piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Comino (2025-10-25 07:26:14+00:00): Hi,

In your edit you use the tag "payment:cryptocurrencies=yes".

The tag "payment:cryptocurrencies=*" was a payment tag proposal which was rejected by the OSM community. Use this tag only when cryptocurrencies are NOT accepted.
Source: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Cryptocurrencies_with_payment_tag and https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:payment:*#Cryptocurrencies

Please REMOVE the payment:cryptocurrencies=yes !

Thank you.

Happy mapping,

Edwin Comino
https://btcmap.org/tagger/6794624
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-25 15:10:36+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/8795119817/history has rooms = 0 that was added in this edit
What was meant by this? That this object has no rooms? Seems surprising here
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-28 13:59:31+00:00): Please don't abbreviate street names (including prefixes and suffixes).  If data consumers want abbreviations in names, they can easily create the abbreviation algorithmically from the full words, however, computers really suck at trying to find expansions for abbreviations.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173734471
K&K13 (2025-10-29 15:54:32+00:00): I didn't realize that, thank you for the information!
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-30 00:45:54+00:00): No worries, glad to help!
Fizzie-DWG (2025-11-23 02:30:06+00:00): DWG revert - incorrect tagging

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175011241
SomeoneElse_Revert (2026-01-18 20:47:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 177391275 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some dubious changes in Somali, Ethiopia and the USA
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-28 13:58:15+00:00): I suspect what got tagged as "Turtle Way" here is actually two different streets.  Could you doublecheck?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173734605
K&K13 (2025-10-29 16:10:15+00:00): According to the plat map, this appears to be correct, with Turtle Way connecting to Marsh Lane and continuing on after the curve.
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-30 00:47:27+00:00): Awesome! I just know some armchair mappers overseas don't usually realize cul de sacs at corners like that usually denote a two-way intersection here and wanted to make sure.
pwbriggs (2025-11-02 05:45:51+00:00): Thank you! Business details are very helpful for OpenStreetMap.

The one change I made was to standardize the telephone number format to `+1-206-588-0379`. It's unusual to see that format around here, but it does help international users of OpenStreetMap data to properly parse the number. This is a minor detail though, and the other changes look OK.

Thanks again for contributing. Please feel free to ask any questions here. Welcome to OpenStreetMap!
HoubkneghteS (2025-10-30 17:07:37+00:00): Hey, thanks for this changeset! The only thing is that the change from grassland to farmland near the southshore may be what the aerial photos show, but I don't think it's current use. The area is currently an empty field and planned for future development.
Fgjgdrou (2025-10-24 22:08:10+00:00): *restricted byways
Gregory Peony (2025-10-30 14:20:54+00:00): Hello, if you're using more specific tags than building=yes then please clearly state the source of that information. It is at times possible to spot e.g. some religious buildings from aerial imagery becasue they are visually distinct, but how do you know that a certain building was built as a house?
bartgron (2025-11-26 20:31:37+00:00): Zestaw zmian wycofany:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175171286
KhalidKashmiri (2025-10-24 21:57:35+00:00): Plan SOR na https://zielonyursus.pl/ursus-podsumowanie-inwestycji-lipiec-2025/ jest chyba aktualny, ale w kiepskiej jakości i bez oznakowania
bartgron (2025-11-26 20:32:19+00:00): Wycofano:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175171318
Fgjgdrou (2025-10-24 22:07:54+00:00): *restricted byways
bartgron (2025-11-26 20:34:39+00:00): Wycofano:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175171436
Fgjgdrou (2025-10-24 22:07:42+00:00): *restricted byways
Fgjgdrou (2025-10-24 22:07:33+00:00): *restricted byways
Fgjgdrou (2025-10-24 22:07:23+00:00): *restricted byways
rohieb (2025-12-11 19:26:59+00:00): Was willst du mit place=locality ausdrücken? Das Tag wird eher genutzt, um größere Areale zu beschreiben, z.B. Flurnamen oder andere unbewohnte Gebiete. Hier sind es aber offenbar Teile der Inneneinrichtung vom Greifhaus?
murmeldin (2025-12-11 21:11:23+00:00): hab's gefixt, passt das so?
rohieb (2025-12-12 21:11:16+00:00): Du beziehst dich auf https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175820553, das finde ich ok so. Nach Rücksprache habe ich auch nochmal die restlichen place=locality dort im Gebäude mit besseren Tags versehen, siehe https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175863007
Baloo Uriza (2025-10-24 23:54:04+00:00): Oops, didn't mean to botch that!
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/173737316
blef (2025-10-25 08:18:28+00:00): Hi,
Why do you tell that you correct missing tags?
Adding bus=yes is not a part of the approved PTv2 scheme. This topic is still subject of discussion.
kapazao (2025-10-25 15:57:52+00:00): Hi, it is explained in the wiki:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Proposal:Public_Transport
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:public_transport=platform
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Tag:highway=bus_stop
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:bus=yes

