Hi interdite,
in this CS you intentionally deleted a large farmland landuse relation, without any refinements or caring for the relation members. You caused extra work for other mappers to restore it.

@Abruzzzo - could you explain your insult against smaprs ?

Same question as in changeset/80386313,
why did you mechanically remove the tags "man_made=works" from objects also tagged building=industrial?

Hi Abruzzzo, could you please explain why you mechanically removed 1677 tags "man_made=works" from objects also tagged building=industrial?
Did you check each of them that no "works" is being performed there?
Has the mechanical edit been discussed somewhere?
Could you see that from Bing which you gave as a source?

Hi Abruzzzo,
could you please explain why you deleted a large landuse relations, leaving the member ways orphaned?

Refining landuse would have been good, blunt deletion is vandalism.

As other editors have meanwhile removed some of the untagged ways, restoring the relation is complicated.

Please refrain from removing the more modern tagging of "natural=water + water=reservoir". Repaired.

reverted in changeset: 81428471 where the comment is:
SE: revert changeset/81135174 which deleted 9 corine landuse relations, leaving their ways orphaned, and without any replacement/refinement

Dear pozilei,
could you please explain why, as your second edit as a new user, you delete 9 large landuse relations, leaving the outer ways orphaned?

Contrary to your comment, you have not replaced anything. Refining landuse would have been good, blunt deletion is vandalism.

Hi Abruzzzo,
where did you get the name "Fuelco" from in your South Africa mapping? It is not visible in Bing. Why do you think it is a different company than the adjacent landuse? What does fixme=Kubota works mean in 655100069? What is the separation between 655100069 and 655100070?

Why did you delete building 403016017, which is visible in all available imagery? (restored #81427161)

Hi Abruzzo,
where did you get the information from that the "Cummins Generator Technologies" indeed fills the whole landuse you created?
Why did you delete the office node (restored) that delivered the name?

Deleted roads have been restored, and subsequently tiger-reviewed, in #81421677 #81421862 #81424090.
All roads did exist! They just needed slight positional / geometric refinements, typical for old tiger imports.

Deleted roads have been restored, and subsequently tiger-reviewed, in #81424690 #81425796 #81425982.

All roads did exist! They just needed slight positional / geometric refinements, typical for old tiger imports.

Thanks @sorcrosc for the restoration.

I'm trying to understand this changeset here - when such a relation is deleted in JOSM, it would normally warn me about all the untagged outer ways? None of them was edited, and no attempt was made to refine the deleted farmland?

In this case, Klaus had transferred the tags incl the name from node/5777157026/history which was subsequently deleted.
In such a case, I usually write in my CS comment "node->campus" or similar, and preserve the de-tagged node in a corner of the new outline for better editing transparency.

Thanks phidauex, you're right with the PD status. The problem here was that the map was not mentioned in the changeset's source tag and presented retrospectively in the form of a snippet, uploaded to github without attribution.
As USGS has plentiful products, specifically naming the "USGS Topo(graphic Map)" would have been helpful as well.

Schol repaired

In this CS, you have deleted the school way/668455410 and recreated a larger area instead, way/773904523. What evidence do you have, that the second building that you enclose now is part of the school?

Why did you tag the empty area way/773904524 as industrial, and why did you copy the name of the adjacent plot, although there is a clear boundary between them, and a separate entrance?
Why do you think landuse=industrial is better for the loaf bakery way/659379432 than the previous man_made=works?
Same for way/659379433 Double M Yard, do you even know what they are producing?

In this CS you have deleted 3 buildings because they are "skewed", i.e. not parallel? This is no reason to delete them!

They are still visible in the imagery you named, as well as in Maxar.
One of them indeed has a trapezoid shape in reality!

A 4th building you have deleted just to recreate it in different shape. Please preserve the object history.

Only way/772273699 has been removed in reality (Maxar, Esri; still visible in Bing/Mapbox).

Repaired.

In case of buildings razed in reality it is helpful to keep that status in OSM for a while, as in razed:building=yes, and not delete them immediately.

reverted in #81247616 with the reason:
US: revert changeset/81238459, too many mistakes, undeclared sources, tagging regression