piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
tastrax (2024-03-03 10:00:22+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
HellMap (2024-03-02 10:13:24+00:00): Hello,

You deleted the informal path across the rail tracks here https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11105809910 - does it no longer exist?

Thanks
Herman Lee (2024-03-02 07:06:41+00:00): If you do not know the actual local situation of Wutong Mount, please do not modify here. Based on the discussion of community, some of the mapper decide to revert this area (but this is a extremely hard job) in which user "南昌地主" added tons of error features. If you interest in this area, you can join to the discussion here 
https://t.me/osmchina/124459
AND YOUR CHANGESET IN THIS AREA COULD BE REVERTED. 
>>>
forward 
shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:49]
报告鼠宝，有麻烦了。有其他mapper发现梧桐山区域问题，在大规模修补地主造的孽。。。这下你的revert计划更复杂了😩

shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:49]


shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:52]
不过这位毕竟对梧桐山不熟，只能发现地主把footway改成service的问题，还发现不了那些假路假溪的问题。他还以为地主干的那些事只是不熟osm犯的小错，所以在尽力修正这类路径升级的显而易见问题

Hao_Tian, [2024/3/2 15:05]
发消息让他停一下咯

shanfu, [2024/3/2 15:05]
已经发消息了
Herman Lee (2024-03-02 07:15:28+00:00): 如果您不了解梧桐山當地實際情況，請勿在此修改。 根據社區的討論，一些地圖製作者決定恢復該區域（但這是一項極其艱鉅的工作），其中用戶「南昌地主」添加了大量錯誤特徵。 如果您對此領域感興趣，可以在這裡加入討論
https://t.me/osmchina/124459
並且您在此區域中的更改集可能會被還原。
>>>
向前
shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:49]
报告鼠宝，有麻烦了。有其他mapper发现梧桐山区域问题，在大规模修补地主造的孽。。。这下你的revert计划更复杂了😩

shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:49]

shanfu, [2024/3/2 14:52]
不过这位毕竟对梧桐山不熟，只能发现地主把footway改成service的问题，还发现不了那些假路假溪的问题。他还以为地主干的那些事只是不熟osm犯的小错，所以在尽力修正这类路径升级的显而易见问题

Hao_Tian, [2024/3/2 15:05]
发消息让他停一下咯

shanfu, [2024/3/2 15:05]
已经发消息了

TRANSLATED BY GOOGLE 由Google翻譯
Koalaman (2024-03-02 15:36:21+00:00): Thank you for the info. Will stop modifying anything in this area.
MxxCon (2024-03-07 01:11:58+00:00): Hello.
This edit looks very messy and needless multipolygon relations. So many features that you mapped as multipolygons consisting of just lines could've been mapped as simple enclosed ways.
The stuff around 1256780022😵‍💫.

You also mapped certain areas as landuse=grass when it's clearly parking lots with gravel.
It feels like you are mapping just to make the map look pretty rather than accurately representing what's on the ground.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148119606
Unggo99 (2024-03-07 05:00:32+00:00): Hi,

Sorry about the small multipolygon areas, I thought it would be easier to map/manage those areas. But I also get it on a maintainence point of view.

Also I always aim to make my edits accurate, sometimes with the satallite imagery its hard to determine either the parking lot surface was actual a parking lot or one of those temporary parking area seen in construction/maintainence sites.
MxxCon (2024-03-07 05:03:06+00:00): In NYC as of a a couple of days ago Bing imagery is the most up to date, so it's probably best to map based on that.
citrula (2024-03-02 07:10:46+00:00): Thanks for the quick fix!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148119669
marquaviusvancouvermxcom (2024-03-02 07:48:21+00:00): No problem! Thanks for the encouragement!!
HellMap (2024-03-02 10:06:19+00:00): Hello!

