piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2026-03-16 17:24:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/8805840012 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Real estate office"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-24 17:33:51+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/180061690
NeisBot (2026-03-16 17:24:40+00:00): Welcome, and thanks for your edits!

I noticed a few unintended crossings between roads and/or between roads and buildings in this changeset. This usually happens when geometry snaps incorrectly. Additionally, changes to tagging (e.g. modifying highway types or adding tags) can lead to unexpected crossings being detected afterwards.

In total, I detected 14 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/108193719 v1 | 8 crossings
https://osm.org/way/108193705 v1 | 6 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/1241659869 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179963221
bxl-forever (2026-03-18 02:12:38+00:00): @NeisBot: This is a new user’s mistake, I reverted the faulty part and restored node 1241659869 to its former location.

@Léna-Monpays: Ne vous inquiétez pas du message de NeisBot, qui est un message d'alerte automatique qui vous signale une petite erreur de manipulation lorsque vous avez édité la carte.  Rien de grave, j'ai pu corriger immédiatement.  J’ai regardé vos autres contributions pour y corriger ce qu'il fallait.  Bonne continuation pour vos futures éditions !
pitscheplatsch (2026-03-18 06:36:52+00:00): Thanks @bxl-forever

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179976284
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:10:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 183960779 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
NeisBot (2026-03-16 17:33:53+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/128290597 v13

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Brewery building"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-24 23:33:04+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180380746
(Restore previous tags. No changes)
NeisBot (2026-03-16 17:33:55+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/11015260905 v6

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Dental practice"

#MapWithoutSpam
MappingMore (2026-03-22 02:31:21+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180232285
pitscheplatsch (2026-03-22 06:58:33+00:00): @MappingMore Thanks for fixing the mentioned issue and for commenting here.

Would it be possible to add a direct link to the changeset instead of only the raw changeset ID? Something like https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/180232285 would be very helpful.

Thanks!
Sylabowy Kot (2026-03-16 17:36:33+00:00): + mikromapowanie garaży

Budynki są źle zmapowane - pełno dziwnych ścieżek przechodzących przez budynki. Do oddzielnej weryfikacji.
fortera_au (2026-03-16 23:34:19+00:00): Hi, the farmland landuses you've drawn don't match up to the actual farmland boundaries, and the house is both traced wrong and has way too many nodes.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179963939
MappingMore (2026-03-17 10:56:37+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:179999246; 179999473
ilias_ (2026-03-16 19:59:03+00:00): please separate changes in north korea and those in algeria
unknown246 (2026-03-16 17:51:38+00:00): Changeset 178160938 was reverted. Ignore above comment.
eggie (2026-03-16 19:10:11+00:00): Beste herbinator.. Hoe kan een adres op deze locatie opeens veranderen.
Truc is om de adresnode te ontdoen van de bedrijfsinfo en dan bij te taggen of te kopiëren op de nieuw locatie.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-03-16 19:15:22+00:00): Het museum verplaatst.
Op dat adres zit nog een fysio. Zit die er nog?

MVG
eggie
herbinator (2026-03-17 10:56:12+00:00): Ah sorry ik dacht dat na de adres wijziging het ding zou worden verplaatst. Werkt blijkbaar niet zo of in iedergeval niet via app.organicmaps.
herbinator (2026-03-17 10:58:29+00:00): Ja de fysio zit er ook nog
eggie (2026-03-17 11:58:48+00:00): Oke duidelijk.. Nee.. zo'n museum floept niet naar een andere locatie. 😀

