piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
highflyer74 (2023-03-23 06:58:50+00:00): Hello again!

I comment on a similar change from your side here https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/133914367, explaining why your addition of address data to the terraced building block is not correct. Then I corrected the mistake and with with this changeset you added it again.

Please be advised that this is not how we interact.

Be so kind to get in touch by replying to this changeset comment and please refrain from adding the address again. Thank you!
ctrl-alt-k (2023-11-14 13:04:05+00:00): Bună, denumirile generice în stilul „Birou” sau ”Sală haltere” nu respectă consensul comunității de a folosi alte câmpuri pentru a reprezenta tipul unui POI și a folosi tagul de nume doar pentru numele propriu al unei clădiri/locații
dodelinho (2023-11-15 10:52:47+00:00): Bună. Acelea sunt denumirile de inventar al clădirilor respective, cum se poate vedea de exemplu în această Hotărîre de Guvern: https://legislatie.just.ro/Public/DetaliiDocument/256507 . Dacă dumneata consideri că poți muta aceste informații în alte tag-uri, te rog să o faci. Mulțumesc
alexnder (2023-11-15 11:26:13+00:00): Salut, denumirile astea generice de tip "Birou" sau "Sală haltere" nu sunt ok. 

- `name` este pentru când feature-ul respectiv are un nume al lui, gen "Clădirea Bibi". Nu prea poți să te duci pe stradă să ceri indicații către "Birou"

- Dacă mă duc în Constanța și dau un search după Birou, găsesc o grămadă de mizerii, de tip "Birou - company" , "Birou - government", "Birou administrativ - building". Ce ar trebui să fac cu astea? Nici măcar nu știu ale cărei companii / instituții sunt. Mult zgomot pentru nimic.

- E ok să faci genul ăsta de tagging când acea clădire a fost intenționată pentru a fi un birou, dacă e doar o clădire oarecare, de obicei se pune building și în interior un POI de tip "birou". 

- Dacă e musai să fie incluse informații specifice _despre feature_ , se pot băga în description= , chiar dacă nu apar pe hartă. Nu totul trebuie să fie "la vedere".


Din nefericire OSM nu face enforcing la propriile guidelines pe care le documenteaza foarte bine pe wiki, așa că, da, poate să facă fiecare cum îl taie capul. Dar ideal pentru comunitate este ca lucrurile să fie făcute bine, ca să avem maximum de utilitate din ce este mapat. Iar o atitudine de tipul "fac cum vreau, dacă nu vă place corectați voi" nu ajută pe nimeni.
dodelinho (2023-11-15 12:20:01+00:00): Salut, din câte știu nu devin automat custodele fiecărui obiect pe care îl editez. Nu era mai simplu să rezolvi problema decît să scrii acest discurs? Oricum, în condițiile neclarității informațiilor de pe wiki, eu am urmat practicile existente în zonă. Avînd în vedere că dumneata nu pare că ai editat recent în zonă, mă întreb care sunt resorturile care te-au determinat să-ți pierzi vremea scriind atîta amar de text...
ctrl-alt-k (2023-11-15 12:25:23+00:00): Bună, când vine vorba de editurile tale metoda de soluționare standard e să lași comentarii la changeset-uri și să rogi persoana care a făcut editul să schimbe tagurile, pentru că altfel se ajunge la edit war-uri, care preferabil pentru toată lumea le putem evita.
ctrl-alt-k (2023-11-15 12:26:38+00:00): Nu pare să fie vreun mod de a edita comentarii, așa că aș vrea să clarific: „editurile tale” în sensul de edituri făcute de oricine, nu mă refer la tine în mod specific. „Tale” a rămas dintr-o versiune mai veche pentru că nu am fost atentă înainte să trimit mesajul.
dodelinho (2023-11-15 12:53:56+00:00): Bună, Am încredere în buna ta credință și îți permit să modifici orice obiect editat de mine. Atît timp cît păstrezi informația adăugată de mine într-un tag oarecare al obiectelor (evident, dacă informația nu e cumva greșită), eu nu îți voi înlătura modificările.
alexnder (2023-11-15 13:13:19+00:00): Discursul/amarul de text a fost scris în ideea că poate vei înțelege că sunt niște convenții pentru cum se fac lucrurile, ca să nu fie nevoie să vină alții după tine și să curețe informatii redundante/anapoda. Dacă nu ți-e clar wiki, poți veni să discuți nelămuririle în comunitate.
ctrl-alt-k (2023-11-15 14:51:59+00:00): >

Bună, Am încredere în buna ta credință și îți permit să modifici orice obiect editat de mine. Atît timp cît păstrezi informația adăugată de mine într-un tag oarecare al obiectelor (evident, dacă informația nu e cumva greșită), eu nu îți voi înlătura modificările.

