piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
MxxCon (2024-04-12 02:11:41+00:00): Hello.
A feature name should not be used a descriptive tag.
It's perfectly fine for features not to have names.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149825247
compilation-error (2024-04-12 02:13:41+00:00): Got it. Will change to remove it. Thanks.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149825247
pesec (2024-04-11 08:01:17+00:00): Добрый день.
Здание не находится ниже уровня земли, у вас ошибка в данных.
eggie (2024-09-19 06:52:27+00:00): Hoi A67 -A67

Ik zie hier geen spoor van straten
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@51.47065,3.822320,17/?datastrip=20240821_PNEO-04

MVG
eggie
eggie (2024-09-19 07:00:29+00:00): A67 A67  Wellicht weet jij meer en of klopt superview niet?

https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@51.48062,3.606681,17/?datastrip=20240914_PNEO-03

De bewuste mapper...
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149810919#map=15/51.48452/3.6137348452/3.61373

Heb jij tijd om er even naar te kijken en evt op proposed te zetten.
Een reactie van mapper heb ik nog niet gekregen.
Groet
eggie
A67-A67 (2024-09-22 13:16:29+00:00): Ik ga ernaar kijken. Als hij 5 maanden geleden zegt dat de straten af zijn en ze op een recente foto niet te zien zijn, dan klopt zijn wijziging niet.
eggie (2024-09-22 13:23:16+00:00): Nee.. inderdaad, maar reageren doet de mapper ook niet Ook niet na een PB.
Top dat je er naar kijkt.
Het werd opeens wel erg druk met een mapper die opeens in razend tempo zaken ging toevoegen. Vandaar dat ik jou als voorgaande mapper  even vroeg te kijken. 
Vandaag weer rustiger. 
Groet
eggie
A67-A67 (2024-09-22 13:23:28+00:00): Ik heb de landbouwgrond in het zuiden hersteld en diverse wegen verbeterd naar construction of proposed.
eggie (2024-09-22 13:26:58+00:00): Top!
eggie (2024-09-22 13:29:31+00:00): ... en volgens mij geldt dat voor Essenveld Middelburg Zuid ook. Dat is hoogstens nog construction voor een deel. .
A67-A67 (2024-09-22 13:36:18+00:00): Daar ben ik ook meteen mee bezig gegaan. Dat zou nu moeten kloppen.
eggie (2024-09-22 13:38:07+00:00): Kreeg net een reactie van Duncan..
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149810919#map=11/51.4748/3.7175
silversurfer83 (2024-04-10 23:03:52+00:00): Gude :)

Das "addr:" Schema wird eigentlich nur für Objekte verwendet an die auch Post versendet werden kann. Also prinzipiell bekommen Gebäude eine Adresse. Um andere Dinge auch adressieren zu können hat vor einiger Zeit jemand das "object:" Schema entwickelt. Details hier:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:object:*
Wäre cool, wenn du das entsprechend anpassen könntest.

Grüße
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149826787
eggie (2024-09-19 07:02:38+00:00): Hoi  Volgens mij zijn die straten niet opgeleverd en/of nog niet eens aangelegd.
Volgens Duncun allemaal wel.
https://viewer.satellietdataportaal.nl/@51.48062,3.606681,17/?datastrip=20240914_PNEO-03

De laatste sat foto is van deze week.
MVG
eggie
Kamil Kalata (2024-04-10 16:12:51+00:00): Zmiana została wycofana (powód: wandalizm) (patrz: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149828005)
Kamil Kalata (2024-04-10 16:15:22+00:00): Zmiana została wycofana (powód: wandalizm) (patrz: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149828146)
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 20:36:49+00:00): Hello,
What actually is the benefit of the "junction=yes" tagging on e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1839949101 ?
Best Regards,
Andy
slice0 (2024-04-10 20:49:51+00:00): well first of all "Remove junction=yes in SA where it's not needed due to no other tags on the junction" is not against any rule or policy. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction=yes I mainly just place them at y intersections where a "straight" command could be used for either direction here is one example https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1003369358 this one is a 3 way split https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2521837104 , they mainly just help clear confussion in the real world sense. On principal I dont beleive the perfectly valid nodes should be questioned rather the "made up" reason for their removal

thankyou
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 20:58:15+00:00): I don't understand "they mainly just help clear confussion in the real world sense."

