piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
LockOnGuy (2024-05-16 23:28:36+00:00): Hello Friendly_Ghost,           
           
Please discuss major edits with the community first, especially if you are not a local to the subject area. At the very least, you could have commented on a changeset when the version 1 was made, like mine for example: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151049172.           
           
If something has been on the ground for almost a year, it is definitely not a temporary event. Thus, having those danger zones is justified as they are truly danger areas exactly as they are tagged.           
           
I recommend reverting this changeset and discussing it with the community first before removing such areas. I suggest maybe posting on c.osm.org or discussing directly with the local community at https://t.me/OSM_Israel .           
           
Regards.
Friendly_Ghost (2024-05-17 01:07:40+00:00): Hi LockOnGuy,

To quote woodpeck from the DWG: 
"While we would normally look at who controls an area (rather than who has legal jurisdiction), there's also the rule that we don't map day-to-day changes in an ongoing conflict. Any alterations to borders or installation of military zones etc. should wait until the war is over."
source: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150279661

With that comment in mind, I think you (and everyone) should refrain from mapping military features in and around Gaza until the war there is over. 

Best regards,

Casper
LockOnGuy (2024-05-17 01:21:11+00:00): As I stated, please discuss it first with the community before mass deleting such objects..    
And for your information, those areas do not change day by day, those landuses are under control stably by the IDF for months, thus making it not temporary areas. In top of that you can take the statements of Bibi and the rest of the officials who stated that the military buffer zones are to stay to prevent future terror attacks in future.      
Also some of those areas are from 1982 like the one I mentioned above in my first comment and now its reinstated.      
Again, I suggest reverting this changeset and discuss it with the local Israeli community before removing such objects.       
Regards.
woodpeck (2024-05-17 06:47:22+00:00): Hello LockOnGuy, most of the areas deleted here were introduced into OSM less than a month ago, only two are older (and these have been reinstated). The others remain deleted. The IDF does not have jurisdiction to install any kind of zones in Gaza; where they do so nonetheless, it is part of an ongoing military conflict and we don't want to map ongoing military conflicts. If any danger areas, buffer zones etc. remain after the military conflict is over, we can look at mapping them.
LockOnGuy (2024-05-17 06:55:03+00:00): Thank you dear Frederik, how about this?      
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151384374        
This one is 42 years old and has wiki pages and well documented.       
Thank you and regards my friend.
LockOnGuy (2024-05-17 06:56:22+00:00): Sorry wrong link, I meant this: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1280828029/history
Frans S (2024-05-18 11:32:17+00:00): Thank you for mapping. You have correctly identified the location of most objects and mapped. 
Please check attached document how tall (high) buildings need to be mapped.

Reminder: Please be sure to square all rectangular buildings with the Q key
Reviewed by a validator at random or as requested. 
FYI. Please view this video about common new mappers mistakes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xs5wX592E1o&amp;t=2s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
In this document, you will find some hints and tricks which might help to expand your mapping skills.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit
Best regards and keep mapping.
            ---
            #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151384463
Violaine_Do (2024-11-27 06:02:43+00:00): sorry I have to revert your changeset because you displaced good quality located data
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151384465
NeisBot (2024-05-16 05:24:00+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151389566
NeisBot (2024-05-16 00:00:05+00:00): Hi BergeyRPI, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1283432435

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
NeisBot (2024-05-16 05:23:01+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151389544
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 05:23:06+00:00): Please don't add fake beaches to OSM!
Violaine_Do (2024-11-27 05:50:42+00:00): Hi birdlawyer, please take care about displacement seriously and tell your #adt friends. You should move imagery prior to move buildings. Buildi gs do have a good precision. Thanks for taking care about it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151385148
birdlawyer (2024-12-03 22:46:39+00:00): Hello Violane_Do, I utilized Strava traces and created an offset to Esri World Imagery for any alignment edits made in this changeset which is referenced in my citation. I believe my colleague Lars_TheViking discussed our team’s approach to alignment utilizing geo-referenced Strava/GPS traces in more detail. Thanks for your care and understanding!
Violaine_Do (2024-12-04 00:12:33+00:00): Hi birdlawyer, Sorry that I was a bit harsh on this comment,  this was too many similar issues I reviewed and I got a little bit upset.  I answered your colleague here (same topic), please don't hesitate to continue the discussion here then  : https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/150814189 Thks and happy mapping!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:20:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:19:09+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:20:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:12:22+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
csimeona22 (2024-05-16 01:14:41+00:00): Correction: Source used was Esri World Imagery.
CurlingMan13 (2024-05-16 22:22:03+00:00): Do not partially overlap areas.  I have gone through and corrected this for you.

