piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Szymson (2026-03-06 14:52:41+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179450676
Szymson (2026-03-06 14:52:46+00:00): Ogarnięte
Penegal (2026-03-16 17:44:08+00:00): Salutations, Sly!

Cette ligne Préalpes de Savoie ne me revient guère : on sent la personne sans imagination ni sources qui a tracé un grand trait pour dire « kekparparla » afin que ça s’affiche sur la carte, ou juste pouvoir dire « C’est mappé ! », mais sans savoir elle-même ce que c’est, ce que ça inclut, où ça s’arrête approximativement… Le genre de truc que, selon moi, tu peux supprimer silencieusement…

Je ne dis pas qu’on ne doit pas mapper ce genre de massifs (j’y travaille moi-même, actuellement, comme documenté ici: https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Penegal/diary/403620), mais alors on met au moins grossièrement une limite, on s’appuie sur le relief existant… Sur le cas que tu pointes, c’est vraiment ce qui se fait de pire en matière topographique.

Si on veut mapper les Préalpes de Savoie (je dis « si », car je n’ai pas assez d’infos pour juger de la pertinence de la chose actuellement), il faut, selon moi, mapper les massifs constitutifs des Préalpes de Savoie (Bauges, Chartreuse…), puis faire une relation qui les englobe, comme la relation du Luberon (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/19313950) qui englobe celles du Petit Luberon (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20328114), du Grand Luberon (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20328113) et du Luberon oriental (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20328112).
sly (2026-03-16 20:41:51+00:00): Salut Penegal, 
D'accord sur tout.
Mais je comprends que l'une des difficultés des massifs de montagne, c'est le consensus. Tant sur leur "frontières" floues, que même sur leur existence.
Ici, je m'intéresse surtout à l'existence, je vois bien que géométriquement c'est mauvais, mais pour autant je serais près à l'améliorer si j'arrivais à donner un usage à cet ensemble. Hors j'en ai jamais entendu parlé.

Ces "Préalpes de Savoie" ont été rentrées par Martin qui ne semble pas local, il est slovaque. Et ce que je suppose, c'est qu'il n'a fait que recopier une autre sources : wikidata.
Mais cette source elle-même n'a initialement pas été créée en français.
De fil en aiguille, je tombe sur https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%A9alpes_de_Savoie qui a été créé après coup.

Vraiment, ça fait penser que certains wikipediens sont à la recherche d'exhaustivité, même si cela conduit à raconter des trucs assez douteux.

Bref, à la fin, je n'ose plus le supprimer, de peur d'être accuser de vandalisme, car on va me dire, mais si regarde, y'a une page sur wikipedia !
Penegal (2026-03-17 08:12:06+00:00): Je vais enfoncer une porte ouverte, mais une page Wikipédia ne prouve rien, si ce n’est… qu’il y a un contributeur WP qui a jugé utile de créer une page. En l’occurrence, c’est une ébauche, très brève, sans source, donc ça ne prouve rien, si ce n’est que personne n’a jugé avoir assez de matière pour justifier sa suppression.

Et puis, Préalpes de Savoie, ça sonne plus comme une dénomination commode, voire touristique, juste pour désigner une partie des Préalpes, mais concrètement, qu’est-ce qui justifie que cet ensemble des Préalpes soit séparé des autres parties de Préalpes ? Est-ce parce que les paysages sont différents des autres Préalpes ? Les sols ? Les roches ? Les forêts ? Les reliefs ? Parce que, si c’est juste pour désigner arbitrairement une zone géographique, ça ne constitue pas une région naturelle comme Revermont ou Xaintois, qui s’appuie elle sur des reliefs, des vallées, des sols, de la géologie, des marais…

J’avais eu le même cas avec un autre contributeur qui avait créé la relation Jura français (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3078420) qui paraissait tellement évidente que personne n’avait contesté. Cela dit, quand j’ai creusé, je me suis vite rendu compte… qu’on était sur une simple définition administrative, qui listait en fait les communes considérées par l’administration comme relevant d’une zone de montagne, à savoir le Jura. Une définition qui n’était pas du tout topographique, donc, et j’ai bien l’impression que c’est le cas ici : quand on fait une recherche sur « Préalpes de Savoie », mis à part des pages WP, on trouve surtout… des sites commerciaux et touristiques. Là encore, pas une région naturelle.