Perfect, mersi!
Kovoschiz (2023-03-23 08:39:32+00:00): `name=` is for the most common name in existing public use. 
Please discuss with the local community first before these changes. Use OpenHistoricalMap to show the full history.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-24 16:06:55+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10743298583#map=19/50.01645/20.01620 - skąd ta nazwa? Czemu plastikowe?
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-03-24 16:07:19+00:00): To jest opis typu kostrukcji? Czy ta nazwa jest w jakimś użyciu
rarad74 (2023-03-23 06:13:35+00:00): Hi. Personal information like the name of the family must not be place on the map. The map is a public place where anyone can see the info ( included potential people with bad intentions).
deeJayOg (2023-03-23 06:58:53+00:00): It's the name of the Townhouse Complex which involves many homes. Thanks
bkil (2023-03-22 16:24:20+00:00): Could we perhaps refrain from testing in production if possible? Could you share what you are trying to do?
Hufkratzer (2023-03-22 21:18:07+00:00): Hi,
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1156335444 sieht nicht aus wie eine Reitanlage (leisure=horse_riding), eher wie eine Führanlage (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:animal=horse_walker)
roptat (2023-03-26 13:10:25+00:00): Salut, merci pour la modif. J'ai vu que tu avais supprimé un nœud, ce qui a eu pour effet de déconnecter le chemin en bas et le parking. Ça m'a cassé une relation de randonnée qui passe par là, alors je me suis permis de reconnecter les deux :)
eggie (2023-03-22 17:10:46+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
BurtsevCPU (2023-03-26 06:25:00+00:00): Добрый день. Сочетания ключа и значения natural=tree row используется для рядовых посадок деревьев. Если надо отметить группу деревьев, как в этом случае, лучше использовать полигон с тегом natural=wood.
gscholz (2023-03-23 06:59:36+00:00): Hi martin_ferrari85,
your recent edit activity has left behind a significant amount of errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting ways:

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=geometry&lon=-58.78067&lat=-25.74689&zoom=9&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=self_intersection_ways%2Cself_intersection_points%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_node_in_way

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=133984102

Can you please fix this?

As this seems to be a systematical error, may be you can think about how to avoid this error at all?

If you look closely at you new natural areas you will find, they overlap here and there with other areas, so they are quite inaccurate. May be you can improve this as well to improve the quality of your edits in total.

Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2023-03-25 06:13:17+00:00): Hola martin_ferrari85,
estos errores siguen existiendo, ¿pueden darme su opinión al respecto?
Guido
gscholz (2023-03-26 05:13:19+00:00): Hi martin_ferrari85, 
due to your missing response I have reverted this changeset to fix those issues.
Guido
gscholz (2023-03-23 08:05:30+00:00): Hi Wisney Karin,
most of your added buildings are tagged with "building=residensial" while most probably you meant "residential".

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=133984555

Can you please fix this?
Kind regards
Guido
Tómas Ingi (2023-03-23 08:26:33+00:00): Hi,

Please, be careful when working with multipolygons, especially large ones such as the Greenland Ice Sheet - it currently has three unclosed segments and one member with no role, meaning that it will not render on any platform.

I've fixed the issues caused by this changeset, but there are a few others.

Best regards,
Tómas Ingi
andershl (2023-03-23 12:32:57+00:00): Certainly. I actually asked the community for help as those consequences were totally inadvertent. Thank you very very much. 

