piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Lelio Alves (2024-06-19 11:51:40+00:00): Good Job, Keep Mapping
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152880722
bxl-forever (2024-06-19 08:14:59+00:00): OK, merci.  Nous avons corrigé pour que cette parfumerie apparaisse correctement sur la carte.
Axelos (2024-06-19 18:31:52+00:00): Merci.

Cependant, la demande concernait la note et non le point d’intérêt.

En effet il s’agissait d’intégrer une information d’existence de photo dans la note présente sur openstreetmap.org, pour permettre aux contributeurs ne se rendant pas instinctivement sur le site amenagements-cyclables.fr, d’avoir cette information.

Axel.
UT93 (2024-09-23 18:38:18+00:00): In diesem Änderungssatz, hast du die Sitzbank https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5514435467 in ihrer Position verschoben und mit der Grenze zwischen Feusisberg und Einsiedeln "verklebt". Bist du dir denn da absolut sicher, dass diese Sitzgelegenheit in mitten der Grenze dieser beiden Bezirke angeordnet wurde, ja sogar, durch das Verkleben, "ein Teil davon ist"?
UT93 (2024-09-23 18:41:05+00:00): Des weiteren fällt auf, dass du auch den Baum https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3054898657 in seiner Position verschoben hast, an einen Ort, an welchem auf dem Luftbild gar kein Baum zu erkennen ist!
Thomaso58 (2024-09-24 06:01:12+00:00): Die Bank ist nicht mehr verklebt, und den Baum habe ich wieder dahin verschoben wo er mal war.
Das mit dem Verkleben ist mir schon mal passiert. Seither prüfe ich die Änderungssätze ob es da was gibt, was nicht plausibel ist. Allerdings hätte ich das mit der verklebten Bank nicht gesehen. Die ist für mich am gleichen Ort.  LG Thomas
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-06-21 23:02:48+00:00): Use conditional restrictions for temporary closures.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153011259
rskedgell (2025-01-08 08:10:01+00:00): Unfortunately, your edit effectively deleted Majestic by removing important tags like shop=alcohol and the brand tags. I have reinstated these.

Also, with regard to the the psychotherapist located within the same building, adding it as a separate node is sufficient. You do not also need to rename Majestic or combine their names. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element
franekzz (2025-01-08 09:50:54+00:00): The whole thing is wrong: It is not Majestic only The Highlands House. Majestic shop only is only on a small part of it. I would suggest to get to some agreement before starting changes again
rskedgell (2025-01-08 10:57:20+00:00): In which case, it would make more sense to move Majestic's tags to a separate node, remove all the business-specific tags from the building and add addr:housename=The Highlands House to it.
franekzz (2025-01-08 11:16:13+00:00): Indeed. Just the pins with business names and details.-
Tomas Straupis (2024-06-19 10:04:03+00:00): Na testas kaip ir pavyko - duomenys pakeisti, bet čia yra viešas ir visų naudojamas žemėlapis, todėl pakeitimą atšaukiau.
TrickyFoxy (2024-09-23 11:37:21+00:00): What is the source of your data?
surbhat (2024-09-23 11:58:16+00:00): Physical survey done by our company Geoid Consultancy Private Limited
Using DGPS/Total Station
Jordi MF (2024-06-19 19:36:31+00:00): Hola MaestroDash,

El elemento que está mapeado es el local fallero, no la obra artística, por lo tanto, no debe mapearse tourism=artwork.

Aunque no es fácil usar las etiquetas adecuadas, los usuarios de OSM decidimos que lo que mejor podía encajar para las asociaciones culturales falleras es office=association + association=falla.
MaestroDash (2024-06-20 08:06:11+00:00): Ah perfecto! Pensé que me había confundido cuando puse centro de eventos porque vi alguna falla que ponía obra artística o algo así, gracias!
Jordi MF (2024-06-20 12:39:01+00:00): Sí, porque en algunos lugares sí que se ha añadido la falla artística, la que solamente está 4 días expuesta. Alguno creemos que un elemento temporal como la falla artística (el monumento) no debería de mapearse, justamente, porque si ahora acudes a dicho lugar, no encontrarás ninguna falla.

