De brandweerpost ligt niet hier (op wat terecht nummer 207 was) maar op 209, het grote gebouw erachter

Oei, hier heb je bovenop een bestaande brandweerpost (op het gebouw) een nieuwe gezet met de verkeerde naam (Genk)

OK, merci

Qu'est-ce qui vous a poussé à décider que/152056808 est highway=unclassified plutôt que highway=track? Fonctionnellement, c'est une "piste importante", je suppose, mais elle n'est certainement pas adaptée au trafic de transit régulier.

You accidentally dragged the road quite a long way away here: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=142162968
It can happen, but the editor should have given you a warning about that...

I can second that way/723857916/ is indeed not a track and is marked private

Yes, and at some point we'll need to consider a user block I'm afraid...
(I just reverted that other changeset)

The images show no indication access is NOT allowed for pedestrians, just that there is no explicit permission. Default for pedestrian access is yes, so it makes no sense to put foot=no here. Reverting.

Klopt niet, zie https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=50.720870499972&lng=4.2952139999722&z=17&pKey=111164704922403&focus=photo&x=0.5300990606117982&y=0.5317803799977485&zoom=0
Volgens het verkeersbord mag je hier niet fietsen, ook al hebben ze er ook een fietsroute over gelegd. Ik heb dit al gemeld bij de gemeente, maar ze hebben me genegeerd.

Merci!

Ik denk niet dat de school de hele site gebruikt hier:
relation/11755779
Ik vermoed dat het niet om een school gaat maar enkel kinderopvang; en dat die in nr 47 zit. Ook nog spelfout gezien: "Pannenfabrief"

These are just two "implantations" of the same "etablissement" with different grades offered, different address and possibly different contacts. Physical school sites tend to have one or more "implantations" from one or more "etablissement". It is OK to map the "etablissement" as a site relation as extra information, but that makes things very complicated and it has not much added value for data users. It is however never a good idea to NOT map the individual implantations.

In this case I would honestly just flatten it into two ways. You could still bundle them together with a wikidata or operator tag. There's a few site relations as well, e.g. relation/10592577 . That particular relation is an example of what I would recommend we DON'T get into ;-) , but for the school we're discussing here it might be a solution.

I'm not sure it makes sense to map this as a relation only. For one, the two sites have different addresses, so having the relation have an address is wrong, I think. Also the small site has only secondary education, whereas the bigger one has both primary and secondary. That makes it feel like two different sites to me, not just a single one. Could still be included in a relation as well, but I'm not convinced we should even try that (the administrative reality of schools is generally insane, trying to model that in OSM will drive us mad)

Everything fixed now.

Hi John,
If you're interested in fire stations in this area, I'm looking for people to help review them. More info here: osm.wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Firestations

I guess you learned by now, but please use lifecycle tags or similar for features that don't exist anymore

Bedankt voor je bijdragen aan dit project!

Hey Boris,
Sorry voor de schade. Zie https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mapping-party-in-halle-with-onwheels/104056 voor meer info. Tegen eind deze week zou alles in Halle gefixed moeten zijn.

They also added a diplomatic office here way/837521686 ...