piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
NeisBot (2025-09-17 02:37:35+00:00): Hi RKhabib, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 99% 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=172040859
NeisBot (2025-09-17 03:06:35+00:00): Hi RKhabib, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 98% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 6 building(s)

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=172041300
mapnerd🤓 (2025-10-09 06:32:25+00:00): Removed roads going through the west City Mall; it is entirely impossible to label parking aisles going through a parking garage, hence why the whole thing has just been tagged as multi-story. Thanks.
NeisBot (2025-09-17 03:30:35+00:00): Hi RKhabib, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 95% 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=172041667
Fizzie-DWG (2025-10-09 07:06:14+00:00): Please check this CS as you have mapped a service road inside a shopping mall?
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 04:48:18+00:00): Hi Enisa, 

All these footpritns represent buildings, but could be more accurate. In short I recommend mapping the footprints of buildings with pitched roofs slightly smaller than the roof. See how I mapped them in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172042952 

 --- When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the [roofs of buildings](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof:shape#Roof_shape), but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+). Take care to make contributions others can build upon.

 --- Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
felipeeugenio (2025-09-17 12:37:02+00:00): Hola. Borró varios elementos agregados por otros maperos. No existen?
Este mapa es la base de datos misma, no es un lugar para pruebas para tareas.
La edición será reversada.

saludos
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 05:07:11+00:00): Hi, it looks like you mistook shadows cast by trees, and vegetation for buildings, though I must say that this is quite difficult to tell using only Bing (I used mapbox to aid my interpretation). In future note how the scene is lit and in which direction shadows are cast, consider consulting a secondary source if it helps. I deleted them in Changeset: 172043535 --- Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172042855
Ricken Lazlo Hale (2025-09-17 06:35:43+00:00): Thank you - that's helpful advice.  I had a tough time with this one.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172042855
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 05:20:17+00:00): Hi, the footprint you mapped here represents a building and you followed the correct procedure to map it, but it's slightly oversized. See how I mapped it in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172043726 

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the [roofs of buildings](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:roof:shape#Roof_shape), but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag.  Take care to make contributions that others can build upon. 

Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
gajera vishal (2025-09-17 04:51:14+00:00): nice view
nevw (2025-09-17 23:39:21+00:00): Hi, osmi has detected a few problems with this area.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=149.01348&lat=-35.29797&zoom=16
The postcode boundary appears to be especially affected
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/11661751#map=13/-35.30938/149.01581
I expect it might be easiest to revert until errors are resolved.
i2004 (2025-09-17 10:44:28+00:00): me ayudas con la 178
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 05:41:02+00:00): Hi, it looks like you did not account for the fact that building walls are visible in the imagery you're using to map footprints. 

When mapping with imagery captured at an angle, please position features where they are at ground level. You can map the outline of the roof and then reposition the building to the base of the walls. I recommend you watch this [video about mapping dense urban areas](https://youtu.be/JAPiGntG6fs) and read this [written guide](https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Roof_modelling#Typical_errors_in_the_interpretation_of_roof_geometry_from_aerial_images).

You created a node shared by a building and a highway; this should only occur in special situations. Hold alt to prevent this. 

Please do not connect the corners of buildings to other buildings or features such as highways or residential areas. In the iD Editor, hold down the `Alt` key to prevent your cursor from snapping to existing data and accidentally creating shared(grey) nodes. This [video about connected nodes](https://youtu.be/ltn1VOiq5_0) has more information and a guide.

I hope this helps.
Joske1020 (2026-05-07 19:34:05+00:00): waarom staat die flyer niet tussen de bronnen dat je hebt gebruikt? (kan je die link delen)
AndyB_66 (2025-09-18 16:27:20+00:00): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Dobre_komentarze_zestawu_zmian
mijam23 (2025-09-18 18:40:46+00:00): Hej, dzięki za sugestię, ale wchodząc na dana zmianę mozna zwykle wydedukować co zostalo zmienione. Jesli tak nie jest to dodaję jakis opis.
 
