piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
aharvey (2024-10-08 04:51:50+00:00): This has swapped back and forth 12 times so far https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/892863645 please take into account the community consensus and best practice guidance. Per https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:name it's clear to me that the common and on the ground usage is "Wattle Glen" with "Wattleglen" as the https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:official_name.
kurisubrooks (2024-10-08 04:54:26+00:00): +1 This sounds like the best solution to me. Unnecessary edit war when such a simple solution exists.
Supt_of_Printing (2024-10-08 05:27:11+00:00): The name of a location, street, etc. can't and shouldn't be determined by "community consensus" (how is this determined anyway? Has there been a survey of the local community?) unless that community consensus has been successful in convincing the legislators or officials who make rulings on such things and then only once such decisions have gone through the proper channels, in this case, if a change from Wattleglen to Wattle Glen has been gazetted. It matters not what the operators might think, but what the official rulings are.
kurisubrooks (2024-10-08 06:29:40+00:00): From the definition of Key:name, "The primary name: in general, the most prominent signposted name or the most common name in the local language(s)." 
Despite the gazetted name remaining as the "official" name, the station's signposted name is "Wattle Glen". You can see in the surrounding area, including that of the suburb is also "Wattle Glen". The gazetted name does not match what is used in reality, and we map what exists in reality, not a legal database. Why is this even a discussion? `name` is not what is considered official; it's what's prominent, most used, and locally recognised – which is what is signposted.
I suggest you choose a better hill to die on before you get suspended by the DWG over this pointless edit war.
Tomaussie_17 (2024-10-08 07:35:19+00:00): Supt look at the sign on the train station and report back as to how it is spelt.
fortera_au (2024-10-08 09:16:46+00:00): PTV's GTFS feed and Vicmap Transport (both permitted data sources) have it as Wattle Glen.
woodpeck (2024-10-08 12:18:05+00:00): DWG here. Please use "Wattle Glen" as the name tag until photo evidence shows the station signage to be "Wattleglen". (Ticket#2024100810000261)
aharvey (2024-10-08 21:28:35+00:00): > community consensus

I'm talking about the OpenStreetMap community, this was discussed at https://discord.com/channels/413070382636072960/926020366927790130/1292754771077365801 and the community consensus there is  that OSM's standard on the ground rule should apply here, which is "Wattle Glen".
aharvey (2024-10-08 21:29:05+00:00): > community consensus

I'm talking about the OpenStreetMap community, this was discussed at https://discord.com/channels/413070382636072960/926020366927790130/1292754771077365801 and the community consensus there is  that OSM's standard on the ground rule should apply here, which is "Wattle Glen".
Jakka (2024-10-03 08:16:48+00:00): Is het adres nog juist ? "Gravenplein" ?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12218151154
De Buck Bart (2024-10-03 08:24:32+00:00): Gravenplein 9 vervangt het oude adres op Oude Zandstraat.
Jakka (2024-10-03 08:27:08+00:00): OK Thx
Vermoedelijk nog andere diensten bedrijven in dat gebouw ?
De Buck Bart (2024-10-03 08:36:16+00:00): Nee. Enkel kinderopvang.
NeisBot (2024-10-03 08:11:03+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits, particularly those concerning the name you've added or modified.

It seems that some of these names are a bit unusual.

#NameCheck
TheSwavu (2024-10-03 09:56:27+00:00): It will not surprise you that these were renamed in 2008.

I have updated them to have the current names.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-03 08:21:03+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2802502954
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1093306175

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Piotr Strębski (2024-10-04 13:30:34+00:00): Poprawione :-)
mkarau (2024-10-03 19:33:43+00:00): Those barriers exist in the real world. If you'd like to undo someone's hard work, it's better to initiate a discussion than just deleting things.
salma_z (2024-10-07 08:08:25+00:00): Hello, mkarau ;
I thank you for adding these barriers that exist in reality to improve the OSM map and apologize if the changes I made upset you but it’s better to place just one barrier on the road, which will serve the route, rather than placing them far from the road, as they would be considered floating and wouldn’t affect the route in any way
For example,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12218156441
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12218156429
And here is the wiki page that explains how to place barriers on the road.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:barrier
Before we deleted the remaining floating barriers in this changeset
https://osmcha.org/changesets/157407525
 we made sure to check the Mapillary tracks to confirm whether these barriers exist or not.
For example,
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=24.523371815731977&lng=54.43358188460479&z=19.9&focus=photo&dateFrom=2017-01-01&pKey=2909420236004972&x=0.49282946688680535&y=0.4797415233108498&zoom=0
Also, some of the barriers you added are not barriers, but rather traffic signal poles
For example,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7710055157
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7710055156
And this was also verified using the Mapillary track.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=24.523303900068996&lng=54.43357200000003&z=19.9&focus=photo&dateFrom=2017-01-01&pKey=334833254678863&x=0.49553902361084423&y=0.6384033843866203&zoom=0
Could you please fix these issues? based on the open street map policy.
Regards
 salma_z
mkarau (2024-10-12 17:14:15+00:00): Hi Salma_z,

