piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
user_5589 (2025-07-20 11:55:52+00:00): "You must not delete the work of other contributors."

Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

I did NOT "delete" the work of other contributors. I replaced it with better tagging. To quote the wiki:

"The following closed ways should be treated as linear features:

* "barrier=*, for thicker hedges or walls or detailed mapping defined using an area add area=yes
* "highway=*, see 'Highway areas' below for more details"

Those highway=footway and area=yes tags have highway=footway lines within them. 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway

That tagging which I correctly used is describing the shape of a pavement area. The linear highway=footway ways through the area tagged with area:highway are the ones used for routing.

The combination that you want to use occurs 456,857 times, whereas area:highway is used 349,749 times.

So get off your high horse and actually look at tagging use reality instead.
Britzz (2025-07-21 16:50:54+00:00): Bonjour, ayons un dialogue constructif sans affect,
lire "Oh dear. Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear" bien qu'amusant ne me semble pas en prendre la bonne direction ;-)
Absolument d'accord pour que "area:highway" soit possible MAIS ce n'est pas une raison pour supprimer (c'est bien ce que vous avez fait) highway=footway + area=yes, les deux peuvent co-exister, créez des ways avec seulement "area:highway" si vous préférez mais ne supprimez pas les tags pré-existants, j'insiste.
Quant au fond, regardons en effet le wiki, la page https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area indique assez clairement que votre position n'est pas clairement validée :
"Note: There is currently no clear agreement on how highway tag values other than pedestrian should be treated when also tagged with area=yes"
Quant à la page que vous prenez en référence (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:area:highway), j'y lis :
- "The tag is not currently rendered in the Standard layer (OSM Carto) on the OpenStreetMap website" : ce n'est pas une raison suffisante pour préférer "highway=footway + area=yes" mais suffisante pour préférer conserver, au moins encore pour l'instant, ces tags pour "voir" ces surfaces dans JOSM ou sur https://www.openstreetmap.org/
- par ailleurs, "area=yes on a highway=* describes a routable highway area on which the dedicated traffic can route omnidirectionally(...) This is typical for pedestrian areas" : s'agissant de trottoirs qui peuvent donc être parcourus par les piétons "omnidirectionally", l'association des tags "highway=footway + area=yes" est donc parfaitement adaptée.
Ma conclusion :
- c'est très bien de dialoguer ;
- sans condescendance, c'est mieux ;
- en cas de désaccord, ne pas altérer le travail des autres contributeurs doit être une ligne de conduite et tant pis si cela génère de multiples tags, actuellement redondants.
Qu'en pensez-vous ?
Britzz (2025-07-18 07:27:15+00:00): Merci de ne pas supprimer area=yes
highway=footway
sur les trottoirs.
OK pour ajouter area:highway=footway
mais pas supprimer les tags posés par d'autres contributeurs avant vous, ce ne sont pas des erreurs.
Glassman (2025-07-15 23:42:09+00:00): Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.

I did remove a node with parking spaces that were along the old town road and next to the river. 

I am curious, the county show town road in a few places. Do you know if the county will be renaming these some of these roads?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168941098
JedOfSequim (2025-07-16 22:01:58+00:00): Thanks for the review, AND thanks for catching the parking spaces. I realized afterwards that I'd seen them along the old road, and when I went back to remove them, I couldn't find them -- quick work on your part.
So far as I know the county has no plans to change the names of any of the segments of the road. I have a connection to the fire dept, and they care strongly about this kind of thing, so I'll ask them at our next meeting.
Glassman (2025-07-16 22:29:30+00:00): Let me know if I can be of help. I'm located in Mount Vernon and have gotten to know the gis people in the city as well as the county. They can be a big help. 

Regarding the fire department, I know they are active in a number of communities around the country. It easy for them to add fire hydrants and other features that can help them.
gscholz (2026-01-13 09:29:00+00:00): HI Jesus,
this changeset has created errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-95.19717&lat=16.18840&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

As this might be a bus route, please educate yourself about how to edit this kind of feature properly:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Buses

Kind regards
Guido
skfd (2025-08-24 21:40:18+00:00): do you think it's "Wellington St W / Stafford St" from across the street? We have dupes now
Jarek 🚲 (2025-08-24 23:09:16+00:00): I'm not sure off the top of my head. Sorry that I missed the one on the north side when updating!

