Hello, what is the scope of this changeset? I see that you dragged some nodes far from where they were supposed to go and deleted some tags.
Tell me what you wanted to modify and I will help you.

Hello willisturm, It is a good think that you are doing quality control on the map, but please check with the local community before deleting a big amount of information from the map. In Romania, we keep a lot of information about the state of highway construction on the map. It is something that a lot of people are interested in and even if those are non-standard tags you shouldn't delete them without consulting.

Hello,
I saw that you deleted some neighborhood boundaries in Ploiești. Is there something bad about them?
I have re-added them in changeset #102947106. Please be more careful.

I double-checked and data in OSM seems to be correct. Those roads are clearly inside the Romanian boundaries and give wrong addresses.

It seems to be a problem regarding the app/site where you ask for address. Can you describe me where do you query the address information from?

What did you try to do in this changeset? I see that you added some roads in the boundary relation. This relation specifies the border of the country and shouldn't have roads in it.

Changeset reverted in changeset/102551602

Hello Iosif. Thank you for editing OSM. I also edited in this area a few months ago and found out that the data from Câmpulung Moldovenesc is pretty outdated, so I am very happy to see an local editor.
I just want to give you one tip: Try to reuse the old building outlines when correcting the houses. By deleting and redrawing them you remove the object history (every point in the OSM database keeps an history of who edited and what in the area, this is lost when deleting the object)

Hello
Administrative boundaries were imported from official sources (from ANCPI). Have you found conflicting information? Does this zone appear in Nușfalău in offical documents (like property deed or lang registry)?

Hello, please include "strada", "utca", "bulevard" etc. in the name. This is the common practice in Romania (and in most other countries)

Hello kaddani. Please don't tag as apartment. This tag is meant for holiday rental apartments. What do you think is missing here?

I have left you another comment last month in which I explained what you are doing wrong, it is not the information that you are adding problematic (street names and incorrectly drawn ways are extremely important to repair i.m.o). This is what I wrote to you in that comment:

"I want to mention a common mistake that I have observed in all your edits, instead of giving names to existing roads you are creating new overlapping roads above the ones already in place.
I would suggest that you should simply just select the road that you want to modify and add a name to it, no need to retrace it.
Thanks."

Or in this case, where you want to delete a piece of road:
- right click on the existing road segment
- split the way (the scissors symbol in the menu)
- delete the unwanted part.

By drawing another element over it, it doesn't help anybody. I have manually gotten over your edits and repaired those mistakes.

Hello user722, please do not overlap ways over existing ones. Learn how to edit what is already on the map.

Changeset reverted in 102062006

Hello, it's me again. This portion of the trail is accessible by car and has been correctly tagged as highway=tracks. The foot only part of the route (Cheile Tureni proper) start from the buildings at the NW limit of your changeset up to Tureni village. The tags you have added in this changeset would have been correct on the other path segment. You certainly do not need via ferrata equipment on the forestry road :)

No problem, nobody started experienced. I hope that you'll continue to edit if you say that you know those mountains, local knowledge is the most needed thing in map-making!

Changeset partially reverted in #102004308

If everything is all right and you don't mind I'll revert the changes done to the peak location and keep the other edits in the area (to the lake and campsites)

1) I have encountered this problem myself before. Most map providers use the SRTM scan as the altitude profile. It's quality is pretty good, but when taken into account that it is a scan of the entire planet, I am not surprised at all that in mountainous area it can have errors (in this case ~40m). I have more trust into GPX tracks, I have checked:
- the public tracks uploaded on OSM - see osm.org/#map=18/45.38082/22.85020&layers=G
- a GPX track provided to me by a friend that has been in the area recently
- Strava heatmap (you may need to have an account to access the high quality data): https://www.strava.com/heatmap#18.05/22.84988/45.38097/hot/all
You can see that almost everybody that hikes in the area is going on the path westward, because they go there to take pictures with the summit post :)
2) You have a point here, in the "name=*" tag you should indeed find the official name used by paper maps and reference books and this tag is used by almost everybody that renders and uses the OSM data. However, variations of this tag (like name:ro, name:hu, name:de, loc_name, alt_name) are additional information that can be useful by some users and will not be visible unless somebody explicitly looks for it. Usually in OSM there is no such thing as too much information, data clients (sites and apps that makes maps out of OSM data) should limit what information is important for their use case.

Hello, thank you for editing OSM.
I have looked over your changeset and I am afraid that I do not understand some things that you have changed.
1. Why did you move the Retezat peak and deleted the path leading to it? I am pretty sure from local knowledge, public GPX tracks and personal GPX tracks that the position of the peak is a little bit to the west of the route intersection.
2. Why did you remove the Hungarian name of the features? This map is for everybody and if a common name exists in another language it should be on the map.

Regarding the deletion of the campsites, as far as I know you are correct!

Hello Geadan, thank you for editing OSM.

I have looked over your changes, as far as I know, the correct tagging for a residential complex is creating an area around the plot of land and tagging it with landuse=residential; name=*.

Take a look at how I mapped the area. Keep on mapping!

I thought that has been the case. Just be aware that even if they have the same characteristics, some may be part of a relation while other may not. I will cleanup the problems that I mentioned, keep on mapping!