piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2025-08-19 05:31:01+00:00): Hoi Dick..

Ik heb het anders opgelost door de route te splitsen over een eigen onewaytraject. Er is daar geen uitzondering.
Van Duitse mapper geen reactie.

Mvg..
eggie
eggie (2025-08-19 05:42:38+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170636439#map=17/51.738234/3.845751&layers=CN
dvdhoven (2025-08-19 06:09:24+00:00): eggie, bedankt voor de correcties
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 16:13:33+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/949695014

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-18 18:44:06+00:00): naprawione
Koreller (2025-08-24 21:58:33+00:00): Hello, what is the source that helps you add these shops?
aceman444 (2025-11-01 14:28:16+00:00): Zdravim, to cela trasa Jelsova je zaroven mostom?

A odkial su tie nazvy a obtiaznosti tras? Z Ortofotomozaiky nie. Su na mieste popisne tabule?
dandalos (2025-11-01 14:33:03+00:00): Informace jsou získané z osobní návštěvy a z webu https://ferrataguide.com/

To je oficiální web na ferraty. 
U každé ferraty je i cedule s obtížností a informacemi. 

Most je samostatná ferata navazující na jiné ale dle ceduli je samostatná.

Nějaké fotky mám.
aceman444 (2025-11-04 19:42:58+00:00): Dakujem. Mame povolenie odpisovat udaje z tejto globalnej stranky do OSM? Okrem toho tieto ferraty maju aj vlastnu lokalnu webstranku.

A na tu Jelsovu ste neodpovedali. Ano jedna ferrata je mostom a aj sa vola Lanovy most. Preco ste ale ako most (bridge=yes) oznacili aj ferratu Jelsova (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1423059018/history/1 )?
Rogoyski (2025-08-29 21:34:30+00:00): Skąd pomysł, żeby tak odklejać trawniki od płotów? Co ma symbolizować taka przerwa, wydaje mi się, że niszczy to tylko topologię mapy.
Yukiro (2025-08-30 08:15:02+00:00): Tak jest na BDOT-cie, inaczej bym tak nie robił, potem i tak będę wszystko sprawdzał dokładnie, jeżeli odbiega od rzeczywistości to poprawię
Rogoyski (2025-08-30 12:52:56+00:00): Zmierzam do tego, że jeśli nie oznaczasz płotu jako obszaru, to lepiej jest jednak skleić zagospodarowanie powierzchni 
(obszar jezdni, chodnika, trawy, zieleni) z ogrodzeniem niż zostawiać pustą przestrzeń. W ten sposób oddajemy na mapie, że jedno do drugiego bezpośrednio przylega.
pitscheplatsch (2025-08-18 17:19:03+00:00): I guess this is #spam and should be reverted?
Tatfahren (2025-08-18 17:40:43+00:00): Laut der Wikiseite zu no_u_turn darf der selbe Weg als "from" und "to" verwendet werden, wenn die Fahrbahnen nicht getrennt eingetragen worden sind. Ich habe jetzt nur ein paar gelöschte von der ersten Seite angesehen, aber kann es sein das du diese vielleicht versehentlich gelöscht hast?
jengelh (2025-08-18 20:14:55+00:00): Es bräuchte auf einer Strecke mit durchgehendem Wendeverbot zwei Restrictions pro Way. Das ist ziemlich idiotisch. Und Wege werden gerne in kleine Happen geteilt,  weil sich irgendein surface=, sidewalk=, maxspeed= oder turn:lanes-Wert jede paar Meter ändert. Da überall restrictions anzulegen ist nicht nur utopisch, sondern auch datentechnisch die Bytes nicht wert.

Wenn man schon das Wiki als Bibel hernimmt, dann darf ich ja auch was zitieren: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:restriction : "Don’t map turn restrictions that are the default for a given jurisdiction and are not signed" (der Punkt steht auch in irgendeinem Forumsthread zur Debatte).
rempshaener (2025-08-18 21:38:49+00:00): Hallo,

in diesem Änderungssatz schreibst du einerseits „Import“, andererseits gibst du als Quelle „knowledge“ an.

An Importe werden recht hohe Anforderungen gestellt, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines bzw. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct.
Es steht im Raum, dass deine Neuanlagen wieder zu löschen wären.