I'd guess so from imagery: Bing and Esri in Toronto are older and show a dock only on north side, Mapbox and the City ortho imagery show a dock only on the south side. But I can try to pass by and verify maybe this week.
skfd (2025-08-24 23:19:48+00:00): No big deal, I'll move it. You are right!
Jeffrey Friedl (2025-09-03 22:42:26+00:00): Why was this change made? This road is well paved, not gravel.
fortera_au (2025-08-01 23:46:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 169841222, 169841249, 169841240, 169841260, 169841200, 169841256, 169841237, 169841215, 169841214, 169841228, 169841245, 169841232 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source
NeatNit (2025-07-30 10:30:44+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contribution.

Bus stop names are taken from government sources. This name is supposed to match the name written on the sign. Can you tell me what the name on the sign is?

Also, you seem to have moved a cafe node. Was this an accident?
Danil (2025-07-28 03:25:13+00:00): perbaikan ini tidak perlu, wikidata yang dihapus justru menunjukkan perbedaan keempat "Sungai Rambai" di wilayah yang berbeda.

Penambahan nama kabupaten di belakang nama justru membuat datanya jadi redundant
Comino (2025-07-15 07:29:03+00:00): Hi Eloisa Ferrari,

In your edit you use the deprecated tag "payment:bitcoin=yes".

Please DELETE the payment:bitcoin=yes tag !
Use the "currency:XBT=yes" instead.

For more information please read: https://gitea.btcmap.org/teambtcmap/btcmap-general/wiki/Tagging-Merchants#legacy-tags
and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bitcoin

Happy mapping,

Edwin
NeisBot (2025-07-15 03:16:32+00:00): Hi Ovando12, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added a new restaurant node with detailed tags including name, address, opening hours, and cuisine."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
fortera_au (2025-08-01 23:47:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 169841222, 169841249, 169841240, 169841260, 169841200, 169841256, 169841237, 169841215, 169841214, 169841228, 169841245, 169841232 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: incompatible source
bartgron (2025-07-15 19:21:14+00:00): Witaj, na jakiej podstawie dodałeś geometrię domów?
NeisBot (2025-07-15 03:45:41+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

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

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Comment #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 06:05:16+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/169090541
NeisBot (2025-07-15 05:06:28+00:00): Hi Ashes SAF, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Added Sacramento Credit Union bank with contact details and opening hours."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #NoComment #AIgenerated
Ashes SAF (2025-07-15 05:48:32+00:00): Added Sacramento Credit Union and added wlan tag to Belle Coolidge
scruss (2025-08-09 21:49:41+00:00): > according to the Lyft-owned street-level imagery

can other public (not Lyft) mappers access and verify this information?
YuliyaShustava_lyft (2025-08-12 09:58:27+00:00): Hi, Scruss! 
My name is Yuliya, and I am the Quality Control Lead on the OSM team at Lyft.
We use our proprietary data sources, detailed at https://github.com/Test-DCT/OSM-LYFT-DCT/blob/1beae15649f43e0bef043fc0ef3950d7cbfdc867/osmtrainingmaterialsfeatures/Lyft-owned%20sources%20(ex.%20proprietary%20sources).md. Our organization maintains a comprehensive dataset of street-level imagery, which is considered proprietary and is not accessible to the general public. This allows us to make map changes more quickly, as our information can sometimes be more up-to-date than what's available in OSM. If source verification is needed in particular case, we can provide the imagery directly within changeset comments.
In this case, the turn lanes were added based on the June Lyft-owned street view imagery. However, the Bing satellite image shows the same information. Therefore, you may verify our changeset using Bing.

Best regards, Yuliya
b-jazz (2025-07-16 14:04:55+00:00): Hey there CurlingMan13,

Thanks for helping clean up golf courses. FYI, you can't share fairway nodes with the green nodes when you have a fairway before and after a hole like the fourth hole in this changeset. Something about it not being a mathematically simple geometry. Some editors (JOSM in particular) will warn you against that type of edit, but I guess iD doesn't. I've gone ahead and fixed it up here (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1415176817) for you but wanted you to be aware for future edits where the green doesn't have a clear fringe around it.