To avoid future reverts, I strongly recommend you review:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151386058
TOH139 (2024-05-16 22:48:23+00:00): Noted
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151386058
SomeoneElse (2024-05-18 09:59:20+00:00): Thanks for adding the extra crossings.  I've added them to the Wales Coast Path as well so that doesn't have gaps there: 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3285170#map=18/51.39883/-3.27742
Do you know how people are supposed to get across the road here:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/3285170#map=18/51.40884/-3.25143
Cheers,
Andy
gomedia91 (2024-05-18 14:53:17+00:00): There is an unmarked crossing with tactile paving there, I've added it in and connected up the coast path to it. I also changed the path to run along the pedestrian side of Ffordd Y Mileniwm, rather than along the separated cyclist part.
SomeoneElse (2024-05-19 21:01:50+00:00): Thanks.  About the segregated cycleway vs footpath routing, that's an excellent point - I bet there are other sections although the way through Barry / Cardiff that could probably do to be moved from one to the other.
rskedgell (2025-04-15 08:17:42+00:00): I'm not entirely convinced that mis-tagging the puffin crossings on Harbour Road as crossing=uncontrolled was entirely helpful to data consumers.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/7282538486/history/3
felipeeugenio (2024-05-16 13:52:08+00:00): Hola.
Gracias por sus ediciones, Pero todo lo que agregó ya estaba. Y lo que agregó lo hixo con valores erroneos.
Por favor no dude en incorporarse al chat de la comunidad si acaso desea obtener ayuda para ver como hacer lo que necesita hacer.
por ahora yo ya reparé todo.
No es grave y es común en quienes empiezan.
Saludos
Supaplex (2024-05-16 02:51:02+00:00): 為何不修改原先的建築?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151386411
zaizone (2024-05-17 10:38:58+00:00): 👍😊
Supaplex (2024-05-16 04:03:33+00:00): 這裡並不是屏東，而且你也沒有敘述你到底做了什麼變動。請參閱 Good Changeset Comments: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_changeset_comments
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151386452
MxxCon (2024-05-16 04:06:41+00:00): "seasonal" is a vague thing.
Rather than using text in description, it's better to use opening_hours= tag to specify what it's actually open..
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151386541
IraGersh (2024-05-16 17:57:21+00:00): I'm tempted to remove them completely as they are only installed if Parks feels like it.  There are also 2 bike racks identified nearby which I also may remove if a pass through there doesn't find them.  I'll be there next this coming Saturday.  I modified one of the bike racks only to note that it wasn't covered.
NeisBot (2024-05-16 02:20:04+00:00): Hi dsmit2342q1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1283479442

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 06:06:20+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151387010

The user deleted her/his own fake beach from the data.
GeeMaps! (2024-05-16 09:27:15+00:00): Reverted as fake / imaginary features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151397915
GeeMaps! (2024-05-16 09:27:16+00:00): Reverted as fake / imaginary features

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151397915
NeisBot (2024-05-16 02:25:04+00:00): Hi dsmit2342q1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1283479588

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
NeisBot (2024-05-16 06:07:28+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151390713
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 06:07:41+00:00): Please don't add fake beaches to OSM!
Mxdanger (2024-05-16 23:46:33+00:00): Hi, I've updated the hours on Papaya to match the ones on their website. I also decided to just update the entire plaza, so if you're local feel free to verify the details.
felipeeugenio (2024-05-16 12:45:06+00:00): Hola. No es la misma escuela de la otra cuadra?
en las imagenes se ve mas como escuela.
saludos
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:17:11+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:11:18+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:15:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:15:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:16:02+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:11:00+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:21:34+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:15:45+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:16:50+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:21:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:17:55+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:14:08+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:21:35+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:15:20+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:12:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:17:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
GeeMaps! (2024-05-16 09:28:06+00:00): Hi dsmit2342q1. Please don't add fake / imaginary items to OSM! Thanks
NeisBot (2024-05-16 02:45:04+00:00): Hi dsmit2342q1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1283481457

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 06:08:42+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151387068

The user deleted her/his own fake beach.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:14:14+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:14:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:10:28+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:14:05+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
NeisBot (2024-05-16 02:55:04+00:00): Hi dsmit2342q1, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contribution to the map. I've reviewed your recent edits regarding the addition of a beach and noticed a few inconsistencies with the surrounding environment features. It appears that the location you've labeled as a beach does not match typical geographical characteristics I would expect for such a feature.