What actually is the benefit of the "junction=yes" tagging?
slice0 (2024-04-10 21:15:15+00:00): confusion I meant, they are helpful for routing. in certain scenarios, a gps may confuse a straight with a turn when there is just a slight difference of angle. Besides that they are fine to be there based on the wiki unless im missing something?
fortera_au (2024-04-10 22:56:08+00:00): The wiki says that junction=yes by itself is pointless, it doesn't indicate anything. Tagging junction=yes means just as much as the bare node itself.

If you want to indicate directions, you need more than that, which is what a manoeuvre relation can be used for. Without having information about which ways are actually joined, how can any kind of routing algorithm know what is actually meant?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149827539
fortera_au (2024-04-11 23:00:45+00:00): Since the wiki page for junction=yes does explicitly say these nodes are incorrectly tagged, I do plan to re-revert these nodes, unless someone can provide a reason not to.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149827539
fortera_au (2024-04-12 01:53:34+00:00): I'll just mention the reviewed_bad from OSMCHA was another user, it just seems to add that to any comment added from there once that's been set by any user.
slice0 (2024-04-16 17:01:40+00:00): because they were deleted again I have reverted the deletion and reported the user for vandalism for deleting perfectly fine data from the map. based on lack of understanding the wiki page. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150094405
SomeoneElse (2024-04-16 17:24:45+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15954
slice0 (2024-04-10 16:47:48+00:00): this road does not carry a (B) route anymore, it has officially been reclassified as a secondary road.
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 23:14:31+00:00): Hang on - following https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/15905 and https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/my-apology-to-my-fellow-osm-editors/111649 I'd have expected to see a discussion somewhere about this road clas change before "just doing it" (read the part of the message that starts "Please do not start changing road classes again...").
Was there actually some discussion that we missed, or should this just be reverted pending discussion?
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 23:17:11+00:00): In response to your question elsewhere "how come every thing I do is questioned and even though I have never broken a single OSM policy I get blocked", it's because (among other things) you write diary entries like these: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/slice0/diary .
slice0 (2024-04-10 23:21:14+00:00): generally speaking I am just a normal mapper like anybody else and deserve to be treated as such, I think a discussion needs to take place if someone wishes to classify a road based on their own definition and not that of our bylaw
SomeoneElse (2024-04-10 23:31:06+00:00): > I am just a normal mapper 

No, you're not.  "normal mappers" don't draw the ire of their local community by just ignoring what everyone else has to say.  Normal mappers don't write diary entries targeting their "haters" like yours.  Normal mappers don't collect a host of block messages like https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/slice0/blocks .