It is made to understand the type of public transport, for unification and also fixing errors with validators.

In this case I could have added these references in the changeset.

I hope I have explained it well.

Regards
nilloc29 (2026-03-08 21:45:43+00:00): This heath polygon is not representative of conditions on the ground. All undeveloped areas in this region are sagebrush steppe. Heath is a wetland or alpine habitat. There are millions of acres of sagebrush steppe so I am uncertain what the intent of this multipolygon was. I am editing the ownership of the new wildlife area and its borders.
deven_smith_ (2026-03-10 02:24:48+00:00): If you look at the Wiki for heath, you'll see Sagebrush steppe as part of what is consider heath. Obviously, if the sagebrush is dense and tall enough it could be tagged scrub. That is how I and many other mappers have been mapping our sagebrush lands here. You can see I tagged portions as grassland where the sage isn't either present or as dense

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural=heath
Madi-Red (2025-11-28 08:24:39+00:00): Hello KingVik, thank You for your contribution. I corrected all issues related to building and highway intersections within our Africa - Fix Building and Highway Intersection challenge. Make sure that there are no validation errors before data upload. Happy Mapping!
KingVik (2025-11-28 08:37:20+00:00): Thank you, Madi-Red, for your feedback
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 06:14:39+00:00): これは重要な警告です
あなたが行った編集は、2024年ごろに新しくできた建築物であるウェイ（https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1416547789）他数件を根拠もなく削除しています
他者の新しい情報の反映を壊すことは、破壊行為とみなされうる行為です。