Please don't add `bicycle=yes` to all/generic footways because this is not technically correct. Access values are for legal/allowed values. Footways should use their default global access value in Latvia, which doesn't forbid bicycles on non-sidewalks and has special rules for sidewalks. Setting any other value overrides this default, implying that there is some sort of sign or exception there. This also makes the data harder to maintain and understand. This is kind of like you wouldn't add `motorcar=yes` to every road.

Please also don't add things like `bicycle=dismount` unless it is legally signed so or physically impossible to pass while riding a bike. For example, there is nothing indicating bicycles need to dismount here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/87976329 (unless something has changed very recently).

For ways like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/631640974 , you should only add `bicycle=no` for sections that are mapped as separate ways of a shared cycle path, but not further than that.

I fixed all these. Let me know if you have any questions.

Thanks
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-02 07:31:00+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/7826822354
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/322903694

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
MxxCon (2024-03-07 01:14:28+00:00): Why so many based grass features were mapped as multipolygons?🤨That makes working with these features needlessly complex.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148120711
mipangan (2024-03-13 00:01:38+00:00): Hi! Thanks for mapping around CDO! I've noticed that you've modified some buildings that were already properly mapped. Please refrain from changing properly mapped buildings. Also, kindly square your buildings by pressing 'Q' after you trace them.
Thank you!
MikeN (2024-03-02 19:09:13+00:00): Hi, what was the reason for downgrading this section which connects other tertiary roads?
MxxCon (2024-03-07 01:15:37+00:00): In this edit too, a basic landuse feature mapped as multipolygon. This seems very unnecessary
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148121354
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-02 08:30:23+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/787869616

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
WieKo68 (2024-06-10 18:45:22+00:00): poprawiono
burrscurr (2024-03-02 15:42:54+00:00): Hi I am Your father, danke für deinen Beitrag zu OSM! Wie genau ist das mit der eingeklammerten Öffnungszeit zu verstehen? Hat das Café dann nur manchmal auf? (Damit man Daten in OSM wie die Öffnungszeiten gut verwenden kann, ist wichtig, dass sie maschinenlesbar sind und dem gängigen Format für Öffnungszeiten entsprechen.)

VG burrscurr
burrscurr (2024-03-02 15:45:51+00:00): Vielleicht hilft dir auch diese Webseite (https://projets.pavie.info/yohours/) weiter, um die Öffnungszeiten anzugeben.
Jrachi (2024-03-06 10:07:44+00:00): Ciao.
Vedo che sei molto attivo ache se hai appena iniziato.
Alcune note:
Il name va usato per inserire il nome di qualcosa, non la sua descrizione o come si chiama l'oggetto in generale.
Sui nomi delle strade minori non si dovrebbe "inventare" combinando la partenza e la destinazione, se non ha un nome ufficiale o almeno riportato su un cartello, altrimenti non si mette niente.
Il discorso vale anche per la segnaletica CAI. Non hanno un nome!
Inoltre attento al copia-incolla.
Hai inserito "name=egnavia CAI"
I guidepost non devono stare su un nodo della way, ma posizionati accanto, possibilmente nella posizione reale rispetto alla strada o incrocio.
Hai disegnato una way etichettata:
 name=strada forestale
 surface=alveo_fiume
che non hanno nessun significato per OSM. 
Tralascio che a me non sembra un ditch ma uno stream, il primo è completamente artificiale e si usa per indicare i fossi che portano acqua a scopo agricolo, il secondo è invece un corso d'acqua di origine naturale anche se modificato dall'uomo.

Mi fermo aspettando una risposta.