I live and work in this area. I can verify with up-to-the-second knowledge that these barriers exist in precisely the location and number that I have mapped. I appreciate your addition of the barrier to the path, and that is helpful for routing. However, many other apps use OSM data, and they prefer to have the authentic physical information, in addition to the logical paths, networks, and topologies. I am working to place data about Abu Dhabi for both physical mapping as well as logical route planning. When you delete the physical objects that truly exist, you're ignoring the other uses of the map beyond just route planning.
mkarau (2024-10-12 17:15:19+00:00): I've reverted your changes and would appreciate your continued support in viewing others' edits as potentially containing valuable information for uses beyond your primary use case.
salma_z (2024-10-13 06:07:04+00:00): Hello, mkarau ;
Thank you for your comment, and happy mapping!
silversurfer83 (2024-10-03 08:38:42+00:00): Hi there :)

when touching rather large objects like these that cross borders and that cover several countries it would be nice to write the comment in english and also to write in more detail what you did and why.

happy mapping
silversurfer83
Damelin (2024-10-06 12:06:04+00:00): Ok I will keep that in mind in the future, thanks for the feedback
silversurfer83 (2024-10-06 12:21:07+00:00): Thanks.

So what exactly did you do and why did you do it?
Damelin (2024-10-08 16:09:15+00:00): I added missing `service`tags to some routes. One route had service=national and one had service=international. I've corrected these values to high_speed as it is correct for those trains. For some only the routes and not the route_master relations had the service tag, in those cases I've copied the tags to route_master tags.

My primary motivation was that OsmAPP shows trains that show at a specific station, these trains get categorized in the categories provided by the service tag. Previously there were a few trains at Frankfurt central station which OsmAPP couldn't recognize the type of. This edit changed it so that all trains get categorized.
Here is the station in OsmAPP: https://osmapp.org/node/205364328
infeeeee (2024-10-03 11:43:47+00:00): Hello

There is no road on the other side of the platform. If you want to draw that service road, it should be placed next to the rail, see this mapillary image: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=856687766274601
morph1973 (2024-10-03 10:08:36+00:00): I'm a citystrides.com user which gets its data from OSM, Titnore Lane is now showing as the only incomplete item in Worthing so I copied the profile of adjacent Highdown Rise, 'no pedestrian access'. The alternative is I complete the item by running the length of Titnore Lane, its unlit but will be quieter at night, what time of day would you recommend?
rskedgell (2024-10-03 11:33:34+00:00): I am not convinced that the foot=no tag which you added to Highdown Rise in 2022 represents a real and explicitly signed prohibition either. That would make both Highdown Gardens and The Highdown unreachable on foot from Littlehampton Road. It would also make the pedestrian crossing over both carriageways of Littlehampton Road at the end of Highdown Rise a little pointless.

Adding non-existent restrictions in order to influence a single consumer of OSM data is likely to have adverse effects on other data consumers.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tagging_for_the_router

If I were determined to tick off Titnore Lane in CityStrides, I would probably wait for a Sunday morning in May-July and go out very early. I also use CityStrides and I do appreciate how frustrating it can be to have streets which are difficult to complete.
morph1973 (2024-10-03 16:34:58+00:00): Thanks for the reply! Highdown Rise has a separate footpath on OSM just to the east but it looks like little more than a worn line in a field so don't know how 'official' it is. I agree that one set of users shouldn't manipulate the data so to have an adverse effect on everyone else, I will have a look at CiryStrides forums and see what others are doing in similar circumstances.
Hassan Arara (2024-10-22 21:26:14+00:00): hi please try to map each building separeately not many duildings as one building thanks
eggie (2024-10-03 09:35:44+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
Chike Okoli (2024-10-03 09:28:19+00:00): new
user_11609320 (2024-10-03 09:26:54+00:00): the county doesn't maintain the road past trails end camp road. that is either Bureau of Reclamation or BLM. 
Trails end camp road is most likely maintained by metropolitan water district
user_11609320 (2024-10-03 09:39:58+00:00): it most likly is USBR. not sure if they number their roads. they maintain about 2600 miles of roads
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-03 09:30:49+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/way/1320076619