もしこれが1回目なら、誰にでもあるミスの規範で寛容に指摘するところですが
あなたは既に昨年、坂戸市薬師町付近でも同様に新しい状況を壊す行為を行っています。
また、今年5月にはディスカッションへ返答しないことに対する注意を受けておきながら、以降約半年間同じ状態を繰り返しています。
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 06:15:35+00:00): 修正：
問題のある削除がされたウェイはこちらです
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1416547789
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 06:42:36+00:00): 以前に事情をお聞きした歩道のように「やり方・スタイル」は適度に尊重したいと考えていますが
他の人の新しい情報を消すことは、純粋に地図を良い状態から遠ざける行為ですので、これに関しては賛同できません
hatochan (2025-10-25 07:34:08+00:00): メッセージにも返したのですが、JOSMのBingをベース確信して修正をしました。参照しているBingが古いのでしょうか。Bingとともに他の標準地図も参考にして、これらより新しい（開発されていることは確認しました）ので、平地になっているものを削除しました。
hatochan (2025-10-25 07:35:11+00:00): 申し訳ありませんが、いまは外なので帰宅したらあらためて詳細に返答させていただきます。
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 07:50:58+00:00): どちらも閲覧しました。
画像に関してはメッセージでも触れたEsriがほとんどの場合この地域で最新です。
一番大事なのは画像がいつ更新されたかだけでなく、地物についているタグから他の人の動向を知ることかと思います。
今回の各地物は
note=誤って削除しないよう注意
source:geometry=Esri 2024
とタグをつけていますので、古いのではと疑いが生じても、コメントで一報いただければなぜ描いたかの説明を差し上げることができました
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 07:56:46+00:00): 削除のほかに、demolished接頭辞の付いた地物を綺麗に直している個所も不自然です（タグを目視していないことを疑います）
もし現存すると思ったらならば接頭辞は消すでしょうし、解体済みと分っている物を綺麗にするのも変です
hatochan (2025-10-25 08:01:40+00:00): 確かにnoteを見ていなかったです。一部のタグだけで削除していましました。
hatochan (2025-10-25 08:51:13+00:00): 削除したデータセットを戻すようにします（はじめてなのでちょっと不安ですが）。大変申し訳ありませんが、まだ外なので少しお時間をください。
大山かなめ (2025-10-25 08:59:39+00:00): ありがとう
ただし、こちらでも地物復元のJOSMプラグインを持っています
こちらは変更セットではなく1個ずつ戻せますので、数日間付近を触るのを止めていただければ分かっている5軒をピンポイント復元します
どちらがよろしいでしょうか
hatochan (2025-10-25 11:29:58+00:00): 慣れている方のほうが確実なので、甘えさせていただいてよろしいでしょうか。毎度お時間を取らせてしまい、本当に申し訳ありませんでした。
大山かなめ (2025-10-27 05:15:58+00:00): 夜の見込みでしたが、時間が取れましたので当該の5軒に関して復元を行いました。
追加の苦言になり恐縮ですが、建物が変化して更新する際は、近くにあるという理由でウェイをそのまま使うこともお控えください（これは、巻き戻す必要があるときに無関係の物を巻き込む危険に繋がります）
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1417159601　など
別の建物だと分かる時は、消して新しく作成をお願いします。
ika-chan! (2025-10-24 23:17:59+00:00): Thankfully, the changeset bounding box turned out to be tiny, but editing programs can be a bit of a troll at times.
princemateenroyal122 (2025-10-24 23:22:45+00:00): HRH Prince Abdul Mateen of Brunei 🇧🇳
Royal Family | Polo Enthusiast | Pilot ✈️
Dedicated to service, discipline, and unity.
Grateful for every supporter — you are part of this royal journey. 💙
#PrinceMateen #BruneiDarussalam #RoyalFamilyOfBrunei #RoyalSpirit
https://wa.me/13142299016?text=Hello%20I%20am%20interested%20in%20the%20VIP%20membership
NeisRevert (2025-10-25 05:21:48+00:00): This changeset has been reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/173741900
where the changeset comment is: 
Remove spam
NorthCrab_upload (2025-10-24 23:41:30+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/232412143
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/322227056

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Piotr Strębski (2025-10-24 23:56:16+00:00): Poprawione!
SomeoneElse (2025-11-01 02:55:00+00:00): Not sure what happened to https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1263414884/history - "roof:shape=gabled" seemed to get changed to "highway=gabled"?
OpenWorldInformation (2025-11-01 11:41:03+00:00): Woops - my mistake. Resolved back in changeset 174057731
SomeoneElse (2025-11-01 13:59:13+00:00): Thanks!
jjyach (2025-10-25 02:47:56+00:00): Parker is not a city, officially it is a town
Joseph R P (2025-10-25 02:59:35+00:00): Places aren't classified based on their legal statuses but rather their size and regional prominence. Parker has nearly 60k population in 2020 with that figure rapidly increasing, plus a lot of surrounding development outside city limits within Parker's ZIP codes.
jjyach (2025-10-25 03:09:22+00:00): Those areas outside are part of other cities and towns but all share a zipcode as Colorado zip codes span municipalities.  The OSM wiki itself calls out that Parker is a town and notes it.  OSM also tends to treat 100k as the dividing line
Joseph R P (2025-10-26 14:11:29+00:00): OSM doesn't exactly have a threshold for how much population a place needs to be classified as a city. Wyoming has no cities that come close to passing 100k in population, but has 10 places tagged as cities in OSM. Colorado itself has a notable example—Grand Junction—which has 65.5k pop. as of 2020 but has been tagged as a city on OSM since 2010. 