Ivo
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-02 09:00:45+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/node/11684030397
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11684030398

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
G_P_J (2024-03-02 10:54:22+00:00): Poprawione.
alester (2024-03-19 22:43:00+00:00): I removed most of the cases where you added "Vancouver Island Trail" or another name to a way where that certainly or almost-certainly is not the name. This included some remote logging roads where they likely have some other name, and are not dedicated solely to the trail. Route relations are a better way to handle multi-way trails like this, and the VI Trail relation already covers it. If you'd like the trail to be more visible in a specific application, it should be up to the maker of that application to provide a way to view the route, not for us to add artificial names where they aren't accurate.
DENelson83 (2024-03-20 01:26:04+00:00): In that case, I have added a map to the Wikipedia article for the Vancouver Island Trail.  That should suffice.
Branko Kokanovic (2024-10-04 16:07:28+00:00): Zdravo,
Mi smo ovde uneli 22 i 24, vidim da si promenio na 22a i 22b. Verovatno znas bolje od nas jer si verovatno lokalac, ali cisto da znas da sam ostavio i 22 i 24 (pored tvojih 22a i 22b). Razlog je sto unosimo sve adrese koje je RGZ dao kao otvorene podatke i 22a/b ne postoje, a na tom mestu postoje 22 i 24:) Vise detalja mozes da vidis na mestu gde unosimo: https://dina.openstreetmap.rs/ar/index.html
rskedgell (2024-03-07 10:35:53+00:00): You appear to have tagged two sections of Fox Milne Roundabout as foot=no in response to a StreetComplete task asking "Are pedestrians forbidden to walk on this road here?"

I'm trying to find any evidence in Bing Streetside imagery that there really is a (signed) pedestrian prohibition here. I cannot see any TSRGD diagram 625.1 "pedestrians prohibited" signs on the imagery, so do not believe that a prohibition exists. Is this a new signed restriction created by a traffic order more recent than the Bing streetside imagery?

The wiki states that access tags reflect legal access. Subjective opinions about whether it would be pleasant, a good idea, safe, etc. for a particular transport mode are not relevant to legal access.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:foot

As real pedestrian prohibitions on public roads other than those tagged as highway=motorway or motorroad=yes in the UK are quite rare and are always signed, this quest is probably better left disabled.
0235 (2024-03-07 18:00:47+00:00): Its a 4 lane roundabout, You would be a moron if you wanted to walk there.

My understanding is all of central MK pedestrians are not allowed on roads, with signs such as this being common: https://www.reddit.com/r/fuckcars/comments/s1pehz/this_sign_in_central_milton_keynes_in_the_uk_a/

I would call that legal access is denied for foot traffic.
0235 (2024-03-07 18:20:30+00:00): And as others have said at similar locations, the practicality of tagging as foot=no far outweighs the legality of it.

If you feel legality outweighs practicality and safety, and that potentially tagging roads as foot=no to direct traffic to the designated footpaths is similar to "mapping for the render" (the render being navigation in this case) then I will revert the changes.

However to me, this is a map which is used to navigate, and it being able to generate unsafe navigation when a safe alternative is provided should be its primary function.
rskedgell (2024-03-07 19:15:34+00:00): A yellow non-statutory sign saying that "pedestrians do not have priority" does not imply anything remotely like a prohibition of pedestrians. It suggests an attitude by a landowner to pedestrians which is hardly in the spirit of the Highway Code, but it's not a prohibition.

It's not just my feeling about access tags. The second paragraph of the wiki page for access=* says "Access values describe legal permissions/restrictions and should follow ground truth; e.g., signage or legal ruling and not introduce guesswork. It does not describe common or typical use, even if signage is generally ignored."

There's currently a discussion of this in the Talk-GB mailing list, starting at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2024-March/031184.html
0235 (2024-03-08 00:40:06+00:00): OK, it seems the mailing list still cannot decide though. legality vs safety over human life, i think safety comes first.

In terms of law, no there is nothing stopping you from walking on that section of road (other than Darwins law).

I will remove this tag, but i believe we should map what is there. Legal definition is not a tangible thing, a 4 lane 60mph roundabout is a thing, and I believe it is not safe for any person to be there, legal or not.

