piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-14 14:51:34+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11180744935/history has guest_house = hotel that was added in this edit
Would it be hotel? ( tourism=hotel - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dhotel )
Guest house? ( tourism=guest_house - https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:tourism%3Dguest_house )

Something else?
olo81 (2024-03-19 18:37:35+00:00): poprzednie tagowanie było poprawne:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/65072003
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Rowery

po za tym bardzo przesunięta ta droga ze zdjęciami orto
mueschel (2024-04-14 10:04:13+00:00): Hi,
could you explain which socket type this refers to? "socket:DCfast" - this is not used on any other chargers.
eggie (2024-03-18 16:35:04+00:00): Hoi,
Langsliggende trottoirs worden inderdaad niet altijd ingetekend. maar wel opgenomen in de tagging van de hoofdrijbaan met sidewalk= left / right/ of both.
Dat zou je wel kunnen toevoegen.
MVG
eggie
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-18 16:10:22+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/relation/17359722

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Syl (2024-03-27 10:18:28+00:00): Bonjour, j'ai annulé le remplacement d'Action par Primark à Centre deux. Les deux ont bien l'air d'exister mais pas au même niveau du bâtiment.
VLD300 (2024-03-18 16:18:09+00:00): #RelationCleanup Modified relation
MarcoR (2024-03-21 13:51:39+00:00): Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Please don't add fictitious names to objects. For more info see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

Happy mapping,
Marco.
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 17:39:32+00:00): Why did you delete what is there just to redraw it (with errors, mind you)? It is best to manipulate what is already mapped to preserve edit history.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148824796
cuzi (2024-03-18 16:46:10+00:00): Du hast auch das Gebäude entfernt, nicht nur die Firma. War das Absicht?
siegbertkarsten (2024-03-18 18:32:42+00:00): Nur die  Firma. Das Gebäude sollte bestehen bleiben.
cuzi (2024-03-18 19:13:53+00:00): Ich habe deine Änderung komplett rückgängig gemacht. Du kannst es jetzt nochmal ändern: Also das Gebäude anwählen und dann nur die Eigenschaften "name" und "craft" entfernen

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148831254
archie (2024-03-18 17:13:26+00:00): Vänligen ändra inte på rätt taggning man_made=mast till man_made=communications_tower!

Det är två olika saker:  

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dcommunications_tower 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dmast
archie (2024-03-18 17:01:03+00:00): Varför tar du bort peak och mast från samma node? Kolla med overpass så hittar du åtskilliga sådana kombinationer i Sverige, Norge och nere i alpområdet. 
Kan det bero på att masterna uppförs just på fjällets/bergets högsta punkt?
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-18 16:40:24+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/11741681908
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681907
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681904
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681903
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681901
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681900
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681898
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681897
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681896
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11741681895
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772396
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772397
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772398
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772399
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772403
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772404
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772405
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316772406
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316779188
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/316779189

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 17:38:23+00:00): Why did you delete what is there just to redraw it (with errors, mind you)?  It is best to manipulate what is already mapped to preserve edit history.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148825557
tordans (2024-03-25 15:02:05+00:00): Hallo decadri, ein Hinweis: Bitte versuch nach Möglichkeit keine Flächen mit Wegen zu "verkleben". Die Wege sollte immer leicht neben der Fläche liegen. Viele Grüße und frohes Mappen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148825594
olo81 (2024-03-19 10:17:09+00:00): Dlaczego usunąłeś te stacje? Czy sprawdziłeś w terenie ich nieobecność? 
Na stronie metroroweru nie ma opcji podglądu stacji tylko samych rowerów. Tak że kasowanie tych stacji bez weryfikacji jest przedwczesne jak dla mnie.
tsp15 (2024-03-19 17:48:16+00:00): Sprawdziłem, tych stacji nie ma. Są same wiaty po starych stacjach SRM, ale stacji jako takich nie ma, być może pojawią się w przyszłości.
olo81 (2024-03-19 22:34:04+00:00): Takiego bałaganu dawno nie widziałem, drogi połączone z obszarami, wodą. Park pocięty na kilka linii i spięty relacją. Ponakładane na siebie obszary itd.
olo81 (2024-03-19 22:34:33+00:00): Już całą okolicę poprawiam.
olo81 (2024-03-19 22:35:56+00:00): łoo, jeszcze ponakładane na siebie drogi
olo81 (2024-03-19 22:41:54+00:00): i gdzieś poznikały części szlaków, zostały usunięte relacje
Mariusz_Z (2024-03-20 07:25:50+00:00): Kolego, gdzie byłeś wcześniej ? Kilka dróg poprawiłem, bo właśnie były na siebie ponakładane. W dodatku pozaznaczane w złym miejscu.
Mariusz_Z (2024-03-20 07:29:07+00:00): Mieszkam tu od 40 lat, znam każdy centymetr tego parku. O bzdurach to ja mogę powiedzieć, że były tutaj pozaznaczane.
Mariusz_Z (2024-03-20 07:36:43+00:00): Być może podczas zmiany położenia drogi usunęła się jakaś relacja czy szlak. Teraz przynajmniej obszar parku oraz alejki i ścieżki zgadzają się ze stanem faktycznym. Jeśli możesz to dodaj relacje i szlaki, masz w tym większe doświadczenie to proszę popraw to.
tttnnn24 (2024-03-18 17:02:23+00:00): oops, bij de hump op nummer 10
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 17:25:06+00:00): Do not lollipop or fold areas back on themselves to create a "hole" in an area.  Multipolygon relations should be used instead.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148826219
OSM_RogerWilco (2024-03-19 13:21:20+00:00): Hallo bsfn,

Warum hast Du hier einen "leeren" Punkt hinzugefügt?

Viele Grüße
Roger Wilco
MxxCon (2024-03-20 16:03:28+00:00): I'm still not sure if we should be mapping "proposed" features. They are not even officially approved/planned.. OSM is a map of the world NOW, not some point in the undetermined future...

But at the very least, shouldn't this be mapped with proposed: namespace prefix rather than just putting "proposed" in the route name?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148827340
TheBestIdea (2024-03-20 16:15:19+00:00): Yes 100%. Not having the "state=proposed" tag in the Ave I, J, L, and M relations was a mistake on my part. Thanks for pointing it out. I fixed it here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148921917 I just put "proposed" in the name of the Ave I relation as it's an extension of the existing Ave I route so I wanted to distinguish between the two relations, but I am open to your thoughts if that rubs you the wrong way.
MxxCon (2024-03-20 16:25:03+00:00): In my opinion, we should map things only "when the shovel hits the ground" sort of thing, when the actual work that affects people on the ground happens. Using this approach not only eliminates the ambiguity and uncertainty when looking at the map and certain maps/routers don't easily distinguish between existing and planned/proposed features, but also decreases the amount of effort we have to put into keeping the map current. You mapped this proposed plan, but then nimbys will complain and DOT will have to revise that proposal, which you'd have to update once again(?), then update it again when they finalize it and start actually building and then update it again when it's actually done.
On the other hand, map it once when the construction starts and update it once it's live...
TheBestIdea (2024-03-20 16:33:03+00:00): I understand your concern with proposed features in general. I think that fact that the CyclOSM and Cycle Map layers on the OSM home page render proposed bike routes (as distinguished from existing) represents some consensus that they are useful (or at least acceptable) to map. (Waymarked trails also correctly parses the state=proposed tag.) But I take a conservative approach to doing so in NYC and only map them once DOT (or Parks/DDC/EDC) publicly present a specific route that they plan to implement. If multiple route options are under consideration (or multiple plans that might or might not include bike infra), I don't map that until one specific plan is decided on. For example, DOT has been doing workshops getting feedback on several options for Harlem River Greenway routes, and I haven't mapped any of them since they haven't announced which one they are moving forward with.  https://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/harlem-river-greenway-bronx-route-alternatives-north-section-mar2024.pdf And I do update the routes if the proposals are updated, and then based on construction and completion.
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 17:50:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
* Partial overlap of landcovers
* Removal of features to redraw them
* Many landcover areas split up to resemble multipoloygons, rather than creating multipolygons

I stongly advise you to read the following wiki section PRIOR to making further edits:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148828349
jjyach (2024-03-18 19:40:49+00:00): Hey just a heads up that this edit and quite a few others go against our state classifications of our Colorado Roads.  We have discussed this at length on here prior and the state guide is what we follow.