Additionally, multiple examples of legal towns tagged as cities and legal cities tagged as town. A place's legal status is arbitrary in the grand scheme of things as a map user is likely not concerned with the legal status of a place but rather its size and regional importance.

I found one mention of Parker on the OSM Wiki, but this doesn't seem to revolve around place classification and only use the word "town" as Castle rock is legally a home rule town while Parker is a municipality that self-declares itself a town.

"Colorado has two basic divisions for incorporated municipalities, towns and cities, though Colorado law makes relatively few distinctions between the two. "In general, cities are more populous than towns, although the towns of Castle Rock and Parker have more than 45,000 residents each, while the city of Black Hawk has fewer than 120 residents."

This excerpt, at least from my perspective, would actually be a good argument for why legal status is arbitrary, considering a legally-defined city like Black Hawk can have a tiny population while places that are legally municipalities, towns, villages, hamlets, census-designated places, unincorporated communities, etc. can have varying populations and in many instances be larger in population and more important to its region than what places local governments have decided to classify as a "city".
Superadlen (2025-10-28 11:46:18+00:00): Merci beaucoup
AstroSinclaire (2025-10-26 08:08:45+00:00): these are marked shoulder cycle lanes - highway=cycleway is intended for separated cycle paths, the relevant roads should instead be tagged with cycleway=lane where appropriate
Tim Niblett (2025-10-26 20:07:16+00:00): Literally per the documentation "cycle tracks that are running parallel and next to the road (consider map them as separate ways with highway=cycleway, or highway=path + bicycle=designated in case of shared foot- and bicycle ways)." the key words being consider mapping them as separate ways. In this case they are clearly marked and are running parallel to the road. In my opinion it makes sense to map them out since they are dedicated lanes and are marked as such and the documentation clearly takes that into consideration. To me it is better to be explicit with what is there than to be implicit, particularly when the documentation allows for such things.
AstroSinclaire (2025-10-26 22:44:37+00:00): the line above the one you quoted mentions "cycle lanes which are part of the road without any physical separation from the other lanes except the painting on the road (don't map them as separate ways)" - the loop-shaped cycleways east of campus have physical separation from auto traffic, the ones throughout campus do not and should not be mapped separately
Tim Niblett (2025-10-27 15:38:09+00:00): You're right, I re-read it. I've removed all of the bikeways and checked the road tags for bike lanes.
Frans S (2025-10-28 15:21:31+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
A few issues.
First, solve the issues shown by the issue triangle of IDeditor before you upload your work.
Your mappings are not that accurate as we might expect.  Buildings not squared. Building nodes connected to other buildings or roads.

Keep an eye on complex buildings, Especial the high rise (multi story) buildings and buildings which shows their sideviews  as well. Check this footage how to map these buildings 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsfUcslLtVc
https://drive.google.com/file/d/13RTwH7sChRWrG5bIjysF2ripBgh3F5l4/view?usp=sharing 

Best regards and keep mapping
NeisBot (2025-10-25 00:46:28+00:00): Hi thd10045, welcome to the OSM projekt and thanks for your contribution!

