piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
flohoff (2025-11-09 21:41:24+00:00): Moin,
nur so als hint. Das ist mitnichten eine "Vereinfachung". Wenn du mehrspurige Straßen mit einer durchgezogenen linie in der mitte zu einem weg machst musst du mit einem mal ganz viele "turn restrictions" verteilen deshalb würde ich das nicht machen.

Dazu - das ewige auftrennen und wieder zusammenführen bei jeder verkehrsinsel sieht nicht nur nicht schön aus - sondern ist einfach auch eine große quelle von Fehlern weil irgendwer dann den überblick verliert.

Insgesamt find ich die änderung nicht so gelungen.

Flo
Neo Hornberger (2025-11-10 11:51:42+00:00): Moin,
danke für Deinen Hinweis!

Ich sehe das aber leider nicht ganz so wie Du. Das Zusammenführen stellt die Realität besser dar, als es zwei verschiedene Wege tun. (Eine durchgezogene bzw. doppelte durchgezogene Linie stellt keine bauliche Trennung dar)
Zudem vereinfacht es auf jeden Fall die Erstellung/Bearbeitung von z.B. Bus-Linien oder anderen Routen-Relationen. (z.B.: bei einer der bearbeiteten Relationen fehlte der komplette südliche Teil der Fahrbahn)

Der Aussage, dass das Auftrennen und Zusammenführen an Verkehrsinseln "nicht schön aussieht", stimme ich weitestgehend zu. Aber Dein Argument, dass das eine große Fehlerquelle sein soll, kann ich leider nicht nachvollziehen. Den Überblick verliert man mMn eher an Kreuzungen, wie sie an der AS 24 Leverkusen-Zentrum zu sehen waren.

Für mich überwiegen hier ganz klar die Vorteile der Änderung, auch wenn Du anderer Meinung bist.


Neo
notmyproblem1 (2025-11-14 14:14:31+00:00): destinatiom or destination? please fix it =D
wildmaps (2025-11-16 09:32:17+00:00): Ahah, grazie l'ho corretto ;)
eggie (2025-11-10 08:33:21+00:00): Dag Tomas,
Je vraagt feedback. 
Lijkt me oke voor een gym 
locatie.
Gr eggie
aharvey (2025-11-10 02:28:12+00:00): hi, please see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property for why we don't delete roads on private property.

In this case I've updated the tags to mark it as a private driveway.
rskedgell_import (2025-11-09 20:44:12+00:00): * also includes London E15 and London E7
spiregrain (2025-11-14 11:57:18+00:00): It might be good to know when a top-level postcode is 'finished' so that missing UPRNs in that postcode can be hunted down.... is E15 'done' yet based on current map data and currently available UPRNs?
rskedgell (2025-11-14 21:34:13+00:00): That's a good idea. I'll add some sort of progress table to the import wiki page after I get back from SoTM.

After the import stage, I'm trying to fill in incomplete addresses for each sector. That's been done for all of E4, E6 and E7, plus E10 7, E17 5, E17 7 and E17 8 so far.
user_5359 (2025-11-10 07:51:42+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I assume you wanted to add your business to the address. Unfortunately, this was not successful, but important information is missing for correction. What type of business is it, and how can you be reached? Our wiki at https://wiki.osm.org explains the options available to you.
Fidelis Assis (2025-12-28 19:04:25+00:00): Boa tarde, iLeoww, tudo bem?

