Some of the new residential roads added by
you looked strange. Parts are paved, parts are barely visble. I have no idea if the latter are really usable. At least they seem not to be used often and they have different surfaces. Without local knowledge I would not map them with only IBGE as a source.

Hi, I am also an armchair mapper, sitting in Germany. I prefer to map nothing in cases where sat images are poor. All normal image sources provided by JOSM seem to show two rails on an embankment, so I think cars cannot pass the rails there.

two things:
1) The name tag on the nodes like
node/5515708425
should be removed.
2) The ways like
way/571731548
I think they are not needed at all, as they duplicate the information of the nodes.

I hope the polski wiki also says that you should add the tag to a node on the highway?

I suppose that was not intentional. Can I help restore the data?

Hi! I've noticed that you removed a river here:
way/247827893
What was the reason?
You also removed some route relations. Was that intended?

Hi! I wonder what this highway=underground means:
way/561758293
Maybe the building is just a roof and the part of the below it a highway=path + covered=yes ?

Hi! I've changed the unusual highway=abandoned:footway to the common
abandoned:highway=footway.
After doing that I wondered if abandoned: is the right prefix for a way that is not visible as
the wiki
osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix for abandoned: starts with "still visible". Maybe you find a better prefix there?

Thanks for the quick response :-)

OK, danke für die Rückmeldung.

OK, I fixed various errors here:
changeset/63533472
I think you probably forgot to download existing data before adding new. This resulted in duplicated or overlapping ways. Hope I did not introduce new errors with my changes...

Hmm, are you sure that normal traffic like cars can use this way? In ESRI I see some marks which indicate that pedestrian use this way but I see no normal infrastructure to cross a rail. Besides that the connecting nodes should be either railway=crossing or level_crossing, depending on the road type.

Thanks and happy mapping!

Moin! Mir sind hier ein paar building:demolished=residential aufgefallen. Normalerweise verwendet man z.B. razed:building=residential
Der "Lifecycle Prefix" ist halt ein Prefix, kein Suffix ;-)
osm.wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix
Bei den Straßen ist highway=demolished auch unklar, könnte auch sowas wie "voller Schlaglöcher" bedeuten.

Hi! You changed / added some ways to highway=demolished here. It is a good idea to keep those ways because Mapbox still shows them, but I think this tag is a bit unclear, it might be missunderstood as "bad surface". I've changed them to razed:highway=* here:
changeset/63579566
See osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Moin!
Mir sind ein paar Wege mit dem unüblichen tag highway=demolished aufgefallen, z.B, hier:
way/224209238
Ist etwas unklar, könnte auch als "voller Schlaglöcher" oder so verstanden werden. Schau mal bitte, ob Du hier einen passenden Prefix findest:
osm.wiki/DE:Lifecycle_prefix

I found a few ways with the unusual tag highway=demolished. I think this tag is unclear, it might be missunderstood as something like "bad surface". Please try to find a proper lifecycle prefix for them. See
osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

There is also a highway=demolished next to it. I think this tag is unclear, it might be missunderstood as something like "bad surface". Please try to find a proper lifecycle prefix for this and other roads with this tag created / modifed by you.

Hi!
If I got that right Bing is quite up to date here and it shows some roads and many new buildings in this area. I don't think this road is in status construction, rather razed:highway=residential.

Hi MikeN!
I found a few ways with the unusual tag highway=demolished. This may also mean something like "bad surface" . Please use one of the lifecycle prefixes instead so that the status is clearer.
See osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix