Thanks Baden for the help and the tips. We do have a challenge all over East-Africa. Most of the edits are as you said made by beginners, mostly engaging in HOT projects. This was long time not such a problem but as the map gets more detailed it starts breaking things, especially because they are organised on an ever bigger scale. We don't go against it, always search for communication and support in makng qualative changes and training whenver possible. Lots of imporvement there however in HOT's validation process.
The taxiway letters are from an unknown source added some 4 years ago. We do take care of any suspicious sources, we carefully look at them. In Tanzania there is, just like in Uganda and Congo very large projects ongoing, which we must encourage and support. Any info or contacts if you see any problems is best to contact the local HOT teams. All edits are made in good faith.
Will see what we can do about the other QA issues you mentioned. The whole airport is currently extended with another terminal, so wanted to wait until that gets more clear and then mobilize a team and also try to engage the Aviation Authority.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello Temadri, you changed the taxiway C again after we corrected it 3 days ago. Please, all of you in the team, be aware that none of the imagery has the correct offset. The correct offsets are for this area stored in the offset database in JOSM and field checked. For your information, Maxar imagery is exactly the same as the ones used by this HOT project. If you can't find them they are: -0.53; -5.83 for this area (name in db: Maxar Imagery 2021 - Airport Defense Zone - Misoro - Bunonko.
I would appreciate if you correct your changes.

Hi Baden,
Thanks for helping out. We are still getting used to the rather new aerodrome tagging. You did however delete some taxiways and I got worried because they contain the history of the references of the taxiways, which were added some 4 years ago from an unknown source. I do understand it might be in some cases easier to replace the whole taxiway, but it is advised to remain with at least f.i. a node to preserve the history.

The misalignments were correct, until yesterday (changed again by a beginner mapper disregarding stored offsets).
Both Bing and Maxar imagery need custom offsets, we store them in the offset database in JOSM after doing field checks, so through JOSM it's easy to get them. We have a very active HOTOSM team in the area though, and they again disregarded any existing offset, just starting to re-align roads, drains and now even the taxiways ignoring the fact that neither imagery is correctly offset. But that came after your efforts.
We don't map for the renderer, but in this case might make a little sin, how do you tag the runway area ? With a landcover=* ?
Thanks, appreciate your help !

Can you please explain what is going on here. As far as I can see you are changing and deleting data entered from a more recent HOT project, that used more recent and accurate imagery then Bing, the source you are referring to. In case of doubt, never delete something, try to preserve the history by chnaing existing and still present map features, so we preserve it's history in OSM. So is another HOT project coming along this area to delete and change it again. Is the OSM community facing a competition between different projects form the same party ?
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello Joyce, In this changeset you deleted 13 buildings and then replaced them with less accurate versions. Please, don't do this, add what is missing, change what is incorrect so we can trace the history in a cooperative way, but don't delete without consulting the community member who added it. Respect others work and ask yourself why you consider it wrong and include it in the comment. If you need any help please do ask. I kindly ask you or someone in your HOT team to repair the damage done or provide a comment that justifies such deletions.
Regards,
Bert Araali

Hello Marvin, In this changeset you deleted so much information (44 ways and 260 nodes) that it can hardly be called a contribution. So please, don't do this, add what is missing, don't delete other peoples work but rather contact them and change in a cooperative way. If you need any help please do ask. I kindly ask you or someone in your HOT team to repair the damage done or provide a comment that justifies such large deletions.
Regards,
Bert Araali

Hello, you changed the highway tag of some roads. Good, it was wrong anyway. However, roads that give access to multiple houses are residential. You used unclassified. Unclassified, that you used, is for roads like connecting neighbourhoods. An access road to a single house is highway=service and service=driveway. See osm.wiki/Highway_Tag_Africa. If you need any help, please do ask. Greetings, Bert Araali.

May I ask why you are deleting taxiways, service roads and other feuatres at our airport ? I can see you are making changes, based on which data source, the whole airport was updated recently with Maxar imagery. It would be better to change nodes/ways, or add tags, not delete them so we keep the history. Some of this data have a history of more then 10 years. Greetings, Bert Araali.

Hello, thank you for adding a correct highway tag. We are investigating more broadly the seemingly organised editing of a group in Sri Lanka, in which this account was used. Have you contacted the users before regarding their activities ?
Greetings, Bert Araali

Could you please use the correct tag for roads. It should be highway=*, not road=*. Are you part of a team making these edits in Sri Lanka ?
Regards, Bert Araali

Could you please use the correct tag for roads. It should be highway=*, not road=*. Are you part of a team making these edits in Sri Lanka ?
Regards, Bert Araali

Not sure I understand what you mean. That taginfo is for road=*.
When I look at street=* in https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/street#chronology I don't see something similar, actually I see a significant clean-up at the beginning of 2021.

Thank you for the prompt response. Vicmap uses an ODbl license if I am not mistaking, so that should be fine. It does however require that you attribute the source: see https://opendata.victoria.ca/pages/open-data-licence.
Your long time additions and mapping efforts are well appreciated, keep on mapping !

Not only, we where afraid it was some import or organised editing but seems to be more widespread. We found a major culprit with road_name in Taiwan but that is already getting resolved by reverts.
On road=* see this for global problem since 08-2020: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/14ye

Yes, just did and left a comment on the HOT OSM project page #9511. The number is quite large and doesn't seemed to be noticed, or not done in HOTOSM validation. We have seen numerous others in Tanzania, contributing to a large spike (from 700 to over 2200) the past half year in incorrect use of the road=* tag.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Sorry, just noticed it was done in a previous edit, sorry for the inconvenience.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the way outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Could you change or delete the road_name key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali