piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
APneunzehn74 (2024-10-09 18:13:44+00:00): You're probably right. You can even see it in his own suggestions; I wanted to work through several of them myself after the vacation.
kuhni74 (2024-10-09 21:56:19+00:00): thanks!
Dimitar155 (2024-10-09 19:02:26+00:00): Hey TrailJunkie,

The street is indeed oneway, but it becomes oneway from the entrance of the football base and not from the woods (as I've marked it apparently). You can see the jersey barriers that cover about 2/3 of the road width on Esri World Imagery. Bing Streetside is out of date because the barriers are here since May 2023 if I recall correctly.

I've updated the road accordingly.

Happy mapping,
Dimitar
TrailJunkie (2024-10-10 20:42:01+00:00): Hi Dimitar, 

Thank you for letting me know. I do see the barriers in Esri World Imagery but based on the current data showing (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/157756010) as being under construction the oneway would not allow for traffic to enter the sports complex at (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/6362134040). Is it possible the road is temporarily bidirectional to allow access to the sports complex until construction is completed? Let me know what you think!
Dimitar155 (2024-10-12 07:44:54+00:00): The road "under construction" is closed because of a compromised column base (see the photos at https://dariknews.bg/regioni/sofiia/vizhte-porazheniiata-po-nadleza-kym-boiana-koito-nalozhiha-spirane-na-dvizhenieto-snimki-2384439). Allegedly the temporary supports will be done in a week and everything should be open (until they find a way to properly fix it of course).

Officially, that segment is still oneway. Only traffic from/to the complex uses this segment. That traffic is practically negligible and drivers likely ignore the signs but they wait for each other since there is only one lane and they can't pass each other.
TrailJunkie (2024-10-14 21:24:25+00:00): Thank you for the insight and further explanation of this area, I will defer to your knowledge here.

Happy Mapping!
kuhni74 (2024-10-09 21:57:05+00:00): thanks!
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-10 19:13:49+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 158982060, 158982058, 158982055, 158982063 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed and problematic import, see discussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158523576 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158533273
Baloo Uriza (2024-10-10 14:17:29+00:00): Unrelated to anything else I'm greatly amused that they're calling this the "north brookside" branch when Brookside's like 8 km and 4 districts away.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157682805
Double_virgule (2024-10-10 14:33:05+00:00): Well, what's interesting is that the website URL says "tulsa-north-brookside" but the actual page title is "Midtown Tulsa".
Baloo Uriza (2024-10-11 01:05:07+00:00): Midtown makes a lot more sense but that's really stretching the limits of "midtown" to the limit with it almost being downtown.  :O)
Josef73 (2026-04-15 08:04:28+00:00): Hello, are you sure that Urban Auotmobile is here?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12238896057/history
BCNorwich (2024-10-19 07:00:54+00:00): Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You are placing sections of footpath on top of other highways. This is duplication and it could cause disruption to routing, please stop doing this. 

Regards Benard.
Baloo Uriza (2024-10-10 14:14:10+00:00): This is no longer a Petco and has been vacant since July 2023.  This Petco location moved just a few doors east in the same building.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157683047
Double_virgule (2024-10-10 20:44:10+00:00): Thanks for updating!
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157683047
Baloo Uriza (2024-10-11 01:41:53+00:00): No worries, happened to notice it one day walking from my office to Reasor's for lunch and noticed an abandoned Petco three doors down from a brand new Petco and was like "when did that happen?" last August.
BPTT (2024-12-08 23:57:27+00:00): Thanks for doing this! This is really good to know. I was not familiar with this and will be sure to take note for next time. Does the Byrne Cranberry Trail loop look correct?
ObscureAngel (2024-10-10 09:02:08+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour votre contribution :)

La piste est-elle bien reliée à la route après vérification sur place ?