Saludos
woodpeck (2024-06-19 11:10:32+00:00): Dear BC MAPANAN MITD OJT11, when uploading data to OSM, please specify a changeset comment as suggested by your editor, JOSM. For example, in this edit here you made changes to 10 parts of "Abano Street" but I have to analyse the history of the individual objects to see what you did. A good changeset comment would have been: "Fix maxspeed on Abano St" or so. See also: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
aseidel (2024-06-19 14:30:44+00:00): Liebe:r heinrichla,
bitte bei width=* noch die Maßeinheit entfernen (width=0.5 statt width=0.5 m).
Danke und herzliche Grüße
Antje Seidel
#lgmaps
user_17222985 (2024-06-19 08:44:37+00:00): ПЕРЕЙМЕНУВАННЯ https://www.nove.in.ua/perelik-pereymenovanykh-vulyts-ta-provulkiv-naselenykh-punktiv-blyzniukivskoi-selyshchnoi-terytorialnoi-hromady-lozivskoho-rayonu-kharkivskoi-oblasti/
miluethi (2024-06-19 22:40:55+00:00): Sofia,
Your building shapes are far bigger than the actual aerial imagery. I'm going to delete them.
Please narrow down your buildings to match exactly the satellite imagery. Thanks.
HBanu (2024-06-20 18:00:43+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152883236
SomeoneElse (2024-08-26 11:38:26+00:00): Hello what was the source of your change and removal of information from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/843077021/history here?
Best Regards,
Andy
OliveraM (2024-08-26 12:34:46+00:00): Hi SomeoneElse, 
Change of classification was made due to inconsistency in tagging. As you can see in history, https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/843077021 was classified as track, but smaller segment leading to the house https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/843077022/history was classified as service. Therefor a track was connecting an unclassified road with a service segment. Since this service segment leads only to a house and seems to be inside a private courtyard, it seemed logical to align classification. I've reached out to some users, and they were in agreement that classification should be service rather than track. 
Thanks,
Olivera
SomeoneElse (2024-08-26 14:38:24+00:00): The "service road" https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/843077022/history was added by an Amazon mapper using their piss-poor "AI".  As you can see from the imagery, that extra bit does not access a house but a field to the south of the farmyard.  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1192178580 looks like a (recent) residential property here; everything within https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/952668378 farm buildings.
bxl-forever (2024-06-19 12:16:10+00:00): Thanks for this.  Yes, the new address point was missing here.
opendcc (2024-06-25 12:14:11+00:00): Knoten in die Straße reingebaut?
Brandlingo (2024-06-25 13:42:48+00:00): Bezieht sich deine Frage auf den Hydranten? Ist ein Oberflur Hydrant im begrünten Seitenstreifen. Ähnlich diesem Exemplar https://www.ff-muehlhausen.de/oberflurhydrant.html
HBanu (2024-06-20 18:00:01+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152884490
SomeoneElse (2024-08-26 11:39:50+00:00): Hello,
What was the source of your change to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/269007903/history here?
Survey, or something else?
What is the access here?
Best Regards,
Andy
PulisakZ (2024-08-26 11:56:54+00:00): Hi Andy.

Source was OS OpenMap Local (October 2022). 


Best regards, 
Zvonko.
SomeoneElse (2024-08-26 14:41:26+00:00): I'm not sure you can use that to reliably distinguish between what in OSM would be called a track or a service road.  Compare https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#16/58.9754/-3.3498/2 and https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#16/58.9754/-3.3498/6 ,
Lelio Alves (2024-06-19 11:50:13+00:00): Good Job, Keep Mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152884582
miluethi (2024-06-24 12:57:22+00:00): Please square out your buildings. Thank you.
miluethi (2024-06-19 12:30:55+00:00): Ben,

Please don't connect buildings shapes to boundaries, highways and landuse=*.
Please square out all buildings.

Thanks.
miluethi (2024-06-19 22:42:27+00:00): Connie,
Your buildings shapes are far bigger than the satellite imagery. I'm going to delete them all.
adiatmad (2024-06-25 09:27:45+00:00): Hello, please square the building by pressing Q in iD Editor
(https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1293612493). Thanks!
NicaTopo (2024-06-26 12:38:31+00:00): Sankar,
Some of your building shapes are far bigger than the aerial imagery. Please match exactly the imagery.

Thank you.
gdt (2025-02-24 14:58:45+00:00): You marked a rite aid closed, but the walgreen's website says it is operating today.   Can you explain why you think there is no pharmacy?  Have you been there?   A note is open that says it has been renamed as walgreen's: https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4048634.