As all 3 routers are currently routing just fine around that roundabout, it should be safe to remove them.
nurdafur (2024-03-22 13:47:50+00:00): Hallo Männedorf

Du hast hier die Relation Pfadiweg angelegt. Ich war heute Vormittag vor Ort. Ich wollte schauen, was das für eine Route ist. Ich konnte jedoch keinerlei Markierungen für eine solche Route finden. Vielleicht kannst du mir irgendwelche Informationen dazu geben. 
Nach dem was ich vor Ort nicht gesehen habe, würde ich die Relation in ein paar Tagen löschen.
Liebe Grüsse und weiterhin viel Spass beim Kartografieren.
Männedorf (2024-03-23 11:38:34+00:00): Lieber Nurdafur
Danke der Nachfrage. Diese Relation ist in der Tat etwas erklärungsbedürftig: sie umfasst verschiedene Wege, die als Zugang zur Pfadihütte der Pfadi Männedorf-Uetikon-Oetwil führen. Für die Relation gibt es einen QR-Code, welche auf Werbemitteln der Pfadi (z.B. Plakat Schnuppertag) aufgedruckt ist und so den Weg zur Pfadihütte auf OSM angezeigt wird.
Ursprünglich umfasste die Relation nur den Weg von der Bushaltestelle Widenbad zur Pfadihütte, wurde dann aber ergänzt um verkehrsarme und Fusswege. Ausgeschildert als Weg ist die Relation nicht.
Liebe Grüsse
nurdafur (2024-03-23 12:19:13+00:00): Wenn es vor Ort nichts zu sehen gibt, dann gehört die Relation auch nicht in die OSM. Der QR-Code reicht dafür nicht.
Männedorf (2024-04-01 20:59:32+00:00): Gemäss Wiki sollen "Elemente einer Relation sollen eine geografische und funktionale Beziehung zueinander haben". Die funktionale Beziehung scheint mir gegeben. Von Ausschilderung steht dort nichts und es gibt eine ganze Menge von Relationen, die nicht ausgeschildert sind, sondern "nur" irgendwo auf einem Papier eingezeichnet (z.B. Fahrplan -> Relation ist dann eine Schiffahrtslinie über den See)
woodpeck_repair (2024-03-06 14:38:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 148298479 where the changeset comment is: revert regelwidriger Änderungen eines Benutzers mit OSM-Hausverbot s. https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Global_ban_of_user_geocodec
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-02 10:10:34+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/node/11684220435

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
G_P_J (2024-03-02 10:56:22+00:00): Poprawione.
Strubbl (2024-03-16 22:31:17+00:00): Hi JMUC, ich schaue gerade, wo sich dein Editor nicht "verschluckt" hat. Ich nehme diese URL mal auf die Ignorierliste. Btw, ob da jetzt das "de" mit in der URL drin ist oder nicht. Wenn die URL kaputt geht, wirds nicht am "de" liegen.
b-jazz (2025-01-12 19:40:47+00:00): Hey there Kenny,
Thanks for contributing to the map. I noticed some problems with some of your fairways that surround bunkers. You are using multiple polygons to surround the item, instead of properly using "multipolygons". See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls for more information about proper golf course mapping. I've gone ahead and cleaned up but wanted you to know for future mapping that you might do.
Thanks.
Dodko (2024-03-02 14:21:17+00:00): Obec Mlynica nemá pomenované ulice nepridávajte tam názov
addr:street=Pieskovisko
Názov ulice najprv musia schváliť poslanci vo VZN a potom úradník zapísať do registra adries.
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-02 19:34:56+00:00): Zdravím, OK vďaka za info. Pieskovisko nie je názov ulice, ale tejto oblasti pre lepšiu orientáciu v Mlynici.  Asi som to dal do nevhodnej kolonky. Chápem opravim to.
Vďaka za info
Pekný večer prajem
Dodko (2024-03-02 19:56:34+00:00): Na tomto dome bola adresa 247 ste prepísali na 246 a to je podľa katastra  susedný dom, treba dávať pozor.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1078402362/history
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-02 20:17:24+00:00): Vďaka za kontrolu. Ano, v reále takto sú tie domy tam číslované ako som upravil. V pondelok zdokumentujem fotografiou. Ale je aj možne, že satelitná snímka neobsahuje ďalší dom, ktorý tam už by mohol byť pred nimi postavený s číslom 246 ako prvý dom a tým pádom by sporný dom mohol byť naozaj 247 v súlade s katastrom. Môžme to doriešiť v pondelok alebo to mám radšej vrátiť do pôvodného stavu?
Dodko (2024-03-02 20:26:28+00:00): Už som to opravil, na leteckej vidieť obidve domy
https://zbgis.skgeodesy.sk/mkzbgis/c/RqD3a
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-02 21:36:24+00:00): OK Ďakujem, musím to tam pozrieť dôkladnejšie pre istotu na mieste. Pekný večer prajem
Dodko (2024-03-02 22:00:04+00:00): Pridal som tam domy a ulice, len prípadne skontrolujte ktoré sú ešte neprejazdné ulice, rozostavané.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=148144794
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-02 22:13:23+00:00): Dobre, robím do tej oblasti kuriera a bude super ak to bude dobre zmapované. Chcel by som Vás poprosiť o radu keďže upravy robím prvý krat. Môžem tam pridať aj dokončené domy ak nie sú na satelitnom snímku? Ďakujem a pekný zvyšok večera prajem
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-02 22:16:05+00:00): Ešte, čo som tam ja opravil zatiaľ neprejazdné ulice nejako divne to teraz zobrazuje aj ako ulicu a pri priblížení tu ulicu zmení na bodkovanú. Nie je hneda v každom zoome.
Dodko (2024-03-02 22:24:36+00:00): Áno aj domy treba pridať, ale najlepšie je zapnúť katastrálnu vrstvu  a podľa nej obkresliť.
Treba stlačiť Ctrl F5 aby prekreslilo nové zmeny.

