piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
pitscheplatsch (2026-06-23 06:06:17+00:00): Hi @AriAlvarez,

Thanks for asking. My previous comment was very short because I was on the road and mainly wanted to mark this changeset for later review.

By “Spam” I did not mean that a business is never allowed to add or improve its own information in OSM. The issue here is that an existing landuse=industrial object seems to have been used like a business listing, with promotional text in description=* and unusual tagging such as industrial=store.

If the shop really exists at this location, it can of course be mapped in OSM, but it should be done in a neutral and verifiable way, ideally as a separate POI or properly mapped shop object, not as advertising text on an existing landuse way.

I also use short comments like this to encourage new business-related contributors to engage in a discussion, although in practice it is often difficult because many of these accounts do not respond or do not seem interested in community feedback.

Best regards, Pascal
mcliquid (2026-06-17 10:23:13+00:00): Siehe Kommentar hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184217024
mcliquid (2026-06-17 10:22:51+00:00): Hallo NVBW_Seifert,

was ist der Vorteil dabei, im Gegensatz das es jetzt deutlich mehr kleinteilige Stücke mit den identischen Attributen gibt?
NVBW_Bodenseekreis (2026-06-17 10:28:33+00:00): Wir lassen die beiden Straßenstücke in den nächsten 2-3 Monaten nachmessen, weil da kein Fußweg ist und dann kommen da Details zu Neigungen hinzu. Der Dienstleister möchte möglich genau für die Erfassung schon OSM-Objekte genannt bekommen, damit die Erfasser nicht vor Ort erst rätseln müssen, welche Wege genau zu erfassen sind
NVBW_Bodenseekreis (2026-06-17 10:29:32+00:00): und hier sollen konkret 2 Rampen erfasst werden, daher in 3 Teile zerlegt
NVBW_Seifert (2026-06-17 10:47:13+00:00): Die Kommentierung erfolgte durch mich, NVBW_Seifert, ich war mit einem anderen OSM-Account eingeloggt
FajrAl (2026-06-17 09:47:46+00:00): 1. Mohon informasinya, kenapa nama Pulau Mandalika diubah dan menghilangkan tag `name:id` dan `name:en`?
2. Data Wikipedia dan Wikidata yang Anda masukkan saat ini adalah milik Pulau Panjang di Jawa Tengah.
3. Apakah Anda sudah memahami fungsi dan penggunaan dari tag `ref` tersebut?
ptrider (2026-06-17 21:23:26+00:00): 1. official name as per Indonesian Minister of Home Affairs Decree 300.2.2-2138 of 2025 is Pulau Mondoliko, not? Also on https://sinar.big.go.id/pencarian/detail/126527; As I understand this is an official indonesian name, Locally it might be known differently, so I didn't remove it but put them as alt_name with no bas intents.
2. Wikidata and wikipedia tags are pointing to the island with the same coordinate (for both Pulau Mondoliko and Panjang)
3. Yes, I do think so. The ref code comes from the same document (Indonesian Minister of Home Affairs Decree 300.2.2-2138 of 2025) and is similar to the ref codes from villages/kelurahan/kecamatan.
FajrAl (2026-06-18 03:09:53+00:00): Resolved after discussion via private message. Thanks!
NorthCrab_upload (2026-06-19 04:25:51+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

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/way/1530311379

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2026-06-17 09:44:34+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.

Waarom een park maken van een bos?
Wanneer dit stukje een bos wordt (is)  dan kun je beter de landuse invullen. landuse=forest.
Het is toch geen park?
De woning heb ik uitgelijnd mbv de BGT.
MVG,
Eggie
Namens de OSM Community
Luuk Jacobs (2026-06-17 09:53:42+00:00): Hoi Eggie, 
Dank voor je reactie. Het is een burgerbos. Een soort park waar bankjes staan, bomen in verschillende varianten en waar paden worden gemaaid, daarom als park aangemerkt. Meer info staat: https://www.aktiefgreunbelvend.com/het-bugerbos/ontwerp/
eggie (2026-06-17 09:58:07+00:00): Oke   Duidelijk.
Je kunt overigens in een apart vlak wel de landuse invullen en het grasveld dan opschuiven.
Wat ook kan is de losstaande bomen apart intekenen met natural=tree
Dan is het een grasveld met bomen.
leisure=park is geen landuse, maar een functie die als een transparant over de landuse heen ligt.
Mapse
eggie (2026-06-17 09:59:38+00:00): Je zou zelfs de bomen (natural=tree)  kunnen specificeren in soorten.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dtree
B252697 (2026-06-17 09:39:22+00:00): Official source from NParks which says bridge is closed till 31 Dec 2027:
Source: https://www.nparks.gov.sg/docs/default-source/notices-docs/notice-for-admiralty-park-bridge-c-closure_amended-13-jan-2026.pdf?sfvrsn=a51ff991_1
Wildsharky (2026-06-23 08:58:08+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184260543
eggie (2026-06-17 10:14:59+00:00): Dag kolkbos.. Svp geen name=  gebruiken om iets te beschrijven.
Voor medemappers gebruike we dan note=... Ik heb het aangepast.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2026-06-17 10:20:10+00:00): Welkom bij OSM,