Pour moi, ça peut être supprimé en justifiant de l’absence de définition topographique de cette région et du caractère passablement commercial de cette dénomination. Ça n’empêchera pas de la recréer plus précisément plus tard, s’il s’avère que des sources d’autorité existent, mais dans l’intervalle, c’est plus une pollution de la base OSM avec une entité qui n’a rien de géographique qu’autre chose.
sly (2026-03-17 12:09:12+00:00): Aller, tu m'as convaincu... et comme une discussion ici sur un changeset n'est pas très pratique, je ré-utilise le sujet sur le forum OSM-fr ici : https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/massifs-montagneux-de-france/2743/5 pour ouvrir la discussion à ceux qui voudrait garder ou non les "Préalpes de Savoie" et ainsi ne pas faire cette opération discrètement.
NeisBot (2026-03-06 14:48:44+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13507112269 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Pet grooming salon"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisBot (2026-03-06 14:54:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13506981913 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "General store"

#MapWithoutSpam
mueschel (2026-03-12 11:40:45+00:00): Please stop creating new accounts and importing your POIs one-by-one. Please read and obey the guidelines for imports and professional editing:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Import/Guidelines
https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/6/62/Organised_Editing_Guidelines.pdf
aaronq227 (2026-03-11 21:20:16+00:00): Hi maifeeulasad,
I noticed you added motorways around toll booths. The OSM Wiki mentions for multiple toll booths "where there is physical separation between lines at toll gates, the lines may be mapped as separate highway=* ways. For practical reasons, this is not always done” (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:barrier%3Dtoll_booth#How_to_map). 
Since the lanes here don't appear to be physically separated — only the toll booths themselves are — would you consider removing the additional motorways and adding toll=yes on the motorways that leads up to the toll booths? 

Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you!
maifeeulasad (2026-03-11 23:31:07+00:00): hello aaronq227

sorry i missed this discussion. thanks for raising the concern.

making the requested changes asap! will wait for your feedback.
aaronq227 (2026-03-12 18:31:21+00:00): Thank you for updating the area, it looks good!
osmviborg (2026-03-07 07:13:57+00:00): Hej, det er din kommune der placerer adressepunktet. I OSM bliver punkterne automatisk opdateret fra Danmarks Adresser, dagligt. En henvendelse til Ringsted kommune kan være nødvendig for at få punktet placeret der hvor du mener det skal være.
Jakobsen_lab103 (2026-03-07 07:43:09+00:00): Tak for info - Jeg har rettet henvendles til kunnunen med henblik på at rettet markør og husnummer så det kommer til at følge lovgivninge vedr fortløbende nummer på vejen. 
/J
NeisBot (2026-03-06 15:21:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13520157875 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Animal Hospital"

#MapWithoutSpam
Alvarado2510 (2026-03-25 14:41:03+00:00): Buenos días, calle 3a norte esta mencionada en la ley, limites político entre Nueva California y Volcán, aquí la fuente: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/images/e/ee/D.TierrasAltas.pdf , pagina 7, usted la cambio a calle 5a Oeste, me gustaría saber sus comentario basados en el cambio del nombre de la calle.
sikmir (2026-03-08 08:59:02+00:00): Исправил, было некорректно
HAALAND_ (2026-03-07 02:34:51+00:00): 真有这个司法鉴定中心吗，好像没看见过🤔
jack walker2 (2026-03-07 05:43:41+00:00): 有的
HAALAND_ (2026-03-07 13:18:26+00:00): 那我就不知道了 反正每天路过的时候没看见过
Hugoren Martinako (2026-03-09 13:09:01+00:00): Buenas de nuevo, en OSM no debemos introducir este tipo de elementos históricos. Solo en muy contadas excepciones con una justificación lógica u organizativa.
Esta relación apunta a una división histórica ya no presente en la actualidad. Para eso está OHM.

Saludos
ReyDerayos24 (2026-03-09 17:03:16+00:00): Hecho. https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179595105

Saludos
iandees (2026-03-06 15:42:12+00:00): Node 1628701134 was reverted in changeset 179452693 (accidental drag detected by node-drag-watcher).
rempshaener (2026-03-06 20:06:07+00:00): Hallo,
die Wege https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1486076289 und https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1486076291 existieren vor Ort nicht. Die Fahrwege stehen in der Regel im 90-Grad-Winkel zur Parktasche.
Dort sind keine Fahrgassen, das sind die Parktaschen.
Viele Grüße
rempshaener (2026-03-06 20:09:12+00:00): Das Stück https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1486076290 ergibt keinen Sinn - die Fahrzeuge können ja bis an den Sperrpfosten heranfahren.
Viele Grüße
Michi_10 (2026-03-07 16:26:31+00:00): Hi,
danke für deine Rückmeldung. Ich habe nun die Wege way/1486076289 und way/1486076291 entfernt, da es Parktaschen sind. Dass die Fahrzeuge bis an den Sperrpfosten heranfahren können, habe ich nun auch behoben.
Viele Grüße und einen schönen Abend noch
rempshaener (2026-03-07 17:49:03+00:00): Dankeschön
NeisBot (2026-03-06 16:03:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13537229303 v2