Moje komentarze "dr" (skrót od drobne) nie są gorsze od "korekta znaczników" u Ciebie (móglbym zmienic dr na 'dodawanie znaczników'). 
Dodatkowo często dodaję elementy na bieżąco - spacerujac/biegając i albo dodam coś z lakonicznym komentarzem albo nie dodam nic bo nie chcę tracić czasu. 

Rozumiem dodawanie komentarzy uzasadniajacych jakies powazne zmiany, ale dodawanie nowych elementów? No dodałem drogę, bo istniała, bo nia szedlem - i tyle, po co taka redundantna informacja, zawarta per se w dodanych elementach.
Pozdrówki!
misterte (2025-09-17 10:16:32+00:00): Hi,
ich bin mir sicher das du nie vor Ort warst. Woher stammen Deine Informationen und warum werden von Dir massenhaft building:use gelöscht ?

mt
flohoff (2025-09-17 10:33:38+00:00): Ich hab da mal noch einen Note drauf gesetzt damit wir das sauber tracken können und das möglichst viele sehen.

4 Wochen ist eigentlich ein bisschen wenig um das in die OSM Daten zu packen bei den langen update Zyklen.

Flo
VicWM (2025-10-20 01:54:46+00:00): Hey :) Just wondering if you updated the road segment because you have confirmation the construction is now complete? If so it just needs the same highway tag as its neighbour highway=secondary. Thanks!
Frans S (2025-10-21 14:25:44+00:00): Buildings are often not correct mapped. Especial the high rise 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
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2026-02-04 23:03:35+00:00): Since there is a physical separation each direction should be mapped as separate ways instead of using turn restrictions.
subham_lyft (2026-04-09 16:19:44+00:00): Hi Spaghetti Monster, 
Hi, I’m Shubham, Abhishek’s teammate on the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you for your feedback. Regarding my edits - I chose to add an implicit turn restriction instead of splitting the way into two, since the physical separation was short. And based on Osmwiki - the implicit key is typically used when a restriction arises not from explicit signage but from physical constraints that make a maneuver impractical, often inferred from road layout or driving norms. 
However, I agree with you too that mapping it as a dual carriageway would have been more accurate. Apologies for the oversight and any issues caused.

Happy Mapping!
Regards,
Shubham
StC (2025-09-17 16:19:40+00:00): Hi!

Could you please share your sources for the French part of this Way? I somehow have doubts as to its name. Also, it would probably be cleaner to have separate relations for the French and the Dutch/Belgian parts because here the route operators are local associations.
literan (2025-09-17 18:08:11+00:00): и зачем вы в Путилково дороги переломали? просто взяли и натянули одну дорогу на другую, да еще и access=no на них повесили. 

откат
cubbe8 (2025-09-17 13:53:03+00:00): What is the purpose for all these edits?
cwhooten (2025-09-18 00:09:46+00:00): I'm trying to improve the data a bit while working on a bike map
werbuli (2025-09-27 12:40:35+00:00): Hallo TornadoFang,
du hast hier eine geplante Schule gemappt.
Unter Note nennst du als Quelle einen Pressebericht. Aus meiner Sicht ist die Presse keine für OSM nutzbare Quelle (Thema Urheberrechte).  Siehe z. B. bei Leinetal Online News in den AGB Ziff. A.
Bitte beachte
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Beginners_Guide_1.1

Um Urheberrechtsprobleme/-verstöße  zu vermeiden, mappe ich daher grundsätzlich nur was ich OTG (on the ground) sehe und somit auch von anderen Mappern überprüfbar ist. Derzeit ist hier nur Ackerland zu sehen - würde es also vorerst bei landuse=farmland belassen.

