piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Rainero (2026-03-21 18:30:34+00:00): Hallo NxPFoto und daganzdaanda,

genauso ist es, der User hat Straßennamen großflächig aus dem Bayernatlas übernommen. 
Beim Revert kann es sein, dass Straßen, die der User neu angelegt hat, entfernt werden, weil sie eben Teil des Änderungssatzes sind.  

Mapbox Luftbilder wären okay, aber Bayern DOP 40? Dafür ist die Freigabe für OSM doch noch nicht geklärt, oder habe ich da was übersehen?

Servus,
Rainer
Rainero (2026-03-21 20:41:03+00:00): Es wäre tatsächlich am saubersten die Straßen neu mit erlaubter Quelle zu erfassen. Mapbox zeigt sie ja recht gut. Den Namen muss man vor Ort feststellen.
rskedgell (2026-01-22 10:32:18+00:00): I'm afraid it is. It used to be my cycling route from Stratford to Victoria Dock for swimming in 2020/2021.

It's part of the Lower Lea Valley cycle route implemented half-heartedly by LB Newham in the 2010s. The source given my @MacLondon in https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/13874834 (from LB Tower Hamlets) is now a dead link. It's had no maintenance since then. Signage and dropped kerbs were treated as optional luxuries #ItsAllVeryNewham

At the entrance to Star Park from Percy Road/Avondale Road, there isn't a dropped kerb, but there is buff corduroy tactile paving on the pavement either side, indicating a transition from a footway to a shared use surface.

Between Grange Road and Pretoria Road/Ladysmith Road the implementation is even worse. Approaching from the Grange Road, there is (or was last time I was there) an incorrect traffic_sign=GB:955 sign (it's obviously not a "route for use by pedal cycles only"). At the other end, I think there was a sign indicating a walking and cycling route, but no dropped kerb or tactile paving.
Adam Edwards (2026-01-25 13:42:14+00:00): Thanks for this.   Someone on a disabled trike needs to challenge the legality of this as it's not fit for purpose at all.
rskedgell (2026-01-26 09:09:55+00:00): I agree with its lack of fitness for purpose. Some time in the next week or so, I'll go out and take some Mapillary imagery in both directions between Manor Road and Memorial Recreation Ground.

If you've got any photos of your own and are on social media, it might be worth tagging London Cycling Campaign, Newham Cycling Campaign and "Plaistovian" (Cllr John Morris, Deputy Cabinet Member for Sustainable Transport at Newham and councillor for the neighbouring Plaistow West & Canning Town East ward). I'll do the same once my imagery is available.
rempshaener (2026-01-20 20:33:08+00:00): Hallo und herzlich willkommen bei OpenStreetMap.

Zu diesem Änderungssatz habe ich folgende Anmerkungen:
- Als Quelle hast du „Hydrantenplan Feuerwehr Lankau“ angegeben. Sollte das die einzige Quelle sein, käme das einem Import nahe. Nähere Infos siehe osm.wiki/DE:Import/Guidelines bzw. osm.wiki/DE:Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct. 
Wichtig ist vorrangig, dass die Hydranten einzeln vor Ort auf Existenz, Lage und weitere Detaildaten geprüft werden.
- https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13471071113: Hydranten sollten nicht mit Straßen, Gebäuden u. ä. verbunden werden. Das lässt sich leicht beheben: im Editor markieren und „E“ drücken – das löst den Hydranten von der Linie. 

