula (2023-11-16 19:41:09+00:00): Is the trail actually abandoned?
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-16 22:39:16+00:00): According to the property owner, there is no actual trail there, but people just cut through their private property. This then creates a very distinct track on Strava, which then leads other people to follow it! Hopefully, this will stop it.
citrula (2023-11-17 01:01:25+00:00): If you look at MassGIS 2021 imagery and 3DEP there is definitely a trail there. I don't think it's a good idea to use abandoned tag in this way when the trail is definitely still present. access=no or access=private on the trail should be sufficient. Almost all trails-oriented data consumers respect this thanks to work the trails working group has done over the past few years.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-17 03:20:22+00:00): Where are you seeing the path, thanks? I can see what may be a loop off the rail-trail to the North, which I believe may be public land? But I can't see anything off Pine St, or between the houses (48-76 Upland Rd) & the river, which is the private property in question?
citrula (2023-11-17 03:32:43+00:00): Yes, you are right about it only being visible on aerial in the north part due to tree cover. However, using 3DEP layer you can pretty clearly see that the trail continues.
https://imgur.com/a/ZCg82R6

For clarity, I have no problem with the trail having restrictive access tags as the landowner requested, I'm just not sure that adding lifecycle prefix to existing trails is the right solution here.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-18 03:51:29+00:00): OK! I thought that may have just been part of the riverbank? 

No, you're right in that as long as there is something there, that should be sufficient.
TomPar (2023-11-18 05:38:36+00:00): The town recently acquired land just NNE and designated conservation land.  See here: https://www.concordland.org/project/the-campaign-for-assabet-river-bluff/

This page, by the very well-respected local land trust, speaks of "A network of well-used neighborhood trails traverses the site and are now preserved and open to the public. The main trail along the top of the bluff affords lovely views of the river. This trail currently continues as an informal path on private property for 500 feet across four house lots and then meets the sidewalk at the Pine Street Bridge."

I added the new conservation parcel and trails on it.  The trails here, and on the private land are visible on lidar so people have been cutting through there for a long time.  Streetview does not show "no trespassing" signs on Pine St.  I hope to check out the new conservation land IRL soon.  If there is nothing posted on the private land, then I believe the access tags for the path on private land should be at least "permissive".

I saw the DWG ref number on the way.  How does one view that?  I'd like to see more information about what the landowner said.  Thanks.

See here too:
https://concordma.gov/2999/Assabet-River-Bluff
TomPar (2023-11-18 21:34:22+00:00): I walked this path today.  There is a clear path.  There are no "no trespassing" signs.  There are no barriers.  There are actually built steps, out of masonry blocks, from Pine Street to the trail.

https://i.postimg.cc/50kRtPFs/IMG-8720.jpg

If I didn't know about this thread, I would not have thought twice about mapping as a path on OSM.

I think until the landowner puts some signage up or other indication on the ground the trail should be mapped.
citrula (2023-11-18 23:16:02+00:00): Thank you for going out and surveying. I don't think that the DWG ticket/reference is publicly visible, so I will write the part that I know. I escalated to DWG after they had made numerous edits without responding or acknowledging my comment or those left by other people, and deleting the trail.
TomPar (2023-11-19 00:13:28+00:00): FYI this newly created wiki page is a helpful reference for future cases like this:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-19 04:34:06+00:00): Tom, thank you very much for all of that! It was put to me "somewhat" differently, so I guess that one of the neighbours may not be so enthusiastic about the project! The idea of having a public pathway crossing private property does bother me somewhat though?
TomPar (2023-11-19 04:46:49+00:00): You're welcome.  I'm not a lawyer but my understanding of trespass laws in Massachusetts is for unimproved and non-enclosed land, notice must be posted: a "no trespassing" sign, etc.

Regardless, this path clearly exists.  So it should at least be mapped with some kind of access tagging.  The wiki page I posted above succinctly captures the reasons why.

I'm sensitive to private property rights and map accordingly.  But again there is nothing posted.
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-20 01:47:50+00:00): Thanks again! I've now updated it via changeset #: 144228329 to a permissive, informal walkway.
citrula (2023-11-24 21:15:28+00:00): Our friend is back and has deleted the trail and stairs which are outside of the "Assabet River Bluff" area!
Fizzie-DWG (2023-11-25 01:39:50+00:00): Reverted!
Frédéric Brière (2023-11-19 17:34:26+00:00): En fait, c'est la portion au *sud* de Court, jusqu'à la Grenouillère, qui est accessible, mais seulement pour la circulation locale (et les camions pour la démolition de Webster).  Je vais donc faire un revert sur ce changeset.