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
gscholz (2024-10-04 07:04:17+00:00): Hi ayobawa,
your recent edit s have created several errors regarding self intersecting ways and duplicate buildings:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=3.59408&lat=6.46454&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=157410012

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-18 00:01:42+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159263484 where the changeset comment is: revert tree deletions in Dubai, see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/200-hours-of-work-deleted-how-can-i-report-this-deletion-and-revert-it-to-its-original-state/120863
osmviborg (2024-10-04 06:00:16+00:00): Rundkørsler navngives normalt ikke.
Peter Brodersen (2024-10-05 17:29:28+00:00): Veje i rundkørsler har oftest navne, hvilket du kan bekræfte i DAR. Det vil derfor være en fejl at fjerne navne på navngivne rundkørsler.
osmviborg (2024-10-06 06:38:20+00:00): Kun hvis rundkørslen har et unikt navn: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout#The_roundabout_itself
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-18 00:01:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159263484 where the changeset comment is: revert tree deletions in Dubai, see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/200-hours-of-work-deleted-how-can-i-report-this-deletion-and-revert-it-to-its-original-state/120863
Mb_651 (2024-10-03 23:15:48+00:00): Hallo Tom,
du hast deinen Änderungssatz zur Kontrolle eingereicht. Sieht gut aus, danke. Einzig die Öffnungszeiten sind zu beanstanden. Bei denen gibt es eine Syntax, die international machinenlesbar sein soll (Siehe Wiki). Es gibt auch Werkzeuge die einem da Überblick verschaffen, wie zum Beispiel YoHours (https://projets.pavie.info/yohours/)
Ich hab die beim NAU mal ausgebessert.
Viel Spaß beim Mappen
LG
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:48:40+00:00): Same here, thanks!
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:48:35+00:00): Same here, thanks!
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:48:28+00:00): Same here, thanks!
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:48:22+00:00): Same here, thanks!
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:48:06+00:00): Just upload the changes before switching the location is fine :)
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:47:33+00:00): Please don't take this as criticism, but if you at least distribute the changes across counties, it makes it much easier to check the changes. Thanks
mcliquid (2024-10-04 07:47:22+00:00): Please don't take this as criticism, but if you at least distribute the changes across counties, it makes it much easier to check the changes. Thanks
MimiMashka! (2024-10-03 11:19:31+00:00): added sidewalk next to house
eggie (2024-10-03 12:59:15+00:00): Welcome to OSM,

Without proper connections to other roads this sidewalks can't route.
Normaly we add the sidewalktags to the mainroad with sidewalk=left right or both.
Без надлежащих соединений с другими дорогами эти тротуары не могут быть маршрутизированы.
Обычно мы добавляем теги тротуаров к главной дороге с помощью sidewalk=left right или обоих.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Key:sidewalk
Greetz,
eggie
MimiMashka! (2024-10-03 11:19:01+00:00): added sidewalk next to houses
vasony (2024-10-04 19:17:45+00:00): Szia!

Nyugodtan visszaírhatod Törőcsik Marira, nem az előterjesztés szerint szavazták meg, ld:

https://gyor.hu/easy-docs/6554cc43539a0

27. oldal.
Tamás
NightH (2024-10-06 10:45:54+00:00): Jepp, az én hibám volt ideát: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/143459581

Visszaírtam.
eggie (2024-10-03 13:03:55+00:00): Dag Webwings..

Dit lijkt me niet consistent getagd tov de andere wegen even los van het feit of die straatnaam bestaat.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-03 13:07:57+00:00): Dag Fernando... Misschien hoort die zandbak ook in het speeltuingedeelte?

