| Country | Changeset | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
 | 172125955 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | Please stop using the tag roundabout=yes https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout commented 2025-09-18 17:51:02 UTC by kabelhaai ♦48 |
| 172125437 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | Hello, Can you please tell us the purpose of adding "roundabout=yes" on such roads? Why do you want this tag? It is not documented anywhere in the wiki. Also, did you make sure that this is really a roundabout an... commented 2025-09-18 17:42:33 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |
| 172124021 (Comments: 2) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | Actually, `roundabout=yes' itself is also pretty meaningless and even discouraged https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:junction%3Droundabout commented 2025-09-18 17:27:06 UTC by Taya_S ♦1,161 |
| 172123260 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | ## REVERTED CHANGESET This is not a roundabout. Even if traffic drives counter-clockwise here, traffic inside the circle must yield to incoming vehicles. The situation was correctly mapped before you changed it. https://www.mapillary.com/... commented 2025-09-18 17:27:04 UTC by bxl-forever_repair ♦48 |
| 172122108 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | ## REVERTED CHANGESET Please do not add roundabout tags when this is legally not a roundabout. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=469653042194831 commented 2025-09-18 17:20:21 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |
| 172122492 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | Sorry but, again, this mechanical edit is completely misguided. There is no roundabout here. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=591746126626916 Your edit has been reverted. commented 2025-09-18 16:44:49 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |
| 172121775 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | ## REVERTED CHANGESET Hey, this is not a roundabout here. There are no D5 signs. Traffic must drive in a circular directions because of D1 signs. Please do not add "roundabout" tags on any road that vaguely looks circula... commented 2025-09-18 16:37:21 UTC by bxl-forever_repair ♦48 |
| 172122001 (Comments: 1) | Penka457 (Discussed changesets: 10) | Hello, This may *look* like a roundabout to you but its legal status is *not* a roundabout. We’ll have to revert your edit. commented 2025-09-18 16:30:42 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |
| 171215494 (Comments: 1) | marczoutendijk (Discussed changesets: 278) | oeps; bedankt voor de fix! commented 2025-09-18 16:10:39 UTC by joost schouppe ♦1,245 |
| 166955842 (Comments: 5) | votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (Discussed changesets: 403) | Bonjour Marc, Merci pour votre alerte Cordialement, L'Equipe DB commented 2025-09-18 10:05:06 UTC by votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale ♦244 |
| 172015326 (Comments: 1) | votre_solution_de_visibilite_digitale_locale (Discussed changesets: 403) | Same remark as at the other site, but also: how does this relate to the already mapped Manoit Saint-Jean and Reine Astrid? commented 2025-09-18 08:39:49 UTC by joost schouppe ♦1,245 |
| 164835167 (Comments: 2) | Ardennen8 (Discussed changesets: 16) | It is about this object: start_date\t1825-03-17;1953-06-30 start_date:note\tOpgericht op: 1825-03-17. Locatie in gebruik genomen op: 1953-06-30. commented 2025-09-17 17:56:14 UTC by Ardennen8 ♦6 |
| 97268803 (Comments: 3) | bxl-forever (Discussed changesets: 156) | Thanks, setting `level=-1` seems the way to go. I didn't comment on a "random" changeset and didn't suggest that your edit was incorrect, but will prefer direct messages for similar questions as you suggest. commented 2025-09-17 16:11:44 UTC by 54dx5a ♦1 |
| 171491435 (Comments: 1) | Petervb1 (Discussed changesets: 2) | Beste, waarom is deze naamgeving overbodig? Er staan nog steeds huizen op deze straat. De weg heeft tevens statuut "autoweg"=trunk, met als gevolg dat er wel degelijk een straatnaam mag op staan. De steenstraat werd aangelegd en dez... commented 2025-09-17 14:51:33 UTC by kabelhaai ♦48 |
| 166410163 (Comments: 2) | Ardennen8 (Discussed changesets: 16) | Ik zie gelijkaardige problematische edits hier: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/155427132#map=11/51.1091/3.7992 Bekijk het resultaat eens voor de sites van Broeders van Liefde via https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2bON Veel duplicates! commented 2025-09-17 13:33:38 UTC by joost schouppe ♦1,245 |
| 172022733 (Comments: 2) | geowobo86 (Discussed changesets: 1) | https://api.basisregisters.vlaanderen.be/v2/straatnamen/75289 commented 2025-09-17 07:18:12 UTC by geowobo86 ♦1 |
| 171967233 (Comments: 1) | Commune de Floreffe (Discussed changesets: 3) | Top pour l'ajout du projet à OSM. Attention à bien accrocher la piste cyclable à la voirie. Si mal connecté, les applications de routing velo ne pourront pas valoriser cette voie. J'ai modifié da... commented 2025-09-16 07:26:08 UTC by Jean-Louis Stanus ♦22 |
| 171784990 (Comments: 4) | Ced_Th (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi multimob, I'm sorry about the bus route relations. The seperate bus route around the market square is removed. And I'm not very familiar with relations. Is there an easier way to restore relationships (like the bus network) than selec... commented 2025-09-15 10:59:18 UTC by Ced_Th ♦2 |
| 171920130 (Comments: 1) | bxl-forever_repair (Discussed changesets: 18) | Thank you! commented 2025-09-15 07:20:16 UTC by wdgwdg ♦1 |
| 170289577 (Comments: 7) | Jakka (Discussed changesets: 225) | I have enlarged the bridge according to the size estimated from the photograph. 1 cm was the size shown by JOSM and it was reported as "invalid geometry" while processing it with Osmosis commented 2025-09-15 05:45:52 UTC by cdavila ♦27 |
| 171894834 (Comments: 2) | Eebie (Discussed changesets: 118) | It is corrected commented 2025-09-14 21:35:56 UTC by Eebie ♦135 |
| 171450810 (Comments: 2) | GeraldineTaveirne (Discussed changesets: 3) | Yes, i have a picture but I didnt see where i could upload it. commented 2025-09-14 14:12:26 UTC by GIS_Melle ♦1 |
| 171633688 (Comments: 2) | wdgwdg (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hello, You did not reply to this comment. But I found out that you made another changeset here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171772522 intended as a fix. I made some additional fixes, it should be okay now. commented 2025-09-14 14:11:53 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |
| 160791705 (Comments: 2) | Eebie (Discussed changesets: 118) | It is corrected commented 2025-09-13 21:58:28 UTC by Eebie ♦135 |
| 170976845 (Comments: 2) | M!dgard (Discussed changesets: 149) | Oeps, bedankt voor de melding. Enkel het adres was verkeerd. commented 2025-09-13 20:04:44 UTC by M!dgard ♦797 |
| 171874963 (Comments: 2) | olecky (Discussed changesets: 13) | Right, thanks. I didn't notice that each of the containers is a separate POI. Deleted with: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171878516 commented 2025-09-13 14:33:40 UTC by olecky ♦15 |
| 171823391 (Comments: 2) | multimob (Discussed changesets: 51) | Your comment seems misguided, the changeset here is not about through-traffic restrictions. If there are such restrictions, the correct tag you could add is https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:vehicle%3Ddestination This changeset is... commented 2025-09-12 13:33:49 UTC by multimob ♦75 |
| 171824588 (Comments: 1) | Korneeldebaene (Discussed changesets: 2) | Don’t forget to keep tags in sync. 30 km/h is the default urban speed in Brussels whereas 50 km/h is the exception. "source:maxspeed" is used for that purpose. You can not just change the maxspeed tag and ignore the rest. ... commented 2025-09-12 11:42:30 UTC by bxl-forever ♦2,549 |