Bodkovanú myslíte takúto?
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/406078353/history
ste tam pridali 
surface=gravel
to je štrková bodkovaná cesta
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:surface=gravel
Dodko (2024-03-02 22:28:19+00:00): Hnedé sú lesné poľné cesty a kvalita cesty sa delí na 5 možností
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Cs:Key:tracktype
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-03 09:14:21+00:00): Dobré ránko, prezrel som hádam všetky možnosti no nenašiel som, kde sa dá v editácií vrstva prekryť katastrálnou vrstvou. Poradíte mi prosím? 
Nemyslel som túto cestu. Všetky cest sú tam iba spevnené štrkové sama jama. Myslel som tu poslednú cestu ktorá smeruje zdola priamo k domu c. 269 a 176 kde som zmenil povrh na poľná. Prejde tam iba traktor.  Netuším ako Vám to mám označiť a tuto do chatu vložiť tak, ako Vy mne priamo linkom na zmenu v mape.   Tam ide len o to, že ak si to približujem zobrazuje sa namiesto bodkovanej klasická cesta alebo sa vyznačujú krátke úseky, strieda sa to. Neviem čo to prekrývanie spôsobuje pri zoome +, -. Krásnu nedeľu Vám prajem a ďakujem za pomoc s tým editovaním a cenné rady pre začiatočníka. :)
Dodko (2024-03-03 09:38:09+00:00): Katastrálna vrstva sa dá pridať v pokročilom editore JOSM.

Táto cesta? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/524559829
Treba stačiť Ctrl F5 aby načítalo v prehliadači nové zmeny. Ono trvá istý čas kým sa prekreslia dlaždice a Ctrl F5 to trochu urýchlite.