Ref https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/86971/inadvertent-change-to-relations-need-help
Tómas Ingi (2023-03-25 13:11:51+00:00): Okay, no worries :)
MxxCon (2023-03-23 06:13:38+00:00): Hello.
Are you sure that this sidewalk is covered in asphalt? Usually sidewalks are made of concrete.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133984626
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-03-25 15:46:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134108394 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism and creating fake objects with nonsense names at random places.
eggie (2023-03-22 17:21:04+00:00): Dag Danny.. Je vraagt feedback. Lijkt me oke. 'k Heb wel moped en mofa=yes toegevoegd. Die worden anders per default gestopt.
MVG
eggie
Palolo (2023-03-28 14:05:49+00:00): Thank you for helping map in Tanzania. Please note that building outlines need to be accurately traced.
SekeRob (2023-03-25 10:54:35+00:00): Hi,

Here's a present OSM Inspector areas view of the edits you did here around the river area. All the light/dark blue, orange, green is incorrectly oulined, same multipolygon relation passing a area line twice or has been assigned the wrong inner or outer role.

https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=6.31500&lat=48.59486&zoom=12&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&opacity=0.65&overlays=duplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

I suggest you carefully reread the multipolygon wiki pages. If you need help or have questions on specific problem point let me know.

ciao
Corentin54380 (2023-03-25 14:18:39+00:00): Hi, 
Sorry for this disagrement.
I contribute with ID and i don't have error when upload my modifications. I create multipolygon with "Surface" tool and add a  relation. 
I make a big job on this area because anything was true...

I begin to edit with JOSM and i hope to improve my practices.

Thanks for your message
See you later...
Strubbl (2023-03-22 19:54:29+00:00): Hi Publishing-Group,
Pacelli Palai is already mapped with the building: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/80539540

Can you please remove your node duplicating the info?
map per (2023-04-03 14:40:35+00:00): Fixed the issue
marczoutendijk_repair (2023-03-25 15:46:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 134108394 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert due to vandalism and creating fake objects with nonsense names at random places.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-03-22 16:43:29+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10753758949
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/366775612
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/215232045
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/366772016

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
eggie (2023-03-22 17:13:46+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht. 

Feedback...  Alleen een naam doet niet in OSM. Ook de aard van de instelling vermelden.


MVG, 

Eggie 

Namens de OSM Community
eggie (2023-03-22 17:15:53+00:00): officetag en website toegevoegd
JJIglesias (2023-03-22 16:55:13+00:00): Saludos y Gracias por agregar las tiendas de muebles Silvera. Por favor incluir tambien los numeros de telefono con la etiqueta phone=+591-xxxxxxx
Gracias
JJ
chl-osm (2023-03-25 22:46:51+00:00): Hello !
I took the liberty of changing this shop by reusing the previous greengrocer's node (+ typo correction : ipizi -> izpizi).
Thanks for your work !
Kovoschiz (2023-03-23 08:42:25+00:00): Please don't attach unrelated objects to roads. This makes editing difficult, and does not represent reality.
Strubbl (2023-03-22 19:53:23+00:00): Hi Publishing-Group, can you please remove this test node?
pyram (2023-03-26 14:39:55+00:00): Scheint für einen Anfänger zu schwierig zu sein => Habe den Node gelöscht.
Gefunden mit https://nominatim.org/qa/#map=20.59/48.14/11.56&layer=addr_housenumber_no_digit
Syl (2023-05-09 17:24:31+00:00): Bonjour, Hénaff & Co n'existe plus depuis au moins un an, j'ai remis le nouveau commerce que vous aviez enlevé.
StephaneP (2023-05-09 17:51:02+00:00): Bonjour Syl,

Merci pour la correction ! 
J'essaie toujours de croiser les données. Parfois c'est difficile de faire le bon choix.
rempshaener (2023-03-22 20:28:12+00:00): Hallo,
z.B. an dieser Stelle https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934863748 hast du segregated=no ergänzt.
Was ist die Quelle deiner Änderung? Zumindest nach Luftbild scheint eine Trennung vorzuliegen.
Viele Grüße
waldhans (2023-03-22 21:28:27+00:00): Falls du das aus dem Luftbild erkennst, tagge es in Ruhe um.
A Hall (2023-03-23 14:01:47+00:00): Does that path exist? If so, adding informal=yes would be the appropriate work around. If there is in fact, no path there. Deleting is the correct course of action.