Thanks.
CurlingMan13 (2025-07-16 14:21:45+00:00): I thought it was acceptable so long as they don't partially overlap.  Overlapping is what screams OSMOSE/KeepRight issue flags.

You're correct, no errors on iD, but I will try take your feedback into account on the next golf course cleanup that screams for attention.  Wasn't aware that it was incorrect.  Would be a lot easier if the people originally mapping the golf courses would spend the time and care to do it correctly the first time, but I digress.
b-jazz (2025-07-16 14:36:08+00:00): Digress away! I've focused my attention this year on cleaning up all fairway/green overlaps. I've probably tackled 12,000+ instances so far this year and am exhausted. I have about 8,000 to go. I've also set up daily diffs so I can catch people making these "mistakes" early on so that they don't spread. You can see some of my progress on my maproulette challenge: https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/50926.

You're right that the partial overlaps are evil and need to be wiped off the map. I don't quite understand all of the math/geometry theories behind it, but somehow it is "cleaner" to have it drawn as two fairway parts instead of a single one. Ideally, the grounds crew would leave a fringe around the green and you can just draw the fairway all the way around the green and leave a gap. At that point, a multipolygon is the cleanest representation. 

Thanks again for the assist.
aceman444 (2025-07-15 08:05:36+00:00): Zdravim, co ste tu revertovali a preco?
HAALAND_ (2026-03-14 07:53:58+00:00): 您好，name里应该写简体中文而不是繁体
samho1234567 (2026-03-16 07:27:14+00:00): 我在註釋中已表明：連城新天地的官方名稱為繁體字

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/800275817

https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/1973719415062279896
fortera_au (2025-07-15 12:16:24+00:00): DWG revert - questionable edits - ticket #2025071510000279

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168962539
user_5359 (2025-07-15 12:07:04+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1414806810 (one of fifteen objects). What is the mean of the tag permittedUseByDoc = для обслуживания многоквартирного жилого дома ?
KekcuHa (2025-07-15 12:14:42+00:00): The tag permittedUseByDoc=для обслуживания многоквартирного жилого дома refers to the official permitted use of the land parcel according to the Russian national property registry (ЕГРН). Specifically, the key permittedUseByDoc corresponds to the allowed land use based on the official land use classification system in Russia.

The value для обслуживания многоквартирного жилого дома translates to "for the maintenance/service of a multi-apartment residential building."  This means that the land is designated to support a multi-family residential building located on it — for example, for the building itself, adjacent infrastructure, and utility areas required for its operation.
Herwescheluc (2025-07-17 20:53:13+00:00): Guten Abend, Lokalfuerst,

habe Deine Änderung meiner Änderung Deiner Eintragung wieder auf "through|slight_right" gesetzt, da wieder der OSMOSE-Fehler auftauchte: "Reihenfolge der Abbiegespuren falsch". Schau mal hier: https://mapilio.com/app?lat=50.6760539&lng=8.274871299999973&zoom=2.617618091167369&pId=13350649, da kannst Du sehen, das die linke Spur strack nach vorne geht und die rechte den slight _right-Eintrag verdient. Mit sehr, sehr viel gutem Willen könnte man noch slight_left für die linke Spur verwenden - das halte ich aber nicht für angebracht! Doch wenn Du unbedingt ändern willst, dann bitte so... 

Die erste Änderung habe ich übrigens gemacht, weil right|slight_right bedeutet: Die linke Spur (stark rechts) kreuzt die rechte (leicht rechts)! Diesmal hast Du zudem mit slight_right||slight_right gleich 3 Spuren angegeben (2 || macht 3 Spuren) und beide Spuren parallel verschwenkt - auch nicht sinnvoll.

Solltest Du nocheinmal auf eine von mir durchgeführte Änderung stoßen, die Dich ärgert: Einfach antickern - man kann über alles reden!

Bisher haben wir uns doch ganz gut ergänzt, oder nicht?