Your beach feature:
https://osm.org/way/1283482577

Could you please clarify:
- The source about this beach
- Any additional context about this location that might explain the unusual designation.

Looking forward to your response!

#BeachCheck
dsmit2342q1 (2024-05-16 02:58:58+00:00): local council has decided to label this a beach
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 06:09:39+00:00): Reverted by https://osm.org/changeset/151390673
NeisBot (2024-05-16 06:14:17+00:00): Reverted by

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/151390916
pitscheplatsch (2024-05-16 06:15:10+00:00): Please don't add fake beaches to OSM!
MxxCon (2024-05-16 04:14:38+00:00): It's here https://shakeshack.com/location/bryant-park-ny#/
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151387189
impiaaa (2024-05-16 16:38:28+00:00): Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thanks for contributing! The "name" field on a building should only be used if the building itself has a formal name that people know it as. Houses don't need them. Also, you can change the attributes of a feature by clicking on it—you don't need to add a duplicate feature on top.
woodpeck_repair (2024-05-30 18:52:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset 152050669 where the changeset comment is: revert garage edits that claimed ownership over data. Anyone can edit OSM data; if you do not like that, do not upload.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2025-01-03 11:17:13+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 160943337, 160943407, 160943366, 160943455 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some SC changes where user used Google Street View - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/160701601
kimo (2024-07-31 12:20:28+00:00): This change added buildings the no longer exist.
AgusQui (2024-06-09 05:37:14+00:00): eeehm... estas mapeando una reserva natural donde hay una zona urbana consolidada... ¿podrias indicar fuentes?
Weasel-Wiesel (2024-08-05 19:45:09+00:00): Sind die Bäume in der Baustelle ALX Tower nicht längst gefällt worden?
StefanHRT (2024-08-05 20:02:52+00:00): Ähm laut 2024er Bild könnte dies teilweise sein (Richtung Straßenbahn hin), sind aber im Baumkataster noch drin *grübel*
Weasel-Wiesel (2024-08-06 11:22:44+00:00): Einige der Bäume sind in der Tat noch da. Die anderen wurden mit Lebenszyklus-Präfix (razed) versehen für den Fall, dass dort wieder welche gepflanzt werden (Änderungssatz: 154888550).
StefanHRT (2024-08-06 13:21:01+00:00): Danke Dir
user_11609320 (2024-05-16 03:52:00+00:00): https://placentia.org/DocumentCenter/View/9638/NOE---Resolution-No-R-2022-07-Hamer-Island-Annexation?bidId=
user_11609320 (2024-05-16 03:58:37+00:00): https://oclafco.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/07/BoundaryAnnexationReport_2022-23_20230608.pdf
eggie (2024-05-16 06:48:00+00:00): Hi jaxersnaps,
Please don't change buikdingshapes in the Netherlands. It's all import from the Dutch Registry.
Never look to roofshapes. Aerial Imageries are not taken perpendicular.
Greetz,
eggie
jaxersnaps (2024-05-16 21:24:40+00:00): Sorry
eggie (2024-05-16 21:29:26+00:00): No problem.. I fixed it.
😀
fititnt (2024-06-20 13:38:57+00:00): Olá @sangonzag. Por que deletou amenity=place_of_worship (criada 8 anos atrás pelo Alexandre) e converteu para building=yes?

https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/405892468/history#map=19/-29.30643/-51.83484
sangonzag (2024-06-20 13:58:29+00:00): Hola, @fititnt. Es cierto, no recuerdo por qué quité las etiquetas. Las acabo de agregar de nuevo en el siguiente changeset: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152947329#map=19/-29.30633/-51.83481
fititnt (2024-06-20 15:52:54+00:00): Obrigado.
ZLima12 (2025-10-21 19:48:21+00:00): Hello,

Here, it looks like you duplicated I-290 while trying to map the lane merging in. Since there is only paint dividing this lane from the main part of the road, a separate way shouldn't be used anyway. But if you did, it should be a highway=motorway_link and lanes=1, while you had highway=motorway and lanes=5.