Restaurei a classificação do *nó representativo* da sede do distrito de Cajueiro para place=village porque, conforme a wiki (cf. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pt:Key:place) a classificação de *nós* representando povoados é feita de acordo com a população, não pelo nível hierárquico da administração. O nó não é o distrito mas a representação de sua sede. Já para as relações administrativas representando a *área* dos níveis  administrativos (país, estado, município, distrito, bairro) aí sim você pode colocar colocar, p. ex. place=district numa relação de distrito, place=municipality para município, etc.
Daan Beernaert (2026-05-11 13:12:01+00:00): Het is per definitie geen "autoweg" maar dat geldt eveneens voor vele andere wegen die wel als "trunk" worden aangeduid. Deze weg ligt echter dichter bij een autoweg dan vele andere waar wel "trunk" aan is toegewezen, namelijk verbod op fietsen en bromfietsen, het enige verschil met een autoweg is het toestaan van landbouwvoertuigen. Gezien de aard van de weg (snelheid tot 90kmpu, verbod op trage weggebruikers en de wegcategorie) lijkt mij de categorie "trunk" nog wel aangewezen.
Ardennen8 (2026-05-11 20:07:12+00:00): Een trunk in België gaat niet alleen maar over (een) autoweg(en), maar ook over alle soorten wegen met tenminste vier rijstroken waaronder twee rijstroken per rijrichting, gescheiden door een middenberm (anders dan door de wegmarkering).

Ik sprak hier in deze update over autoweg omdat het om een enkelbaanse weg ging.
Hugoren Martinako (2025-11-14 13:27:16+00:00): Revertido changeset xq introduce elementos duplicados
snikers89 (2025-11-12 09:04:13+00:00): Czy nie usuwasz zbyt dużo polnych dróg bez weryfikacji? Ze 2 tygodnie temu jechałem tą polną drogą, a widzę że właśnie ją usunąłeś. Całkiem ok była. https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/245481464

Wcześniej też widziałem, że jakieś polne usunięte, która normalnie istnieją.
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-11-11 02:46:22+00:00): Merhaba. Daha önce Atılım Üniversitesi düzenlemelerinizden birinin tartışma kısmında aşağıdaki bağlantıyı paylaşmıştım ama gözünüden kaçmış sanırım. OpenStreetMap'te yapılan düzenlemeler bazı uygulamalarda (veya openstreetmap.org'daki varsayılan harita katmanında(OSM Carto da bir render aracıdır) ))görünsün diye yapılmamalıdır. Önemli olan verilerin doğruluğudur. Verileri doğru eklediğiniz halde sizce "güzel görünmediğini" düşündüklerinizi, ilgili uygulamanın (veya render aracının) geliştiricilerine bildirmeniz gerekir.

OpenStreetMap'e katkı sağlarken önemli olan görünüm değil, verinin doğruluğudur. Lütfen bkz: 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Don%27t_tag_for_the_renderer
keyyushi (2025-11-14 20:43:28+00:00): HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi, değişikliği geri almamız gerekmiyor mu? Ayrıca kullanıcının diğer değişikliklerine de bakabilir misiniz? Biraz problemli gibi gözüküyor.
HaritaDuzenlemeHesabi (2025-11-17 03:58:00+00:00): @keyyushi. Merhaba. Değişiklik açıklamasına, görünüm için sildiğini yazsa da Anafartalar adında bir semtin varlığından şüphe ettiğim için değişikliği geri almadım. Çarşının ve caddenin adı olsa da bu bölge Anafartalar olarak anılıyor mu bilmiyorum. O yüzden place=quarter etiketli Anafartalar'ın silinmesi belki doğrudur diye bir şey yapmadım. Siz eminseniz geri alınabilir.
ggs290 (2025-11-10 13:19:50+00:00): las imagenes que has puesto no existen, puedes poner imagenes que si que existan o deshacer los cambios?
JassKurn (2025-11-11 14:29:10+00:00): HI've reverted this revert. I'm making contact with the Data Working Group about this subject.
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-11-19 05:28:17+00:00): So, according to this very database, these highways are tagged with "name=Old Highway 91." I've mentioned this multiple times before, but "Old Highway 91" sounds like something better suited for a ref tag, instead of a name tag. These highways were once part of U.S. Route 91, and there are many human-readable variations of that, such as "Old Highway 91," "Old US 91," "Old Route 91," and even "Old US Highway 91." All these human-induced tags can be simplified into a tag like `ref=US 91 Old` ("Old" is not quite the same as "Hist," like "US 66 Hist"). I would sort of count these as official designations, since they are signed as Old Highway 91.
Carnildo (2025-11-19 06:55:50+00:00): Looking at some intersections in Google Street View shows the green blade of a street name, not the square beehive of a numbered highway.  This leads me to believe that yes, this is a street named "Old Highway 91", and as such, putting the name into a "ref=" tag would be incorrect.