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Catering service"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisBot (2026-03-06 16:06:40+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 23 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/1486095981 v1 | 6 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1484686006 v3 | 5 crossings
https://osm.org/way/1486053172 v2 | 3 crossings

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179453606
NeisReview (2026-03-14 17:33:26+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/179455270
https://osm.org/changeset/179493529
NeisBot (2026-03-06 16:06:43+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13621493537 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Fire equipment supplier"

#MapWithoutSpam
eggie (2026-03-06 18:53:25+00:00): Hoi.. Kijk even in de wiki..
Implies
access=no
bus=designated
emergency=yes

Dat hoef je dus niet toe te voegen. Het is default.
Mvg,
eggie
James_OWORNTE (2026-03-20 07:37:47+00:00): The task was well mapped. I simplified some objects that were mapped with too many nodes, using SHIFT+Y in JOSM. Once again, thank you for your participation!
rtwbike (2026-03-10 08:37:09+00:00): Hi. I try to keep the Horsforth area of Leeds up-to-date and I noticed that this changeset adds an old FHRS ID to the new Costa Coffee (node 10801914248). The added FHRS code is for the previous Costa Coffee at 33A Town Street which is not the current Costa Coffee just up the road at 38 Town Street. If I remove this old FHRS code that you've added, is it likely that you'll add it back?
smsm1 (2026-03-10 10:37:29+00:00): Thanks for raising my oversight on this example, I'll do better checks going forward to prevent the same thing happening again.

I've been trying to reduce the length of some of the bars on https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhodot/summary.html to improve the FHRS coverage.

This exact issue of FHRS data still existing after a place has closed or changed is something that the Edinburgh OSM group have picked up on, as we think it would be good for there to be some form of way to tell the above linked tool that the place has closed and thus no longer exists thus preventing these sorts of issues longer term.
rtwbike (2026-03-10 11:23:41+00:00): BTW, thanks for trying to improve the FHRS IDs. That link you shared is very interesting.

I've emailed Leeds City Council about the specific Costa to ask them why they seem to be inspecting something that has closed down. 

I'll note that over the last couple of years I have noticed quite a few establishments around Horsforth (an area of north west Leeds) have seemingly gained new FHRS IDs in the official data i.e. they already had FHRS IDs marked on OSM but then I've found that those no longer existed on the FSA site. I've just found this frustrating and I've manually found their new IDs and updated them as and when I notice. I'd assumed this was something that most be happening everywhere but the link you shared is now making me wonder if there could be specific things Leeds City Council are doing differently to other areas that mess up the data quality.
smsm1 (2026-03-10 12:38:25+00:00): Based on the FHRS id changes I've seen it look like it's linked to an inspection, so a new inspection can mean a new ID.

The map on https://gregrs.dev.openstreetmap.org/fhodot/ and the different map layers is really useful for updating the ids, especially via JOSM. 

You can click on a region an get a graph below the map showing the FHRS id coverage over time. There's 2 graphs which highlight different data depending on which layer you are on (FHRS establishments vs OSM objects). It looks like the matching was high for Leeds back in 2019/2020 and then slowly over time has reduced, I suspect due to the usual churn of business changes and new inspections.

The Edinburgh OSM group have questions about the inconsistency that some things can disappear straight away, and others and stay for years after they are closed.
rtwbike (2026-03-10 16:48:48+00:00): I got a reply from LCC who say there was a mistake with the two Costas and it'll be updated with the FSA this week.
Johnny Mapperseed (2026-03-06 16:30:28+00:00): Used OSIP imagery as a reference
Emilius123 (2026-03-06 18:24:41+00:00): Herzlichen Dank.
GiovanniPen (2026-03-23 13:02:15+00:00): ciao, cos'è quel source ref che hai inserito (ho letto dalla wiki "Il codice della sezione che monitora la situazione di quel determinato percorso" ma la sede non è su un percorso? come mai hai rimosso amenity=community_centre
club=sport? so che nella wiki non sarebbero previsti ma imho "male non fanno"
ps si può aggiungere loc_name=CAI Acireale o vengo revertato? lol
pps c'è ancora node/5822628262 che credo sia stata spostata qui. cosa si fa? si sposta il precedente in quanto più vecchio e si elimina questo (mantenendo i dettagli mancanti) o si elimina/tagga come obsoleto quello vecchio?
grazie :)
Andrea Del Sarto (2026-03-23 17:59:37+00:00): Ciao  GiovanniPen,