I'm going to retag as walgreen's, operating, but happy to discuss if you think reality is different.
user_21425661 (2025-02-24 18:03:36+00:00): Thanks for confirming my edit of closing Rite Aid.
user_21425661 (2025-02-24 18:04:36+00:00): Have you considered using some more standard tags such as
brand=Walgreens
brand:wikidata=Q1591889
name=Walgreens

You could also add the website so users can easily access up to date information about this POI.
website=https://www.walgreens.com/locator/walgreens-935+andover+st-tewksbury-ma-01876/id=17588
gdt (2025-02-24 18:10:34+00:00): What do you mean "'confirming my edit of closing riteaid"?  There was a merger/acquisition and it's normal for stores to get rebranded.  But perhaps it was announced that the location was permanently closed and then  later they changed their mind.
gdt (2025-02-24 18:12:35+00:00): Certainly the tagging for walgreens could be improved.    I'm not really local (same county, not near), so I was really focused on correcting the map data that said there wasn't  a pharmacy.    You've edited, and I'm guessing you are more local, so of course you should feel free to add more tags.
user0944 (2025-08-04 10:30:27+00:00): Added more info to Walgreens, along with additional brand tags.
user0944 (2025-08-04 10:30:37+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169946559
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-19 09:40:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11646540403

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
pitscheplatsch (2024-06-19 10:34:12+00:00): Hi Sai Ganesh1, welcome to OSM and thanks for your contributions!

I noticed something interesting in your recent edits, specifically with the names at this location: 
https://osm.org/node/11991702462

Some of the names appear a bit unusual. Could you share a bit about your sources for these names?

Thanks.
archie (2024-06-19 10:23:10+00:00): Grüzi Spüli, Hab vielen Dank für deine Beiträge! Bedenke doch, dass du den Bildhintergrund (Bing) vorher ordentlich eichen solltest. Bing hat einen nicht unerheblichen offset. Desshalb bitte nichts was schon eingezeichnet ist verschieben. Die von dir neu eingegebenen Objekte (vielen Dank!) können wir dann immer noch an die richtige Position verschieben. Blöd bloss wenn vorher richtig (oder einigermaßen richtig)  positionierte Wege/Straßen auf einmal einen offset bekommen. 
Danke für dein Verständnis!
Spüli (2024-06-19 10:28:21+00:00): Hallo! Ich nutze immer eigene GPX-Tracks zur Verifizierung. Mir ist durchaus klar, dass man mit den Bilddateien sehr vorsichtig sein muß. Daher habe ich vorhandene Wege nur verschoben, wenn ich das durch GPX oder Eindrücke vor Ort wirklich sicherstellen kann.
Gruß Ingo
archie (2024-06-19 10:47:33+00:00): Eine einmalige GPX-Spur gibt nicht viel her. Ausserdem hast du Gebäude mit dem gleichen offset eingezeichnet wie du die Strassen verschoben hast.
silversurfer83 (2024-06-19 15:35:25+00:00): Hallo und willkommen bei OSM :)

danke, dass du hilfst die Karte zu verbessern.

Der von dir gewählte Wert "reha-klinik" ist ein extrem unüblicher Wert für den Schlüssel "building" und wir vermutlich von keiner Auswertenden Software unterstützt. Ich kann nachvollziehen, dass "hospital" nicht der korrekte Wert für diese Klinik ist, reha-klinik ist aber vmtl. eine schlechtere Wahl.

Du kannst dich ja mal im Wiki unter https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:building umsehen, ob du etwas passendes findest.

Bei Fragen, immer raus damit
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152886166
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-19 09:50:23+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera nadmiarowe informacje. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Paczkomat nie powinien mieć nazwy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8736526675
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11533512483

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
miluethi (2024-06-19 11:57:06+00:00): Hi Oliver,

Please square out all your building shapes in OSM. 99% of all buildings are square.

Thank you for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
Lelio Alves (2024-06-19 11:48:11+00:00): Good Job, Keep Mapping
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152887103
DaanLT (2024-06-19 11:19:32+00:00): Pagal jų web psl ir foto, jie randasi ten kur aš pakoregavau o ne ties 38 namu tiesiai. Ten pastatai dar su pusiau požeminiu plotu nuo Viršuliškių g. pusės
Tomas Straupis (2024-06-19 11:30:25+00:00): A, ok :-) atsiprašau
alexnder (2024-06-19 10:23:30+00:00): De ce ai șters nodul 275223729 https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/275223729 ? Acolo sunt 2 stații de autobuz cu numele "Manolache"
tinncaal (2024-06-21 08:44:14+00:00): My bad! Am facut update si push
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-22 08:38:27+00:00): Вы прикрепили в качестве фотографии путь к файлу на своём диске. Его никто не откроет.
baprischka (2024-08-11 08:34:23+00:00): Bonjour,
J’ai supprimé ce point car le POI existe déjà ; il faut le modifier au lieu de le dupliquer (j’ai copié vos ajouts sur le point existant).
Deux remarques :
- On met uniquement le nom de l'enseigne, pas un titre promotionnel type « Opticien Paris 20 »
- contact:street ou addr:street contient uniquement le nom de la rue, pas le numéro
Patchanka (2024-06-19 17:58:09+00:00): 