This is a very common pattern in the western United States: a highway or highway routing gets decommissioned and turned into an ordinary road with a name of "Old Whatever Highway".
Flap Slimy Outward (2025-11-19 19:10:03+00:00): This is Old 𝗨𝗦 Highway 91, not Old Utah State Route 91, so of course the number "91" won't appear inside a beehive shape. On the contrary, it also does not appear in a brown rectangle like Historic Route 66 does. I actually made a fork of AmericanaMap.org that colors "𝚄𝚂:𝚄𝚂:𝙾𝚕𝚍" Highways as green (consistency with sign blades). Again, "Old Highway 91" could refer to any old highway, so keeping that in 𝚗𝚊𝚖𝚎=* while not at least giving it 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝚛𝚎𝚏 tag could lead to ambiguity.
gurglypipe (2025-11-11 11:40:45+00:00): Hiya, when changing the alignment of geometry, please make sure to align the aerial imagery to the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels layer first. The aerial imagery has an offset from reality (due to how it is photographed) and this varies from -2 to +2m in both dimensions from town to town, or even across a town. So the aerial imagery by itself cannot be used as an accurate source of ground truth for geometry alignment. The Cadastral Parcels can, as they come from accurate GPS measurements from the Land Registry.

I’ve re-aligned a few things in Windermere accordingly.

Any questions, just ask :) Thanks
StC (2025-11-22 14:20:44+00:00): Bonjour,

êtes-vous francophone ? Dans le doute, je continue en anglais.

This changeset raises several points, among which:
 - the (longish) name improperly added to a path. Most paths have no name, it is the routes (in OSM, the relations) that have names.
 - the changeset has broken the continuity of the route relation, by adding a way at the end of the relation instead of at its rightful place. There exist means to avoid this, including ensuring that the relation is loaded in full in iD before editing it.
- as far as I can tell, the last person who edited the path that you now removed was... you 4 years ago :-)

I'll take care of fixing the route.
C-sinensis (2025-11-23 17:59:35+00:00): Bonjour,

oui je suis bien francophone !
Merci de vos commentaires.

- L'ancien tracé du GR situé trop en hauteur datait d'il y a bien longtemps. Il y a 4 ans j'avais dû essayé de le déplacer sans y parvenir (d'où le fait que j'ai été indiqué comme le dernier éditeur).

- Je ne sais pas bien éditer les "route relations" ; j'ai essayé de respecter ces "route relations" en les attribuants aux tracés déjà présents.
Les noms assez longs étaient déjà tels quels (j'ai essayé de bien conserver les noms "Tour du Parc National des Écris", "Les Gros Mollets", "Tour du Roussillon".

Merci d'avoir bien réparé la continuité des "route relations" ! Auriez-vous le lien d'une page web pour apprendre comment bien les éditer et respecter leur continuité dans iD?

Bien cordialement
StC (2025-11-24 13:09:12+00:00): J'ai posé la question d'un tutoriel, sur le groupe Plein Air (un canal dédié sur Matrix et sur Telegram). Jusqu'à présent, ce sont plutôt des séances de formation "par oral" qui ont été organisées. Mais j'ai récupéré les conseils suivants écrits par un contributeur très expérimenté :