Vielen Dank für deinen Beitrag und weiterhin viel Spaß beim Mappen.
Viele Grüße
Lostmonkey (2026-03-24 17:21:35+00:00): Hej. Jeg har ændret nogle af dine ladestationer til ladestandere. Sagen er, at en ladestation (amenity=charging_station) består af én eller flere ladestandere (man_made=charge_point). Er der kun én ladestander på lokaliteten, kan denne nok godt blot tilføjes som en ladestation, men er der flere ladestandere (fra samme operatør) i samme afgrænsede område, skal de ikke hver især tilføjes som ladestationer. Det er ladestandere, som skal samles under én ladestation (område eller punkt).
NeisBot (2026-01-21 07:22:52+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 7 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1020221053 v4 | 4 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1332878712 v2 | 3 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/12330982296 v3

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177485677
NeisReview (2026-01-28 07:32:33+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/177697379
NeisBot (2026-01-20 17:16:21+00:00): Hi AlimiGaming1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 83% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 210 landuse(s)
- 12 natural(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177485852
AlimiGaming1 (2026-01-20 17:19:43+00:00): Hello, thank you for the message.
Yes, the deletions were intentional. I was correcting farmland areas that were incorrect or overlapping.
If something was removed incorrectly, please let me know and I will fix it.
I am still learning OpenStreetMap and appreciate your feedback.
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-20 17:31:46+00:00): Hi, thanks for your reply and for explaining your edits.

Similar to another recent changeset, I noticed that a large number of landuse areas were removed that you yourself mapped only about 10 to 12 days ago. That made me take a closer look at the edits.

Based on your username, I wondered whether you might be mapping with a video game or fictional use case in mind. If so, and I may be mistaken, please note that in the OpenStreetMap project we map what exists on the ground and can be verified from reliable sources such as aerial imagery, surveys, or local knowledge, not what might exist in a game or simulation.

When comparing your recent edits with the available satellite imagery in this area, it seems there may still be room for improvement and alignment with what is actually visible on the ground.

This wiki page explains the principle in more detail and may be helpful:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground
NeisBot (2026-01-21 07:22:56+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 11 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/459802056 v2 | 7 crossings
https://osm.org/way/459802039 v2 | 4 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/4555422764 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177486156
gscscnd (2026-01-21 18:59:32+00:00): public_transport=stop_position jest tutaj nieprawidłowe.
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 01:15:02+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawną składnię. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Adres strony internetowej został skrócony przez serwis typu URL shortener. Przekazując adres strony, upewnij się, że jest on w pełnej, bezpośredniej formie.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/197047346

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
maro21 (2026-01-20 22:17:16+00:00): Co oznacza tag [church:id]?
WieKo68 (2026-01-20 22:22:34+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177475807#map=19/52.151756/20.848634
arvdk (2026-01-22 08:51:23+00:00): Goede aanvulling, top :~)
NeisBot (2026-01-21 07:23:04+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 7 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/913480307 v2 | 6 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/8485666419 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177486951
NeisReview (2026-01-28 07:32:34+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/177520350
Frans S (2026-01-21 12:37:23+00:00): Hello again. 
You added a lot of fixme=yes  tags to buildings. Why? Are you not sure that you mapped them correctly ? (your mappings are fair, seen the dense build area here.)
Switch to the Esri world imagery ( you did that. Didn't you? Adjust the imagery so that it fits the buildings on the Bing Imagery. (a Validator will correct the mappings when it is necessary.
Buildings ought to be tagged as building=yes by default. (We cannot determine the use of a building from a satellite image.). 
This has to be done by local mappers.
Best regards
JeroenvanderGun (2026-05-22 12:17:21+00:00): The treaty signed in 2023 is not in force yet, because the approval process is still ongoing. There does seem to be some progress this year:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Disputed_territories#North_America

Also note that once the agreement is in force, there will be a baseline closing Oyster Pond such that Oyster Pond will not be part of the territorial sea (but instead internal waters).
JeroenvanderGun (2026-05-22 22:00:29+00:00): Ik heb de Nederlandse claim op Oyster Pond weer terug ingevoerd zodat die weer correct wordt weergegeven, maar daarbij jouw 2023-geometrie van de grens volledig intact gelaten. De overige verschillen met de oude grens zijn waarschijnlijk klein en niet echt de moeite waard om nu ongedaan te maken.

Ik heb ook note-tags toegevoegd om duidelijk te maken dat alvast de 2023-geometrie is gebruikt, maar dat het 2023-verdrag nog niet in werking is.