Daher folgende Fragen:
Woher stammen die Daten?
Woher stammen die ref? Warum ich frage: Die Daten scheinen nicht aus einer Vor-Ort-Erhebung zu stammen. Beispiel: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1703887086486323&focus=photo&lat=52.369869165103&lng=7.4146701860231&z=17&x=0.7740108843361124&y=0.5297819975937837&zoom=1.389261744966443, erfasst mit ref „HY3452“ (www.openstreetmap.org/node/13078262082), obwohl offensichtlich keine Hydrantennummer ausgewiesen ist.

Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2025-08-18 21:40:57+00:00): Nachtrag:
Ich habe schon "ref" geschrieben, obwohl das natürlich voraussetzt, dass die Daten aus "name" erst einmal zu "ref" wandern.
rempshaener (2025-08-18 21:49:16+00:00): Hallo,
ich habe gerade gesehen, dass du auch Saugstellen durchnummeriert hast.
Ich gehe davon aus, dass das ein interner Schlüssel ist? Dann gehört das weder in name, noch in ref. Maximal in description. Noch besser wäre ein Verzicht.
Viele Grüße
fabil7h (2025-08-18 21:56:01+00:00): Moin!

Woher stammen die Daten?: Die Daten stammen von der Feuerwehr der SG Spelle intern bzw. einem Kameraden einer der dortigen Abteilungen, der technisch nicht so ganz mit OSM-Editoren warm geworden ist, weshalb ich hier unterstützt habe.

Woher stammen die ref?: Die wurden so aus dem Datensatz übernommen in der Annahme das würde an der richtigen Stelle stehen

Da ich selber noch kein OSM Profi bin kann hier definitiv was falsch gelaufen sein ;)

Was muss beachtet werden bzw. was muss angepasst werden, dass diese Daten ins System passen?

Beste Grüße!
fabil7h (2025-08-19 09:25:45+00:00): Moin @rempshaener!

Ich habe mir die verlinkten Artikel und weitere Quellen durchgelesen. Das hatte ich vorher leider übersehen. 

Der „name“ ist nun bereinigt (siehe Changeset 170658251).

Falls es noch weiteres gibt, meld dich gerne.

Beste Grüße
pitscheplatsch (2025-08-18 17:19:10+00:00): I guess this is #spam and should be reverted?
user_5359 (2025-08-18 18:50:18+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please notice this is a production database.
Please only draw in existing objects and facts. I have now reverted your changes.
pitscheplatsch (2025-08-19 06:15:35+00:00): Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/170635905
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 16:13:32+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4636135964

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
dypa (2025-09-05 06:31:54+00:00): При указании размеченных не регулируемых пешеходных переходов нельзя использовать тег crossing=zebra, см https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:crossing=zebra

Пожалуйста при внесении следующих правок используйте теги (Размеченный (нерегулируемый) пешеходный переход)
crossing=uncontrolled
crossing:markings=zebra

Заранее спасибо!
SekeRob (2025-08-20 11:20:33+00:00): Hi and welcome to OSM,

You say in your changeset that your source is Bing aerial imagery and nothing else, yet you map buildings that are only visible in Google - WHICH IS ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN. Were there other sources such as on-the-ground surveying?
The shape is poor of the Torre Zembra. It looks perfectly square for which there is an ID Editor function in the right click menu. I've square the building but you still need to clarify the source of these building additions.

Also you say your edit is in/around Villamagna, but you too changed the Corso Mazzine in Vasto from Secondary to Tertiary. By what measure is that change correct? Why this in the same edit? 

Please let me know.
Maximvs_7 (2025-08-20 20:23:53+00:00): Hi, and thank you for your comment. 
I just checked the labels and realised that I hadn't ticked the “Local knowledge” (I live in Villamagna) and “Aerial imagery” options. In fact, Torre Zambra RESORT finished construction a few months ago and I only used the internet and Google Maps to see how they are laid out (I only used Google Maps because I couldn't find any aerial images on the internet, and I want to refine it anyway) .

As for Corso Mazzini in Vasto, I was testing some of the editor's features, but apparently I didn't revert the changes. Now I'm restoring it to how it was before.