(Je prévoyais justement aller tout vérifier sur place ces prochains jours, question de faire une dernière mise à jour avant l'ouverture.)
Frédéric Brière (2023-11-22 03:47:47+00:00): Pour l'info, j'ai découvert à ma grande surprise que la portion entre Queen-Victoria et Terrill était déjà ouverte à la circulation générale.  (On aurait pu croire que la Ville aurait pris soin d'en faire mention lors de son annonce.  M'enfin.)
Matt_ (2023-11-16 04:03:36+00:00): Please see: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/US_National_Inventory_of_Dams
pesticides (2023-11-16 04:48:55+00:00): The signs don't indicate where one greenway ends and the other begins, so I picked Delridge Way SW as the boundary since that's the road these greenways flank.
user_5359 (2023-11-16 08:06:01+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys). Please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org!
If you need help, You are welcome!
Aarogya Pandey (2024-05-27 15:14:50+00:00): Thank you for mapping. The mapping looks great and also the changeset comment. Happy Mapping. #OMGuru
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144078527
user_5359 (2023-11-16 07:38:53+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys). Please have a look on https://wiki.osm.org!
If you need help, You are welcome!
woodpeck (2023-11-16 08:43:29+00:00): Hello, yungsup, and welcome to OSM. When contributing, please use a changeset comment that humans can understand, rather than (just) "#WSPNZ23" which is a term known only to insiders. Also, you don't have to hit "save" for every building you draw; it is ok to save only once every 20 buildings or so. Finally, please don't give your buildings a name of "House" - just leave the name field blank. The fact that it is a house can be seen from the "building" tag.
silversurfer83 (2023-11-16 08:58:34+00:00): Moin :)

kleiner Hinweis zu den Parkplätzen:
idR ist es angebrachter den Betreiber in das Feld "operator=*" einzutragen. Wird auch von einigen Karten angezeigt, spätestens wenn der Parkplatz angeguckt wird. "name=*" ist meistens, gerade bei Kundenparkplätzen, nicht korrekt.

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144080818
luk323 (2023-11-17 08:41:56+00:00): Achso, okay, weil ich hatte den parkplatz von dem schon vorhandenen kopiert. Also name weg und operator: nahkauf und beim Restaurant auch operator=Restaurant Weserdampfschiff? Mfg
silversurfer83 (2023-11-17 09:04:36+00:00): So ist das üblich, ja. 

Namen findet man häufig an sogenannten Wanderparkplätzen.

Grüße
Silversurfer83
map per (2023-11-16 08:35:12+00:00): Hallo MWE69a,

wegen review_requested:
Bitte keine Adressen in etwas anderes umwandeln. Hier gibt es jetzt keinen Adresspunkt für die Hausnummer 6 mehr, sondern nur noch ein Restaurant. Bitte da einfach neben dem Adresspunkt eine neue Node für das Restaurant anlegen.

Danke und viele Grüße
map per
map per (2023-11-17 11:24:23+00:00): Danke für den Korrekturversuch, aber ich hatte das anders gemeint. Die Addresse und das Restaurant sollten als zwei verschiedene Nodes eingezeichnet werden. Hab das entsprechend korrigiert. Meine Änderung kannst du in (1) sehen.

(1) https://osmlab.github.io/changeset-map/#144109674
os-emmer (2023-12-21 20:00:33+00:00): Hallo AndySchulte,
du hast hier 3 Gebäude mit addr:country=SW eingetragen. War das absicht?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1134131827
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2992541929
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1224028476
AndySchulte (2023-12-22 05:50:56+00:00): Hallo os-emmer,
nein, SW war natürlich ein Versehen. 
Habe er mit Änderungssatz #145394207 korrigiert.

Danke dir für den Hinweis.

Gruß Andy
arjunaraoc (2024-01-03 10:52:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM.  Please visit  India page on OSM wiki (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India) and  join OSM India Telegram channel (https://t.me/OSMIndia).

Check my update for minor issues: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145833846

Happy mapping!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144082602
map per (2023-11-16 17:59:08+00:00): Hallo mhamad alrmee,

ein anderer Mapper und ich habe dir Nachrichten geschrieben und nie eine Antwort erhalten (vgl. (1)(2)). Falls du diese Nachricht liest bitte ich dich um eine Antwort, da das OpenStreetMap Projekt nur mit Zusammenarbeit funktioniert.

Ansonsten gehen ich davon aus, das die E-Mails nicht bei dir ankommen und werde in den nächsten tagen die Data Working Group (3) um Hilfe bitten.

Viele Grüße
map per


PS: Um die Chancen zu erhöhen, das du diese Nachricht liest sende ich sie doppelt, einmal als Kommentar zum Änderungssatz und ein mal als persönliche Nachricht.