Bonne journée et bonne cartographie :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157683349
Langlaeufer (2024-10-14 15:54:29+00:00): Ist das ein Gehweg oder ein Rad- und Gehweg?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157683944
Langlaeufer (2024-10-14 15:57:37+00:00): Sehr wahrscheinlich Gehweg würde ich sagen
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157683944
os-emmer (2024-10-14 16:28:20+00:00): Hi Langlaeufer,
ich bin mir nicht sicher, wie die Situation vor Ort ausgeschildert ist. Deswegen hatte ich es als highway=path erfasst. Wenn du dir sicher bist, dass es ein Fußweg ist, passe das gerne an.
Langlaeufer (2024-10-14 17:00:27+00:00): Es ist eine 30er Zone und ich kann auf Mapillary nichts erkennen, was dennoch auf einen Radweg hindeutet. Daher ist ganz doll von Gehweg auszugehen - ich hab es geändert.
Filip009 (2024-10-10 06:53:33+00:00): Zdravím, existujúce objekty nie je nutné mazať, je možné uch aj len presunúť.
Parmatr (2024-10-10 20:05:13+00:00): Zdravím, ďakujem za comment. Budem ešte experimentovať v JOSM ale mi nebolo intuitívne ako presuniem node na danú koordinátu...
Filip009 (2024-10-10 20:57:00+00:00): Najjednoduchšie potiahnutím, aj keď to nebude presne na konkrétnu pozíciu. Alebo potom vytvoriť bod na daných súradniciach a presunúť existujúci bod pri pridržanom klávese Ctrl presunúť existujúci bod na ten novo vytvorený. Toto ich zlúči dokopy.
Dodko (2024-10-11 09:57:14+00:00): Dá sa použiť nástroje - presunúť bod Ctrl P
Parmatr (2024-10-11 18:17:15+00:00): Díky moc
Vinber (2024-10-24 13:35:09+00:00): c'était un test osm go, désolé de l'absence de commentaire. ajout du tag survey:date
Fraxi (2024-10-11 22:39:15+00:00): Здравейте!
Тук може да се запознаете с приетата към момента практика за отразяване на адреси: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bg:WikiProject_Bulgaria#%D0%90%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B8

Промених малко очертанията на сградата и махнах ненужни тагове(https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157775397). Ако адресът от първата версия (ул. Добри Чинтулов 17) е валиден, би могъл да бъде добавен допълнително като точка някъде на полигона.
kitsee (2024-10-09 19:48:05+00:00): Hi there,
It appears you added a duplicate line on top of the existing one by mistake. I've corrected this and replaced it with a track with no motor vehicles allowed.
Kind regards,
Kits
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157684673
bobficerdy (2024-10-10 07:56:00+00:00): Thank you for reply and correcting my attempt at changes to the tracks status. However on opening the map, at some scales it is still shown as a road. When you have screen showing large area it is a track. When you zoom in with 'Pontwelli' on left and 'Llanllwni' on right, it is displayed as road. (this seems to be scale used by Sat Navs). If you zoom in further it becomes a track again.
Kind Regards Bob
kitsee (2024-10-10 09:32:59+00:00): Hi there,
There is no need for concern, this is very normal. Your browser is caching the parts of the map, this is normal and used to reduce load on the server. usually you can force a full refresh with Ctrl + Shift + R in most browsers. The cache will also naturally expire over time. You can read more about it here: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Browser_cache
Kind regards,
Kits
bobficerdy (2024-10-10 11:32:06+00:00): Thank you for replying and explaining, I now, to some extent, understand how things work. All I need now is for google to reply to my request that they change their maps. We may then return to 20th century levels of service. Technology has its use but the reliance of satellite imagery rather than human observation in making life in farming all the more frustrating. Your help was much appreciated.
Regards Bob
dcapillae (2024-10-09 18:25:05+00:00): Se ha añadido la etiqueta «historic=building» a los edificios que lo requiere conforme al IAPH.
Nzau (2024-10-09 18:32:41+00:00): *boucle 4
literan (2024-10-10 17:37:56+00:00): that's not a park
literan (2024-10-10 17:40:59+00:00): also, it's not an artwork
https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CDXfMEYv

