| Country | Changeset | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|
 | 177444355 (Comments: 1) | nickjohnston (Discussed changesets: 26) | What's your soruce for the outline on this? It doesn't appear to be on the main imagery sources yet. commented 2026-05-02 21:02:07 UTC by InsertUser ♦488 |
| 181987206 (Comments: 6) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | I'd suggest this needs checking on the ground. A situation I have seen several times is the Public Footpath running adjacent to a farmers track. Looking at the detailed maps this PROW does appear to run to the south of this "service road&q... commented 2026-05-02 17:36:53 UTC by JassKurn ♦173 |
| 182123812 (Comments: 1) | swinetown (Discussed changesets: 30) | Relatify is being troublesome again so may have to do this later commented 2026-05-02 16:28:05 UTC by swinetown ♦37 |
| 182122188 (Comments: 1) | Pewley Col (Discussed changesets: 2) | Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182123738 commented 2026-05-02 16:24:41 UTC by pitscheplatsch ♦6,374 |
| 182124793 (Comments: 1) | lottie1040 (Discussed changesets: 9) | Sorry about lumping that change in Edinburgh with the ones in Kelso - I hadn't noticed the warning was from a different place commented 2026-05-02 16:20:33 UTC by lottie1040 ♦8 |
| 182120917 (Comments: 1) | SteveHSmith (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hello! I noticed that node https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/4729511476 was moved a long distance in this changeset. This is a common mistake that happens when you click on a point and drag to move the map. The point moves with your mouse instead of... commented 2026-05-02 15:05:16 UTC by iandees ♦1,391 |
| 182115347 (Comments: 1) | Tim 2_718281828 (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. We are not allowed to copy Google Maps data into OSM. Google Maps is copyright-protected. I would strongly suggest you revert your changes. I can do this for you if you wish. Regards Bernard. commented 2026-05-02 14:35:53 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 175065050 (Comments: 1) | flarkey (Discussed changesets: 5) | No, I did not 'doctor' this map to add a power line that isn't there. This overhead powerline is clearly visible on Google Street View and on the Energy Provider's webpage. This line goes up from the roadside at Tyddyn-uchaff farm... commented 2026-05-02 08:56:37 UTC by flarkey ♦5 |
| 181841535 (Comments: 6) | jSeke (Discussed changesets: 18) | I'm afraid this particular user seems quite keen on ruining the name=* tag commented 2026-05-02 08:55:38 UTC by SuborbitalPigeon ♦34 |
| 179655543 (Comments: 1) | Richard N (Discussed changesets: 1) | This construction has not yet been approved so has been changed to construction site incorrectly on the map commented 2026-05-02 08:00:12 UTC by Guinevere23 ♦3 |
| 180907594 (Comments: 1) | Sparky31 (Discussed changesets: 1) | This construction has not yet been approved so shouldn't show as a construction area at this point commented 2026-05-02 07:59:12 UTC by Guinevere23 ♦3 |
| 182095317 (Comments: 1) | Pewley Col (Discussed changesets: 2) | Reverted by https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/182097774 commented 2026-05-02 07:44:33 UTC by pitscheplatsch ♦6,374 |
| 5419907 (Comments: 3) | LivingWithDragons (Discussed changesets: 42) | Hi Gregory, Thank you for you reply. You are right. I left a fixme at that node. Kind regards, lyctkel commented 2026-05-02 06:58:35 UTC by lyctkel ♦366 |
| 182088354 (Comments: 1) | Atkin (Discussed changesets: 1) | Self-reviewed, no longer requires review commented 2026-05-01 19:29:02 UTC by Atkin ♦1 |
| 181865286 (Comments: 2) | WRRyan02 (Discussed changesets: 2) | Thank you for the information. I will update the other tags too. I have deleted some railway sections which all visible features have been removed and are now non-existent, e.g. new building developments or earthworks. I've changed... commented 2026-05-01 18:42:08 UTC by WRRyan02 ♦2 |
| 182029054 (Comments: 2) | lyctkel (Discussed changesets: 61) | Hi Pink Duck, so far I have only renamed the ones that were once named Mini-Recycling. As far as I can see there are 6 more in Norwich. Kind regards, lyctkel commented 2026-05-01 15:54:15 UTC by lyctkel ♦366 |
| 178512386 (Comments: 2) | 0235 (Discussed changesets: 9) | You are right, I have no idea how i have ended up changing every section of this road to A6003? It should be A43, but my original download of Corby still lists it as this, and my subsequent JOSM files i have kept of edits has this changed to t... commented 2026-05-01 15:24:00 UTC by 0235 ♦42 |