Bedankt voor uw bijdrage.
Ik heb eeb bedrijfstag toegevoegd, anders geen effect in OSM.
Evt kan ook phone==31  en website worden toegevoegd.

MVG
eggie
rajdhani (2026-06-18 06:58:42+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:184256724
NieWnen (2026-06-17 11:01:58+00:00): Cześć,

ten automat paczkowy był otagowany jako wyburzony, jak istnieje to warto usunąć tagi demolished:*=*

Jeśli chodzi o tagowanie numeru identyfikującego daną maszynę, to jest do tego tag ref=*

Tutaj znajdziesz przykłady tagowania:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Tag:amenity%3Dparcel_locker#Przyk%C5%82ady_tagowania
GhostlyDream (2026-06-17 11:50:43+00:00): ok, dzieki poprawiłem
Filippo Bianchi (2026-06-18 08:16:56+00:00): Questa modifica è relativa alla nota: 
#3639180
NieWnen (2026-06-17 11:08:15+00:00): Cześć,
dawanie crossing:markings=zebra liniom będacymi przejściami dla pieszych i przejazdami rowerowymi nie jest zbyt poprawne.

Część rowerowa nie ma wartości "zebra", a ma zwykle "dots".

Żeby to połączyć, to można dać:

footway:crossing:markings=zebra
cycleway:crossing:markings=dots

A crossing:markings pominąć, albo ustawić na crossing:markings=yes

Nie zawsze warto słuchać się tego co edytor id podpowiada z uzupełnianiem tagowania, bo czasem forcuje dziwne rzeczy, a brak tego tagu to nie błąd, a dodana błędna wartość już tak :P
VLD0251 (2026-06-18 08:50:59+00:00): Hello! Thanks for your mapping work in this area. I noticed that you’ve added a lot of waterway=dam tags.

osm.org/#map=14/32.37221/14.19047

Please reserve dam for large dams.

Happy mapping!
isotopicemoting (2026-06-18 20:14:04+00:00): Hey, I noticed that the key ":access" on https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1530326447 looks like a typo but didn't want to just change it to "access" in case you meant something more specific.
eggie (2026-06-17 10:59:01+00:00): Dag Mc,

Tip.. probeer als het kan de bestaande adresnode te gebruiken.
Mvg,
eggie
eggie (2026-06-17 11:04:53+00:00): Commentaar moet zijn .. reshaped from BGT omtreklgericht
morkovkin (2026-07-04 11:54:08+00:00): По соглашению https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Адреса в РФ в теге addr:housenumber вместо "стр" надо использовать просто "с"

Исправлю
morkovkin (2026-07-04 12:20:03+00:00): Чисто из любопытства спрашиваю: зачем создавать мультиполигоны с одним участником и без тегов на контуре? Например, relation/19852642 или relation/19852641
AndyB_66 (2026-06-17 11:18:59+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184200286
AndyB_66 (2026-06-17 11:18:33+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184199797
AndyB_66 (2026-06-17 11:18:06+00:00): revert of https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184199974
World_Winner (2026-06-19 13:47:43+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset id: 184316812
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-25 09:03:26+00:00): I cleaned up SEO spam and other mistagging for POI in changeset 184572616

https://osm.org/changeset/184572616

However, the POI for this hot tub store is inside the building of another (presumably competing) hot tub store, and the address given matches that on the other hot tub store's website, while it does not match the address on its own website that was provided here. Therefore, I then removed it in changeset 184572683

https://osm.org/changeset/184572683
yelisey90 (2026-06-17 18:56:22+00:00): rv - unlikely; part of it is definitely stairs

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184241044
birimkulova (2026-06-18 09:45:47+00:00): hello	
Thank you for the comment, I’ll take it into account. Thanks!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-17 21:58:35+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI as a highway node with blatant advertising hype in description=* and malformed tags/values in changeset 184246877

https://osm.org/changeset/184246877
literan (2026-06-17 19:20:11+00:00): В 2025 канатная дорога была на местности https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CTAAzYpE