Zodra het verdrag in werking treedt, zijn nu alleen nog maar hele eenvoudige wijzigingen in Oyster Pond nodig.
democat (2026-01-21 06:11:15+00:00): Hey there, thanks for your change! There's no need to split these streets unless something changes with their tags, like road surface or lane count. Also, landuses should generally not share nodes with roads, since they make it hard to change the landuses separate from the road way.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177487460
Supaplex (2026-01-21 02:24:36+00:00): 不要一個物件上傳一次請不要用非正規編輯器，會跳過不少QA工具的檢核
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177488143
Fizzie-DWG (2026-01-21 04:13:36+00:00): DWG revert – improper deletions / changes

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/177503385
NeisBot (2026-01-20 18:13:22+00:00): Hi AlimiGaming1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 80% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 116 landuse(s)
- 1 natural(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177488613
AlimiGaming1 (2026-01-20 18:18:50+00:00): Hello, thank you for the message.
Yes, the deletions were intentional. I was correcting farmland areas that were incorrect or overlapping.
If something was removed incorrectly, please let me know and I will fix it.
I am still learning OpenStreetMap and appreciate your feedback.
pitscheplatsch (2026-01-20 18:24:11+00:00): 👍 Thank you.

Best regards,
Pascal
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 00:54:48+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/way/895931146

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 01:14:53+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/way/895931146

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-02-04 01:48:38+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13471248691/history has housenumber = 1a that was added in this edit
Is it just less-used duplicate of addr:housenumber ?
See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:housenumber

Is there any reason to not change to more widely used key?
herisusa (2026-02-04 19:52:49+00:00): Hello,
it was a mistake from mysite.
I`ve change it now.
Fizzie-DWG (2026-01-21 04:11:47+00:00): Please see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/19621
Norbert Dichter (2026-01-21 15:41:05+00:00): Hello, thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. Thank you for your contribution. The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. Or just hit the Q-key.
Also please keep in mind: many buildings are very close but do not actually touch each other, try to map them close to each other without letting them connect or share nodes with each other, roads, or residential area outlines. In the iD web editor, holding down the "alt" key will keep nodes from "snapping" to each other and accidentally connecting.  Thanks so much for your contribution, Norbert 'Nodi' Dichter, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177488830
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 00:54:49+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/1468833550

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 01:14:55+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/1468833550

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Pikse (2026-01-22 10:18:44+00:00): It is true that distinction can be made between German-language words and words that are mere transcriptions but name:<lang> keys are not explicitly meant for exonyms, exceptional names or names of certain language origin. These language tags are used to store names that are just commonly used in given language, and are expected to appear on (modern) maps in given language, which includes transcribed names.

A few users have expressed a view that transcriptions shouldn't be stored in OSM at all because in theory transcription can be automatic but in reality there likely isn't any data consumer that can transcribe names reliably, so that relevant transcription system for each language is selected in the first place and many possible exceptions are handled properly. So if transcriptions were just ditched from OSM it'd mean that language specific renderers would be pretty much stuck with name variants that are definitely inappropriate in given language.

The way you change names is in first place problematic because you present historical names as if they were current names, which is grossly misleading. As I already pointed out earlier (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/176862757) old_name:de key exist for names that not current and in most cases names that you add already were present using that key.

Note that this kind of edits have been reported to DWG in the past already have been reverted as inappropriate (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/36561697).
Pikse (2026-02-13 10:41:47+00:00): I've reverted this change and related recent changes in this area.
NeisBot (2026-01-20 18:31:21+00:00): Hi Eldarado, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 80% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 20 highway(s)
- 3 name(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177489413
Eldarado (2026-06-15 06:19:52+00:00): Intentional. There's a new railway that cut many roads and made'em usless
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-15 06:27:58+00:00): Thanks for getting back to me, even though my comment was already five months old. :)
Eldarado (2026-06-15 07:32:50+00:00): Better late, than never ))
Actually I just discovered commments to changesets
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-15 07:38:41+00:00): True, better late than never. :)

Out of curiosity: Is there anything that could have helped you notice changeset comments earlier?
Eldarado (2026-06-16 05:10:59+00:00): Maybe notifications center or some kind of chat
Amany_Ahmed (2026-01-21 10:19:41+00:00): Hello Bakr Al-kahlani,
I noticed that you reclassified several unclassified roads and upgraded them to trunk roads, which does not seem consistent with OSM road classification guidelines.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway=trunk
According to OSM rules, the  trunk classification has specific criteria and is usually based on the road’s functional importance and connectivity, not only its width or appearance.
Examples of unclassified roads that were upgraded to trunk:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1104176878
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/274013963
In addition, you added some roads that are not visible in any available satellite imagery, yet they were tagged with a high classification (secondary) and directional attributes.
Example:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1468843846
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1468843859
Could you please review these edits, verify them against reliable sources or imagery, and correct the road classifications and added features where necessary?
Thank you for your cooperation.
Best regards,
Amany Ahmed
NeisBot (2026-01-21 07:23:25+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 24 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1352289493 v1 | 9 crossings
https://osm.org/way/861132315 v1 | 6 crossings
https://osm.org/way/848077485 v4 | 4 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/8025916462 v2
https://osm.org/node/7913601687 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177489496
NeisReview (2026-01-28 07:32:34+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/177533079
https://osm.org/changeset/177533281
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-21 19:28:44+00:00): please, follow https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-21 19:29:22+00:00): and if you look for things to map - feel free to ask for advice on https://community.openstreetmap.org/ (or even here)
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-01-21 20:14:12+00:00): and on looking in detail what this suspect edit was doing: it was a vandalism, setting 

name=Yakari a Malý Blesk

I probably should be more suspicious about people being malicious and stupid
Yakari (kleiner Indianer) (2026-01-21 20:24:24+00:00): I was too much frustrated! But I reverted it in the morning, which damage would make?
Jakuje (2026-01-21 20:24:39+00:00): And they even boast about doing this about doing this on talk-cz:
https://openstreetmap.cz/talkcz/c4402
I am watching this user (changing his name over they years) and I am still not sure if he is that dumb or trying to be funny.

Ales, please stop this!
kenken234 (2026-01-20 18:36:48+00:00): https://www.mpa.gov.sg/docs/mpalibraries/circulars-and-notices/pc25-03.pdf?sfvrsn=d2a17764_1
Stalker61 (2026-02-01 11:35:57+00:00): Здравствуйте.
 Полигон СНТ, а вы НСТ вносите. Кому такая халтура нужна?
Ozon OSM12 (2026-02-01 17:02:57+00:00): Спасибо, что исправили. Не обратила внимание, что наименование СНТ уже внесено в ОСМ, и внесла в виде, как указано в кадастре
Norbert Dichter (2026-02-02 20:29:13+00:00): Hello, thanks for mapping and welcome to HOT. Thank you for your contribution. The buildings you mapped are well done as to their location. But pay attention to the squareness of the corners. Always draw buildings as square and precise as you can. Then add the Building feature type. And last, right click it and click the square icon. Or just hit the Q-key.
Also please keep in mind: many buildings are very close but do not actually touch each other, try to map them close to each other without letting them connect or share nodes with each other, roads, or residential area outlines. In the iD web editor, holding down the "alt" key will keep nodes from "snapping" to each other and accidentally connecting.  Thanks so much for your contribution, Norbert 'Nodi' Dichter, HOT validator.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177489904
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 00:54:41+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/707875866

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2026-01-23 01:14:47+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/707875866

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NeisBot (2026-01-21 07:23:31+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 22 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1316677291 v1 | 11 crossings
https://osm.org/way/660604624 v24 | 10 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/12186187569 v3

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=177490258
NeisReview (2026-01-29 07:09:45+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/177821020
kywrd (2026-01-20 19:21:19+00:00): 环湖绿道一侧有围网，隔开一级水源地涵养林和俯仰之间公园。