If you aren't able to compromise I'm afraid that this may not be the project for you, and perhaps you should refer to the matter of "Arkell vs Pressdram".  However if you do want to continue contributing please do start making your case for this changeset in the forum and - most importantly - listening for what other people have to say.
slice0 (2024-04-11 07:12:28+00:00): sorry I just got back as a friend asked me to go on a hike. I started this discussion here with my intentions before your comment was made https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/queensland-to-classify-roads-based-on-bylaw-data/111652
fortera_au (2024-04-11 23:01:53+00:00): Discussion needs to occur before changes, and since there's been no actual community consensus on using DataSA for road classifications, and no bylaws actually provided to use, the previous classification is reasonable, and based on regularly driving through here, more appropriate.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149827902
SomeoneElse (2024-04-12 08:56:09+00:00): @fortera_au Agreed - Given that https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/queensland-to-classify-roads-based-on-bylaw-data/111652/16 has neither identified any bylaws (in QLD or SA) nor shown that they should directly determine OSM highway values, it would make sense to revert this change.  I'm happy for you to do this; or if you prefer I can do it.
slice0 (2024-04-12 09:01:11+00:00): @someoneelse https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/was-changing-the-road-classifications-to-align-with-south-australias-bypass-law-really-an-import/111445
kornad (2024-04-11 06:07:25+00:00): Cześć, jakie zmiany kryją się pod nazwą "1"? Proszę abyś chociaż ogólnie opisał co zmieniasz. Dodatkowo staraj się unikać edytowania dwóch zupełnie różnych miejsc (Gdańsk i Morąg) za pomocą jednego zestawu zmian - rozbij to na dwie edycje.
richlv (2024-04-24 14:52:31+00:00): Paldies par autoservisa nosaukuma pievienošanu, tieši noderēja :)
Filip009 (2024-04-11 09:08:41+00:00): Keď máš záujem sa tomu venovať aj po škole, tak ťa môžem naučiť rýchlejší spôsob, ako na to, ale keď nie, tak v tom význam veľmi nevidím.
pitfire (2024-04-11 12:03:19+00:00): Hi Yoshi2009,
bist Du dir sicher, dass deine Änderungen der Realität entsprechen.
Das Gartencenter firmiert 
ausschließlich unter Frauenstraße 329.
Hat der Anbau mit eigener Hausnummer Frauenstraße 330 überhaupt etwas mit der Gärtnerei zu tun? Hattest Du die Örtlichkeiten so erkundet? Jetzt hast Du aus einem einfachen Gebäude ein Gartencenter/Gärtnereimarkt erstellt. Ist normalerweise ein großer Komplex?
Yoshi2009 (2024-04-12 07:13:50+00:00): Hi pitfire,
Ich wohne in direkter Umgebung der Gärtnerei.
Es handelt sich um das Gebäude, in welchem im Erdgeschoss der Verkauf der Pflanzen stattfindet. Unter anderem auch die, welche ja direkt neben dem Komplex angebaut werden. Ja, die beiden oberen Geschosse sind die Wohnungen der Eigentümer, dienen aber nicht als Verkaufsfläche. "Gartencenter" ist vielleicht aber trotzdem etwas übertrieben. Hättest du eine bessere Idee für eine Bezeichnung?
pitfire (2024-04-12 10:18:50+00:00): Habs mal nach Deinen Infos erfasst.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149902884

Gruß pitfire
euroPathfinder (2024-04-13 10:32:56+00:00): You requested a review of your changeset. I have checked it and it looks good.

This is an automated message. You can reply to it and I will come back to you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149829408
euroPathfinder (2024-04-13 10:34:39+00:00): La seule chose que j'ai remarqué: d'habitude, les contours des maisons sont tracés à base du cadastre au lieu des photos aériennes. 

Bien cordialement
danieldegroot2 (2024-04-11 13:52:46+00:00): Hey Lachgast,

Modified the service way in
- https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=149865604
- https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=149866031
Let me know if there are any issues, please.

Regards,

Daniel
bes199 (2024-04-12 09:58:33+00:00): Hallo Marvin_Braun, willkommen bei OpenStreetMap und Glückwunsch zu deinem ersten Änderungssatz!

Du hattest ja um Überprüfung gebeten und dabei ist mir aufgefallen, dass du das Rathaus dort eingetragen hast, wo jemand vor dir die Hausnummer 42 eingetragen hatte. Offiziell ist das auch die Hausnummer vom Rathaus.
Allerdings ist aktuell im selben Gebäude auch die Hausnummer 44 eingetragen und wenn ich auf Straßenfotos von dort schaue, ist dort eigentlich eine Sparkasse drin (gewesen).

Stattdessen steht an dem Gebäude, welches aktuell in OSM Hausnummer 42c hat, auf Straßenfotos sichtbar groß "Rathaus" über dem Eingang.