Откатываю вашу правку
user_5359 (2026-06-18 10:31:38+00:00): Hello! Please have a look on https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/20995011. What is the mean of the key aa?
HyperFlint (2026-06-18 14:52:54+00:00): Hi and thanks for this notice! It was just a typo, I'll fix it as fast as possible
JezCrow (2026-06-17 17:04:44+00:00): Hi Keiron, welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Thank you for adding these buildings to the map. It looks like you've somehow accidentally deleted the RAF Shawbury area too (I'm assuming it still exits as a site) Don't worry though, I have restored it in changeset/184235287
Happy mapping!
Jez
#review_requested
Keiron Cornell (2026-06-17 17:08:55+00:00): Hi Jez,
My bad! I'm really sorry about that! Thank you for restoring it. It's definitely still there! 

Thank you
Keiron
Mateusz Konieczny (2026-07-08 13:12:29+00:00): Hello!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13947604222

what you wanted to mark? because it is clearly not a motorway junction
luziferius (2026-06-17 12:33:28+00:00): Benutzte Quellbilder aus 2026. Es sind nirgendwo zeitabhängige Beschränkungen beschildert. Auf dem Segment durchgehend 120km/h:
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.44813931904801&lng=7.03782161428569&z=18.70057070891023&pKey=1317833266926712&focus=photo
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.4378174&lng=7.031731199999967&z=19.56499886625362&focus=photo&dateFrom=2026-01-01&pKey=1014320291763416
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.43109461&lng=7.0200655700000425&z=19.56499886625362&focus=photo&dateFrom=2026-01-01&pKey=931773292696227
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.42398622318004&lng=7.008843607260701&z=18.65926547971921&focus=photo&dateFrom=2026-01-01&pKey=1437784287692532
Metzor (2026-07-04 11:23:02+00:00): Hi mee6

Welcome to OSM and thanks for contributing :-) 

One general recommendation: 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!

Please also have a look at this page as you use StreetComplete:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/StreetComplete/FAQ#A_changeset_made_with_StreetComplete_covers_a_massive_area%2C_why_is_this%3F_How_can_it_be_prevented%3F
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184224986
iamanit (2026-06-17 12:52:26+00:00): dint mean to request review.. i've seen it with my own eyes
BCNorwich (2026-06-19 10:15:57+00:00): Hi, You forgot to tag all these building. I've tagged them but please check the tags and see if I've missed any.

Regards Bernard.
9_tab (2026-06-27 12:21:14+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity=doctors is generally used for physicians. Robin Gervais is not licensed to practice in Switzerland.
9_tab (2026-07-02 09:04:36+00:00): Also, ground survey didn't find this.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-17 21:57:04+00:00): Reverted SEO spam POI with blatant advertising hype in description=* and malformed tags/values in changeset 184246836

https://osm.org/changeset/184246836
OlasMapy (2026-06-17 13:16:59+00:00): 2026*
flohoff (2026-06-17 15:24:21+00:00): Moin,
ich habe hier die änderung teils zurückgenommen. Wenn du einen gemeinsamen Node für einmündende Straßen machst die getrennte Fahrspuren haben so wie hier die Abfahrten dann führt das dazu das du im Routing eher so ansagen einer "Spitzkehre erzeugst" 

Siehe hier dem output meiner Routingüberwachung die sofort angesprungen ist:

https://osm.zz.de/routeqa/?rid=936222,1290716#51.25349,6.49234,18z
Glassman (2026-06-18 16:01:46+00:00): #TIP: Street names need to be spelled out. The reason is software has a hard time with abbreviations. Can you fix this and the previous edit to the landuse?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184226722
JezCrow (2026-06-17 15:19:38+00:00): Hi Yurik05,
Unfortunately we are not allowed to use google's aerial imagery to update OpenStreetMap as their Terms of Service do not permit that. It looks like neither Bing, Esri nor Mapbox imagery shows the roundabout as you have mapped it, so unless a compatible source can be found, this edit will need to be reverted.

#review_requested
Yurik05 (2026-06-18 10:51:08+00:00): Hi JezCrow,
Thank you for the review. I can see that ESRI Vector Maps have already been changed to reflect the new roundabout geometry (https://www.arcgis.com/apps/mapviewer/index.html). Satellite imagery doesn't have fully up-to-date images yet. Also my colleague confirmed the works are completed there and the shape is correct.
Alliegaytor (2026-06-17 21:12:48+00:00): Hi, thanks for your contributions here :)

regarding https://www.osm.org/way/1151077588 please check esri, it is a paved footpath now as surveyed by a streetcomplete user recently (https://www.osm.org/way/1151077588/history/3). The old alignment for it was correct, I've restored it and the surface value in changeset/184245716

please conflate newer imagery while mapping to ensure you don't remove features not present on bing
ScottyThePilko (2026-06-18 03:45:07+00:00): Hey Allie, thanks for your work.