| 181986798 (Comments: 3) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | For those sections that have not been eroded, they should still be available for public use as defined, unless there is an official traffic order made by the highway authority. The eroded parts although they may be unusable remain legally highways. I... commented 2026-05-01 10:51:19 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 182051628 (Comments: 1) | VlIvYur (Discussed changesets: 59) | I’m sure Unicode support in OSM tagging is widely supported. commented 2026-05-01 08:43:24 UTC by Pink Duck ♦173 |
| 182053423 (Comments: 1) | SomeoneElse (Discussed changesets: 465) | Also Strensall Common, ts2706b, 22/04/2026 commented 2026-04-30 23:16:36 UTC by SomeoneElse ♦13,752 |
| 182038134 (Comments: 1) | LateNightTone (Discussed changesets: 49) | Oops, I meant note 4918056 commented 2026-04-30 15:12:11 UTC by LateNightTone ♦76 |
| 113479788 (Comments: 2) | LateNightTone (Discussed changesets: 49) | According to Sabre description, yes, so have updated. commented 2026-04-30 14:06:57 UTC by LateNightTone ♦76 |
| 159131613 (Comments: 2) | LateNightTone (Discussed changesets: 49) | I didn't set it as secondary myself... but I've gone with the description on Sabre that all of this stretch (former A5) is continuation of the B84. commented 2026-04-30 14:01:05 UTC by LateNightTone ♦76 |
| 182029323 (Comments: 1) | Our Hq (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi welcome to OSM. I guess something went wrong here. You renamed a street to your HQ ... Best regards. commented 2026-04-30 13:51:35 UTC by pitscheplatsch ♦6,374 |
| 141645480 (Comments: 1) | Firefishy (Discussed changesets: 44) | Zizzi has long flight of stairs to restaurant in basement. Only street door is step-free. Visit on Marathon Sunday 2026 commented 2026-04-30 07:55:36 UTC by Ted Pottage ♦26 |
| 181954907 (Comments: 1) | Car Tographer (Discussed changesets: 3) | Thanks. I've put a access=private tag on the cafe for clarification. commented 2026-04-29 18:47:12 UTC by Bexhill-OSM ♦104 |
| 181989091 (Comments: 1) | MapMakerMarry (Discussed changesets: 1) | After surveying it, it seems the north-most goals were taken down at some point, leaving just the two pitches commented 2026-04-29 18:14:01 UTC by MapMakerMarry ♦1 |
| 181957902 (Comments: 2) | Colin Smale (Discussed changesets: 55) | oops, my bad! it's fixed it now. Thanks for catching it. commented 2026-04-29 15:47:52 UTC by Colin Smale ♦327 |
| 181986153 (Comments: 1) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | If it's private, please use access=private - access=no is not a synonym and means "no access for any transport mode, for anyone". Thanks. commented 2026-04-29 15:23:17 UTC by rskedgell ♦1,824 |
| 181987353 (Comments: 2) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | You might find this useful when mapping public rights of way: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom commented 2026-04-29 15:20:45 UTC by rskedgell ♦1,824 |
| 181986917 (Comments: 1) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | Foot and horse use here is a designated use, the name is Crab Lane. commented 2026-04-29 15:01:38 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181986889 (Comments: 1) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | Foot and horse use on a public bridleway is a designated use. commented 2026-04-29 14:56:38 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181986357 (Comments: 1) | Andy L MTB (Discussed changesets: 7) | It's a public footpath, so there is some access. commented 2026-04-29 14:39:00 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181989989 (Comments: 1) | jayaddison (Discussed changesets: 2) | NB: I forgot to mention: I browsed the artist's website to find the name and start_date for this artwork. I remembered the artist's name thanks to knowing about other installations of theirs in Edinburgh. commented 2026-04-29 13:58:39 UTC by jayaddison ♦19 |
| 181978948 (Comments: 2) | PeteRichardson (Discussed changesets: 2) | Got it - will review again, thank you commented 2026-04-29 09:56:30 UTC by PeteRichardson ♦2 |
| 181720872 (Comments: 4) | PeteRichardson (Discussed changesets: 2) | Hang on - I misread your original comment, the lightbulb has gone on. I will update again and *remove* foot=no, :) commented 2026-04-29 09:36:04 UTC by PeteRichardson ♦2 |
| 172762708 (Comments: 1) | Aethonatic (Discussed changesets: 6) | Why tag this aerodrome as disused? If Wikipedia is to be believed, the airfield is operational. commented 2026-04-29 08:38:09 UTC by Jan Olieslagers ♦214 |
| 181710204 (Comments: 2) | RyanBush (Discussed changesets: 16) | 2026-04-29: Reverted bus lane highway types. commented 2026-04-29 00:23:14 UTC by MorahT ♦29 |
| 178600240 (Comments: 1) | adgough (Discussed changesets: 2) | Are the "id" tags on these buildings the house numbers? If so, they should be tagged as addr:housenumber=* , if not what do they represent? commented 2026-04-28 16:56:22 UTC by rskedgell ♦1,824 |