To make collaboration easier and help others understand your edits, it’s best to add a short description of the changes you made. Clear comments help the community follow your work and provide better feedback. You can find tips on writing good comments here[1].
---
[1] https://osm.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments

#HelpfulComment #Gibberish
NeisBot (2025-10-25 00:46:28+00:00): Based on your map edits in this changeset, I’ve drafted a suggestion for what a comment could look like: "Removed toilet facility"
mueschel (2025-10-26 18:46:14+00:00): Hi,
could you explain what this sign shows? The tags are not sufficient to tell.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/13255172612
Dawid2849 (2025-10-25 06:17:47+00:00): Ale głupota... Trzeba jakoś załatać dziurę w budżecie
stragu (2025-11-10 12:16:24+00:00): Hey there, just wanted to let you know about some inadvertent moves of nodes in your changeset, which I assume happened as you were dragging the map while moving along the cycleway. I fixed them in the following changesets:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174458814
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174459111
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174459491
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174459700
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/174459833
pitscheplatsch (2025-10-25 08:28:49+00:00): Hello, and welcome to OSM!

May I ask where the name “New-Yorker-Landstraße” comes from? I wasn’t able to find anything similar in the Geoportal of the state of Hesse.

Thanks and best regards,
Pascal

---
Hallo, willkommen bei OSM.

Darf ich fragen was die Quelle des Names "New-Yorker-Landstraße" ist? Im Geoportal des Landes Hessen kann ich nichts vergleichbares finden.

Danke und viele Grüße,
Pascal
user_5359 (2025-10-25 07:08:36+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Thanks for your addition!
Please move the node to the main building. Could please add also the key religion, denormination, service_times?
uknown-gryphus (2025-12-03 04:19:07+00:00): Hi, thank you for your changes! I reclassified this section as highway=trunk + expressway=yes, because as far as I can tell, it is a national highway, not an expressway. It uses the standard green NH signs, and doesn't have the expressway signage at any point. See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/India/Tags/Highway . As you noted, it provides local access at Porur too. I would say the whole road needs to be classified as trunk.
user_5359 (2025-10-25 06:54:54+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful! You moved the node https://www.osm.org/node/11552533563 more than 100 meters. Please check the correct position. If you need help, you are welcome!
aaronq227 (2025-11-06 17:49:34+00:00): Hi chiideeraa1,

I noticed you added a motorway (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1444627434#map=12/6.4532/3.6461) and cited Esri World Imagery. It seems Esri shows an outdated version of this areas. Recent Vantor Hub imagery shows that the configuration of this junction changed a few years ago. There are two physically separated roads that are modeled by the existing trunk dual carriageway, and the roundabout has been removed. The previous modeling more accurately matches the updated road configuration. What would be your thoughts on changing the modeling back?

Note: Apple has an agreement with Vantor (Maxar) to use their more recent imagery to edit OpenStreetMap, which is not publicly available for editing OpenStreetMap. We generally use the imagery that is already available in JOSM but where we do use that more recent imagery, we always cite it and the date the imagery is from in the changeset source.

Thank you and looking forward to hearing from you.
aharvey (2025-10-27 22:46:17+00:00): hi this is the footpath not a bridge, therefore I've reverted this change.
Sylabowy Kot (2025-10-25 08:17:50+00:00): Nie za wcześnie trochę na mapowanie budynków? :P Chyba nadal wyburzają stary biurowiec.
Michał Paluchowski (2025-10-25 08:35:41+00:00): Curtis Plaza dawno już zniknęła. Stoją dwa żurawie i budowa nowych budynków ruszyła.
AkuAnakTimur (2025-10-25 04:05:30+00:00): Ground truth from May 2023
Alliegaytor (2025-10-25 04:25:14+00:00): Please take care not to connect the building nodes to the SRL
mueschel (2025-10-26 10:23:15+00:00): Hi,
instead of "count:blue" (which is not helpful for people not knowing the locally used color scheme for containers) it might be better to state the type of recycling, e.g.
recycling:glass_bottles:count

Could you change that?
Fraxi (2025-10-26 11:14:40+00:00): Hi,
please see:https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/topic/136856
mueschel (2025-10-26 11:29:05+00:00): I don't fully understand the proposal in this post, because automatic translation is too bad. 