Bonjour
Merci de corriger vos contributions avant des les envoyer une par une !

cf ces changesets :

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152888488

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152890131

et x autres...
Artur'In (2024-06-20 08:19:57+00:00): Bonjour Patchanka, les contributions sont réalisée par les clients en direct, d'où le 1 par 1. Nous fournissons juste l'outils permettant de simplifier la mise à jour. Cependant, il semble y avoir des problèmes de formatage de la part des clients. 
J'ai stoppé les mises à jour pour reprendre tous les changesets. Merci d'avance
Patchanka (2024-06-19 17:56:41+00:00): Bonjour
Merci de corriger vos contributions avant des les envoyer une par une !

cf ces changesets : 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152888488

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152890131
literan (2024-06-19 17:06:19+00:00): дубль ставите. Рядом уже отмечен
FelixNyaa (2024-06-19 18:57:15+00:00): 1. Где? По какому адресу?
2. Старый адрес неактуален, т.к. они переехали в связи с конфликтом собственника.
literan (2024-06-19 20:25:09+00:00): здесь же, в 10 метрах от того что вы добавили 

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10582960446/history
Patchanka (2024-06-19 17:45:42+00:00): Bonjour

merci de vérifier vos contributions avant de les envoyer. Il y a pas mal de choses qui ne vont pas : 
- contact:street : ne devrait pas contenir le numéro (qui devrait être dans contact:housenumber), qui plus est vous avez indiqué le numéro "-30"
- contact:twitter : ne devrait pas contenir la première partie cf wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:contact:*
- le name ne devrait pas contenir la description "courtier d'assurance" qui devrait être mis avec le tag dédié (à la place du office=compagny générique) et ne devrait probablement pas être tout en majuscules
- les horaires sont écrires de manière erronée par rapport aux recommandations du wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:opening_hours

Bref je ne vais pas recopier tout le wiki ici...
Merci de corriger vos contributions, surtout que ce n'est pas la première fois que cela vous est signalé.

merci d'avance
Artur'In (2024-06-20 07:33:08+00:00): Bonjour, 
Les modifications ont été réalisé directement par le propriétaire du bien.. 
Je re-stoppe les mises à jour pour comprendre ce qu'il se passe. 

Merci de vos commentaires !
nevw (2024-06-19 11:17:45+00:00): Hi, welcome to osm.
I reverted this edit because you appear to have shifted the culvert and stream unintentionally and am unsure what your intention was or how to fix it.
Can you zoom in closer and have another try and maybe leave the stream as is.
This displays your edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=152888533
nevw (2024-06-19 11:31:47+00:00): I had a closer look at the mapping as I am familiar with the area and saw the grassed easement area encroached the private property boundary so I went ahead and realigned it using the Esri imagery.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/241446936
If you clear the cache in your browser and check tomorrow you should see that it is correct now.
trial (2024-09-06 11:56:50+00:00): Bonjour, c'est quoi ce doublon ? C'est quoi ce nom fantaisiste ?
Dalsegno Alfine (2024-06-19 10:35:07+00:00): Based on local knowledge)
VRautenbach (2024-06-19 10:36:48+00:00): Remove some dirt paths that are not there anymore. 
Changed footpaths to golf cart paths where relevant
Added Entrance Gates
Updated classification according to https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/the-correct-use-of-highway-tags-in-residential-estates-and-complexes-in-rsa/106815/5
pitscheplatsch (2024-07-02 18:23:32+00:00): Partly reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/153447558
DD1GJ (2024-12-26 01:21:42+00:00): "Vergessene" Sperrung rückgängig gemacht.
gurglypipe (2024-06-19 10:44:16+00:00): Hiya, what was your intention with this edit? That footpath was already marked as a public footpath with the correct tagging (foot=designated and designation=public_footpath). foot=yes is less definitive than foot=designated. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom#Public_footpaths
Dan12345678 (2024-06-19 11:55:39+00:00): Hi there, apologies if that was the wrong thing to do. It's not possible to plan a hike on Komoot (which uses OSM) along this entire section and I can't figure out why. It's definitely a footpath on Ordnance Survey. I'm stumped. any suggestions? All the best!
JassKurn (2024-06-20 01:25:15+00:00): Hi Dan,

From experience I guessed the problem would be on a node along the way. Dragging end point of Komoot route along the footway confirmed that the issue was the tagging on the gates.