Thanks again for your comment.
Maximvs_7 (2025-08-20 20:46:02+00:00): In addition, I am now also using a cadastral map (WMS) taken from the Revenue Agency website (https://www.agenziaentrate.gov.it/portale/documents/20143/260417/Manuale+consultazione+cartografia_Documentazione+descrittiva+del+servizio+di+consultazione+della+cartografia+catastale+20180611.pdf/35e955f7-2344-56c8-1157-8f7567531660).
r2d (2025-08-19 14:00:26+00:00): Bonjour,
D'après le cadastre ce chemin est publique. Je revert ce changement.
Cordialement,
Nicolas
silversurfer83 (2025-08-18 17:16:40+00:00): Hi :)

ich hab grad deine beiden Waldwege im Upland gesehen. Dazu einen Hinweis bzw. eine Frage:
Du hast bei beiden "motor_vehicle=no" gesetzt. Das bedeutet, dass hier absolut KEINE Motorfahrzeuge entlang dürfen. Grund egal.

Kann ich mir ehrlich gesagt nicht vorstellen, daher meine Frage: Warum setzt du diese Eigenschaft?
Wenn diese Wege durch Hessenforst Forst führen ist der übliche Wert "motor_vehicle=forestry" und gerne "bicycle=yes". Alles andere ist erstmal überflüssig.

Grüße aus Korbach
silversurfer83
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170624657
heiclaud (2025-08-19 10:03:04+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis.
Hatte ich so eigestellt, da es ein Privatweg ist und die Option "forestry" mir nicht angezeigt wurde - hab's jetzt geändert ;-)
silversurfer83 (2025-08-19 10:32:44+00:00): Danke für die Rückmeldung :)

Nu sieht's plausibler aus.

Happy mapping
SOSOwner (2025-08-18 15:53:10+00:00): ...because: https://stephensonsofessex.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/48/2025/08/23-TT-31-8-25.pdf
kartler175 (2025-08-19 10:46:09+00:00): Ist dir bewusst, was Du mit deinen Änderungen bewirkst? Hast Du ein Konzept, wie Du die Informationen, die in den verstümmelten Relationen stecken, wieder herstellt?
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=9.05776&lat=51.27667&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.95&overlays=ring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
silversurfer83 (2025-08-19 11:11:17+00:00): Moin

Ja. Hab ich beim Bearbeiten schon gesehen, dass hier die Wiesen und place=localities in unmögliche Relationen gepackt wurden, die es unglaublich aufwändig machen hier etwas zu bearbeiten, wie zB landuse von highways zu trennen. Am Ende hab ich für mich gesagt: Drauf geschissen, hier wird jetzt langsam Stück für Stück geräumt. Und gestern im Chat noch gejuxt, dass ich nen Timer stelle, wann der Erste wegen der kaputten Relationen um die Ecke kommt ;)

Wie im Kommentar geschrieben: Work in progress. 

Von meiner Seite: Habe Geduld :)

Cheers
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 16:31:36+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/8262016435
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2232078188
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2232078528
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888664245
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888663904
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888664541

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-18 18:46:50+00:00): naprawione
dcapillae (2025-08-18 18:55:07+00:00): Ya estaba en el mapa.
Jrachi (2025-08-18 19:11:19+00:00): Ciao.
Nel tour precedi di percorrere due volte 58 metri di via Scardini?
O hai inserito quei due tratti di highway due volte, per errore?

Ivo
Jrachi (2025-08-18 19:12:21+00:00): Pardon!
Ho scritto precedi, ma intendevo prevedi...

Solo chi non fa non sbaglia...
Frimmer (2025-08-18 19:32:45+00:00): Hi Jrachi,
Thank you for your remark! It was right on spot. Have already corrected the dataset. 
Attila
wolfy1339 (2025-08-18 18:54:09+00:00): Bonjour, merci de rajouter des données ferroviaires dans osm.

Il ne faut pas utiliser `railway=junction` pour tous les points désignés sauf s'il s'agit réellement d'une jonction ferroviaire. Voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Operating_site_types

Le point que tu as rajouter https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13078361864/ 
est déjà present par l'import de CanVec https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/1201245967

Aussi, vous avez indiquer seulement Bing comme source, comment avez vous trouver ces noms? Il serait bien de l'indiquer

If your preferred language is English, that is no problem, I just assumed since some of your changeset comments are in french and you are editing in Quebec
MonsterSnowGoon (2025-08-29 16:22:16+00:00): Hi - first of all, if it was you, I don't appreciate the complaint that led to me being blocked. I was on vacation and not checking OSM. 

I use both languages, so feel free to respond with whatever suits you best. The "designated timetable locations" fall into a category that doesn't quite fit with OSM's tagging scheme and I've noticed that using the "junction" tag is the convention that the community in North America seems to have settled into. These are the operating locations that appear in railway employee timetables, which are mostly private, though there are some public avenues to obtain this information. Also sometimes referred to as "controlled locations" or "control points" or "station name signs" or, colloquially, a "plant." They are not stations, and should absolutely not be conflated with them, and there aren't any other tags in the OSM database that quite match up to how they are used - "junction" is the best fit, since they often are in fact junctions. It also has the bonus of making them show up more prominently on Open Railway Map, where the information is most desired. 

With respect to the node I added in Lorette, it's the precise location of the station name sign marking the designated location of Lorette at mile 152.4 of the Trois-Rivières subdivision, and is meant to be separate from the nearby "locality" node. 

With that being said, if you think there's a more appropriate designation for these that I may have overlooked, I'm willing to hear it. I admittedly have mostly been concentrating on obvious errors and omitted information, and haven't yet taken the time to go further in depth with tagging.
wolfy1339 (2025-08-29 16:42:18+00:00): > The "designated timetable locations" fall into a category that doesn't quite fit with OSM's tagging scheme and I've noticed that using the "junction" tag is the convention that the community in North America seems to have settled into

It's a false convention. The tag `railway=junction` should only be used for actual junctions.

> With that being said, if you think there's a more appropriate designation for these that I may have overlooked, I'm willing to hear it.

I talked with other mappers and all agree that `railway=junction` is not the proper tag.
I concur that these aren't actual stations, and more designated locations/control points.

> It also has the bonus of making them show up more prominently on Open Railway Map, where the information is most desired. 

That would be tagging for the renderer, since it's not the proper tagging being used.

> With respect to the node I added in Lorette, it's the precise location of the station name sign marking the designated location of Lorette at mile 152.4 of the Trois-Rivières subdivision, and is meant to be separate from the nearby "locality" node. 

The locality node actually refers to the "station" if you check out it's entry in the Banque de noms de lieux du Québec, or even the Canadian Geographical Names Database.

A locality point can refer to a railway site/junction.


> These are the operating locations that appear in railway employee timetables, which are mostly private, though there are some public avenues to obtain this information

Are you able to provide the source? Because time tables aren't necessarilly approved sources to use as they are private and most likely copyrighted.

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America#Private_Data

---

The railway tagging is very euro-centric (in fact it's very much based on German practices as the original authors were German), and we mappers of North America have to untangle the differences in meanings and conventions.

Unless there is an actual junction, these should most likely be tagged as `railway=site`
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Other_operating_sites

I suggest that you refer to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging_in_North_America
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Canada/Railways

There are a good deal of railway mappers present in the OpenStreetMap US Slack https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

And as always, there is also the community forum where things can be discussed.
wolfy1339 (2025-08-29 16:44:24+00:00): It seems as though in my last comment, I failed to mention `railway=site`

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Tagging#Other_operating_sites

If it's an actual junction, then `railway=junction`, if not `railway=site`
MonsterSnowGoon (2025-09-03 22:05:21+00:00): Ah, I overlooked the 'railway=site' tag, and it better fits the situation. I'll start updating the tags.

This information can be found in the Canadian Trackside Guide, which is available for purchase publicly. The exact locations I know mostly through personal experience.

I had a look at Lorette in the Banque de noms de lieux, and though the node in OSM matches what's there, I've been to the site can confirm that the station name sign is in the location where I dropped a new node about 150' east of the crossing, likely where the old station once stood. You can see it, and the 'begin/end main track' signs associated with it, quite clearly in Street View from Route de l'Aéroport, behind Hotel Must.
wolfy1339 (2025-09-03 22:22:43+00:00): Could you add that to your change sets in the sources?

Yeah, sometimes the locations don't match exactly between the locality and the station sign. The actual station sign location should take precedence.
In cases where there is a locality that references the station sign or junction, it should be merged with the newly created railway site

Yep I see the signs. The main track end sign is something that can be mapped as well, though there isn't a defined railway tagging for signals or signs in Canada.
You can help out by adding your knowledge to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/OpenRailwayMap/Work_Rules_in_North_America#CROR

Just a reminder to not use Google Street View for OSM
martianfreeloader (2025-08-19 21:07:36+00:00): Closes https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4881922
SekeRob (2025-08-19 07:10:18+00:00): Hi,

Not seen the discussion, time to move it to the community category forums, but my general observation is that hardly ever the 'length/width' of a drawn object is *exactly* as what is signed at bridges and tunnels and in many cases significantly off. So I'm a length/width tagger when I see (take picture of sign for documentation) and will add as supplemental source:length=*. In JOSM have a measuring tool so can get close, but not exact.

cheers
Friendly_Ghost (2025-08-21 08:07:12+00:00): Hi. Why did you revert my edit without even mentioning it to me?
McCio (2025-08-24 22:37:53+00:00): @both the discussion on Telegram was the same that resulted in the revert of the other mass-deletion of tags made in Veneto by Friendly_Ghost: the mass-deletion was unannounced and not discussed by itself, so any discussion on the reason of deletion might happen on the status quo pre-deletion. Then this other changeset was found and quickly unrelated people (to the previous discussion) agreed it was an incorrect deletion, for both the meaning and the methods.
@Friendly_Ghost during the original Telegram discussion you agreed to revert the other changeset on your own, but omitted to make known of this other mass-deletion changeset, that was simply discovered later.
@SekeRob that's a good suggestion to bring in the chat to the user who added the tags from the signs, so it's clear the measure is taken from the signs (as the user explained himself is how he added the values).
快乐的老鼠宝宝 (2025-10-18 03:55:33+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173433692

This was fully reverted in above changeset, and your hate speech addition problem was reported to admin.
citrula (2025-08-19 19:04:00+00:00): Thanks for your contribution. What's the source you used to locate these ALPRs?

Please be careful to not attach the ALPRs to other features like sidewalks and roads - I fixed a couple of these for you.
burrscurr (2025-08-18 17:50:15+00:00): Sorry for the huge bounding box :( I changed a tag of the relation and some members... Is there a way to prevent the bounding box being that big?
Sylabowy Kot (2025-08-18 21:43:25+00:00): Well, relation is a nice OSM feature but changing any part of some relation shows such a disadvantage of using it for such a big things. But don't worry - if we know what you  done there's nothing wrong. You've changed ONLY these relations so everything is correct. Let's just hope that they'll make flexible bboxes.
WAX26 (2025-08-18 22:59:52+00:00): Der Flixbus hält in/fährt über Dresden.
burrscurr (2025-08-19 05:24:16+00:00): For context, I changed two things:

- Changed type=was:route to type=route (because the route seems to still be active)
- Removed the sections in Dresden because, according to the Flixbus website, the bus only stops in Rostock, Dessau, Halle and then again in Lviv.

@WAX26 Do you have specific evidence to supports your statement that this route stops in Dresden? (If that is the case, then at least part 2 of my changes would be incorrect and need to be changed.)
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-29 03:41:28+00:00): Skąd przekonanie że to wandalizm?

Skąd wiesz że tam taka nazwa jest?
volkertransalp (2025-10-18 18:21:01+00:00): Der Pfad führt über ein Privatgelände. Das ist von den Anwohnern nicht mehr gewünscht. Jetzt werden Schilder aufgestellt und in Zukunft Zäune montiert!
chris66 (2025-10-08 09:07:35+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13078466119

warum foot=no ?

Grüße
Chris
Glassman (2025-08-19 16:32:37+00:00): typically the maxspeed is added to the road.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170634649
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 20:34:12+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/11204436138
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1088199103

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1050268631

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-19 20:25:48+00:00): poprawione
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 20:02:54+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/4571425323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/751964198

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 20:13:04+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/4571425323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/751964198

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 20:23:09+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/4571425323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/751964198

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-08-18 20:34:03+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/4571425323
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/751964198

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Barroszt (2025-08-20 14:57:56+00:00): naprawione