revert
Vas111 (2024-10-10 08:10:45+00:00): Hello,
Thank you for editing OSM. Please check the way is connected to the surrounding road network and the geometry doesn't contain sharp turns/edges before uploading the changeset. Thanks
CjMalone (2026-01-04 18:11:23+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1322683929#map=19/50.716915/-1.123994&layers=N being a public footpath seems questionable, last time I was there, there was a big, permanent gate.
dmgroom_ct (2026-01-05 10:43:28+00:00): I have added an OSM note for someone to check access.  As I said in my original chnageset comment, this path exists on the councils ROW dept dataset, released last summer
dmgroom_ct (2026-03-27 19:05:20+00:00): Surveyed on 25 March 2026.  There is a pedestrian gate next to the vehicle gate.  The pedestrian gate is not locked, and on the fence next to the gate is a council footpath arrow pointing through the gate.
CjMalone (2026-03-30 08:03:40+00:00): Thank you https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/5118342
mcliquid (2024-10-10 07:53:52+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!
mcliquid (2024-10-10 07:53:46+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!
Vas111 (2024-10-20 10:43:44+00:00): Buses are included under the psv tag, so if psv=yes is there, don't add bus=yes please.
rempshaener (2024-10-10 15:22:17+00:00): Hallo,
du hast um einen Review gebeten.
Du warst mit deinem Gedanken schon in der richtigen Richtung unterwegs: jemand anderes hat das Tierheim mit amenity=animal_shelter erfasst (https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/295948847), aber leider werden Tierheime nicht gerendert. Insofern ist deine Ergänzung problematisch: sie ist eine Dublette und sogenanntes Taggen für den Renderer, siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Taggen_f%C3%BCr_den_Renderer
Auch wenn es schade ist, dass Tierheime auf der Karte nicht auftauchen (siehe hierzu die Diskussion https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/4260), muss man es leider hinnehmen. Entferne am besten einfach das „Tierheim Burgdorf“ von https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/334906347.
Wenn noch Fragen bestehen, bitte einfach melden.
Viele Grüße
4004 (2024-10-13 23:31:06+00:00): 
при разделении улиц, особенно крупных, нужно учесть такие вещи как включение их в отношения маршрутов общественного транспорта, полосность, даже просто имя должно быть на обоих линиях
santamariense (2024-10-28 02:40:56+00:00): Olá Diretoria de Habitação Jandira SP,

Quando tiver alguma informação para atualizar em objeto já existente, não desenha a mesma geometria por cima. Apenas selecione os objetos a serem modificados e atualize as suas informações. Isso evita que se tenha sobreposição de geometria / duplicatas.

Estou a disposição para tirar qualquer dúvida.

Bons mapeamentos!
5m4u9 (2024-10-10 04:25:48+00:00): Hola, lamentablemente el cambio a vía secundaria no es justificada, las poblaciones son muy pequeñas.
René84828 (2025-09-07 06:08:41+00:00): Auf dem Weg 1322703456 führt ein Wanderweg. Das ergibt für mich keinen Sinn, dass man da als Fussgänger nicht gehen darf.
stglei (2025-09-08 09:14:25+00:00): Es sind die Wanderwege nicht korrekt eingezeichnet. Eigentlich gibt es da überhaupt keinen Weg. Dieser Abschnitt wird von Wanderern und Radfahrern nur als Abkürzung genommen.
5m4u9 (2024-10-10 04:28:21+00:00): Hola, el cambio de categoria de vía no es justificada, las poblaciones son relativamente pequeñas.
JJIglesias (2024-10-10 07:24:50+00:00): POR FAVOR, deja de cambiar las Categorias de las vias. Todos los cambios q estas haciendo están siendo REVERTIDOS o Eliminados, si quieres colaborar con el mapa DEJA DE SABOTEAR lo existente. Ya se te ha avisado repetidamente. Si continuas así voy a levantar un ticket para banearte, espero q lo entiendas claramente.

Gracias
AgusQui (2024-10-10 03:51:52+00:00): Por favor indique la fuente de esta edicion
Aranc (2024-10-09 20:32:13+00:00): Hello, please use 2021-2022 imagery when drawing buildings in coastal areas, due to new buildings being constructed. Best regards!
Aranc (2024-10-09 20:34:42+00:00): https://geoportal.dgu.hr/services/inspire/orthophoto_2023/ows?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.3.0&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=OI.OrthoimageCoverage&STYLES=&CRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}