Zu dem Thema passt u.a. auch diese Diskussion im Forum
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/ab-wann-kann-ein-bebauungsplan-als-landuse-greenfield-gemappt-werden/93055/4

Falls du weitere detailliertere Info benötigst, stelle deine Fragen gern hier
https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/de/56

VG
werbuli
Gregory Peony (2025-09-17 18:05:26+00:00): Both footprints here represent buildings and are quite accurate. Good job mapping the Northern one obscured by vegetation, though it appears to be slightly too long. Did you cross-refference other imagery sources when mapping it? You didn't mention it in the task comment, nor the sources of the changeset. It looks like 3 of its corners are visible in Mapbox.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172048371
Sakari_N (2025-09-21 21:39:30+00:00): Kumottu "yksityisen polun" poisto, polku oli merkattu oikein access=private, kts https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172267088
eggie (2025-09-17 07:57:17+00:00): Welkom bij OSM.

OSM kent geen test omgeving.
Alle wijzigingen en uitprobeersels  zijn direct opgenomen in de wereldkaart. 
Bedrijven worden in Nederland bijgetagd op de adresnodes.

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-17 08:03:17+00:00): Cargill Deventer zit niet op dit adres.. 
Verplaatst. 
Cargill Antwerpen was dat een serieuze bijdrage?
MVG
eggie
Dimitar155 (2025-09-19 06:17:14+00:00): Благодаря за промяната!

Имайте предвид, че не е желателно да се поставят описателни имена върху елементите. Например трафопост в редактора се намира при търсене на "подстанция".

Също така обърнете внимание, че коментарите към промените се четат и от други хора. Добре е да бъдат смислени и информативни - случайни символи или текст, написан от „котка, стъпила на клавиатурата“, не са особено полезни. За справка: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Bg:Good_changeset_comments
boernjamin (2025-10-03 09:38:06+00:00): Please be cautious when removing or changing deprecated tags, such as 'cycleway=opposite'. Replace them with 'oneway:bicycle=no' if the street is still bikeable in both directions.
Here is the description for this tag https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:oneway:bicycle

In the case of Herschelstraße, you are correct for tagging that there are no bike lanes, but please do not remove the possibility for bikes to drive in both directions.

I saw that change from you a few times and corrected it. Please be careful when removing or changing that tag.
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-17 08:00:52+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie powinna zawierać przedrostka.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1025433999

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NorthCrab_upload (2025-09-17 08:11:00+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/1430489086

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

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
literan (2025-09-17 20:32:03+00:00): https://yandex.ru/maps/-/CLe4JIlv а где вы здесь тротуар увидели?

я месяц назад там проезжал, люди идут по проезжей части этой узкой дороги, тротуарами и не пахнет
OSMchik (2025-09-18 06:49:57+00:00): Блин, думал, что это тротуар, так как дорога Уже и не понял почему две улицы отрисованы. 

Удалил тротуар
rempshaener (2025-09-17 15:23:37+00:00): Hallo,

du hast um eine Prüfung deiner Bearbeitungen gebeten.
Zu den einzelnen Tags:
Stadtbezirk	Gibt es in dieser Form nicht, wird aber auch in der richtigen Form „addr:suburb“ nicht bei Straßen hinterlegt. Bitte löschen.
highway	Meinst du wirklich unclassified – was innerorts an dieser Stelle eher unüblich ist – oder construction?
is_in:city	Wird so nicht verwendet, bitte löschen.
name	Nutzt du eine zulässige Quelle?

Bei Fragen bitte melden.
Viele Grüße
sahealy30 (2025-09-18 09:51:54+00:00): Quelle: https://geoportal.augsburg.de/WebDaten/synserver?project=stadtplan&client=flex&view=stadtplan
rempshaener (2025-09-18 16:35:34+00:00): Hallo,
dann bitte ich um äußerste Vorsicht.
Auf den ersten Blick ist auf der Seite unten rechts ein Copyright-Hinweis angebracht. D. h.: Die Daten dürfen auf keinen Fall genutzt werden. Wenn du keine anderslautenden Fundstellen auftun kannst, solltest du die Daten wieder löschen.
Viele Grüße
daganzdaanda (2025-10-17 15:48:11+00:00): Wegen der Quelle hab ich in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172052390 nachgefragt, aber da habe ich dieses Changeset noch nicht gesehen. Ich glaube auch nicht, dass wir von der Karte der Stadt Augsburg abschreiben dürfen, leider...