Het zou best in te bouwen zijn, maar zover is het nog niet.
MappingMore (2026-03-18 13:49:46+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180060735
ZioDragon (2026-03-19 19:34:09+00:00): Vui lòng sửa tuyến bus, hiện tại nó đã bị lỗi
MappingMore (2026-03-18 17:28:52+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:180071519
gendy54 (2026-04-28 21:32:18+00:00): Bonjour,
Je me permets une remarque car j'ai déjà modifié à 2 reprises un poste de police municipale que vous aviez remodifié en gendarmerie alors que le poste de gendarmerie est déjà cartographié à côté.
Il s'agit du node 2621568185
Lisapple (2026-04-30 17:42:36+00:00): Merci pour cette remarque. Effectivement, c'est de ma faute, j'ai confondu la police municipale et la gendarmerie à cause de la proximité entre les deux.
Ça n'explique pour autant pas que j'ai confondu deux fois en deux mois (connaissant aussi bien Jard sur Mer), je ferai donc plus attention !
Cordialement.
Glassman (2026-03-17 01:55:24+00:00): Where did you find the mail drop box ref number?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179964932
molinamos (2026-03-17 03:18:30+00:00): I saw it on the mailbox as the "location number". I add a picture for reference. Is that the right thing to use for the id?

https://imgur.com/a/TcKMPXY
Glassman (2026-03-17 16:50:10+00:00): I've never looked that close before. thanks for pointing it out.
rarad74 (2026-03-16 19:22:43+00:00): Alooooo!!! Ti-am mai scris si in alta editare. Nu mai folosi imaginile BING ca sunt foarte vechi si nu mai reprezinta actualitatea din teren. Nu mai desena petice de teren arabil ca nu o sa mai fie in acelasi perimetru si forma de la an la an. Se modifica. Nu mai sterge tag-urile de pe delimitarea administrativa a localitatilor, ca nu o sa mai gasesti localitatea la cautare cum ai facut la Merenii de Jos si ai lasat doar poligon ca AREA .
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:00:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183960337, 183960380, 183960341, 183960408, 183960275, 183960389, 183960221, 183960319, 183960306, 183960280, 183960292, 183960414, 183960349, 183960228, 183960252, 183960358, 183960240, 183960299, 183960267, 183960399, 183960370, 183960328, 183960364 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
woodpeck_repair (2026-06-11 09:02:15+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 183960337, 183960380, 183960341, 183960408, 183960275, 183960389, 183960221, 183960319, 183960306, 183960280, 183960292, 183960414, 183960349, 183960228, 183960252, 183960358, 183960240, 183960299, 183960267, 183960399, 183960370, 183960328, 183960364 where the changeset comment is: revert low-quality AI building imports
MappingMore (2026-03-19 00:50:37+00:00): Partially Revert of 179882859
AndyB_66 (2026-03-16 19:52:40+00:00): Zestawy zmian należy opisywać - zgodnie z zasadami: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
AndyB_66 (2026-03-16 19:52:06+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments
eggie (2026-03-16 19:05:52+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 (2026-03-16 19:08:03+00:00): fixed format openingstijden
NeisBot (2026-03-16 18:42:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13602977708 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Bar and grill"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-24 23:33:07+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/180380749
(Restore previous tags. No changes)
Jean-Louis Stanus (2026-03-26 15:18:44+00:00): Ce chemin est visible dans le Projet de Cartographie Continue (PICC) de la région wallonne. Privé certainement.
Avez-vous vérifié qu'il s'agit d'un fond de jardin?
https://geoportail.wallonie.be/walonmap#SHARE=D282AFA167EF487FA4F350BB612E787C
maro21 (2026-03-16 19:00:06+00:00): Co było w niej nieprawidłowego?
dzamper (2026-03-16 20:18:46+00:00): nawet jeśli edycja była nieprawidłowa, to podejrzewam że niestety nie było próby kontaktu z osobą której edycja została wycofana :(
maro21 (2026-03-18 20:22:33+00:00): W edycji były edytowane dwa obiekty: przeciągnięty przypadkiem węzeł - może zdarzyć się każdemu, częściej początkującym. Druga edycja to dodanie nawierzchni drodze, która nie budzi wątpliwości. Byłem w trakcie naprawy przeciągniętego węzła i natrafiłem na konflikt edycji. Wystarczyło przywrocić węzeł, a nie cofać całość.
iandees (2026-03-17 04:24:19+00:00): Hello! I noticed that nodes https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12526374426, https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8493184200 were moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of the map.