See the trail access project for more details: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/United_States/Trail_Access_Project
A Hall (2023-05-16 19:10:32+00:00): Please engage in changeset discussions. I added this because there was evidence in LiDAR imagery that it existed, and there are buildings nearby that have E911 addresses for 'Lewis Pond Trail'. Deleting the way does not seem like the right course of action, but there's probably some more accurate tagging of the way that would be better.
Old_Forester (2023-06-09 18:09:14+00:00): As I stated previously, there is no trail at this location. There are countless old 'skid roads' created during logging that occur on the Division. In some cases, if built by bulldozer, these trails can appear on LIDAR. On-the-ground these locations are overgrown with vegetation. I've reviewed the trail access project link, which I appreciated very much. If you have a suggestion for how best to tag this area I'm happy to consider your suggestions.
A Hall (2023-07-10 13:49:08+00:00): The state of Vermont has an E911 access road mapped at that location, and E911 addresses registered to "Lewis Pond Trail". If this road truly does not exist the E911 resources should be updated to prevent any misunderstanding should first responders ever need to access this location. https://maps.vermont.gov/e911/Html5Viewer/?viewer=e911viewer
MarcoR (2023-03-23 10:31:43+00:00): La fontanella si trova in mare? :)
MarcoR (2023-03-27 11:35:03+00:00): Ho rimosso il nodo.

Buon mapping,
Marco.
Frans S (2023-03-22 17:53:57+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.

You are a new mapper. Welcome to HOTOSM.

We cannot expect that you are already familiar with all issues around mapping. Therefore, I inform you about the most issues,


In iDeditor, zoom in so far that the hidden objects are visible.(blue note on bottom line warns about hidden objects)
Please pay attention to next points:
Buildings are in general rather rectangular. Just 4, 6 or 8 nodes are sufficient.

Tag buildings as building=yes. Nothing more, no names.

Please map each building accurate over the rooflines and squared(rectangular only).


Don't connect nodes to other buildings or features.

The shadow of a building is not a part of the building. 

Do not cluster buildings. Each building need to be mapped individually.

See also this document:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/11PsAW0bzUZHbS8YnbaFzqOYhJY7tSPYG/view?usp=share_link


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133989042
Frans S (2023-03-22 17:54:12+00:00): The brown objects are possible pieces of land. Check if you see any shadow that proves it is a building.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133989042
Frans S (2023-03-25 09:33:52+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map more accurate and square each rectangular building.
Best regards
Frans S (2023-03-24 16:38:43+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please map more accurate, square the buildings and do not let roads crosses buildings.
Your mappings are sometimes very weird  and oversized.
Best regards
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133989341
Frans S (2023-03-24 16:41:52+00:00): Hello. Thanks for mapping.
Please solve the issues reported by the Issue triangle.
Your mappings are rather accurate, but not squared. Square each rectangular building with the Q key.
Best regards
Frans S (2023-03-23 10:06:27+00:00): Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator, at random or as requested. 
I am sorry to say, but your mappings are not squared properly




Explanation can be found on this document what  might be helpful to improve your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping !
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133989866
❤️‍🔥 (2023-03-28 05:28:45+00:00): hey, not sure what you meant by this comment, should I add the tag back with proper capitalization? thanks
mueschel (2023-03-28 18:02:35+00:00): Hu, this change was not what I intended... 
I wanted to change communication:vhf to communication:VHF, because this tag was already used on some other nodes. 

I'll fix it right now.
❤️‍🔥 (2023-03-28 20:18:15+00:00): thanks :)
A Hall (2023-07-19 14:22:17+00:00): I had checked with the mapping community on the osm Slack channel discussing these changes. The community was in agreement that many of these edits should be reverted. The guidance, between track/service being: highway=track roads access land, highway=service roads access facilities. The distinction here can be a bit muddled, but my rationale was this: roads that encourage traffic to specific places with infrastructure designed for specific activities, should be service. This would include the various boardwalk trails, picnic areas, boat launches, cabins/buildings, trailheads, etc. Pretty much anything with a sign, and some things without signs. Roads that access 'land' would be track. This would include dead end roads where logging roads use for access to the forest, or other roads hunters/birdwatchers/bushwhackers might use to access remote areas. The distinction between track/service (and many of the other highway= tags) has to do with how the roads are used, and doesn't reflect their condition. There are tags for tracktype=* and smoothness=* that describe the appropriateness of different types of vehicles, such as off-road capable trucks vs. standard sedans, etc. Further, something can be a highway, and be closed to traffic, or closed to non personnel of the land management team. There are many access= related tags to capture that information. 