Du könntest vorerst das Rathaus ins richtige Gebäude rüber schieben (zur 42c) und wenn du magst und dort in der Nähe lebst nochmal schauen welche Hausnummern dort jetzt stimmen und die korrigieren. Aber bloß kein Zwang!

Zögere nicht, wenn du Fragen hast und noch viel Freude beim Mappen!
Christopher1704 (2024-04-11 22:27:33+00:00): Me equivoque de ubicación, estamos ubicados en knoxville tennessee
BCNorwich (2024-04-11 07:16:09+00:00): Hi, Thanks for adding the extra track. Sorry to say though that the layers are not logically placed. You've got a layer=0 joining a layer=2 section. I don'y know the layout so I can't fix it. One thing to bear in mind is that layer=0 is the lower layer and in the absence of any layer tag such a section is implied as layer=0.

Is there a map of the ride at the site?

Regards Bernard
SekeRob (2024-04-11 08:08:54+00:00): Hi,

Think the contact:phone needs to be changed phone:tollfree as QA wants the E123 format on phone and contact:phone incl intl prefix. Numero verde can go to https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/phone%3Atollfree#overview

ciao
FinixFighter (2024-04-11 08:28:42+00:00): Thanks, I changed it. 

Bye
mavl (2024-04-11 02:22:30+00:00): Здравствуйте. Напишите, пожалуйста, зачем в тег alt_name добавлено "Тюменская область"? Разве это часть названия округа?
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-04-27 13:13:16+00:00): 可有什么参考依据？上来就点了这么一堆点，也完全不具有可验证性。

并且你全都使用了高速公路的名称来命名你的changeset，而你画的和连霍高速一点关系都没有
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2024-04-27 13:13:47+00:00): 我随机抽查了几个你所谓的camp site，发现它们很多都是面积非常很小的建筑，不可能做的了什么camp site，我有理由怀疑你这一系列编辑都是出于政治泄愤的目的或为了营造某种“不得了！新疆居然有这么多camp”的所谓事实而去进行的编辑
发光的电子管 (2024-05-03 13:02:03+00:00): 操作失誤，正在核實並刪除。
NM$L (2024-05-21 03:26:56+00:00): 您好，注意到您在上次回复后似乎没有做出行动，请对此做出解释。
user_7130456 (2024-06-04 15:46:43+00:00): 您好，注意到您在上次回复后似乎没有做出行动，请对此做出解释。
mavl (2024-04-11 16:08:19+00:00): Здравствуйте. Этот пакет правок отменён. Название округа было правильным.
Patchi (2025-09-30 05:54:17+00:00): Bonjour chamdam,

Mieux veut tard que jamais, mais j'ai quelques réserves à exprimer concernant le passage de l'opérateur de ces lignes de bus vers "Transdev Oise Cabaro". Le département de l'Oise est bien loin de Fréjus/Saint-Raphaël et je doute que la filiale de Transdev pour le département de l'Oise exploite des bus dans le département du Var. A ma connaissance il n'existe que 2 compagnies qui exploitent ce réseau "Estérel Cars" et "Rafael Bus".

Ce problème concerne les lignes 1, 2, 3, 4, 9, 11 et 13.