Link for 2023 imagery
Đuro Jiří (2024-10-09 20:39:17+00:00): Živio Aranc,
aplikacija Vespucci ne ima satelitske snimke 2021-2022.
Aranc (2024-10-09 20:47:01+00:00): Probajte ubaciti https://geoportal.dgu.hr/services/inspire/orthophoto_2021_2022/ows?FORMAT=image/png&TRANSPARENT=TRUE&VERSION=1.3.0&SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetMap&LAYERS=OI.OrthoimageCoverage&STYLES=&CRS={proj}&WIDTH={width}&HEIGHT={height}&BBOX={bbox}

u Vespucci kao custom imagery. Pozdrav
Đuro Jiří (2024-10-09 20:59:09+00:00): Piše mi ovo:
Stranica ne funkcionira
Ako se problem nastavi, obratite se vlasniku web-lokacije.
HTTP ERROR 400
NorthCrab_upload (2024-10-09 20:01:05+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/12239536256

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
nurdafur (2025-01-31 15:56:55+00:00): Hoi Wikilux
Du hast wohl in diesem Changeset die Brücke über die Bahnlinie korrekt eingezeichnet und dafür ein Wegsegment aufgespalten. 
Anscheinend übernimmt der iD-Editor beim Aufspalten nicht automatisch die Routenrelationen des ursprünglichen Segments. Da gab es nun eine Lücke in der Radroutenrelation. Ich werde diese nun gleich schliessen. Bitte achte doch künftig darauf, ob da noch irgendwelche Relationen sind und die dann vollständig sind.
Liebe Grüsse und weiterhin viel Spass beim Kartografieren
Frans S (2024-10-25 10:07:49+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please realize that this is a building and road mapping only. (read the instructions :-) )
Focus on highways which connects settlements, buildings and villages.
Don't waste energy on mapping traces in between agricultural plots and rural areas, as ending somewhere in the middle of nowhere.
Also, agricultural plots don't need to be mapped !

Best regards and keep mapping.
Em :) (2024-10-25 19:08:12+00:00): Hello! Thanks for the advice, sorry about that! I was new at the time and didn't notice the symbols at the bottom indicating what needed to be mapped and what did not. Thanks for letting me know to do that from now on! :D
ivanbranco (2026-02-14 16:20:09+00:00): Hi Hervé TUC, seems like you copied the genus value in many species tag, e.g. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/12239558356/history

genus=Malus + species=Malus
species should contain the species only, e.g. species=Malus domestica, =Malus pumila, =Malus sylvestris ecc.

could you please review and correct these import's values?
ivanbranco (2026-02-14 16:28:38+00:00): If this helps, these are the 1980 values to be fixed: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2kwp
ObscureAngel (2024-10-10 14:09:04+00:00): Bonjour, merci pour votre contribution :)

A l'avenir veuillez noter qu'il est recommandé de mettre des commentaires plus précis sur vos groupes de changements (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Bons_commentaires_de_groupe_de_modifications). En effet le commentaire "Paraza" ne nous donne que très peu d'information sur les changements que vous avez opérés.

De plus, pour quelle raison avez-vous retiré les attributs "source=*" des bâtiments modifiés ?

Bonne journée et bonne cartographie :)
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157688240
TrickyFoxy (2024-10-14 17:26:13+00:00): Нельзя брать данные с яндекс.карт
gurglypipe (2024-10-10 09:09:19+00:00): foot=private is not the right tagging to use here, as it means the path is legally not accessible.

The normal tagging for paths on access land is foot=yes unless they are on the council’s definitive map as a public footpath (most aren’t). In that case the tagging should be foot=designated.

There is a precedent for a non-public-footpath on access land being closed for conservation near Broad Crag — see https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086252957. In that case we went with disused:highway=path foot=no.