Aaaaber, wenn man lang genug sucht, kommt man auf die Seite
https://www.augsburg.de/buergerservice-rathaus/buergerservice/dienste-a-z/aemterweise/leistungen-geodatenamt/internet-stadtplan-hinweisarchiv/strassenbenennungen/
wo die Stadt ihre Straßenbenennungen veröffentlicht. Da gibt es dann sogar Links zur offiziellen Mitteilung und zum Amtsblatt (nicht in diesem Fall, aber es ist hier https://www.augsburg.de/fileadmin/user_upload/footer/amtsblatt/2025/Amtsblatt-2025-35-36_vom-05-09-2025.pdf )

Im Forum wird bestätigt, dass Amtsblätter als Quelle OK sind: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/taggen-auf-grund-eines-stadtischen-amtsblattes-als-quelle-okay/95144/
wobei es bei (Hintergrund-) Karten nicht ganz so einfach ist. 
In diesem Fall kann man also die Straßennamen aus dem Amtsblatt nehmen. Die Geometrie vielleicht auch, aber besser wären noch GPS-tracks.
daganzdaanda (2025-10-17 15:49:26+00:00): Sind die Straßen denn schon fertig gebaut?
Und sie sind sicher auch keine "Tertiary", sondern Wohnstraßen "residential".
daganzdaanda (2025-10-17 16:25:09+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/173418956
Ich hab das Amtsblatt als Quelle für die Namen hinterlegt, und gleich noch Etymologie-Infos ergänzt. Außerdem sind die Straßen jetzt "residential", bitte das noch der Realität vor Ort anpassen.
ALu68 (2025-10-26 09:17:33+00:00): @sahealy30, bitte nicht auf der Grundlage von Ankündigungen, Verdacht und veralteten Luftbilder mappen.

Vor-Ort-Kenntniss ist angesagt.

Gruß. ALu68
rskedgell (2025-09-17 11:40:35+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I'm afraid that you may have misunderstood how crossings work in OpenStreetMap. The definition of a crossing in OSM is a bit broader than just a marked or signalised crossing like a zebra, pelican, puffin, toucan, parallel, or pegasus crossing. There's more information about how crossings are mapped on the wiki, linked below.

The crossings over Thomas More Street at its junction with East Smithfield have lowered kerbs, yellow blister tactile paving and a crossing island. The crossing over the service road/driveway for Tower Bridge Business Centre also has modified kerbs and tactile paving. These have been explicitly designed as pedestrian crossings.

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dcrossing
rskedgell (2025-09-17 11:47:47+00:00): Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172060354
Jauntstar (2025-09-17 12:03:57+00:00): Hi thanks! I understand what different types of crossing are and the Principe of drop kerbs and tactile paving. When you look on Google Street Maps, I can't see what you described or what's on OSM and this echoes a report we had also from a user survey. There is a drop kerb to right of the junction though. I also can't see
Jauntstar (2025-09-17 12:04:49+00:00): Please excuse the typos!
rskedgell (2025-09-17 12:40:52+00:00): The crossings are visible on both Bing Maps street view and Mapillary, which have licences compatible with OSM (use of Google Maps/Street View is prohibited by their licence). 

An example of relatively recent imagery for the Thomas More Street crossings is here:
https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/wasd42?lat=51.50859092482358&lng=-0.06912037297161078&z=18.581312534415048&pKey=274005104421719&focus=photo

The crossing details were also confirmed and updated by physical surveys by myself and @okwithmydecay, both local mappers.
Jauntstar (2025-09-17 13:18:20+00:00): Thanks for checking as that was what I was after. The way the Thomas More Street connects at the junction with East Smithfield looks weird to me on map view in comparison to other mapping platforms as well as the imagery but you're the experts. Thanks!
rskedgell (2025-09-17 13:29:51+00:00): You're quite right, the geometry of that junction could do with simplification.