Bonne continuation,

Patchi
frasty (2024-04-13 19:27:00+00:00): Ciao,
ho visto che hai aggiunto highway=cycleway sul lungomare. Si tratta però di un duplicato in quanto la corsia ciclabile è già mappata come cycleway:* sulla highway principale (Viale Italia), con tag espliciti referenziati anche nella ciclovia Tirrenica (relazione 1782624). Inoltre trattandosi appunto di tratti di corsia ciclabile all'interno della carreggiata e non divisi da essa come sarebbe una pista ciclabile vera e propria è più corretto indicarla con cycleway:* come spiegato nel wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane. Direi quindi di cancellarla
Đuro Jiří (2024-04-13 19:39:43+00:00): Ciao,
 hai ragione,ora è duplicata.
Però è mappato cycleway:right track. Sinceramente non ricordo superficie, però sicuramente non è "track".
Se sei d'accordo,io cancello quella che ho aggiunto.
frasty (2024-04-15 14:32:08+00:00): track dovrebbe indicare che la corsia ciclabile è fisicamente divisa dal resto della carreggiata e non il tipo di superficie. Comunque l'ho modificata in lane, credo in effetti sia meglio visto che non ci sono divisori.
ciaofrasty
miluethi (2024-04-12 22:00:35+00:00): Hi Baraka, I noticed that your many of your building shapes are either much bigger than what is shown on Bing or ESRI satellite imagery or some buildings are simply in-existent. Please create only building shapes for visible buildings on Bing or ESRI.
I also adjusted the boundary of the village, so the building shapes do not cross the boundary line.
Baraka Jungwa (2025-05-02 09:11:57+00:00): Thanks and well noted!
wkdgs (2024-04-29 08:03:58+00:00): Bist du sicher, dass der Fußweg "Kleine Martinistraße" heißt? Normalerweise haben solche Wege doch keine namen, oder?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149832340
BigBlue (2024-04-29 16:38:14+00:00): Die nördliche Hälfte des Weges (mit den Häusern 69 und 71) ist ein öffentlicher Weg mit dem Namen "Kleine Dürerstraße".
Der südliche Teil (mit den Häusern 72 bis 78) ist ein Privatweg), diese Häuser gehören aber zur Kleinen Martinistraße.
Die Bezeichnung "Kleine Dürerstraße" für diese Hälfte des Weges des Weges ist falsch.
Confetti199 (2024-04-11 03:25:54+00:00): what am i looking at 💀
Confetti199 (2024-04-11 03:27:04+00:00): im gonna revert this
Carto'Cité (2024-10-02 09:33:26+00:00): Bonjour.
Je pense qu'il est correct d'appliquer les tags railway=train_station_entrance et entrance=main sur https://www.osm.org/node/10839863336, de même qu'il est incorrect d'ajouter public_transport=stop sur https://www.osm.org/node/241926523 et 
https://www.osm.org/node/269296749. Notez que le tag public_transport=station est défini sur le périmètre de la gare https://www.osm.org/way/1165420072, et qu'il ne doit pas être ajouté aux railway=station.
Mais bien sur on peut en discuter :-)
Cordialement,
Antoine de Carto’Cité pour SNCF Transilien
euroPathfinder (2024-04-13 10:29:55+00:00): You requested a review of your changeset. I have checked it and it looks good.

This is an automated message. You can reply to it and I will come back to you.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149832611
CurlingMan13 (2024-04-11 23:46:18+00:00): changeset reverted
trifano (2024-04-10 19:01:08+00:00): Por favor, sé cuidadoso cuando añadas información del mapa del IGN. Has añadido picos (natural=peak) que no lo son porque no son el punto más alto de la montaña. Simplemente son cotas de nivel. Los he eliminado.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11807711352
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11807715570

Saludos.
RedAuburn (2024-04-10 18:37:47+00:00): see https://github.com/organicmaps/organicmaps/issues/7642

the issue has now been fixed in OM, but i will re-run the query in a month or so to catch any stragglers
4004 (2024-04-14 00:04:58+00:00): ого, неожиданно, раньше одни гаражи были с этим адресом. Лукойл остался по Пучкова? по траектории он ближе всех если виртуально продлевать Пучкова на юг
Prusaker (2024-04-14 08:34:06+00:00): По Лукойлу, к сожалению, не скажу, не знаю. У меня была информация с места только по дому 19 (Мостостроительное управление).
emersonveenstra (2024-04-11 10:37:51+00:00): Hi there,

Did you mean to add the tag "CR 309=no" to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9861481 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/9859144#map=16/44.8411/-96.5615?
SD Mapman (2024-04-11 16:47:13+00:00): no, not at all, don't know where that came from to be honest
HellMap (2024-04-13 09:39:48+00:00): Vai tu esi pārliecināts, ka visa [1] iela ir ciet ar būvniecību? No [2] izskatās tā pat kā marta vidū - atļauts tikai taksometriem un pa vidu šur tur kaut kāda būvniecība, bet izbraukt var (un līdzīga situācija principā uz daudziem ceļiem un ietvēm). Mans Mapillary vēl nav ielādēts un es tā saprotu tu pa tieši šo ceļu nenobrauci bet tu arī teici, ka kaut kur citur filmēji?