MVG
eggie
klik (2024-10-17 06:43:24+00:00): Hallo Radfahrer_64832Kernstadt,
was hat Dich denn hier dazu bewogen bei einem asphaltierten Weg tracktype=grade2 zu setzen?
Aus meiner Sicht war hier tracktype=grade1 vollkommen korrekt.
EM311 (2024-10-14 20:32:24+00:00): Es gilt der Grundsatz, wir mappen nicht für den Renderer, sondern die Wahrheit. Ich nehme an, du hast das wieder auf usage=branch geändert, damit OpenRailwayMap das anzeigt, oder? Das ist hier aber keine Nebenbahn mehr. Die Lösung kann eigentlich nicht sein, hier was Falsches einzutragen, nur damit ORM das anzeigt. Man fragt sich natürlich schon, warum abgebaute Strecken in ORM angezeigt werden, Touristenbahnen nicht. Ich habe das bei ORM schon nachgefragt.
MimiMashka! (2024-10-03 11:18:18+00:00): added a sidewalk along  the bike path
eggie (2024-10-03 13:50:46+00:00): Oke... but we prefer the tagging in the highway=cycleway with sidewalk =right
Greetz,
eggie
eggie (2024-10-03 13:53:10+00:00): Fixed almost junctions
philippec (2024-10-04 20:36:17+00:00): Ik tel maar drie bakstenen.
Eebie (2024-10-05 13:23:55+00:00): Waar gaat dit over?
philippec (2024-10-05 14:53:05+00:00): De afstand van de aed tot de hoek.
Eebie (2024-10-06 18:28:39+00:00): Een nauwkeurigheid van 80 cm op een voorgevel van 18 meter is bovengemiddeld goed.
Ivanov Sergey (2024-10-03 13:45:11+00:00): Мост же вроде закрыли, то есть разобрали. Или там пока можно пройти?
Raa39 (2024-10-03 15:48:28+00:00): Новый уже стоит
Maksim Hradaboyeu (2024-10-07 06:58:00+00:00): added missing roads based on Bing Maps Aerial #mapbox_missing_roads
CoyKoi (2024-10-05 09:52:19+00:00): Hi adssadsad, thanks for adding the new road. Does it need to be made access=private?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157414216
adssadsad (2024-10-06 09:44:55+00:00): oh yes, certainly, I've now gone through and updated that!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157414216
Maksim Hradaboyeu (2024-10-07 06:53:44+00:00): added missing roads based on Esri World Imagery #mapbox_missing_roads
wies1 (2024-10-06 05:56:20+00:00): Hallo 

ich muss mal nachfragen. Weswegen löscht du die Adress-Tags am Gebäudeumriss und machst einen Adress-Node daraus? Worin besteht die Verbesserung?

Gruss

wies1
eggie (2024-10-03 13:22:15+00:00): Hoe kan dit adres nu plotseling de Simon Stevinweg zijn ?

Dat is toch heel ergens anders.
De juiste procedure is dan om de bedrijfsinfo te verwijderen van de node. Het opude adres in tact te laten en op de nieuwe locatie weer bij te taggen op de adresnode aan de Stevinweg. 
Ik draai dit even terug.
MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-10-03 14:44:34+00:00): Info verplaatst naar nieuwe locatie.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-03 12:01:04+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Teresewo":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/464490565
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/464490593
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/958390243

"Dziadoch":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/586016432
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/586016433
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1038704535

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-06 08:53:56+00:00): name транслитом? 🤨
BatsAnEye (2024-10-06 09:08:11+00:00): Можешь прокомментировать вопросом, конечно, только вот толку, если лучше просто 1) написать, в чём я неправ, а потом 2) взять и исправить? Видно же, что у меня меньше пяти правок
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-06 09:13:07+00:00): Вы поставили name=Chaynaya gavan', а до этого было name=Чайная гавань

https://osm.org/node/6562671286

Конечно, могу вернуть назад, но мне интересно почему так произошло: ошибка приложения или вы специально так сделали. Потому и вопрос:)
BatsAnEye (2024-10-06 09:15:33+00:00): Сделал так специально, потому что не был уверен, как именно работает именование здесь. Теперь понимаю и исправлю сам
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-06 09:17:19+00:00): 👍
stillhart (2026-05-25 20:38:18+00:00): Das ist ein Tesla Destination charger, oder?
stillhart (2026-05-25 20:39:08+00:00): nevermind, gerade street view gesehen
eggie (2024-10-03 13:17:52+00:00): Dag Jim,

In OSM taggen we in de regel bij op de adresnode. Niet op de gebouwomtrek.

Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=157415739

Ik heb de info verplaatst naar de adresnode en tourism=hotel toegevoegd. 

MVG
eggie
silversurfer83 (2024-10-03 21:50:27+00:00): Gude :)

sieht nicht verkehrt aus. Hast du mal im Wiki nachgesehen, welches VZ wie auf die Wege angewendet wird?

