Hello mirikaaa,
Please dont just use "fix" or "fix tag" as a changeset comment. Please explain what you changed and why, and what source you used.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
You've deleted relation/6058814/history - was it really broken https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1bdF ? What was wrong with it?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
If you draw the roads as lines (which is what we do in OSM) then in sort-of is a 150 degree turn, isn't it? In reality Clementhorpe outside the Swan is very wide - you can go straight across from Price's Lane, and the left turn out of Clementhorpe is actually about 90 degrees. Adding an area:highway area for the end of Clementhorpe would make it a little bit clearer, but router instructions ("turn right on Bishopgate Street and then left on Clementhorpe") would still be misleading.
My apologies to NikitaSalt- both Yorvik Prestigitator and I are local to here - and we can't both agree on how best to represent this!

Hello sbelemey,
Here you've said "removed broken restriction on Boulevard Charles de Gaulle. According to Bing. #mbx_france_roads" but haven't explained what the problem is or why you think that there is no "no u turn" restriction here. Please do explain.
Best Regards,
Andy

For the benefit of anyone else reading this, the author of this changeset has replied to this comment and osm.org/user_blocks/5333 by OSM private message.

... and thanks for adding the "unclassified_highway" designation - it shows up now at https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#zoom=13&lat=50.3314&lon=-3.762 as one.

Oops - I think this might have introduced a gap in the South Devon AONB (the track was a member, the new service road was not). I've fixed that in changeset/111230183 . I also moved the junction between the two unclassifieds to the end of the service road.
Best Regards,
Andy

For info, I've undeleted node/308730709 as requested by https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/81724/delete-changeset-111138937 .

Hello Joshua Paul,
You've added "residential=scooter" to way/509842336 , but I'm not sure what that means?
Best Regards,
Andy

Wat was the source of "hgv=discouraged" on way/4099866 ?

What was the source of the maxheight and maxlength tags here?

What was the source of the maxheight on way/372940496 ?

Related to the above, I asked on IRC for examples of documentation in the OSM wiki on this sort of thing and someone suggested osm.wiki/Lanes#Motorway_with_lanes_and_destinations and turn=* , which should help explain why "where the carriageways split" is important.
- Andy

If the name in real like doesn't include "privé" then it doesn't belong in OSM either...

您好 maimai1130w，欢迎来到 OpenStreetMap！

请不要在此处添加测试数据 - 如果您想这样做，请使用测试服务器 - 有关更多详细信息，请参阅 osm.wiki/Sandbox_for_editing。

此致，

Andy Townsend，代表 OSM 的数据工作组。

Hello maimai1130w and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Please don't add test data here - if you'd like to do that please use the test server - see osm.wiki/Sandbox_for_editing for more details.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Juste pour info - le DWG avait un rapport selon lequel les noms utilisés ici (qui incluaient "privé") n'étaient pas exacts. J'ai eu une longue discussion par e-mail avec @bide2 résultant en osm.org/user_blocks/5314 à propos de osm.wiki/FR:Names#Name_est_juste_le_nom , mais ils sont restés sceptiques. Si vous êtes sûr que "Bois (privé) de la Garde" est vraiment le nom ici, alors très bien - mais je ne vois pas comment cela peut provenir d'OrthoHR ?
Meilleures salutations,
Andy

Just for info - the DWG had a report that the names used here (which included "privé") weren't accurate. I had a long email discussion with @bide2 resulting in osm.org/user_blocks/5314 about osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only , but they remained unconvinced. If you're sure that "Bois (privé) de la Garde" really is the name here, then fine - but I can't see how it can have come from OrthoHR?
Best Regards,
Andy

adjacent to Tyne Tunnel - tidying up after changeset/110823595#map=4/62.07/12.06&layers=H revert.

Apologies for the " changeset revert grossness" - unfortunately the mapper concerned had copied data from Google StreetView, which means that we don't have a choice but to revert and redact that information.
Thanks for tidying this section up - I'm currently about 80% through the list of revert fails that caused the duplication that you've fixed here.
- Andy, from the Data Working Group.