Liebe Grüße aus Herborn

Andreas
reigi (2025-07-16 04:15:39+00:00): Hallo hoddelac,
auf welcher Grundlage (Verkehrszeichen o.ä.) hast du diese Änderungen vorgenommen?
reigi (2025-07-16 13:50:20+00:00): Hi hoddelac, vom Adenauerring kommend habe ich keine VZ 254 auf mapillary sehen können. Trotzdem ist das nicht ausgeschlossen. Bist du sicher. Ansonsten schau mal bitte in meinen Kommentar zu CS 168945182.
hoddelac (2025-07-16 14:48:34+00:00): Doch es steht aber da, bin da Sonntag vorbei gekommen und mein Karoo hat mich dahin navigiert da ist es mir aufgefallen. wie gesagt auf Google maps ist es zu sehen
hoddelac (2025-07-16 14:50:25+00:00): https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.916198899972&lng=6.2000415999722&z=17&pKey=594939652210356&x=0.49648694557000694&y=0.4718258243290041&zoom=0&focus=photo
yelisey90 (2025-08-01 14:35:06+00:00): I reverted these edits because they included deletion of existing objects which cause some issues in iD velifator. This revertion is approved by local Geogian community

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/169821860
reigi (2025-07-16 04:14:28+00:00): Hallo hoddelac,
auf welcher Grundlage (Verkehrszeichen o.ä.) hast du diese Änderung vorgenommen?
hoddelac (2025-07-16 08:37:11+00:00): Ja genau VZ 254 sieht.an auch auf Google maps
aixbrick (2025-07-16 12:58:01+00:00): Bitte unbedingt beachten: Google Maps (und damit verbunden auch Street View) ist zur Nutzung für OSM nicht zulässig.
reigi (2025-07-16 13:52:28+00:00): Hallo hoddelac,

vorab: Google Maps ist keine erlaubte Quelle für OSM, da die Daten keine „freien“ Daten sind. Mapillary gehört zu den freien Quellen die du nutzen darfst. 
Hier gibt es Bilder, die die Situation zeigen. Auf diesem Bild kannst du erkennen, dass VZ 254 die Nutzung mit dem Fahrrad auf dem Wegstück zur Hauptstraße verbietet, aber nicht auf dem ganzen Track. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.915770999972&lng=6.1994620999722&z=17&pKey=901317512010783
Auf der anderen Seite dieses Wegstücks steht das VZ 260 mit dem Zusatzschild 1026-38 (land- und forstwirtschatlicher Verkehr frei) https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.91583397978843&lng=6.199616326543833&z=18.200281518317762&pKey=1917425371780413&x=0.4446134873054853&y=0.3872191078141084&zoom=0.6851852460839253

Du hättest also den way am Knick teilen und das Wegstück zur Straße entsprechend taggen müssen. Der Rest des tracks ist von diesem Verbot ja nicht erfasst.  Ich habe einfach mal dein Einverständnis vorausgesetzt und die Änderung durchgeführt so wie ich sie gemacht hätte. 

Access=no bewirkt übrigens, dass niemand weder zu Fuß noch mit einem Fahrzeug den Weg benutzen darf. Kommt in der Praxis nicht so häufig vor. Nähere Einzelheiten zu access=* kannst du im Wiki nachlesen. https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Key:access 
Ich empfehle dir, gerade in der Anfangszeit deines Taggings im Wiki nachzuschauen falls du dir unsicher bist. 

Viele Grüße

Reinhard
hoddelac (2025-07-16 14:44:26+00:00): Google Maps habe ich lediglich erwähnt weil man da das Schild sehen kann. Ich glaube ich lasse das ändern besser. Danke für deine Korrektur
reigi (2025-07-16 15:17:31+00:00): Lass den Kopf nicht hängen Ist nicht nur mir anfangs so gegangen wie dir. Mit der Zeit lernt man immer mehr dazu. Außerdem hast du ja darum gebeten, dass sich das mal jemand mit mehr Erfahrung ansieht. Genau dafür ist diese Funktion ja da.
hoddelac (2025-07-16 15:31:15+00:00): Die Verbindung der Knotenpunkte 50-56 würde ja jetzt auch nicht mehr stimmen
hoddelac (2025-07-16 15:45:34+00:00): Auf der von dir geänderten Seite sieht man die Schilder (VZ254) auch, sind deine Änderungen dann so richtig?