Also als Beispiel: Ein reines VZ 239 (blauer Fußgängerlolli) wäre ein "highway=footway"

cheers
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157415871
Signalschruber (2024-10-05 21:06:12+00:00): Hallo,

ich habe ins Wiki geschaut. Footway halte ich für falsch, weil das VZ 239 dort nicht vorhanden ist. Ich bin da auch schon häufiger mit dem Fahrrad hergefahren und habe nichts gefunden, was dagegen spricht. PKWs werden durch Poller behindert.
silversurfer83 (2024-10-05 21:13:26+00:00): OK. Wenn keine VZ zu sehen sind, wäre es entweder ein path oder ein highway=service. Die Poller sollten korrekt erfasst werden. Die können auch entfernbar sein, was dann für eine Feuerwehrzufahrt spricht
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:emergency%3Ddesignated
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-03 12:33:16+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/12218643096
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12218643097

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
literan (2024-10-18 06:45:23+00:00): зачем вы утащили мост в сторону от местоположения, выровненного по трекам? Заодно и на трассе изгибы резкие сделали. 

Откачу
Maksim Hradaboyeu (2024-10-07 07:07:18+00:00): Added missing roads according to Bing Maps Aerial
#mapbox_missing_roads
Frans S (2024-10-03 13:36:54+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
The instructions are to map buildings and roads. Please focus to that.
You mapped land use objects and introduced many errors by doing that. Please just map buildings and highways.
Don't connect nodes of objects to other objects. These are errors which have to be solved, 
Best regards and keep mapping
21311202 (2024-10-04 14:16:14+00:00): 董友弟墓不应该在25.400035, 100.732122吗？
ymapper (2024-10-05 05:53:00+00:00): 你去过吗？
我只是根据卫星图像和书中的描述猜测的。
好像我猜错了。谢谢。
21311202 (2024-10-05 07:35:27+00:00): 我还没去过。我是根据 https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/YsmHePB9OnWpAUw6ZwROcA 和国家地名信息库标的，卫星图上的半圆形池塘和两座小房子也能和网络照片对得上。
gurglypipe (2024-10-16 20:50:02+00:00): Out of interest, why do you keep tagging pavements as bicycle=no? As far as I understand it, bicycle=no is the default for highway=footway (otherwise highway=cycleway would be used).
Pete Owens (2024-10-17 23:11:19+00:00): Unfortunately the default tagging for pavements is "Not Specified" - exactly the same as for trunk roads. This confuses cycle routing applications into recommending illegal routes.
gurglypipe (2024-10-17 23:16:07+00:00): That is unfortunate. Perhaps a better use of time would be to file a bug against those cycle routing applications to change their default assumptions and only use highway=footway ways if they are explicitly tagged as bicycle=yes/designated/permissive? Having that as a default would surely cause fewer routing errors from avoiding using pavements which actually *do* allow cycling (false negatives) than there are currently routing errors from suggesting using pavements which don’t allow cycling (false positives).
NGL-engel (2024-10-22 20:10:35+00:00): Hallo Tourijens, 
  ich würde empfehlen den Punkt "Bibelgarten" zu löschen. Er ist ja schon als Fläche angelegt. Und so wie es jetzt ist gibt es ihn doppelt. 
Oder bist du anderer Meinung? 
Gruß NGL-engel
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-18 00:01:43+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159263484 where the changeset comment is: revert tree deletions in Dubai, see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/200-hours-of-work-deleted-how-can-i-report-this-deletion-and-revert-it-to-its-original-state/120863
PPete2 (2026-06-30 08:02:15+00:00): Hallo, in https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5325129 gibt es gerade eine Diskussion zu https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12218738888 welchen du angelegt hast, könntest du dort bitte deine Sicht erklären, danke!
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-18 00:01:44+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 159263484 where the changeset comment is: revert tree deletions in Dubai, see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/200-hours-of-work-deleted-how-can-i-report-this-deletion-and-revert-it-to-its-original-state/120863
canfe (2024-10-06 07:48:51+00:00): Come ti avevo scritto nel CS 156526826 del 2024-09-16 (son passate due settimane e non hai mai risposto) i boschi qui son tutti coltivati e il tag non è corretto.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157419554
mizioasr (2024-11-04 13:05:41+00:00): Ciao. Non ho visto. Figurati se non ti rispondo. Che significa "i boschi sono coltivati" . Non sono naturali o al posto di alberi, arbusti, ecc. vi sono coltivazioni.