- nella parte della wiki relativa alle sedi è presente il tag source:ref per indicare la Sezione, è per quello che viene inserito

- non è tanto che non sono previsti e che proprio non rapresentano il luogo

- alcuni usato il tag short_name=*

- in generale, se possibile si sceglie la prima opzione che hai detto; cioè spostare/aggiornare il vecchio

grazie a te e buona mappatura.
NeisBot (2026-03-06 17:27:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1486113822 v1

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Mineral Water Warehouse"

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisRevert (2026-03-15 05:33:02+00:00): 🔄🤖 Partly reverted due to either a lack of response from the contributor or remaining promotional text by https://osm.org/changeset/179883774
(Delete spam tags. First version)
babak ghasemi (2026-03-06 17:56:43+00:00): tnx
NeisBot (2026-03-06 17:39:45+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/572375381 v4

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Kombi ve Klima Tamir Merkezi"
---
Örneğin metnin daha tarafsız ve gerçek bir versiyonu şöyle olabilir: "Kombi ve Klima Tamir Merkezi"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-15 05:33:08+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/179458407
Nakaner-repair (2026-03-06 17:36:54+00:00): This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 173312908, 173358110, 173392255, 174404424, 174496136, 174714883, 174714912, 176126961.
NeisBot (2026-03-06 17:42:49+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/1242316159 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Vehicle repair shop"
---
Örneğin metnin daha tarafsız ve gerçek bir versiyonu şöyle olabilir: "Araç tamirhanesi"
---
(Auto-translation)

#MapWithoutSpam
NeisReview (2026-03-15 05:33:09+00:00): 👍 Thank you for updating the element by https://osm.org/changeset/179458402
Frans S (2026-03-07 13:38:50+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
This is a building only project. However, when you map highways, tag them as per wiki highways africa.
'Track' to be used  to rivers, wood, agricultural plots. 
Best regards
habi (2026-03-06 17:51:05+00:00): Nein, Note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5192871
NeisBot (2026-03-06 17:54:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/way/368433878 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Discount store"

#MapWithoutSpam
CAM-Gerlach (2026-03-11 02:05:28+00:00): Blatant SEO spam description removed in changeset 179665276 https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179665276
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-04 04:16:29+00:00): Clean up remaining spammy/incorrect tags on SEO POI "Friday Deals" in changeset 183622000

https://osm.org/changeset/183622000
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-03-11 02:02:13+00:00): Reverted adding a duplicate store POI by a SEO spammer of one that's already tagged, which to boot is missing any other meaningful tags

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/179665249
NeisBot (2026-03-06 18:00:39+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 28 potential crossings.

⚠️️ Problematic elements (top 3):
https://osm.org/way/162360245 v5 | 9 crossings
https://osm.org/way/23001424 v14 | 9 crossings
https://osm.org/way/118195512 v2 | 6 crossings

⚠️ Dragged Nodes (max 3):
https://osm.org/node/235832270 v9
https://osm.org/node/1329803092 v2

Would you mind revisiting those areas?

#CrossingCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=179458285
NeisReview (2026-03-15 05:33:24+00:00): ✅ Should be fixed by 
https://osm.org/changeset/179476772
https://osm.org/changeset/179573892
NeisBot (2026-03-06 18:14:22+00:00): Hi chefjack00, 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:
- 95 building(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=179458898
chefjack00 (2026-03-06 18:18:11+00:00): Yes, replaced them
Kees 59 (2026-03-10 10:33:54+00:00): Gaarne controle van deze wijziging.

De node gezondheidscentrum heeft addr:housnumber en een aantal andere tags aangepast naar de apotheek die al zijn eigen node heeft (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/267383943).

Huisnummer 130 kan nu niet meer gevonden worden en 140 bestaat nu dubbel.
NeisBot (2026-03-06 18:24:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description, note or slogan contain 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.

⚠️️ Problematic element (limit 1):
https://osm.org/node/13618528168 v3

Could you please revise your text accordingly?

✅ For example, a more neutral and factual version of your text could be: "Candy store"

#MapWithoutSpam