Please see : https://data-cdot.opendata.arcgis.com/datasets/cdot::major-roads-1/explore

And our state guidance on types: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Colorado/Highway_Classification
Joseph R P (2024-03-18 20:33:27+00:00): I have reviewed this OSM Wiki page in the past, but I (and, judging by the OSM US Slack server, many other people) try to avoid and highly recommend avoiding functional classification data. Functional classification from DOTs generally do not line up with OSM's guidelines regarding roads and are mainly intended to display how the roads are funded and maintained by the DOT rather than reflect the road's importance for civilian navigation. Rather, a basis on what major destinations (populated places, commercial areas, airports, etc.) and other major roadways a road links to is what should be used for classification rather than how the state describes it for what are primarily internal purposes. Additionally, AADT data is useful to determining how important a road is relative to nearby roads that serve a similar purpose, but should certainly not be relied upon always.
jjyach (2024-03-18 21:11:40+00:00): Just warning you as numerous folks here are going to change it back on you as I have had happen many times at been yelled at for doing/being flagged.  I was told by the OSM admins to follow their guidance.
MarcoR (2024-03-21 13:49:07+00:00): Ciao e benvenuto su OpenStreetMap!

Cosa intendi per confine lotto e "lotto sr"? Non credo che le particelle catastali siano mappabili.

Buon mapping,
Marco.
olo81 (2024-03-19 18:00:53+00:00): Tagowanie do poprawy
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:tourism%3Dtheme_park
totera (2024-04-19 22:59:49+00:00): Ciao ludomi05, anziché limitarti alle traduzione sintetiche usate dell'editor ti invito a consultare il wiki https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/IT:Key:place
da cui puoi evincere che nella situazione di Valmir il tag più adatto è place=village
olo81 (2024-03-19 17:22:37+00:00): Poplątanie z pomieszaniem. Atrakcja to nie wypożyczalnia :/ 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:tourism=attraction?uselang=pl
Tak że na pewno nie może tak zostać. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Wypo%C5%BCyczalnia
martinst (2024-03-18 18:53:51+00:00): Hallo TestSkizze,
gehört Way 1263823893 noch mit dem benachbarten Fahrweg verbunden?
Viele Grüße
TestSkizze (2024-03-19 14:45:48+00:00): Servus martinst, 
danke für deinen Hinweis - ich war (vorab) nur skizzenmässig unterwegs... ;D Verbindung wurde bereits erledigt. 
PS: Du hast bei der "ehem. Achner-Alm" noch eine (3 Jahre alte) Note offen - also einen "Weg" haben wir keinen gefunden... ;) 
Viele Grüsse zurück
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-24 12:52:02+00:00): Thanks for a fix!
Xvtn (2024-03-19 16:40:55+00:00): Hi, I changed sport=club to leisure=fitness_centre. It should show up on osm.org now. (You may have to clear your cache - press ctrl+F5 to do so.)
eggie (2024-03-18 20:00:06+00:00): Da's weer mooi actueel... Ik heb je info samengevoegd met de bestaande adresnode. Je hoeft dus geen adressen aan te maken. Die adressen komen uit de BAG en zijn er dus 'altijd'. 
Groet
eggie
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 18:32:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
* Partial overlap of landcovers
* Removal of features to redraw them
* Many landcover areas split up to resemble multipoloygons, rather than creating multipolygons

I stongly advise you to read the following wiki section PRIOR to making further edits:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148829830
aceman444 (2025-06-24 19:53:31+00:00): Zdravim, myslim, ze tu jedlo nevyrabaju (takze nie product=food), ale predavaju zariadenia pre gastro. Pozriem na to.
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-04 17:08:40+00:00): 

Hello!

Note that you do not need to add description of feature type as a name.
For example when mapping tree it is enough to specify that it is a tree, no need for putting that name of this specific tree is "Tree" (or "Arbre", in French).

So for buildings it is not needed to put Bâtiment as their name.

Or do you maybe know that this specific object mapped at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263842094 is specifically named with such name?