| 181939893 (Comments: 2) | KayCeeKayCee (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, actually the bridge structure is already mapped with Way: 542949337. There are now 2 beam bridge structures mapped. The first one Way: 542949337 looks a better. It might be better to place the new tags on this outline. Regards Bernard. commented 2026-04-28 14:44:13 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181618893 (Comments: 3) | scudderfish (Discussed changesets: 2) | It's the max height of the entrance to Kings Court, not the Skew Bridge commented 2026-04-28 13:48:34 UTC by scudderfish ♦1 |
| 181936652 (Comments: 3) | hechawk (Discussed changesets: 1) | No problem, it's something which isn't quite intuitive and trips a lot of people up. I would use the following for this: vehicle=private bus=yes taxi=yes bicycle=yes (removing psv=yes) Just to make it more conf... commented 2026-04-28 13:48:28 UTC by rskedgell ♦1,824 |
| 181683550 (Comments: 1) | andy mackey (Discussed changesets: 41) | Could you check this way, it got a strange tag: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1502549257 commented 2026-04-28 13:36:48 UTC by mueschel ♦7,060 |
| 181938293 (Comments: 3) | BCNorwich (Discussed changesets: 260) | Link incorrect above: https://forwardmotionsouthessex.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/SouthendTravelMapTownCentre.pdf commented 2026-04-28 13:11:59 UTC by Iain Banks SCC ♦1 |
| 181925296 (Comments: 1) | Iain Banks SCC (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Unfortunately, your route has resulted in duplication of highways, which could disrupt routing. There are now also many highway crossings, and many warnings for them are posted above. Thus I've removed this ... commented 2026-04-28 12:34:14 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181922940 (Comments: 3) | gqin (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, I don't really understand the statement nor the question. But any problem has to be detected first. In this case the detection was because I look at all new mappers, (in eastern england), first few edits. I saw a problem with your edit and w... commented 2026-04-28 11:07:18 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181728087 (Comments: 3) | Nar_ach (Discussed changesets: 13) | Hi DaveF, I adjusted the highway alignment to fit within the roadbed based on the Esri World Imagery on my edit. I understand that for accuracy and consistency I should have checked the imagery offsets and align both the building and the road. I&rsqu... commented 2026-04-28 08:51:36 UTC by Nar_ach ♦14 |
| 181925302 (Comments: 1) | BCNorwich (Discussed changesets: 260) | Hi, thank you for the correction, and sorry for my mistaken attempt. I’m currently mining OSM history data and came across a case of distance injection in the past many years: for example, turning a line from A-B-C into A-B-C-B-C, which ... commented 2026-04-28 08:37:52 UTC by gqin ♦2 |
| 181883445 (Comments: 1) | CrystalTravel (Discussed changesets: 1) | Moved to number 12 building. commented 2026-04-28 06:42:33 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181904624 (Comments: 1) | Mike61G (Discussed changesets: 2) | Hi, I;ve removed several duplicated sections of highways. Some were difficult to determine because you've mapped the grass areas to the highway center lines. The grass doesn't grow across these highways, does it? Regards Bernard. commented 2026-04-28 05:43:45 UTC by BCNorwich ♦5,158 |
| 181910918 (Comments: 1) | officesupplies1 (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi there, What's your source for this please? Diolch Ceirios commented 2026-04-27 21:11:41 UTC by ceirios ♦107 |
| 152572723 (Comments: 1) | Bunkys (Discussed changesets: 4) | Have these PRoWs been confirmed independently e.g. for Strava data? I'm looking at the N/S footway on Hedleyhope Fell and can't see how it relates to ground features. commented 2026-04-27 20:41:07 UTC by phodgkin ♦77 |
| 79065429 (Comments: 1) | drnoble (Discussed changesets: 57) | Is the wheelchair=no tagging on node 7098651864 intentional here? From a recent look I think that the cabinet is at a height that would be operable from a wheelchair, but I am not certain. commented 2026-04-27 19:57:38 UTC by jayaddison ♦19 |
| 181852828 (Comments: 4) | jSeke (Discussed changesets: 18) | The name of Mill Burn is the only name in current common usage. Your source is bogus as it's an old reference, not a guide to current names. It's been known as Mill Burn since at least 1892. Stop trying to make everything Gaelic, yo... commented 2026-04-27 16:15:32 UTC by mapbear66 ♦32 |