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142028980
(2) https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142439636
(3) https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Data_working_group
citrula (2023-11-16 19:38:21+00:00): The description tag is not meant to be used as a place to advertise your business. Also, "Additional Phone numbers" is not a valid tag.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144082735
CloCkWeRX (2023-12-05 08:12:48+00:00): With https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1224030782 the road base is a bit more visible on esri
fortera_au (2023-12-05 08:14:58+00:00): I did notice that today funnily enough, looks fairly accurate at least.
eggie (2023-11-16 11:33:22+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
OSM FTW (2024-04-23 11:04:07+00:00): здравствуйте.
пожалуйста, не создавайте дубликаты фаст фуда с добавлением "Авто" к имени, просто добавляйте drive_through=yes к уже существующем точкам.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Один_объект_-_один_элемент_OSM
Константин Гам (2024-04-23 11:54:35+00:00): Здравствуйте!
Элементов два и точки две.
Часто меню разное, способы оплаты и пр.
Данное правило здесь не применимо, пожалуйста не удаляйте то, что вам не понятно
Srdjan023 (2023-11-17 15:14:20+00:00): Samo me znanima odakle ti izvor za ove podatke pošto ih unosiš dosta brzo.
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2023-11-16 08:24:31+00:00): 这个changeset是用来暴论的，实际编辑作用不大。
iandees (2023-11-16 16:43:21+00:00): Thanks for contribution! Your edits look great. Keep up the good work.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144083593
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-03-26 10:36:17+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11353588428/history has shop = skateboards that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
shop=skateboards ? What kind of shop, if any is here? Would shop=sports + sport=skateboard would be maybe a better tagging? See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:shop=sports and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:sport%3Dskateboard

Note that splitting categorisation into more general (shop=sports) and more detailed (sport=skateboard) makes easier to use OSM data.
dvdhoven (2023-11-19 12:43:22+00:00): Ik heb de parking weer terug gezet. Er staat al een node met amenity=marketplace midden op het plein.
Door jouw actie was de info marketplace dubbel en was de info parking verdwenen.
Nu is het vlak weer parking en voor de markt hebben we een node midden op het plein
NieWnen (2024-06-23 10:56:55+00:00): Dlaczego ciągle to zmieniasz? Było w porządku...

Proszę doczytaj wiki zanim ponownie to zmienisz: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery#Drogi_dla_pieszych_i_rower%C3%B3w
NorthCrab_upload (2023-11-16 08:50:31+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1224035438

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2023-11-16 08:50:30+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11353614301

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
user_11609320 (2023-11-17 00:47:34+00:00): Sorry, didn't mean to break the boundary. I was trying to delete the duplicate line
micheleOSM3 (2025-04-06 15:54:51+00:00): Why did you set the names on "way"? Are you aware that there are names on "relation"?
Klenje (2025-04-07 07:30:19+00:00): yes, well aware, did you check this changeset? 
Both of them are valid according to the wiki which is our reference
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:waterway

> The relation should obviously be tagged with name=*, as well as name:*=* for names in other languages. However, because not every renderer supports waterway relations, each waterway should also be tagged with the local name=*. Short segments may have different names (e.g. a section of rapids) or no name (if it passes through a lake), and these can be tagged accordingly. Also, the local name of the waterway may change as it passes through different countries or regions that speak different languages, in this case tagging each way with the local name becomes more important, and the relation should have an appropriate mutlilingual name.
micheleOSM3 (2025-04-07 07:58:49+00:00): You're right, the changeset is quite large and I wasn't very precise: I was referring to this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way
there are duplicate names that are already present here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2833805.
Regarding rivers, I almost never map them and therefore I have no experience, so I ask you, in the case in which the watercourse is very short (a few dozen km) does it make sense to duplicate the names on the ways? Isn't it more logical to set them on the relation?
micheleOSM3 (2025-04-07 08:00:22+00:00): sorry, this is the way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/211464367
Klenje (2025-04-07 12:50:06+00:00): yes I can see it, there is for sure duplication in this case. But names are special, this is also specifically called out in the wiki, name is the exception
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation
> Tags describing the collection as a whole should go only on the relation (e.g. wikidata=*, destination=*, ...), except for the name, if any, which should go in the relation members, too.
4004 (2023-11-18 23:26:01+00:00): здравствуйте, спасибо за правку.
если на одних снимках облачность - можно посмотреть другие снимки, в боковой панели справа. перерисовал.
Не понял только, где там Арпа протекает, будто просто по полю
trigpoint (2023-11-16 13:44:02+00:00): What is the source of this apparently remote edit?

Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2023-11-23 10:01:33+00:00): No response after a week so reverting this edit.
martianfreeloader (2024-03-09 22:24:13+00:00): Hi,
Just a reminder that foot=use_sidepath (+ sidewalk=separate) is preferred over foot=no on roads where you map the sidewalk separately.
map per (2024-02-02 21:38:04+00:00): Hallo MichealFS,

ich hab den doppelten TUM Shop wieder gelöscht, weil der hier (1) schon eingetragen ist.

Viele Grüße
map per

(1) https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10148921548
MichaelFS (2024-02-03 15:55:32+00:00): Ooops, danke für die Berichtigung und ein besonderer dank für die Info.
Viele Grüße
Michael
habi (2023-11-16 09:14:22+00:00): Cycleway removed because it's on the street, and should thus not be mapped separately.
Udarian (2023-11-17 22:48:17+00:00): 2 points here, first, please next time try to keep you commits in various areas local (restrained to one geographic area like a city or town) as to keep the geographic area down, this makes it easier to review. Also please next time provide a change set comment describing what was done in the commit, for more information see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments for more details.