[1] https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/418108931

[2] https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=7650251375041368&focus=photo
richlv (2024-04-13 10:03:08+00:00): Paldies par pamanīšanu, slēgts tiešām ir no plānotās Parka ielas - atjaunināju.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-04-10 19:40:25+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres jest niekompletny, brakuje informacji o nazwie ulicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1090212110
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1090212111

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
ONF Alençon (2026-07-08 08:52:05+00:00): Bonjour @jluc95240
Merci pour l'ajout de ces parcelles forestières de la Forêt domaniale de Réno-Valdieu.
Cependant, les parcelles ne se cartographient pas avec "natural=wood", car cela créé un doublon d'occupation du sol avec la forêt déjà cartographiée.
Il est préférable d'utiliser le tag "boundary=forest_compartment" :
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Tag:boundary%3Dforest_compartment
Allison P (2024-04-10 23:47:27+00:00): The road name was correct before. The issue was the apartment complex not being fully mapped. Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/149842271
Xvtn (2024-04-11 14:47:56+00:00): Nice! Thanks for that. I rode by here the other day and saw the new lane put in. (Really more of a bike shoulder, but I'll take it.)
Allison P (2024-04-11 00:19:38+00:00): access=permissive? If I understand correctly, I couid come here and park for free, then leave and go to the church? Or maybe access=private is more appropriate.
Zipfile5283 (2024-04-11 00:24:09+00:00): It's permissive from 6am to 10pm, private after. I tried to note that in the hours field but I'm not sure if there's a better way.
Allison P (2024-04-11 01:02:34+00:00): access=private
access:conditional=permissive @ 06:00-22:00
kechan_tagfix (2024-04-10 20:17:15+00:00): added buildings
Frans S (2024-07-23 08:59:16+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper. However, a bit late.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapping.
E: Buildings not squared.
F: Buildings partly hidden under trees.
In general, you try to follow the tree lines rather than extrapolating the roof.

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149838366
nullroute (2024-08-11 18:51:01+00:00): Hi, new OSM mapper here. I was adding a theme park in Wichita and I used Worlds of Fun as a reference.

I noticed that the new theme park boundary that you added (Way 1271569173) nests a more detailed existing theme park boundary for Worlds of Fun. Perhaps this changeset should be reverted?
ralrei (2024-04-12 13:19:20+00:00): Das stimmt.
Aber warum machst Du daraus ein place=city_block ?
dieterdreist (2024-04-12 13:30:33+00:00): please make and upload local changes. You should not upload edits in the Netherlands together with edits in Melbourne.
el_emka (2024-04-12 13:35:00+00:00): Sorry, this was no deliberate action as I was misguided by the app settings, which stated that all updates are uploaded immediately. It didn't state that they would still be part of the same changeset.
dieterdreist (2024-04-12 15:08:35+00:00): no worries, I just thought I'd point it out to you (because I was trying to analyze local changes and your changeset appeared), but you were by far not the only one. 

Have fun mapping :)
wkdgs (2024-04-29 08:02:23+00:00): Hi,

der Tag name ist nur für Eigennamen von Objekten gedacht, nicht für Beschreibungen. Dafür sollte description verwendet werden.

Noch besser wäre natürlich den passenden Tag dafür zu verwenden:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:birds_nest%3Dstork

Und bist du sicher, dass das Nest dort auch langfristig bleibt? Objekte, die nur für kurze Zeit existieren, sollten nicht gemappt werden.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149839778