| 180738420 (Comments: 13) | MacLondon (Discussed changesets: 274) | There's still a bit to be done at the Greenway end. The riverside path is done at that end and has steps to get up to... basically nothing, for now. commented 2026-04-27 15:29:44 UTC by MacLondon ♦237 |
| 181758932 (Comments: 3) | a-sav (Discussed changesets: 2) | No worries, building part tagging is quite niche and most contributors don’t know about it. For someone who’s only done ~40 edits you’re doing some really high quality stuff, so thank you for your attention to detail! I (and ... commented 2026-04-27 12:54:33 UTC by gurglypipe ♦1,035 |
| 181772256 (Comments: 7) | Xeroctic (Discussed changesets: 5) | I am certainly no wiki expert so am not able to work out where any discussion of depreciating this tag took place or if there was any. commented 2026-04-27 11:22:10 UTC by trigpoint ♦2,663 |
| 181786075 (Comments: 3) | Adze1 (Discussed changesets: 11) | Thanks! I thought it would be something like that; easily done. :) commented 2026-04-27 11:16:17 UTC by gurglypipe ♦1,035 |
| 179347994 (Comments: 3) | Adrian Shobrooke (Discussed changesets: 16) | How much detail you want? In short, I have a small tool that compares taginfo data with iD preset data - and if apparent typos are detected it lists them depending on case I post changeset comment, make note or make an edit commented 2026-04-27 11:05:28 UTC by Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,810 |
| 181868197 (Comments: 1) | beatpoet (Discussed changesets: 23) | Hello beatpoet. Phil from the Data Working Group here. Whilst OSM is a map of the world as it exists now, not as it may be in the future meaning adding proposed features is controversial, copying from copyright documents is not ok The proposed... commented 2026-04-27 10:25:58 UTC by trigpoint ♦2,663 |
| 181206312 (Comments: 2) | mapbear66 (Discussed changesets: 11) | On a number places of you had deleted the well known name and replaced it with gaelic, but not put the existing name in name:en. But that is immaterial. Do not repeat that changeset as it's a huge edit without proper scrutiny or verifiab... commented 2026-04-27 08:39:14 UTC by mapbear66 ♦32 |
| 181676989 (Comments: 2) | Xeroctic (Discussed changesets: 5) | historic:railway=station is marked as deprecated, so I changed some to abandoned:railway=station, although some completely demolished stations were still tagged as the former. The vector OpenRailwayMap also has a setting to choose between this or Ope... commented 2026-04-27 08:33:08 UTC by Xeroctic ♦3 |
| 181719578 (Comments: 2) | SimonXIX (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, I think that's Auldfield Lane but I can have a wander round there at some point to verify. commented 2026-04-27 07:36:15 UTC by SimonXIX ♦1 |
| 181342465 (Comments: 1) | kreuzschnabel (Discussed changesets: 77) | Hi please don't place name tags for villages & small settlements where they clash with other objects. https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/294258936/history/2 commented 2026-04-26 22:22:36 UTC by DaveF ♦1,628 |
| 181856910 (Comments: 3) | randomhacks (Discussed changesets: 6) | No problem! Have a good weekend. commented 2026-04-26 18:05:37 UTC by iandees ♦1,391 |
| 181132620 (Comments: 6) | Dawesy (Discussed changesets: 5) | So what’s the plan for fixing the information so it is useful and doesn’t break waymarkedtrails.org? commented 2026-04-26 16:55:16 UTC by gurglypipe ♦1,035 |
| 181777772 (Comments: 2) | rskedgell (Discussed changesets: 122) | Thanks for updating that. It's no more "wrong" than changing it to highway=construction , as both imply it could be put back into use relatively easily. Having read the yellow sign by the Parkinson Way / Yeadon Way roundabout pr... commented 2026-04-26 15:20:18 UTC by rskedgell ♦1,824 |
| 181800222 (Comments: 1) | Green-1 (Discussed changesets: 1) | Hi, Sorry but I’ve put the node back until the data can be copied off of it. The brand is probably wrong anyway as there at least 3 different coop brands in the area. Regards Richard commented 2026-04-26 14:17:54 UTC by RAC_UK ♦20 |
| 181404416 (Comments: 2) | ndrw6 (Discussed changesets: 31) | Hi, the past discussion was inconclusive, with different people preferring different levels of details. I understand your motivation and respect your choice of mapping style and I would expect nothing less from you. You may consider data I am adding ... commented 2026-04-26 13:37:04 UTC by ndrw6 ♦81 |
| 177906899 (Comments: 5) | conifermapper (Discussed changesets: 98) | I’ve reverted these changes again - please read the docs and do not use name:en for archaic/historical names. commented 2026-04-26 13:08:38 UTC by samjcorbin ♦5 |
| 168891749 (Comments: 5) | lottie1040 (Discussed changesets: 9) | Thank you. I have removed the alt_name tag. Cheers Phil commented 2026-04-26 12:24:17 UTC by trigpoint ♦2,663 |