My apologies for the mistake, that was just carelessness on my part (I thought I had walked along there IRL recently enough but I guess it was a couple months back now).

I'll do my best to avoid undoing other people's work going forward.
felipeeugenio (2026-06-17 16:22:10+00:00): Hello. Sorry, but this makes no sense. Are you sure this is on use as we speak and it is not part of the construction provisional roads? becasuse that highway was built very recently.
regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184227159
Geocrest (2026-06-18 09:12:32+00:00): Hi felipeeugenio, Thank you for your feedback. I will analyze the situation and come back to you.
felipeeugenio (2026-06-18 12:59:35+00:00): ok, Thank you very much
felipeeugenio (2026-06-18 13:06:02+00:00): Sadly, there are no mapillary pictures there, but I am sure this is a disused crossing made provisionally for the construction.
Geocrest (2026-06-22 17:36:37+00:00): Thank you for your feedback regarding this. The sections were clearly visible on ESRI Imagery but it might be possible that I misinterpreted construction activity as vehicle traffic from the GPS traces I used.
I am seeing that another user has already attempted to fix the situation by adding disused:* prefix to the segments. Please let me know if it is agreeable to you.
felipeeugenio (2026-06-23 00:49:12+00:00): Hello. I thought it was you the mapper who did that, It is totally OK.

regards
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-18 11:08:57+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with blatant promotion and nonsensical tagging

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184266201
Aurelien1685 (2026-06-17 14:22:49+00:00): Bonjour,

Merci pour ces améliorations !
Petite correction à faire, la voie des Longs Culs n'est pas en herbe à partir du portail d'entrée dans la forêt (juste au nord de la plaque commémorative) jusqu'à la sortie de la forêt et le deuxième portail

C'est une surface en dalles alvéolées (en plastique sauf erreur de ma part) avec du gravier dedans donc je dirais peut-être grass_paver. 

Je ferais une autre session photo sur ce chemin que je connais bien (j'ai déjà contribué à la carte sur ce chemin) la prochaine fois que j'y serais 

Bonne journée,
Sébastien Pi (2026-06-17 14:33:36+00:00): Corrigé : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184229649
yelisey90 (2026-06-17 19:09:56+00:00): Hhmmm... Do you think that it's forbidden for general public to walk along those service roads? Usually, it's not... Consider changing to motor_vehicle=private instead of access=private
Elizen (2026-06-18 08:57:49+00:00): You're right. I fixed it
rajdhani (2026-06-18 07:30:02+00:00): Reverted in changeset id:184257726
literan (2026-06-17 19:17:39+00:00): у вас получилось два 4-х подъезда. Исправлю
sannkc (2026-06-20 21:11:11+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368610
sannkc (2026-06-20 21:11:18+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368610
sannkc (2026-06-20 21:07:33+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368517
sannkc (2026-06-20 21:03:41+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368397
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-21 10:12:56+00:00): DWG revert - incorrectly deleted validly mapped features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184383471
Fizzie-DWG (2026-06-21 10:13:47+00:00): DWG revert - incorrectly deleted validly mapped features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184383497
sannkc (2026-06-20 20:58:33+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368274
sannkc (2026-06-20 20:56:09+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368230
sannkc (2026-06-20 20:53:54+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184368180
sannkc (2026-06-20 20:12:25+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184367064
rarad74 (2026-06-17 20:27:44+00:00): Why you change the road with double carriage? There is a phisical separation between lanes?
sannkc (2026-06-20 20:08:59+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184366963
sannkc (2026-06-20 19:54:24+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184366493
sannkc (2026-06-20 03:56:32+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184338438
sannkc (2026-06-20 03:54:00+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184338416
greatnameguys2472 (2026-06-17 14:44:18+00:00): Please stop with this undiscussed mass removal of driveways
flyingember (2026-06-17 14:50:20+00:00): why don't you add the missing 100,000 if you care so much?  In some places there's five driveways for a neighborhood of 500.  I'm introducing consistency
sannkc (2026-06-20 03:50:50+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184338369
Glassman (2026-06-18 21:45:15+00:00): Is this the correct name for a taxiway? I usually see names like "A" or "F".
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/184230098
eggie (2026-06-17 17:31:12+00:00): Dag Bob.. Zo te zien is dat geen fietspad, maar een toegangsweg afgesloten met paaltjes Wellicht ook bedoeld voor hulpdiensten dat doorloopt naar de hoofdrijbaan.