What is the actual significance of the colors, if there are different combinations that is not covered by the common recycling tags? A tagging scheme with only colors is not used in any place, apart from a 1-user one time import in a town Italy.
Dimitar155 (2025-10-26 11:51:18+00:00): Due to local garbage collation issues, it is important to know how may recycling containers of each colour there are.

recycling:glass_bottles:count could work for the green containers, but not for the yellow (plastic packaging + cans).

Also each company can use either 3 colour bins or 2. The second schema combines yellow and blue into yellow.
NeisBot (2025-10-25 05:39:42+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form: "Scrap yard in Oklahoma City"
NeisBot (2025-10-25 05:39:42+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisReview (2025-10-26 10:03:57+00:00): 👎 (Partly) Reverted due to lack of response from the original contributor by https://osm.org/changeset/173786465
Stephan Zinke (2025-11-03 16:52:12+00:00): Hi,
is there a reason why the tag building=train_stations was removed?
shogun (2025-11-03 17:10:53+00:00): Hallo, wo habe ich es gelöscht? Das Gebäute hat am Umriss building=train_station. Was ist damit ?
Stephan Zinke (2025-11-03 17:30:48+00:00): Ah, OK, das ist mir nicht aufgefallen, ich hatte nur die Änderungen bei Objekt 88225075 gesehen.
Sorry für die Verwirrung und danke für die prompte Antwort!
NeisBot (2025-10-25 06:03:41+00:00): Hello, welcome and thank you for your contribution to OSM!

Your changeset was commented because your added description or slogan contains detailed text that may be interpreted as promotional or SEO-related. To ensure OSM remains neutral and focused on map data, I recommend keeping descriptions concise, factual, and free from marketing or promotional language.

Could you please revise your description accordingly?

#MapWithoutSpam #Tags #Description
NeisBot (2025-10-25 06:03:41+00:00): Just to help illustrate what I mean, here is how your description could look in a more neutral, factual form: "Solar panel cleaning service in Encinitas"
NeisReview (2025-10-26 10:03:29+00:00): ✅ Corrected by https://osm.org/changeset/173743111
dieterdreist (2025-10-30 20:06:54+00:00): Anche questo è un duplicato, lo cancello ora,

saluti
Martin
dieterdreist (2025-10-27 22:19:10+00:00): hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap , I just wanted to tell you that there is no missing node for the station, it is already here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/1821284 the node you added is a duplicate and I removed it.
Enock4seth (2025-10-26 19:41:23+00:00): Hi, thanks for mapping. This looks more commercial, especially on the eastern part.
Lepuse (2025-10-25 15:26:39+00:00): Please note that single-character place names feel unnatural in modern Chinese, so the '村' in two-character place names should not be omitted.
katpatuka (2025-10-25 16:43:47+00:00): Ok Lepuse ;)

What about other village names? Today I got another comment on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172618754 concerning the '村'...
Lepuse (2025-10-26 09:24:09+00:00): In cases where a place=* represents an administrative village (行政村) division rather than a physical settlement, the character '村' should be retained in the name, though whether to retain such place=* feature remains a matter of debate.
In contrast, natural villages are physical settlements rather than administrative divisions. Village naming conventions vary by region, source, and individual preference. Some users consistently append '村' to all village names, while others omit it. Practices for signage also differ: some include the '村' suffix to indicate the place type, others exclude it, and some use the '自然村' (natural village) suffix instead.
When specifying the address of a natural village, the associated administrative village may be referenced to clarify its location, using formats such as 'XX村YY自然村', 'XX行政村YY村', or simply 'XX村YY'. From this perspective, not adding the additional character seems to allow for more flexibility in handling. Additionally, the Chinese name subkey should always align with the name=* tag, regardless of the convention used.
Taksine (2025-11-01 02:40:32+00:00): In general, if you are not very familiar with Chinese, please do not change any of the characters for "村". Thank you.