Hello,

Thanks for noticing that railway tracks have changed in this area. But I regret to inform you that this is a damaging edit. While changing the layout of the railway tracks you broke the continuity of railway relations.

I imagine you just just wanted to help. The simple online editor is unfortunately not a suitable tool to edit complicated structures, like route relations. I will try to repair this now.

Hello,

Can you please take some time to read the OpenStreetMap wiki, in particular this page.
osm.wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings

In this edit, you created several invalid structures because you are piling up building parts without using building:min_level=*.

You might want to clean this up.

Thanks in advance.

Hello,

Thanks for your mapping efforts but I need to warn you because there is a problem here.

All the buildings in Belgium are traced on the official footprints provided by the regional governments. There is no such thing as "correcting the geometry" of a building from aerial imagery. If you do that, what you are actually doing is that you move good buildings away from their real location. Despite we have high-quality aerial imagery in Brussels, it is not a suitable source to trace buildings.

I will undo your latest changes in Brussels, when it comes to building geometries.

Thanks in advance and have a nice day.

Hello,

Thanks for your contribution. However, it raises a few questions. You named those two points as "meeting points"… but at the same time you tagged them as offices. Therefore, they will be presented to map users as offices; people will expect to be able to purchase tickets there.

What are those two places, exactly?

Thanks in advance.

Hello,

As far as I can see, Брюссель is the Ukrainian name for Brussels. But the object you edited here is not the city of Brussels but the "Brussels-Capital Region". This is the name of an administrative part of our country, and the name is longer. All the translations for this OSM object use the full name. Can you please review your edit and provide a translation that says "Brussels-Capital Region" instead of just "Brussels".
Thanks.

Hello,

This is a large bounding box because in this edit you merely clicked on automatic "suggestions" in iD (fed by the name-suggestion-index) on various places, and also on long-distance railway relations.

Since you are an experienced user, I guess that you are already aware that the NSI contains a lot of controversial suggestions. In particular for railway relations. The history of most of those TGV relations contains back-and-forth edits where the operator gets changed into "SNCF", then reverted to "SNCF Voyageurs"… until the next iD user starts the edit cycle again. I hope the French mapping community will soon settle how the operator of those relations should be tagged, to put an end to those endless edit wars.

Pourquoi ne pas travailler avec landuse=construction ou des access:conditional ? Ceci est mieux que de changer le type primaire des rues ou les sens de circulation.
OSM ≠ Waze, le but n'est pas de faire une carte day-to-day mais une carte globale du territoire. Il est mieux de rajouter les infos sur les modifications provisoires séparément, plutôt que de tout mélanger.

way/27260357 contient encore des lignes de bus. Pas correct. Ceci est une raison pour utiliser highway=construction exclusivement sur des futures routes et pas pendant des travaux de rénovation d'une route qui existait déjà avant.

Comme ceci : node/12150472279

Hello, and welcome to OSM.

The helipad is still visible on latest aerial imagery. We were aware that it is not in use anymore. This is why we had *explicitely* used a "lifecycle prefix", to tag it as a disused helipad. That way, it won’t be rendered on any map, but will serve as a warning in case someone else opens the imagery and says: "Oh, there is a missing helipad here, I’ll add it."

This changeset has been reverted.

Hello, DavidXander.

Despite the innocent-sounding title of "Added a few Things to a Park", you moved buildings again.

I would like to raise your attention again against redrawing buildings. Please stop doing that! We have already spent too much time trying to repair every edit you made over the past days. In this edit, you moved edges of a buildings which I had just repaired a few hours earlier.

Aerial imagery is not a suitable source to trace buildings in Belgium. In this country, we use the detailed footprints provided by governments, which show the exact position of buildings. It is very disappointing that you keep moving good building outlines to follow the distorted imagery. You may be interested to know that aerial imagery is updated about once a year and that every building seems to "move" with each new set of photos, which obviously is not what they do in reality. That is why we have consistently been drawing buildings according to the exact footprint over the past decades. Please do not reintroduce incorrect data.

Thanks in advance.

Hello,

Is the name on this sign only in French? It looks like an official sign, we expect to see the text in the two official languages. In case you took a picture of it, please have a look and tell us. Thanks.

Hello, DavidXander,

Again, please do not trace buildings from aerial imagery. Those images are distorted and are unsuitable for buildings. In all of Belgium, we use numerical imagery provided by the governments to trace buildings.

I had to fix the outline of this building + many others that you moved, it’s a lot of work to have to redo everything after you. Perhaps you might want to use correct imagery (for Brussels, this is URBIS numerical imagery), though I fear it is hard to map correctly in the simple online editor.

Have a nice day.

This changeset updated 3 nodes: one in the Canary Islands, one in Berlin, and one in Croatia. That should have been uploaded as three separate changes instead of one.
osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Why does this polygon has a name and nothing else?
way/1479855187

Isn’t there a confusion between polygons and multipolygons? We can help you fix the map if you want.

Hello,

I observed some of your latest contributions, where you seem to be interested in micromapping playground areas.

A few comments here, that might be useful to improve your actions on the map and avoid irritating other mappers.

1) Please avoid mapping two remote places in the same changeset. Make two uploads instead of one.

2) Make sure that your changeset description matches your actions. If you say that you "added sand", we should not expect that the changeset also adds trees, moves buildings, adds small footpaths (way/1479929729) and more.

3) In a previous changeset, you created a playground with surface=sand: way/1066910951 This is the correct way to map it, congrats. However, adding areas with "natural=sand" as you did here is not correct. Those areas are found in nature, but this is not something to use inside a city. And certainly not on top of an existing playground having that information. I understand that some people want the map to "look nice" but this is not accepted. Please remove those unnecessary sand areas.

Thanks and happy mapping.

Hello,

It is very unlikely that this 38-meter high apartment building is named "West Appliance Service".

If you want to add your company to the map, please do it in a honest way, i.e. create a floating point inside the building area and add a name, business type, opening hours and a website. But please do *not* rename an existing building if that is not its real name.

Hello,

It looks like there is a confusion about how some OSM tags work.

In this edit, you added the following tags:

turn:lanes:backward=1
turn:lanes:forward=1

This is not correct.

turn:lanes:* are meant to indicate whether the lanes are there to prepare a left or right turn. If you want to indicate the lane *count* on this road, the relevant tag is "lanes=2", which is already set here. (Being a two-way road, lanes=2 is automatically parsed as having one lane per direction.)

I suggest removing turn:lanes:backward and turn:lanes:forward here.

Hello,

Many of those trees are small sheds at the back of gardens. As you can see, they are aligned with houses on Rue Franklin/Franklinstraat.

We have a full up-to-date inventory of buildings in the Brussels Region, therefore there is no need to cast doubt on their existence just because you cannot see them on imagery. They are clearly visible on 2015 imagery (which was taken during the winter), we can also see most of them on 2021 and 2023 imagery too.

Hello,

The pond you added (way/1479411181) is visible on UrbIS imagery, but this imagery was shot in September 2024. On earlier versions of UrbIS, a small water body is visible here but looks more like a hole filled with water, connected to the construction site.

If I open Digitaal Vlaanderen preliminary aerial imagery, which was taken in the summer of 2025, the pond is not there anymore.

Did you survey this area recently? Did they really make a new pond here?

Reverted by changeset/178573168.

You had already uploaded the judo club a few hours earlier, please do not submit the same information multiple times. Duplicates are unwanted.