https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/hektor1989?lat=50.9157272&lng=6.1993859&z=17&pKey=1851100295409885&focus=photo
reigi (2025-07-16 15:59:51+00:00): Ich habe gerade die Änderungen hochgeladen. So dürfte es richtig getaggt sein. Aixbrick hat übrigens das passende mapillary-Bild gefunden und mir geschickt. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.9162393&lng=6.1999563999722&z=17.90732131042802&pKey=594939652210356&focus=photo Die Radroute ist natürlich dadurch unterbrochen. Das hast du richtig erkannt. Aber das können wir hier nicht lösen.
mos_next_door (2026-03-07 15:53:56+00:00): Partially reverted in https://osm.org/changeset/179498214
Do not delete buildings (or anything really) to please a QA tool.
NeisBot (2025-07-15 06:06:28+00:00): Hi matheeww98, welcome and thank you for your contribution to the OSM project!

To help improve collaboration and make your edits easier for others to understand, please consider providing brief descriptions of your changes in the comment field. This will make it easier for the community to follow your adjustments. You can find some helpful tips on good comments here: https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Furthermore, based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Modified traffic islands and crossings, adding signals and distinguishing between sidewalks and traffic islands."

PS: I’ve also sent this message via the OSM messaging system for your convenience.

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish #AIgenerated
fmc_6 (2025-07-15 09:27:21+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
Tomas Straupis (2025-07-17 07:19:23+00:00): Sveikas. Nebereikia Neravų, visi adresai ten jau Vilniaus. Aš todėl ir išėmiau.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-05-29 03:00:36+00:00): Reverted SEO spam POI change with nonsense name=* and tags

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/183331005
NeisBot (2025-07-15 06:36:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

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

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-07-18 06:04:31+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/168949635
aceman444 (2025-07-15 08:17:45+00:00): Preco revert? Nenapisali ste dovod ani sem ani do povodnej sady zmien.
mapperue (2025-07-15 07:15:14+00:00): U otváracích hodín sa medzi jednotlivými dňami používa bodkočiarka.
EfreetSK (2025-07-15 07:25:54+00:00): Aha áno, vďaka, opravím
JAAS (2025-07-15 22:14:35+00:00): Hello Miner The Miner,

This highway segment you have recently edited and switched to a `motorway` is not a `motorway` by OSM's definition and therefore should remain as trunk at this time. That CA-9 segment can be considered a motorway from the intersection with RN-14 northward, up to where it intersects with CA-9 Sur (where the Palin entry way is). 

I appreciate your good intention with this matter, but there is a reason behind this road being left as 'trunk' for the time being, at least until some major changes can be made by the local authorities on this road.

Thank you and best regards,
JAAS
user_5359 (2025-07-18 10:37:24+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/1414822842. What is the mean of the tag Santa = Apollonia ?
VLD549 (2025-07-24 17:39:03+00:00): Hi, I was asked to verify name changes. It seems to me that the word 'uitkijktoren' is necessary to be added, since the entire area is called Diessens Broek (natuurgebied).
https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diessens_Broek

Could you elaborate, as I am not sure?

Thank you!
evgenykatyshev (2025-07-15 12:24:26+00:00): You could move link for reservations to website:booking tag. I've moved.
evgenykatyshev (2025-07-15 12:27:30+00:00): Anyway thanks for your edit. Previous value was definetly wrong
user_5359 (2025-07-16 11:06:23+00:00): Welcome to OSM! What ist the mean of the tags
FDJ=Yes
PMU=Yes
Tabac=Yes
Please notice also we use lowercase for values (yes not Yes).
Fischkopp0815 (2025-07-17 08:52:09+00:00): Die Luftbilder  zeigen das noch als landwirtschaftliche Fläche.Was findet da denn z.Z. statt. Stehen da fertige Häuser?Wird da gebaut, dann wäre das landuse=construction. Oder ist das nur im Bebauungsplan als Bauland vorgesehen, dann wäre das noch landuse=agricultural. Außerdem hast Du da die landuse überlagernd eingetragen, also gleichzeitig als residential und agricultural. Das ist natürlich falsch, die Flächen können nur eins von beidem sein.