Pre začiatočníkov si pozrite toto video
https://youtu.be/q59kIyirKzM
Frantisek Teplicky (2024-03-03 09:53:44+00:00): Áno presne tá cesta. Ta je autom neprejazdná. Ďakujem za rady a snahu pomôcť aj za video. Idem pozerať. :) Pekný deň prajem
tastrax (2024-03-29 05:01:40+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added to OSM according to the following format with the country and regional code +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number.
For freecall numbers that work whilst overseas (ie 13 13 13) use +61 XX XX XX as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features .  I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Mb_651 (2024-04-16 21:49:20+00:00): Der Weg südlich davon sieht ziemlich identisch aus und ist als Fußweg und nicht als Zufahrtsstraße getagged. Bist du dir sicher dass da ein Auto lang passt und unten nicht. Beide sind ja von dir editiert worden, also möchtest du das vllt nochmal überprüfen?
olo81 (2024-03-03 15:56:11+00:00): Tagowanie source:maxspeed=PL:urban i maxspeed=40 się wyklucza.  Do poprawy.  Na czas remontu trzeba skasować source:maxspeed=PL:urban
olo81 (2024-03-04 00:07:45+00:00): Na tej samej stronie jest wykaz w którym nie ma tej dzielnicy. Dlatego podaj źródło urzędowe. Zestaw zmian wycofany.
aTarom (2024-03-02 15:51:30+00:00): Hola, aparecen por primera vez varios "fuel:electric", "fuel:electricity" no es válido?
No encuentro nada por la wiki, si me puedes orientar para siguientes revisiones de tags nuevos, saludos
kapazao (2024-03-03 07:33:46+00:00): Hola, en la wiki no he encontrado fuel:electricity y sí fuel:electric (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:fuel), que además es lo que claramente se usa más según taginfo.
De todas formas a mí no me parece una etiqueta para una gasolinera, sino para una estación de carga eléctrica para vehículos (amenity=charging_station), que no usa ese etiquetado fuel:electric tampoco, por lo que todos esos elementos creo deberían revisarse.
Un saludo
kapazao (2024-03-03 07:37:16+00:00): Bueno en taginfo tuve una confusión realmente y ví "fuel=electricity" y no "fuel:electricity", que cambian el uso. Pero en la wiki sí que no se menciona nada de electricity.
rskedgell (2024-03-06 09:15:36+00:00): Is the licence of CAMRA's proprietary WhatPub? database compatible with OSM? The statement that "Where not already belonging or assigned to others, all material remains our copyright." on the site would suggest otherwise.
trigpoint (2024-03-06 12:52:45+00:00): That would also say to me that we cannot use whatpub and I believe this, very long, list of edits require reverting/redacting.
Odud (2024-03-06 20:19:03+00:00): I assume that the copyright statement refers to items that were generated specifically for WhatPub, for example reviews, photographs etc. But not just facts that are generally known i.e. their telephone number, or Facebook URL etc. Surely for facts like these then Fair Use applies
trigpoint (2024-03-06 21:03:44+00:00): Fair use of facts is an American concept. OSM is a UK organisation and in the UK we have a laws on database rights. Taking information on the scale you have from a database on this scale is not fair use. CAMRA have spent time and effort collecting these facts and under UK law this effort is protected.
Odud (2024-03-06 22:00:55+00:00): OK Fine, can you tell me how to remove all the changes. Some sort of bulk process is needed
trigpoint (2024-03-06 23:59:37+00:00): We can revert the changes.

It is obviously possible to do your own survey of such things or add them from your own local knowledge.

Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2024-03-07 13:50:30+00:00): iD is not a suitable tool for reverting this number of changes. I did say we can revert these as we have experience with more powerful tools.

Please do try reverting them with iD, I am in the process of doing a revert and am working through the conflicts caused by later edits, I am trying to avoid loosing later changes.

Cheers Phil
trigpoint (2024-03-07 15:54:59+00:00): I have completely reverted these changes in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148348284
Odud (2024-03-08 11:02:16+00:00): Thanks very much for doing this. There are also related changes with comments:

1) Updating pubs in North East Sussex CAMRA area
2) Updating pubs in Western Sussex CAMRA area

If it easy to revert these I would be very grateful. 

Pete
Leo Slager (2024-03-02 10:52:18+00:00): sorry, wrong comment.
should be:
fixed self-intersecting way, landuse
mueschel (2024-03-03 14:03:50+00:00): Hi, 
could you explain this edit?
The correct way to add a name in a different language is ":XX". "_XX" like you changed it to is not used.