Pour iD c'est :
- regarder si des itinéraires passent par un chemin
- charger intégralement la (les) relation(s) avant tout changement. 
- ne pas fusionner des ways parce que c'est "mieux'
- réfléchir avant de rallonger un way
- en cas de découpe de way est-ce la relation passe bien par les deux segments.
C-sinensis (2025-11-24 15:44:52+00:00): Merci !
Un tutoriel écrit serait en effet utile (français ou anglais).
La prochaine fois que je modifierai des relations, je demanderais à faire valider mes modifications, histoire d'être sûr de n'avoir pas fait de bêtise.
StC (2025-11-24 16:14:18+00:00): Hélas, le système de relecture n'est pas très utilisé je crains (il faut des volontaires pour aller regarder, et je ne crois pas que beaucoup d'entre nous le fasse). Le mieux est encore de venir sur le canal Plein Air (Matrix ou Telegram) et de demander de l'aide, ou bien sur le forum (mais c'est plus informel et convivial sur le canal).
C-sinensis (2025-11-25 13:28:49+00:00): Ok, merci !
SomeoneElse (2025-11-09 22:29:25+00:00): Also Leeman Road in York.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-11-26 07:15:31+00:00): DWG revert - uncertain information from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175140043
Markus366 (2025-11-10 11:38:23+00:00): Hallo.
Wäre zwar tatsächlich schön, wenn diese Wege konsistent Radwege wären. Sind sie aber leider nicht. Ausgeschildert als "normale Gehwege" mit geteilter Nutzung für Fußgänger und Radfahrer. 
Ich schlage vor, es bleibt beim vorherigen tagging .

Gruß Markus
jengelh (2025-11-10 12:02:33+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Bicycle/Radverkehrsanlagen_kartieren#highway=cycleway_und_highway=footway
Markus366 (2025-11-10 12:18:05+00:00): Und deswegen war der vorherige Ansatz  der Kartierung schlechter? 

Vielleicht missverstehen ich dich auch gerade. Ich lese gerne Quellen, aber du kannst auch gerne Kontext ergänzen.
jengelh (2025-11-10 13:25:30+00:00): Es war auf jeden Fall nicht mehr so recht konsistent mit der restlichen Wegstrecke.
Markus366 (2025-11-10 13:44:00+00:00): Da gebe ich dir Recht wenn es um den Weg parallel zur Bundesstraße geht.

Trifft zumindest nicht auf den Weg 26939442 zu.
 Da ist nun ein kleiner schmaler Fußweg mit erheblichen Sanierungsbedarf plötzlich ein Radweg geworden.
zuicz (2025-11-10 09:55:23+00:00): dlaczego?
user_22712836 (2025-11-11 07:53:17+00:00): ale to nie jest przedłużenie S86
pavvv (2025-11-12 14:05:41+00:00): Co prawda jest to najlepsza droga z Katowic na południe, ale może w tym miejscu lepiej jest dać tutaj primary, bo traktujemy konurbacje jako jedno. Więcej szczegółów napisałem na forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/stosowanie-tagu-highway-trunk-w-polsce/122106/1216
UserCurt (2025-11-09 22:25:22+00:00): New features in this changeset are offset by about (-0.36, 1.58) since I forgot to align aerial imagery before creating these new features.
citrula (2025-11-10 19:43:46+00:00): Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contribution. This looks like the name of the entire park rather than the individual playgrounds. On OSM, we try not to duplicate information across several objects - in this case, the name is already marked on the larger area for the whole park.
eggie (2025-11-10 08:16:46+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
muralito (2025-11-10 11:34:40+00:00): Mirá las cartas del Instituto Geografico... las puntas desde Piriapolis son Punta Fria, Punta Colorada y Punta Negra.
dpons (2025-11-12 12:18:28+00:00): Mirá las cartas náuticas de la época de Artigas hasta ahora. "punta colorada" es un nombre de fantasía creado por las inmobiliarias, porque desde tierra se ven piedras rojozas. Pero desde el mar se ve una muralla negra, de ahí su nombre. Y además la baliza se llama oficialmente de "punta negra". No sólo eso, lo que vulgarmente se llama "punta negra" en realidad se llama "punta rasa", debido a su falta de elevación. Y de paso, "punta fría" es "punta imán". Lo diga el IGM o no.  Recomiendo obtener en el SOHMA la carta: UY500032.000, desde Punta Rasa hasta Punta de los Burros.
muralito (2025-11-12 17:22:54+00:00): Gracias por la recomendacion. Según todos los criterios validos en OSM, esto se llama Punta Colorada, no es solo lo que diga el IGM, es lo que dice la gente, es el nombre común y por eso va en "name" que es el criterio aceptado en OSM.