I recognize that I'm primarily an armchair mapper but I don't make decisions willy-nilly. I also correct a lot of bad information in OSM. I invite those with better or more recent knowledge to correct any of my mistakes, just as I do for others. You are in a unique position to contribute really valuable information to the map for the lands you manage, but there are goals and standards of the OSM that might not line up with the goals and standards of the government agencies you work with. It's a delicate dance, but I encourage you to engage the community when you have questions.

I'd expect you to revert the changes you made, specifically the highway=* tagging. However, if you don't after a period of time, I'll go in and do what I think is appropriate.
Kevin Kofler (2023-07-31 22:12:08+00:00): In this changeset, you have added the cycleway=no tag to a few streets with oneway=yes, oneway:bicycle=no tags. Unfortunately, in the OpenCycleMap (the Thunderforest one), this results in the oneway:bicycle=no exemption no longer being rendered, because cycleway=no appears to take precedence. I would also argue that cycleway=no (i.e., no bicycle infrastructure whatsoever) is not actually true if cycling against the one-way is allowed (which normally also comes with some kind of floor marking, even if it is not a true cycleway:opposite).
Luzandro (2023-08-01 05:10:47+00:00): 1) the rendering of the OpenCycleMap is not such a great argument, that had already many other problems in the past and IMHO an oneway:bicycle=no would not necessarily need any markings so this is first of all a bug of the OpenCycleMap

2) but like Kevin said, many times there are actually markings, at least as shared lane, like here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?z=19.809686532448527&lat=48.18893611111099&lng=16.370963888889037&pKey=1394005871031089&focus=photo&x=0.48577229844253345&y=0.6506645048407272&zoom=0

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:cycleway%3Dshared_lane

3) and finally: it's good practice to not change the tagging style without contributing anything new. In this changeset 149 cycleway:left=no + cycleway:right=no were changed to cycleway=no
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133990070
Luzandro (2023-08-01 10:20:10+00:00): I've set up a MapRoulette Challenge for these cases: https://maproulette.org/challenge/40569
Luzandro (2023-11-28 16:32:57+00:00): Andy Allan finally fixed the issue in OpenCycleMap. Besides that, the majority of cases of the maproulette challenge, especially all regarding Vienna, have been checked in the meantime (atm approximately one fifth of the cases were closed as "not an issue", i.e. there are actually no markings whatsoever).
Mex (2023-03-23 09:54:41+00:00): thanks for the fix, don't sure how did that.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133990213
Gonéo (2023-03-23 17:52:14+00:00): Bonjour et merci pour la mise à jour de la place Danton. Quelques remarques:

Attention les chemins n'étaient pas connectés. Nœuds très proches mais non connectés, le routage GPS ne pouvait pas se faire. L'éditeur iD a d'ailleurs levé des avertissements.

J'imagine qu'il est encore possible de passer à pied et à vélo. Dans ce cas il faudrait ajouter les chemins pour que routage puisse se faire dans ces modes.

Le tag leisure=common est spécifique au Royaume-Uni, il n'est probablement pas adapté a statut de la place.
goodidea (2023-04-08 03:46:24+00:00): Da waren auch bereits Knoten von mir vorhanden mit kerb + tactile_paving (an der realen, richtigen Position der Bordsteinkante). Habe deine Tags wieder entfernt. Street Complete will die scheinbar an die Verbindungsknoten von footway=sidewalk und footway=crossing setzen .... Das ist aber nicht optimal, weil nicht die richtige Position in dem Fall. Ggf. muss man die footway-Linien dann entsprechend ändern/anpassen, damit der Punkt an der korrekten Position ist (wo eben auch die Bordsteinkante ist!), wenn man das so haben möchte. Aber doppeltes kerb/tactile_paving-Tagging sollte man auf jeden Fall vermeiden. Grüße!
WhyDoDisplayNamesHaveToBeUnique (2023-04-08 11:33:26+00:00): Stimmt, danke! Hmm, dann werde ich die Quest bei mir deaktivieren. Jetzt frage ich mich wie man die Erkennung verbessern könnte wann die Quest gestellt werden sollte …