Tip of the day:

osm.wiki/Keep_the_history
"If a café closes down, don't delete the node. Just remove the cafe related tags and leave other tags (like the address) in place"

It works a little better already. Not sure how a pedestrian approaching from the east (osm.org/?mlat=50.80526&mlon=4.30003) is supposed to get around. Routers on osm.org are still running with last week’s data, so I cannot check if they behave properly.
Anyway, we can just leave this like this at the moment.

Hello,

Please inspect the list of tags here:
node/6716272356/history

You will find that the website and phone number were already in the database.

I think the problem comes from the iD editor you are using. If you only look at the presets (upper part of the screen) it will hide some information from you and fool you into believing data is "missing".

If you want to use iD, it is always better to type the tags directly in the tag list, at the bottom of the window.

Hope that helps.

Hello,

If you add housenumbers, please be extremely careful about not creating duplicates.

In this change, you added number 124 on the building here:
way/244497496

But number 124 was already set on the building here: way/244497149/history

Duplicate numbers on the same street are not supposed to exist. If the building structure is faulty, do not hesitate to report it—many buildings have been traced on official UrbIS data, which is the official reference in Brussels, but there are occasional mistakes in official data— StreetComplete is usually a nice app but it can ruin the database integrity easily too; I think there is an option that says "this building has no number".

Thanks in advance. Have a nice day.

Hello,

Would you please be so kind as to always write titles for your changes. A "no comment" changeset implies some detective work to examine changes one by one. (In other changesets, you used to write very good descriptions, though.)

It looks like you added surface=paved to footways and cycleways. This is fine, despite "paved" is considered a weak tag, it’s always better to be a little more accurate: in Brussels, most infrastructure like this will have "asphalt" or "paving_stones", and in some cases, "sett".

Kinderdagverblijf is already on the map
way/1091202329

Please undo your edit, yo are creating a useless duplicate.

Hello,

I am sorry to announce that your change breaks pedestrian routing entirely.

Since pedestrian infrastructure is not drawn in this zone, routing engines assume pedestrians will walk on the road—which is the only available path.

When you add "foot=no" on the bridge itself, the whole itinerary becomes impraticable. To make it work properly, one needs to add a few footway connectors between the road and the cycle track. (The reason is that the cycle track and the road are not connected, and routers never assume people teleport from one to the other, there has to be a connector somewhere, with adequate permissions).
And also add tags to confirm that the cycle track is not exclusively for cyclists but is shared with pedestrians.

There is a lot to improve here. I’ll try to see if I can spend some time to fix it in the next days. You can do it too if you like.

@Mon Agence,

I am afraid to tell you that your change is incorrect.

Several of us have tried to contact you in the last months to explain the mistakes you are doing when editing the map. Your customers pay you to get their companies on the map. Fine! But to make it right, you should not just add company names to buildings. Sometimes, they should be added as single nodes inside buildings, and most importantly if it is a shop it must be properly tagged… as a shop.

Again, changeset titles is not the place for promotional messages about your customers. As I tried to instruct you in a former comment, spamming the OSM database won’t improve your rankings anywhere.

I fixed your edit.

Please be kind enough to read messages emailed to you, through changeset comments or direct messages.

Hello,

Thanks for writing back.

I did a few changes after your correction. Here are some explanation, they might be useful.

1) Since many mappers use aerial imagery, as long as the old road is still visible, I recommend leaving it on the database, just removing its tags. That will avoid that another mapper wants to "add a missing road" here. I undeleted the road and tagged it as disused:highway=*

2) In Belgium, cyclists are vehicle drivers, so oneway:bicycle=no is important, and thanks for adding it. Pedestrians are not concerned by this, and one-way restrictions never apply to pedestrians. I removed your "oneway:foot=no" tag, this is not necessary.

Hello,

Thanks for spotting the recent changes in the traffic situation.

I might have a few questions because there seem to be a few inconsistencies on the map now.

You made Kerklaan a one-way street without any exemption for cyclists or class-A mopeds. This is very rare, normally there should be one of those white M2 or M3 signs, right? A few days ago we fixed the part under the railway, which is open to cyclists, so it would be very unlikely cycling towards Woluwelaan would be forbidden.