I moved things back to where they were before in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179980091, so no harm done!

To avoid this in the future:
- Try to click on an empty part of the map when you want to move around
- If you see a point move by mistake, press Ctrl+Z (or Cmd+Z on Mac) to undo it

Happy mapping!
Jarek 🚲 (2026-05-26 00:12:31+00:00): Hey, just a heads up that setting access=no and bicycle=designated (I think with the "bicycle path" setting in iD?) like you did on the Gordie Howe Bridge MUP (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1213883004) results in it being tagged as open to cyclists (because the more specific bicycle tag overrides the access=no tag).

As a result OSM will currently route bicycles and pedestrians across the bridge which is not yet open, see for example https://www.openstreetmap.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_foot&route=42.284294%2C-83.086563%3B42.30932%2C-83.09722 . Any app that depends on OSM data to do routing will do the same.

I have added a barrier on the Canadian side https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13879289652 that will hopefully stop it for now once the routing updates, but something to keep in mind for the future!
Windsor Essex Strong Towns (2026-05-27 15:45:26+00:00): Thank you for the comment! Thats a great idea thank you! I haven't done much detailed editing in sandwhich yet but eventually I will go over the town in detail to clean it up and get everything to current OSM standards. I think what you did is perfect until the bridge opens up.
Jacksonville (2026-03-25 23:29:20+00:00): Hi Armnzahid! I have noticed your recent contributions to OSM. I wanted to let you know that the name parameter should have the Urdu name, and the English name should only be under the name:en parameter. Please feel free to reach out to me for any information.

KInd regards!
bartgron (2026-03-17 09:12:24+00:00): Zestaw zmian jest nieprawidłowy i został wycofany.
Pozdrawiam
lkmn (2026-03-17 09:58:52+00:00): Co zrobiłem źle?

Tej restauracji tam fizycznie nie ma, jest puste pole
bartgron (2026-03-17 17:15:40+00:00): W takim wypadku należy spojrzeć czy budynek jest widoczny na OrtoFotoMapie (zdjęciach lotniczych). Jeśli jest (a w tym przypadku jest) to musi zostać jakiś ślad po nim, bo inaczej ktoś go doda na nowo ze zdjęć lotniczych. Poprawię to, będziesz mógł zobaczyć jakie tagi trzeba w takich sytuacjach zastosować.
Dziękuję za odpowiedź na mój pierwszy komentarz.
bartgron (2026-03-17 17:17:04+00:00): Poprawiłem
fluffycupcakes (2026-03-18 14:23:01+00:00): Your changeset seems to have duplicated itself and now there's two of the same dentists in the same place and same with surveillance cameras. Perhaps one of the two changesets should be reverted?
pluton_od (2026-03-18 17:29:03+00:00): fluffycupcakes, thanks for the comment! Yes, the changeset got duplicated due to poor mobile internet connection. I've reverted this changeset in 180071454. No more duplicates.
rskedgell (2026-06-15 12:24:19+00:00): The kerb ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13653236413 ) added on the E side of Three Colts Street immediately to the N of Narrow Street is detrimental to pedestrian navigation for the following reasons:

1) There isn't a crossing here. There are railings to *prevent* crossing here and the real crossing is a few metres to the N. See https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.509198818539545&lng=-0.02996236766034599&z=18.909379867793092&pKey=23917920041182266&focus=photo&x=0.6862991178902553&y=0.4471011160109967&zoom=0

2) Adding a barrier=kerb node at the intersection of two footways lies to routing software, telling it that a pedestrian or wheelchair user needs to traverse a kerb in order to turn the corner.

I'll fix this, but let me reiterate how much I, as an unpaid volunteer and local runner personally inconvenienced by incompetent paid "mappers", bitterly resent it.
rskedgell (2026-06-15 13:16:13+00:00): Errors above fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184137148 - but in my opinion, all of your changesets in Greater London should be reverted.
Mruthula12 (2026-06-16 03:09:06+00:00): Hi rskedgell , 
Thanks for performing the edits, I had previously created the crosswalk based on ESRI Aerial, going forward will make sure to use the latest Aerial imagery. 
Thank you for catching these errors and for taking the time to revert the changesets. We are not currently editing in London, UK, and we stopped editing there on 26 May 2026. We will review the mapping concerns that have been raised before making any further changes.
Regards,
Mruthula H
Pipeton (2026-03-20 10:29:57+00:00): Hola, por qué has borrado esos pasos? Y más problemáticamente, por qué has movido los nodos? La calle está bien torcida.
Yog Sot (2026-03-17 23:26:47+00:00): dziękuje, miło, że nie musiałem robic tego sam, ale wejdz w temat relacji inner i outer proszę. 
narysowałeś tez area od nowa, a nie faktycznie przywróciłeś. 
Przywraca się revertem pełym/częściowym lub undelete

Liczę, że pozostałe place też przywróciłeś.
ajmat (2026-03-19 18:30:37+00:00): Reverted in changeset id: 180124649
TS89000 (2026-03-22 13:46:28+00:00): Hallo firefoxinspace, du hast die Bundesstraße 311 in eine Landesstraße (secondary) geändert, die Ref ist aber B 311. Kannst du das nochmal prüfen. In dieser Kombination ist es nicht richtig.
Siehe auch Versionshistorie zu diesem Thema.
firefoxinspace (2026-04-01 14:22:17+00:00): Hallo TS89000, es kommt durchaus vor, dass die formale Herabstufung zur Landesstraße erst zu einem späteren Zeitpunkt erfolgt, selbst wenn bereits die Ortsumgehung hergestellt ist. In jedem Fall ist die überregionale Verkehrsbedeutung der Ortsdurchfahrt von Erbach mit Fertigstellung der Verbindungsspange auf ebendiese übergegangen, weshalb ich die Herabstufung auf "secondary" vorgenommen habe.
TS89000 (2026-04-01 18:23:31+00:00): Danke für deine Erklärung.
felipeeugenio (2026-03-17 14:10:23+00:00): Hola. Esa no es la forma de ningún edificio que esté ahí. Ya fue corregido a farmyard. por favor atención con esas coas. gracias
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179969360
rajdhani (2026-03-18 05:19:12+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id:180038700
trial (2026-03-16 20:50:56+00:00): quand je parlais de l'angle je parlais de l'angle saillant au nord ;-), la partie sud est l'entrée du parking souterrain.
trial (2026-03-16 20:52:37+00:00): Comme quoi certains fois la pub' est assez proche du réalisé : https://api-vm08.trouver-un-logement-neuf.com/MEDIAS/28748/conversions/13030_0e2caac0_2120165029_1-original.jpg
cpa8 (2026-03-17 12:09:04+00:00): C'est corrigé, en espérant avoir bien compris cette fois ;-)
trial (2026-03-17 12:28:15+00:00): C'est tout bon cette fois !
DaveF (2026-03-17 12:04:41+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87245836/history/7

You've duplicated an existing, correct id
DaveF (2026-03-17 12:14:52+00:00): You've duplicated an existing FHRS:ID 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/465242150#map=18/51.397524/-2.342146
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13438285783

Please remove your duplicate.
smsm1 (2026-03-17 16:29:01+00:00): I'm fixing way/87245836 apologies for the oversight.

Regarding the several craft=caterer nodes I've found in the area I'm not convinced it's the right way to tag the information as there is not a separate catering business that you could go to, instead it's an outside contractor or multiple different managers within the same building, hence eg for catering service for a school I'd just add the FHRS id to the school potentially as a ; separated list rather than having a separate node for the caterer. I see the tag craft=caterer being the base/office/van of a business that you could go to for eg outside catering, or other venue catering. The FHRS comparison does support having a list of FHRS:ids.
DaveF (2026-03-17 20:00:49+00:00): > there is not a separate catering business that you could go to

Then why did you add contact details?