MVG,
eggie.
greatnameguys2472 (2026-06-17 14:52:07+00:00): Why would some of these be sidewalks if they don't run along the side a road
sannkc (2026-06-20 03:44:59+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184338308
sannkc (2026-06-21 02:20:37+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184373603
rarad74 (2026-06-18 19:38:44+00:00): Hi, Bridhges are strainght not curved. It apera for you curved because the image is taken from an angle and the bridge is curved in vertical plan, then if you look at it from a side it will apear curved, but if you look from above perpendicular on the bridge will apear straight.
BakoyeRiver (2026-06-22 17:40:45+00:00): Hello rarad74, Thank you for the information. I made the edit based on recent Vantor Hub imagery from 06/17/2026, which shows the reconstruction of the bridge with a minor curve to it. In that imagery there is a larger gap between the dual carriageways at the middle of the bridge than at both ends of the bridge.
rarad74 (2026-06-22 19:39:58+00:00): Hi. The bridge is straight for sure. PERFECT Straight. I go over that bridge many times. I live in Bucharest and drive in that direction many times. Your satellite images from Vantor are deformed from optical point of view. They probably was taken from airplane or sattelite from an angle. Not perpendicular. So , for future you cannot be shure based only on imagery.
rarad74 (2026-06-22 19:58:56+00:00): Asa completion- the bridge is straight - both lanes, the road whichconnect to the bridge heads are curved.
yelisey90 (2026-06-17 19:07:12+00:00): It doesn't go through no. 10, but through no.  8, please fix
birimkulova (2026-06-18 14:39:40+00:00): Hello, thank you for the comment. I have fixed it.
sannkc (2026-06-21 02:20:42+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184373603
Tommybara (2026-06-17 15:48:29+00:00): https://baotayninh.vn/phuong-tan-ninh-trien-khai-de-an-sap-xep-khu-pho-149603.html
sannkc (2026-06-21 02:20:46+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184373603
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 04:43:39+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with malformed tags that doesn't actually exist on the ground (AnchorBooks is an online listing service for boat owners and operators), in changeset 184339002

https://osm.org/changeset/184339002
yelisey90 (2026-06-17 19:43:15+00:00): rv - definitely not, there's a retaining wall there

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/184242875
mapeditor11 (2026-06-21 14:09:05+00:00): This was not ai detected, it's lidar.
HellMap (2026-06-21 14:26:57+00:00): What is your comment supposed to mean? I did not say anything about AI here.

LIDAR is in many locations more than a decade old and cannot be reliably used by itself. And the track going that far is neither visible on LIDAR nor latest aerial. If the track is here, then provide some verifiable source like a GPS track or photos.

You added a ford in the middle of nowhere where you most certainly have not surveyed in person.
sannkc (2026-06-21 02:12:49+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184373482
eggie (2026-06-17 15:45:06+00:00): Dag Reinoudje,
Tip.. 
Kijk even hier hoe fietspaden te taggen.

G11: mofa=yes, moped=no, traffic_sign=NL:G11
G12a: moped=designated, mofa=designated, traffic_sign=NL:G12a
G13: moped=no, mofa=no, traffic_sign=NL:G13

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/NL:Cycleway


MVG
eggie
sannkc (2026-06-21 01:30:32+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184372907
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 04:45:18+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with malformed tags that doesn't actually exist on the ground (AnchorBooks is an online listing service for boat owners and operators), in changeset 184339029

https://osm.org/changeset/184339029
martinst (2026-06-17 19:34:23+00:00): Tipp: Mit diesem Hintergrund im iD-Editor lässt sich der Verlauf von Bächen usw. oft noch genauer ausmachen:
https://mapsneu.wien.gv.at/basemap/bmapoberflaeche/grau/google3857/{z}/{y}/{x}.jpeg
sagrnn (2026-06-17 21:45:19+00:00): Danke für die Zusatzinfo!
sannkc (2026-06-21 01:28:22+00:00): Reverted in changeset #184372878
Brummelwuff (2026-06-17 19:04:22+00:00): Nabend, 
du hattest hier den Poller Node vom Way der Straße getrennt. Das habe ich rückgänig gemacht.
raelianer (2026-06-18 14:15:13+00:00): Jetzt werden die Poller nicht mehr so angezeigt, wie sie dort vor Ort positioniert sind? Soll das so sein?
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-06-20 04:45:49+00:00): Reverted adding SEO spam POI with malformed tags that doesn't actually exist on the ground (AnchorBooks is an online listing service for boat owners and operators), in changeset 184339041

https://osm.org/changeset/184339041
sannkc (2026-06-21 01:25:22+00:00): Partially reverted in changeset #184372842