Otros nombres alternativos pueden ir en "alt_name".
Hung Tran 9x0 (2025-12-05 09:19:46+00:00): do you know that part of the bride is completely blocked like how I edited?
Hung Tran 9x0 (2025-12-05 09:21:00+00:00): i guess you're not local
pepsi_max2k (2025-12-05 09:39:29+00:00): Ah sorry - I didn't directly change access, only permissions for motorbikes / motorcars / foot which were wrong in places (and corrected an issue with the sidewalk routing), but I think it automatically changed access tags too because of this. I've changed it back now.
Glassman (2025-11-11 00:48:45+00:00): Pierce County records still shows Elk Plain School of Choice at that location as well as the school's website. https://epsoc.bethelsd.org/welcome/welcome

So why the name change?

I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174438799
LateNightTone (2025-11-10 12:08:09+00:00): Hi kevinmcg, I've corrected one of your edits on Dargan Road, the Dale Farm building. You labelled this as shop=dairy, but while that's the activity of this company, the building is not a dairy. For clarity, the description of your tag is "A shop selling dairy products."

I've changed this to office=company, the description of which is "An office of a private company."

Please do reach out to me, I'd be happy to chat via the messaging system in the openstreetmaps editor – I'm an experienced mapper and can offer tips and advice to avoid adding incorrect information to the map. I have tried getting in touch previously, so you may already have messages waiting in your inbox.
TactfulAimAttention (2025-11-17 17:12:31+00:00): This data is accurate. Source: local knowledge.
user_5359 (2025-11-10 09:29:53+00:00): Hello! Waht is the mean of the tag https://www.geograph.org.uk/browse.php?form=simple&q=NO+90320+92092&go=Find&type=on = NO99SW0012 ?
tagishsimon (2025-11-17 11:45:20+00:00): It's the Aberdeenshire historic Environment Record reference ID - see https://online.aberdeenshire.gov.uk/smrpub/master/default.aspx?Authority=Aberdeenshire
user_5359 (2025-11-17 12:16:22+00:00): Did you mean the key https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ref%3AGB%3AHER%3AAberdeenshire ?
tagishsimon (2025-11-17 12:24:49+00:00): Well yes or no. I specified the URL of the search screen for Aberdeenshire HER; you've supplied the tagINFO page for the ref: on OSM. All that we need now is for someone to document the tag, which I may get around to doing. See also similar tags for Angus and Highland.
pwbriggs (2025-11-12 05:19:35+00:00): Thanks for the OpenStreetMap edit. We appreciate you adding this data.

However, are you sure that this is an automatic license place reader? It seems like it's just a normal city traffic monitoring camera. And, if it is, are you sure that this camera is manufactured by Flock Safety as you've indicated? I appreciate that Flock is the most well-known brand of ALPRs, but unless you're sure, it's better to not specify the manufacturer at all than to indicate an incorrect one.

Thanks again for your edit, though. What makes OpenStreetMap's data so rich is local community members like you who add information like this. Please reply on this changeset comment or send me a message at https://www.openstreetmap.org/messages/new/pwbriggs I look forward to helping get these edits ironed out so the cameras can be accurately available for map users.
Carlos206 (2025-11-12 05:30:27+00:00): Well as far as I know it’s a not a city run one and it is a Flock ALPR
pwbriggs (2025-11-13 01:35:24+00:00): Okay, thanks for confirming.
felipeeugenio (2025-11-10 11:40:54+00:00): Hola, agregaste valores de superficie en el tag de acceso, pero se entiende. Ya lo corregí. gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174439750
NorthCrab_upload (2025-11-10 00:12:31+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13293551978

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Arturo Francisco Barbero (2025-11-10 02:49:46+00:00): Iba a marcar como terminadas las obras del Paseo Santo Domingo de Guzmán, ¡y ya estaba hecho!