>instead it's an outside contractor 

As a separate contractor it requires as separate FHRS. 

> potentially as a ; separated list rather than having a separate node for the caterer.

But that doesn't name the catering contractor
The FHRS is assigned to the contractor, not the school.

>I see the tag craft=caterer being the base/office/van of a business that you could go to for eg outside catering, or other venue catering. 

The caterer is contracted to multiple venues each with its own FHRS therefore requires a separate tag for each venue.

>The FHRS comparison does support having a list of FHRS:ids.

I don't know what you mean by that.
smsm1 (2026-03-18 10:02:09+00:00): > Then why did you add contact details?  

I wasn't aware of the multiple objects for the same thing at the time.
Aim is to try and add address from the FHRS data where available.

> But that doesn't name the catering contractor
The FHRS is assigned to the contractor, not the school.

> The caterer is contracted to multiple venues each with its own FHRS therefore requires a separate tag for each venue.

Where there are multiple items inside the same building each one doesn't need to be named separately in OSM.

Ad an extreme example for RBS Gogarburn there are 5 FHRS ids tagged to the building: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/91156737 As it's a private business that we can't easily map the inside of, this is the best way to do it. Each of those businesses or corporate catering kitchens are unable to be accessed by the public or customers, thus assigning them all to the same building is the best way forward. One of them is even a Tesco Express which is only open to staff there. Oddly the Tesco Express is on their store locator with no mention that it's not open to the public https://www.tesco.com/store-locator/edinburgh/175-glasgow-rd

The Deli counter: https://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/661932 I've worked there about a decade ago and know it's for staff and signed in visitors only. Could map it separately however as a generally mapper from the public it's impossible to keep it up to date, hence the view of myself and others in the Edinburgh OSM meetups is that we shouldn't map them separately and instead attach the FHRS ID to the building or bigger business.

In terms of the schools that have outside catering. We (the Edinburgh OSM meetup group) are of the view that you go to the school, you can't go to the school and order some catering. The catering is private to the school, and therefore the FHRS id should be attributed to the school rather than as a separate business. I regularly see schools with 3 FHRS ids: Main school catering, Nursery, and an after school club, or some variation on this. The general consensus I've seen elsewhere in the country is that these would all be attached to the school with the IDs separated by a semi colon. Bath is the only place I've seen outside catering of a school or nursing home or similar with a separate node for the catering. There some areas where a pub will have multiple FHRS ids as eg the Sunday lunch is done by a different organisation. This then matches the on the ground rule. 

You can see the pub, school, or nursing home, but can't see there's any separate catering business there.

> I don't know what you mean by that.

I've been using this tool to help target where to work. Bath is almost over the 90% threshold in matching which is excellent. It's going to good to see some more areas over 90% (needs both FHRS id and postcode to match).
https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhodot/?lat=52.06843&lon=-2.11281&zoom=13&layer=suggest
DaveF (2026-03-20 15:57:01+00:00): Your actions exclude & obfuscate valid data.

Failing to give separate companies separate, named entities means that accurate data (such as a list of Tesco shops) can not be retrieved.

This is poor mapping. 

> (needs both FHRS id and postcode to match).

Presuming FHRS's addresses are accurate is also poor mapping.

> "you can't go to the school and order some catering."

The tag gives no implication that that is the case. 

It's disappointing to see another case where edits reduce the quality of the OSM database. Please pass this on to "the Edinburgh OSM meetup group".

You've still not corrected your duplication:  https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/465242150
DaveF (2026-03-20 22:21:19+00:00): > it's for staff and signed in visitors only.

So what? It's still an entity in its own right. Add access=* to indicate who can shop there. 

> Could map it separately however as a generally mapper from the public it's impossible to keep it up to date.

No. It's status is verifiable from the FHRS database. Giving the shop it own node & tags inside the building is still more accurate & detailed, even if the location within the building is rough guess.

I've started a conversation on Talk-GB.