As the crossing island on East Smithfield is straight across rather than a staggered crossing, a carriageway split isn't really needed here. Having an unmarked crossing here with only a dropped kerb and tactile paving on one side does suggest some of the highway planners have an "interesting" approach to pedestrian safety here!

I'll update it later this afternoon, as there's also a missing HGV weight restriction on Thomas More Street.
Jauntstar (2025-09-17 13:45:55+00:00): Yes absolutely re: pedestrian safety! It is the carriageway split on the map that caused some confusion here. Thank you very much for your help.
rskedgell (2025-09-17 14:36:47+00:00): Geometry simplified in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172067976

Looking at the edit history, it looks like the person who overcomplicated the geometry there was me. I think this was the first major road I'd to which I'd added separate sidewalks (for the unofficial Reverse London Marathon) and wouldn't do it quite like that now. Islands with staggered crossings and longer islands still need a carriageway split, but these didn't.
eggie (2025-09-17 08:21:48+00:00): Osm kent zo van die regeltjes en afspraken. Bedrijven svp bijtaggen op de adresnodes.
Mvg..
eggie
eggie (2025-09-17 09:06:29+00:00): M Archos,
Alle info heb ik samengevoegd met de adresnode nr 2

MVG
eggie
M Archos (2025-09-17 09:50:32+00:00): ok . .bedankt voor je hulp. Maar het gebouw staat op twee verschillende kavels en heeft twee verschillende huisnummers: nr 2 (kantoor) & nr 4 (Magazijn leveranciers).
eggie (2025-09-17 10:35:39+00:00): Dat is bij veel bedrijven zo, maar voor de eenduidigheid lijkt me één bedrijfsnaam voldoende.
Je zou wel verschillende ingangen kunnen maken.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/korte-vragen-met-hopelijk-een-kort-antwoord/127479/207
entrance=main 
entrance=secondary

en dan onder description= Ingang leveranciers

Anders even een vraagje op het forum stelle.
Ik geb zo 123 ook geen oplossing daarvoor.
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/korte-vragen-met-hopelijk-een-kort-antwoord/127479/207

MVG
eggie
eggie (2025-09-17 10:36:11+00:00): de wiki over ingang https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:entrance
rskedgell (2025-09-17 11:47:38+00:00): (Review requested)

Unfortunately, you have disconnected Thomas More Street from East Smithfield, which would cause problems for routing software.

Everyone makes mistakes in OSM and this was easy to fix, so no harm has been done.

Reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172060354
sosquqer (2025-12-17 11:04:35+00:00): Hi! You didn't add name:en, just moved the point a couple of meters
rempshaener (2025-09-17 15:44:52+00:00): Hallo,
Standard-Values in OSM haben eine englische Syntax, d. h. hier müsste es "main" statt "wasserleitung" heißen.
Viele Grüße
FF_LEIB (2025-09-17 20:56:30+00:00): Hallo rempshaener, 
vielen Dank für den Hinweis, hatte es in dem Bereich "Felder" ausgewählt, dort ist "wasserleitung" das Einzige, dass im Bereich "Eigenschaften" nicht übersetzt wird. Es kann als einziges deutsches Wort auch direkt bei Eigenschaften ausgewählt werden, ist dies dann seitens OSM ein Fehler?
MfG FF Leib
FF_LEIB (2025-09-17 20:57:59+00:00): Hallo rempshaener,
werde die fehlerhaften Angaben trotzdem schnellstmöglich korrigieren.
MfG FF Leib
rempshaener (2025-09-18 16:30:15+00:00): Hallo,
ich nutze einen anderen Editor (JOSM), ich habe es mir gerade in iD mal angeschaut. Stimmt, da ist ein Fehler. So wie ich das hier https://github.com/openstreetmap/id-tagging-schema/pull/1561/commits/ecd207fe282b3c451a5fc64293582dc0174a0d19#diff-e8d0831f8baa4ec84f6d46429619928e0076c04fdb1b382b051359344485cb25
sehe, scheint es aber gerade eine Vereinheitlichung zu geben.
Viele Grüße