Привіт avinet_ua,
Ви повинні використовувати змістовні коментарі до набору змін. "виправити" недостатньо добре. Перегляньте osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments.
З найкращими побажаннями,
Енді Таунсенд, від імені робочої групи даних OSM

Hello avinet_ua,
You must use meaningful changeset comments. "fix" is not good enough. See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments .
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Revert started in changeset/136598791 . It may take some time.

See osm.org/user_blocks/7146

Great! Now we know (without having to do a web search) that GHSL is a web map layer, and (after a web search) it's actually Europe's Copernicus "Global Human Settlement Layer". We still don't know the actual URL that you used since https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/ is just a website, not a map.

> Could you provide a list of allowed abbreviations for changeset description?
No. You have 255 characters in a changeset comment - please use those to explain your changes.
"https://ghsl.jrc.ec.europa.eu/" is just a website. What does it have to do with your changes here?

Just checking - Are you sure this is still open?

Hello yodooli,
I hope you don't mind me asking about an edit from 10 years ago. On this changeset you added a "source=Google" tag on node/4365719820 here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here - it would cause real problems for the project if we were found to be using Google Maps as a source.
If this is somewhere that you are familiar with, then "source=local_knowledge" would be perfectly OK.

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

Bonjour ChrisCatta,

J'espère que cela ne vous dérange pas que je vous pose des questions sur une modification d'il y a quelques années. Sur cet ensemble de modifications, vous avez ajouté une balise "source=Google" sur Mahatsinjo et Ankilimiangy ici. Nous ne pouvons pas réellement l'utiliser comme source dans OSM car la licence de Google ne permet pas de l'utiliser ici - cela causerait de réels problèmes pour le projet s'il s'avérait que nous utilisions Google Maps comme source.
Si c'est un endroit que vous connaissez bien, alors "source=local_knowledge" serait parfaitement OK.

Cordialement,
Andy Townsend, au nom du groupe de travail sur les données d'OSM.

Hello ChrisCatta,

I hope you don't mind me asking about an edit from a few years ago. On this changeset you added a "source=Google" tag on Mahatsinjo and Ankilimiangy here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here - it would cause real problems for the project if we were found to be using Google Maps as a source.
If this is somewhere that you are familiar with, then "source=local_knowledge" would be perfectly OK.

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

Hola jocarvajal,
Espero que no te moleste que pregunte sobre una edición de hace unos años. En este conjunto de cambios, agregó una etiqueta "source=Google" en node/6507141375 aquí. En realidad, no podemos usar eso como fuente en OSM porque la licencia de Google no permite que se use aquí; causaría problemas reales para el proyecto si se descubriera que estamos usando Google Maps como fuente.
Si está en algún lugar con el que está familiarizado, entonces "source=local_knowledge" estaría perfectamente bien.

Atentamente
Andy Townsend, en representación del Grupo de Trabajo de Datos de OSM

Hello jocarvajal,
I hope you don't mind me asking about an edit from a fews years ago. On this changeset you added a "source=Google" tag on node/6507141375 here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here - it would cause real problems for the project if we were found to be using Google Maps as a source.
If this is somewhere that you are familiar with, then "source=local_knowledge" would be perfectly OK.

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

As unfortunately is normal with "#MapWithAI" road tracing, what you've traced here is massively offset from reality. Just compare it with OS OpenData Local and the available imagery and you can see the issue. I've nudged it closer to reality.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
You've added "foot=permissive" to the relation here, which doesn't make a lot of sense (though it might make sense for individual pieces) - I'll remove it.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
Has the White Horse Trail also been completely moved to the eastern route? Currently it's on a bit f both.
Best Regards,
Andy

My guess of way/996601874 for the route of the CW and the CHT is based on what had been previously mapped to the west.

I didn't reply to https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2023-April/088196.html because it just made no sense - for example you said there "this batch is supposed to be listing 1:1 replacements" when you went on to change lots of individual values to "shop=yes". That's either muddled thinking, a mistake or somewhat disingenuous. I gave you the benefit of the doubt and assumed your post was just in error, and you hadn't meant to say "I am changing everything to shop=yes" because we had specifically discussed exactly that case previously AND in that example your had reverted your erroneous changes.

> I am not fan of NSI style blind replacements based on name match and I am not planning to do them
I'm glad to hear that, but unfortunately what you are doing is even worse! You aren't even thinking about what the correct value for an object is. What you are doing is akin to setting everything to "highway=road" because you can't be bothered to survey or look at imagery.

> Also, do you still think that it was an undocumented bot edit?

Yes, in the sense that you wrote some documentation saying what you were going to do and then did something else instead. To be honest, I have re-read osm.wiki/Mechanical_Edits/Mateusz_Konieczny_-_bot_account/fixing_malformed_shop_tags and I still struggle to understand exactly what you are trying to say. I presume that "Please write at bot approval thread." means "please reply on the mailing list" to prevent part of this change from occurring" I did that and you ignored the request. By that definition it is surely an undocumented mechanical edit.

To be clear, what I'm suggesting is that if you _really_ care about having correct values in OSM then a tiny bit of research will often yield correct values. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1v53 is the set of your recent changes over a widish area. Many of the items that that finds can be easily found: node/441917983/history is clearly https://www.the-stone-shop.com/ for example, and of the in-use tags at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/shop#overview perhaps https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=gemstones is the best bet.
node/658618239/history is pretty obviously https://www.facebook.com/raysdiscountstores/ , and looks like a https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/shop=variety_store to me.
Changing these to shop=yes means that they get lost in https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1v54 , which means that they will just get ignored, like the other 180k examples.