Do not worry too much about this issue - I made way worse mistakes when I was starting. Maybe some tool or explanation is confusing? Why you added this name? Note that I am asking as maybe something can be fixed to be less confusing.

And if it was mistake - can you edit map to remove this name?
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 18:48:19+00:00): This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
* Partial overlap of landcovers
* Removal of features to redraw them
* Many landcover areas split up to resemble multipoloygons, rather than creating multipolygons

I stongly advise you to read the following wiki section PRIOR to making further edits:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148830429
Solar Dump (2024-03-18 18:50:24+00:00): Why the stream is not showing up in the same contrast as the stream it connects to is unknown. 

Junkyard addition is VERY important, as the health department has been notified of its existence. This junkyard has not been in operation at least since 1952, yet the scrap was not hauled off until 2018.
MxxCon (2024-03-20 16:46:24+00:00): Hello.
What is the source of these changes?
None of the available satellite imagery matches what you added.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148830301
NorthCrab_upload (2024-03-18 19:00:59+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.

"Morwowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11742049414

"Roszarnicza":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11742049446

"Truskawkowa":
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11742049476

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
G_P_J (2024-03-19 14:59:19+00:00): Poprawione.
eggie (2024-03-18 19:20:02+00:00): Hoi  Ik kijk altijd even met de validator van JOSM  Ik zie overlappende wegen op de Zwijnsbergen. Ik kijk even of ik het simpel kan oplossen, want er lopen een aantal routerelaties.
Administratieve Grenzen die uit de database komen worden door een specialist in OSM onderhouden. Die kun je dus beter niet veranderen en ook niet vastplakken aan andere grenzen.
Ik kijk even naar de Zwijnsbergen.
Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-03-18 19:22:27+00:00): Opgeplakte weg kruispunt Zwijnsbergen Veenendaalsestraatweg opgelost.
eggie (2024-03-18 19:26:39+00:00): bicycle=yes wederom verwijderd. Dat hoort niet op reguliere wegen. Het is default.
Wat is het probleem in de fietsroutering?
eggie (2024-03-18 19:32:39+00:00): Onze routeexpert heeft ook e.e.a.  hersteld omdat je een wegdeel hebt verwijderd.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148809238#map=16/51.9828/5.5132&layers=CN

De NS wandelroute heb ik inmiddels ook hersteld net als de routerelatie op de N416.
Alle begin is moeilijk. Zodra je routes tegenkomt vraag dan even om hulp. De kaart is erg kwetsbaar.

Groet
eggie
eggie (2024-03-18 19:39:29+00:00): Nog iets... Gebruik alleen een multipolygoon als je iets wilt insluiten... Bv water of een stukje bos.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=148830499
Die stukken landbouwgrond hoeven geen mp te hebben en ook niet te bestaan uit meerdere outers. Misschien heb je het per abuis gedaan of doet editor iD dit automatisch als je de polygoon breekt.
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 19:39:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
* Partial overlap of landcovers
* Removal of features to redraw them
* Many landcover areas split up to resemble multipoloygons, rather than creating multipolygons

I stongly advise you to read the following wiki section PRIOR to making further edits:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148832087
dadavid (2024-04-24 13:03:24+00:00): Hi, ich nochmal :D

ich würde mal behaupten ein Gebäude, in dem dauerhaft ein einsatzbereites NEF abgestellt ist, ist im Sinne von OSM eine Rettungswache (ich weiß, ist es formal nicht, aber nach den Tagging-Konventionen von OSM wäre es das) .

Schau dazu auch gern nochmal ins wiki. 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:emergency%3Dambulance_station

Wenn du Fragen hast melde dich gerne :)
jcr83 (2024-03-26 17:22:23+00:00): Bonjour,
C'est bien d'avoir mis à jour les noms, mais il y a des règles de nommage. Voir https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bonnes_pratiques#Respectez_les_conventions_d'%C3%A9criture_pour_l'attribut_name

Par exemple : "Chemin du Col de la Feuille", et non "chemin du col de la feuiile".