Also, what shall we do with this road?
way/28798159
Vehicles can no longer reach this connector. Has the road been blocked? Anything special here?

Thanks.

Hello,

Why are you mechanically removing apparently valid data, like "network=Astuce" on bus stops?
node/4397256508/history
Such tags are used to query all bus stops served by a given network.

Did Osmose really ask you to do this? Why?

Hello, Pieter,

I know you would love to see the Atomium showing up on the main OSM map… and we all would too.

We are aware of the problem, this is a know bug in osm-carto, documented here: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/688

There are plenty of layers that feed on OSM data, and all of them render the Atomium properly. Only osm-carto does not. The problem should be fixed there, not by putting incorrect data in OSM until it "looks good" in osm-carto. This includes: playing with multipolygons to give "inner" roles to the upper spheres or splitting the pedestrian area to make it disappear under the monument → this is called "mapping for the renderer" and is not allowed on OSM.

Have a nice day.

Please do not add false information to the database!

"Marché aux Toiles" is only the name of a square. Adding amenity=marketplace on it solely because of the name contains a magic word is plainly wrong and will mislead map users into thinking they can expect a real market here.
way/116039984

Please make sure to review your edits carefully instead of creating huge changesets based on Osmose suggestions.

Look at this too:
way/761711675/history
Changing "é" into "É" is nice but you are only applying mechanical edits without looking at the real problem. The problem is that a small pond should not have a name in the first place. It’s better to fix the mistake instead of just making the mistake look prettier.

Have a nice day.

Hello, Yaaaaaaaa:
I see your claim in your profile description to clear up every Osmose flag, but perhaps it would be wise to exercise good judgment before clicking on any "fix" option.

Here is an example: This should not be tagged with amenity=marketplace, this is just a street, there is no market here.
way/29106018

Hope this helps.

I’ll try to help you here.

I have never been to Milwaukee, therefore I will solely base my judgement on what I see on aerial imagery.

You did some minor geometry changeset near Mitchell Interchange: no problem here. It looks fine.

You created a road link here: way/1148893637
It looks strange to me. I assume the intention is to create a left turn for drivers exiting the motorway.
On the latest available imagery I see no infrastructure to do that. But if you are a local, perhaps you have more information and perhaps the place was rearranged recently. If that is the case, you can keep the road.

Another problem here: way/1148893639
This road seems to be in the wrong direction, I suppose it should go *to* the motorway instead of *from* it.
To solve this, edit the map again, select that road, right-click and hit the Reverse («) button.

The two roads I mentioned above have an additional problem: they intersect the westbound road for West National Avenue. In OSM, when two roads intersect, you should create a common node at the junction of them. The editor apparently warned you but you ignored its warnings. This is something you should solve.

Hope this helps.

Hello!

The summary of a changeset is aimed at describing what you intended to do when changing the map.

Sure, people can volunteer to help you but if your change lots of stuff without saying a word about what—Did you find mistakes? Has the situation here changed recently? Do you live in this area or are you editing primarily when looking at aerial imagery? Are you mapping with some particular purpose (e.g. some people need to change the data because they use an app that requires data to be presented in a very specific manner).

Along with the "I would like someone to review my edits."-part, please make sure to always write a few words so that people can understand what you were attempting to do. (You might also want to add comments on your past changesets to explain.) No-one has replied so far because without any information from you, the only way to help you is to look at every object in the database one by one and trying to figure out what changed. This is detective work.

OK, thanks for writing back.

In that case, this is another situation. Anyway, the road should not be transformed in a line of bollards. I’ll restore a normal situation, so that cyclists and pedestrian can pass through but not motor traffic, then. (Routing was broken.)

Hello,

Welcome here.
We had to undo your change. Zwaluwenveld 24 is the *address*, not the *name*, right?

Hello,

It’s recommended not to remove highway tags from roads, even though traffic is not allowed here during the works. Otherwise, we lose the information about the object being a road in the first place.

I’ll fix it.

I suppose the "(around:)" instruction in the Overpass API will do the job.

It’s fairly trivial to do proper reverse geocoding with Nominatim, e.g. this will return a JSON file which can be easily parsed.
https://nominatim.openstreetmap.org/reverse?format=geocodejson&lat=50.8579747&lon=4.3680181