Can you please fix relations that are broken by this changeset:
relation/11066102 - Kifri Central Subdistrict,
relation/15577657 - Central Kfri Subdistrict,
relation/15577658 - Sarqala Subdistrict,
relation/11066101 - Sarqala Subdistrict,
relation/11066103 - Kokis Subdistrict

OK, I can see where the confusion is coming from. Please do not use census data for this. Census polygons classification is based on how many residents are there, not looking at the function of the place itself. Ražanj is a town with a low population, but it is the administrative center of the municipality, so it is a town by functionality, but it has a very low population.

Please do not change the classification of places within Serbia, you have created a lot of mess, this is a town, not a village. I have found a couple of issues that you have made, please do not change anything in the future

I see that user is blocked by Data Working Group (DWG) osm.org/user_blocks/6875

I will help you with fixing the name to Warri on all the relations where it was changed to Wado

I saw that the change is made to node node/501462908#map=19/5.55550/5.78501 but you have to correct relations also

Hi Jon Snow 47 ,
have you tries to contact user Streetvibes?

If the user is creating vandalism please report that to the DWG (for example you can contact user SomeoneElse which is a member of DWG) because they can block that account.

I have just fixed broken relation here, have not changed any tags.

As I can see you have local knowledge, can you fix the name to the proper one?

Fixed, thanks for the hint

Yes, that is the case, sometimes if you do not download all relations that are influenced by the cut, it can create broken boundaries, but no worries, it can be fixed easily :)

No problem, I will fix it, just wanted to double-check. Thanks

Hi Mohnish Landge,
you have broken 2 relations in this changeset
Bangalore North (10594855, v5)
Yelahanka taluku (14934841, v3)

Was this unintentional or there is any reason for this?

Can you specify the source for MZ Oglečeva? As far I know this is not a correct border, the one you have named and started creating relation for

Hi, I saw that you have reverted the Kyrgyzstan-Uzbekistan border, but the current state is also not correct. On the changeset that you commented on before doing this, you mentioned that you should be informed if someone is trying to fix the issue. I would like to make changes to their relations as they were before the first vandalism happened. Is this OK with DWG or do we need some more ground truth? Currently, we have self-crossing boundaries way/809037412

Thanks for notifying me, I did this one by accident, sorry, I will pay more attention in the future (I usually do, but will double check in the future)

I have removed the coastline tag since it is not used properly. I have not deleted the way itself, can you describe what you wanted to tag or we should just delete it?

Hi archie, we have done a check of all 46130 highways that have been created/modified by our editors in Sweden and I can confirm that this one was the only error.

We have removed one more road that we have added just because we were uncertain of its existence on the field changeset/131110158 so maybe someone local user can add it.

I see no reason for such resentment, but you certainly have a right to it. All edits on OSM can be verified by all users around the planet, but only a few users actually do this, so that's why I said THANK YOU for keeping an eye, but you certainly have the right to understand it however you want. I don't want to deepen the unnecessary discussion that deviated from the topic, which is the quality of the map. When I finish the check I will inform you about the results.

I will do the check also ASAP and inform you of the findings

Hi archie, thanks for reporting this issue.
The road has now been removed.
However, this is not vandalism, this is an accidental copy and offset of the road way/111490069
There was no intention to create a wrong road on the map, it was a pure accident, which I agree should not happen, but it did.
We are not doing any automated imports, so human error can be expected. We are running checks after we finish the task and this would be picked up and would be removed, but thanks for keeping an eye, we really appreciate the community involvement.
I have checked all roads created or edited by magrej and have found only this one to be an error, so I would not call this a quality issue, but sure an issue that has been now solved.
BTW magrej is my colleague and he is a huge fan of Sweden, he has been traveling a lot of times to different places across the country and he even learned the language, so feel free to contact him and send him the community-created tasks, so we can jump in and help.

Hope this answered all the questions, but if you have more concerns feel free to comment.

Best regards,
Aleksandar Matejevic

Your edit broke the Beijing relation relation/912940

Can you please fix this?

While I agree that this is an oversight on the part of the editor and that we should double-check before making the change, I strongly disagree with this way of labeling a road segment with a tunnel name.
There is a tunnel:name tag that should be used. Also, there is a variant for bridge:name

Here is the wiki documentation:
https://viki.openstreetmap.org/viki/Kei:tunnel#Hov_to_map

Also, this tag is used quite a bit on OSM
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keis/tunnel%3Aname

Would it be in the interest of the community to map all these names correctly?