Merci !
Hufkratzer (2024-03-18 23:06:35+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263855653 cannot be a sports centre. It is a straight line (unclosed way). Maybe it is a leisure=track.
WWMapper101 (2025-01-23 20:17:54+00:00): Actually, this is still not correct. The ISO code for Philippines is PH. Fixing
mini-me (2024-03-18 22:18:56+00:00): Не надо создавать вымышленные объекты. Для групп по интересам есть соцсети.
CurlingMan13 (2024-03-18 19:39:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
* Partial overlap of landcovers
* Removal of features to redraw them
* Many landcover areas split up to resemble multipoloygons, rather than creating multipolygons

I stongly advise you to read the following wiki section PRIOR to making further edits:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148832090
iandees (2024-03-18 19:35:34+00:00): Reverting due to delete+recreate instead of improving existing data.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148831958
Frans S (2024-03-21 13:15:40+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping on this project.

Please connect nodes of highways to each other to get a network
A remark about mapping highways
How to decide when a trace is a path or an unclassified highway
First, look what they connect.  Houses, settlements, villages. Then measure the width of that trace.
In iDeditor 

Shortcut : Ctrl+⇧ Shift+M – toggle  opens measurement panel
Draw a line between the shoulders of a trace (zoom in very far) and read the distance.
If a trace is max 2 meters wide, tag it as a path.
Wider and connect hamlets, houses and villages should be tagged as unclassified.
Tag residential in urban areas (villages, towns)
In JOSM, use the measure tab, or draw a circle (round building, shortcut Alt-Z when the building plugin is installed)) between the shoulders of a trace and read the distance on the lower toolbar. (remove the circle after that)

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/East_Africa_Tagging_Guidelines
This is mentioned about tracks on the
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Routing#Routing_considerations

Quote: Tracks are roads of agricultural purpose. They usually connect fields to farms. The surface sometimes makes them inaccessible for regular cars, or at least limits the speeds to a very slow pace. Tracks should always be avoided for through-going traffic or within urban areas.
Ferrocarriles de México (2024-03-23 00:29:56+00:00): Tramo 5 norte del Tren Maya no está abierto. La “preapertura” fué un evento puramente político y no corresponde a la realidad. Fuente: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4HAp1b4LII
AlexBlasio (2024-03-23 03:51:27+00:00): Buenas noches, una disculpa, enserio, me creí la noticia.
aceman444 (2024-03-19 00:02:40+00:00): Zdravim, nie je velmi potrebne zadavat povrch chodnikov cez sidewalk:both:surface, ked su chodniky aj s povrchom zakreslene samostatnym objektom (ciarou). Je to zbytocna duplicita a hodnoty sa mozu casom rozsynchronizovat.
iandees (2024-03-18 19:54:15+00:00): Reverting due to delete+recreate instead of improving existing data.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148832618
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-04-09 17:00:33+00:00): #BeLux2024 is not actual name of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263874057 and others, right?

Can you edit this objects to remove this mistake?
iandees (2024-03-18 20:03:10+00:00): Reverting due to wholesale deletion of useful data

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148832960
iandees (2024-03-18 20:03:55+00:00): Reverting due to delete+recreate instead of improving existing data.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/148832991
goodidea (2024-05-01 18:50:45+00:00): Hallo Schreddermeister! Du hast bei diesem billboard https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9051818035 im März den operator von Wall GmbH zu JCDecaux geändert ... Das stimmt glaube ich nicht. Wall GmbH hat das Geschäft von vormals  JCDecaux Deutschland GmbH komplett übernommen vor einigen Jahren. Jedenfalls nach meinem Wissensstand. JCDecaux ist nur als Marke geblieben ... was auch so eingetragen war. Ich ändere es nochmal zurück ... Und vielleicht hast du ja noch andere geändert, keine Ahnung. Dann bitte korrigieren .... Viele Grüße!
MasterShredder (2024-05-05 17:39:30+00:00): Hallo, danke für den Hinweis.
Ich finde leider keine weiteren Änderungen. Ich meine zwar noch 2 oder 3 solche Änderungen gemacht zu haben, aber ich arbeite mit iD im Browser, und dort Änderungen(gezielt) zu finden ist nicht einfach. Jedenfalls wüsste ich nicht wie.