Muchísimas gracias
wireguy (2025-12-16 22:52:48+00:00): Phil, 
this seems to be a dup of https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9791559
jmapb (2026-01-26 15:52:25+00:00): Hi philpennmap, wireguy is correct here -- there was already a relation mapped for Liberty Island (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/9791559), so there's no need to create a new one. I reverted this changeset with changeset 177701290 and removed the new relation you added (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19815770).

It looks like you also created duplicate relations for Governors Island (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19815779) and Ellis Island (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19815764). These have been fixed too.

It's a good idea to use OSM's search function and the "query features" function (? symbol on the right of the map) to find what's already mapped, to avoid creating duplicates. And if you think you might have created other duplicates and need help fixing them, please let me know.

Thanks, jmapb
jmapb (2026-01-26 15:53:06+00:00): Hi philpennmap, I've reverted this changeset with changeset 177724792 -- there was already an existing relation for Governors Island (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2389631). Please see comments on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174440574

thanks, jmapb
qunsam (2025-11-10 05:41:24+00:00): I checked the intersection and there is no any flock camera there. there are only traffic sensors cameras which seems irrelevant to the flock node.
QuiLe (2025-11-10 01:05:51+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
literan (2025-11-10 18:34:50+00:00): дубль внесли
ika-chan! (2025-11-27 10:41:30+00:00): service=* are not supposed to be used on the main railway tracks. They are used for yards, crossovers and sidings only.
GanderPL (2025-11-10 06:07:42+00:00): Super! Ten park czekał na to od dawna 😁
Yukiro (2025-11-10 09:36:48+00:00): Spoko, jak jeszcze coś trzeba ogarnąć podobnego to mogę zrobić jak będzie czas
Kovoschiz (2025-11-10 08:39:08+00:00): If you think they are "private", you should remove the `name=` only. The graves still existing physically in reality.
Fizzie-DWG (2025-12-24 05:51:51+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised Editing & import

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176337780
LokNeko (2025-11-11 15:14:21+00:00): 想问下前山建材街的这栋建筑是打算拆除了吗，我看今年8月份的地图，他还在啊
Eric Sofen (2025-12-16 02:58:09+00:00): Hi Christian. I just reverted a portion of this change for two reasons:
1. The East Coast Greenway relation is a "super relation" made up of state-level relations, so the individual road/trail segments for the ECG in a given state should be part of (e.g.) East Coast Greenway (ME) rather than the super-relation. 
2. We (mostly me and ElliottPlack) try to keep the OSM route in-sync with map.greenway.org. Since construction isn't finished, this section hasn't been officially adopted yet. There's an OSM wiki page with details: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Bicycle_Networks/East_Coast_Greenway

-Eric
Baloo Uriza (2025-11-10 16:30:04+00:00): This camera location appears to be inside an IHOP.  This likely isn't right.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174442844
Baloo Uriza (2025-11-18 16:17:22+00:00): What's the correct location for this camera?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174442844
nevw (2025-11-10 04:14:25+00:00): Hi, street names are not abbreviated in osm.
eg Bosk St should be Bosk Street
fortera_au (2025-11-10 03:21:31+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 172078436, 172131769, 172201297, 172238114, 172369710, 172426600, 172484676, 172523621, 172545924, 172570520, 172595269, 172649057, 172705100, 172854576, 172879447, 173026377, 173150837, 173194718, 173219358, 173380374, 173522942, 173632517, 173724479, 173823975, 173833054, 173855380, 173899290, 173928728, 174026702, 174070407, 174108800, 174121592, 174135006, 174142117, 174145539, 174420977.
fortera_au (2025-11-10 04:12:00+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM. One tip, if you select a way and press Q in JOSM, iD and RapiD, it'll square off the item. Always a good idea to do this with buildings.

You've also got some buildings that don't match up to their footprint, I've seen one that's smaller than the building and one that's got an outdoor area as part of it, buildings should match the outline of the building based on where the walls are, excluding verandahs.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174443623
bounding_star (2025-11-10 05:09:37+00:00): Thanks, really appreciate the help!