An error has been made and the gates have locked=yes. Which means no access through the gate.

I tried to create on Overpass search to show locked gates on public rights of way. But I wasn't up to the task.

The search below is a more basic and shows anything tagged locked=yes. So will help you find the locked gates.

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1N6A
gurglypipe (2024-06-20 09:26:11+00:00): Nice to know about that technique for debugging Komoot, thanks @JassKurn.

I’ve reverted the access changes as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152933272, since they made the access tagging less correct.

@Dan12345678 if you have walked this path recently then please edit the offending gates to mark them as locked=no, if that’s correct.

Looking at https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/262689051, up until version 6 it was tagged as a stile. I wonder if there’s a stile next to the gate, and routing a footpath over the stile would overcome the problems of the gate being tagged as locked=yes. Presumably it’s been tagged that way because it’s locked to vehicles.

The addition of locked=yes was made by a National Trust GIS officer. I’ll comment on their edit and query the locked=yes, because it might be part of a wider pattern of changes which stop Komoot from working in other places.
JassKurn (2024-06-21 16:38:21+00:00): I've gone back and had a look at his.
Found video of on YouTube that confirms we're dealing with gates that are not locked.

https://youtu.be/5N8bW8Tzi74?si=eFzh8OeIWIiNCFMR&t=56

(questions about observations of facts in youtube being an acceptable source)

I also managed to create an Overpass Query to show "locked=yes" on all PRoW designated ways.

https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Nb7

They problem tags mostly appear due to editing by the National Trust
gurglypipe (2024-06-21 16:45:09+00:00): Thanks! I’ve linked the NT to this on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150437359
NTTrailsLSE (2024-07-15 10:08:05+00:00): Hi all! Thanks for flagging. The edits on nodes 569708638 & 262689051 which mark them as 'locked=yes' were accidental and made as part of a large walking survey in Borrowdale. These edits have now been corrected after confirmation from the local ranger that these are not locked for pedestrian use - apologies if this created some temporary routing issues. I've noted this scenario as a case study to support our rangers with data capture in the future. Thanks again for verifying the edits - National Trust GIS Paths Team.
gurglypipe (2024-07-15 10:13:43+00:00): Thank you!

There are still 6 gates marked as locked=yes while being on a public footpath, in the query which JassKurn put together above (https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1Nb7). Would you be able to verify the status of those gates too please? They may also be causing routing issues.

For ease of future reference, those two nodes were fixed in:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153962947 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/153963166.
NTTrailsLSE (2024-07-15 12:01:52+00:00): I've updated the nodes in the above query based on images taken during our site survey in March. I will ask our local ranger to take a look and confirm the locked status remains the same on each of these. Thanks.
gurglypipe (2024-07-15 12:28:27+00:00): 👍
Piskvor (2024-06-19 12:09:14+00:00): Hola hola,
dávalo by smysl tohle tagovat i jako amenity=hunting_stand ?
ADAC Touristische InfoSysteme (2024-06-26 15:12:28+00:00): you changed a city into ab railway station, please revert
miluethi (2025-10-11 18:40:40+00:00): Building shapes far to big - 3x or 5x bigger than imagery. Please narrow shapes.
rskedgell (2024-06-19 12:42:08+00:00): All of these are at version 1, so they have been created (or re-created) rather than restored. This means the the entire edit history of these objects has been lost.

Please could you supply some information about the changeset(s) which deleted these objects. This changeset and the changesets which deleted the objects should be reverted.
InsertUser (2024-06-19 14:05:27+00:00): @rskedgell I have not checked any of the individual locations, but it was likely this DWG edit by woodpeck_repair:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152823382

Previous discussion: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152814713
rskedgell (2024-06-19 14:31:12+00:00): @InsertUser Thanks. I'll leave it in DWG's hands.
woodpeck (2024-06-19 14:41:28+00:00): Fedor Filimonov, you have not sufficiently explained the data source for these additions. In the changeset referenced above you admitted to copying the data from booking sites which would make it unsuitable for OSM. If you cannot show a legal source for these additions they will have to be removed again.