I think that tagging is appropriate here too, so I’ve made the same changes here in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157705044

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1086252957#map=18/54.455882/-3.211548
gurglypipe (2024-10-10 09:09:49+00:00): See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom for the tagging guidelines for footpaths in the UK more generally
Filip009 (2024-10-10 06:39:37+00:00): Zdravím, parkovacie miesto má reprezentovať práve jedno parkovacie miesto.
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-17 13:27:25+00:00): Hi, construction didn't started. Few days ago, there was a deadline for construction companies to deliver their offers to rsd (directorate of roads and highways). I'm reverting those changes.
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-17 13:23:06+00:00): Hi, construction didn't started. Few days ago, there was a deadline for construction companies to deliver their offers to rsd (directorate of roads and highways). I'm reverting those changes.
GuyFrom2007 (2024-10-19 07:44:59+00:00): Have you really watched it locally? Before you start to revert a changeset, you should follow the aerial photographs (Praha low vegetation). Your edits are mainly in Italy so I can't fully trust.
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-19 09:48:23+00:00): Hi, i live in Prague and I checked it locally and also on rsd.cz. I’m also interested in this road constructions so I’m tracking the construction progress in detail. Few days ago, there was a deadline for construction companies to deliver their offers to the maintainer (rsd.cz). So the construction itself didnt started yet
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-19 09:49:42+00:00): The aerial photos show only the archaelogical survey (which always takes its part before begin of the construction).
vojtechzaboril (2024-10-19 09:53:58+00:00): You can look there (https://www.rsd.cz/mapa-staveb/) that this part is not under construction
GuyFrom2007 (2024-10-19 10:28:19+00:00): Ok. Thank you!
Noktoborus (2025-05-05 07:31:00+00:00): Константин, здравстувуйте.

Вы какие данные насобирали, что снова бессмысленно передвигали highway=traffic_signals, например, здесь: https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10943846356/history

Прекратите заниматься вандализмом.
NeisBot (2024-10-09 21:02:37+00:00): Hi ocn, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 97% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
No primary map features!?

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=157689895
pitscheplatsch (2024-10-10 04:26:35+00:00): Thanks for the clean-up, ocn!

#HappyMapping
woodpeck_repair (2024-11-10 19:13:47+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 158982060, 158982058, 158982055, 158982063 where the changeset comment is: revert undiscussed and problematic import, see discussion in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158523576 and https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158533273
Kai Johnson (2024-10-09 21:16:41+00:00): I feel like this changeset needs a little more explanation than would have fit in the comment. The roads in Mesquite Valley have conflicting names in different sources. Where possible, I tried to reconcile BLM, San Bernardino County road centerline data, and San Bernardino County assessor maps. Unfortunately, there's not much street-level imagery here. And what imagery I could find didn't have any signage. In some cases roads ended up with one or two alt_name values where the different sources didn't agree. The assessor maps aren't even consistent with one another! This was a best effort to try to make things consistent, but corrections supported by on-the-ground data or sources that reconcile the inconsistencies would be welcome!
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-10-11 23:50:56+00:00): Don't change borders without sources
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157690479
ChromeLotus (2024-10-24 13:25:34+00:00): Hello empty_child, I wanted to reach out regarding a large amount of living streets that were modified into service roads (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/157690656). The modification appears widespread and has some impact on OSM cartography. For instance, the west side of the tertiary-classed bridge (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/129834371) has a frequent amount of service roads while the eastern side is less so. In addition, there is ground-lv imagery showing a highway that arguably is publicly-accessible (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/112395774). Service roads are generally applied to highways that are accessible to the public (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dservice). Would you consider changing the highway features to a different classification (residential or unclassified)? I look forward to hearing from you.
empty_child (2024-10-24 18:03:42+00:00): Hello
Most of these roads are directed to private or residential sites, due to this point I used highway=service. About using highway=living_street tag in general, we can't use this tag at all except territories limited by "Living zone" road sign. Yes, you're right, some changes were incorrect and require another tag, I revise this changeset later
ChromeLotus (2024-10-25 22:08:50+00:00): Hello empty_child, thank you for the response! Do you have an estimated timeline for when all the changes will be completed? Additionally, could you clarify which residential neighborhoods will remain publicly accessible?

Your explanation for why living street isn’t the designated classification makes sense. However, I was asking if you agree that residential or unclassified would be a more suitable classification than service for roads that aren’t private?
empty_child (2024-10-26 11:46:26+00:00): >Do you have an estimated timeline for when all the changes will be completed?
If something wrong yet, contact me again
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/158309402

>residential or unclassified would be a more suitable classification than service for roads that aren’t private
Of course, you're right. What I did was a mechanical edit, which I usually don't practice. I'll be checking these details in the future better