@Samuele Battarra - are you saying that you'd like me to revert some of the changes in changeset/137016320 ? If so, you might need to be specific which because some of that looks OK - https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/280982186 .

Thanks!

Ahem - you seem to have missed way/1171250526 by the same user :)
(probably all of their changes can be reverted, to be honest)

The node added here was one of a whole series of notes, accounts, and some edits that have exactly the same data format and content, apart from the location.

If you're happy that this one is genuine (maybe you've surveyed it in person, or have access to Mapillary etc. for this location) , please do undelete this node.

node/10316517329/history just looked like spam to me.

... and another question - is there definitely a supply of water at node/3196447108/history ? I have a feeling it might just be what it was previously tagged as, a stone trough.

Thanks for trying to tidy this up, but the Wolds Way starts in Yorkshire, not Lincolnshire: relation/13222021#map=13/53.7060/-0.4605 . See https://www.nationaltrail.co.uk/en_GB/trails/yorkshire-wolds-way/route/ . E2 doesn't exist on the ground in the UK so is unverifiable, but there is presumably a bit of it that isn't part of any National Trail between Barton and Hessle. Similarly there's apparently a short bit of the Wolds Way that isn't part of E2 at the south end, and possibly also at the north end (though I'm not exactly sure where the Wolds Way ends there's a large acorn, so it should be verifiable.
Note that relation/13222021 is neither the "Worlds Way" (as you have spelt it) nor the "Wolds Way". relation/78028 is the Wolds Way.

Thanks!

Based on the website descriptions I've gone with building=care_home for Mayfields and building=apartments for The Hawthorns. I've left the houses to the northwest as they were.
I've also added an amenity tag to the care home and retirement home (though some combination of "social_facility" tags would have worked just as well).

Oops, see changeset/136718271 for a better description.

There's a bit of use of "farm_auxiliary" as a key rather than as a tag: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/farm_auxiliary#overview

I know that farmers in at least one country (not the UK) were unhappy at the overly specific tagging of sheds and barns (they were worried that thieves could identify were machinery was stored). However, I doubt that that's an issue with mushrooms!

Just to reiterate what I said before at osm.org/user_blocks/7138 :

There’s clearly a difference of opinion over how https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/1086252957 should be tagged. The previous discussion was at changeset/136128234 and changeset/135290950 . If anyone thinks that what is there is factually wrong then please talk to people about it rather than just “change things back to match your point of view”.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb is probably the best place to do that with the wider GB community.

Здравствуйте avinet_ua,

Как вы знаете, DWG вернул некоторые из ваших механических правок в OSM после многочисленных жалоб.

Мы также получили жалобу на node/3102875794/history. Как видно из https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/3102875794 вы удалили предыдущее (русское) имя и добавили украинское.
Учитывая историю Крыма, я ожидаю, что узел 3102875794 на самом деле будет иметь имена на крымскотатарском языке (возможно, в нескольких орфографиях), русском и (с 1954 года) украинском языке. Если у места есть название на определенном языке, добавьте его как «имя:язык=независимо». Сам тег «имя» должен определяться людьми, живущими в этом районе. Подробнее см. https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf.
С наилучшими пожеланиями,
Энди Таунсенд, от имени Рабочей группы по данным OSM

Привіт avinet_ua,

Як ви знаєте, DWG повертає деякі з ваших механічних змін до OSM після численних скарг.

Ми також отримали скаргу щодо node/3102875794/history. Як видно з https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/3102875794 ви видалили попередню (російську) назву та додали українську.
Враховуючи історію Криму, я б очікував, що вузол 3102875794 насправді матиме назви кримськотатарською (можливо, кількома орфографіями), російською та (з 1954 року) українською. Якщо місце має назву певною мовою, будь ласка, додайте її як "name:language=whatever". Тег «ім’я» повинен бути визначений людьми, які живуть у місцевості. Дивіться https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf для отримання додаткової інформації.
З найкращими побажаннями,
Енді Таунсенд, від імені робочої групи даних OSM

Hello avinet_ua,

As you'll be aware the DWG has been reverting some of your mechanical edits to OSM after numerous complaints.

We also got a complaint about node/3102875794/history . As you can see from https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/3102875794 you deleted the previous (Russian) name and added a Ukrainian one.
Given the history of Crimea I'd expect that node/3102875794 would actually have names in Crimean Tatar (possibly several orthographies), Russian, and (since 1954) Ukrainian. If a place has a name in a certain language please do add it as "name:language=whatever". The "name" tag itself should be decided by the people living in the local area. See https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf for more details.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

This is currently being reverted in a series of changesets such as changeset/136684355 with description "Following a report to the DWG, reverting a series of substation mechanical edits. See also osm.org/user_blocks/7146"

@jmarchon There is no such thing as a "standard tag" - only frequently used ones. Please read osm.wiki/Any_tags_you_like . In particular, changing a detailed tag to a less descriptive one without preserving that detail devalues the hard work of actual mappers and devalues the data in OSM.
If a data consumer wants to process "mushroom)farm" as "farm_auxiliary" it is trivial to do that when they process OSM data.
Fixing an obvious misspelling (perhaps "farm_auxiiary") to an expected value would make perfect sense, but that is not what you have done here.

Hello,
You've changed "building=residential_home" on way/326141636 and some others here, but it doesn't mean what you think it does - it's nothing like the examples at building=residential?uselang=en-GB .
The website of the place itself appears to be https://www.mha.org.uk/care-homes/dementia-care/mayfields/ - that should give you an idea of what it is.
In this case better tagging would certainly include an amenity and.or healthcare value. The website pictures suggest "fairly typical for this sort of place", so a taginfo search would help find suitable candidates.
The others, such as way/286059284/history , would need further investigation, and possibly a survey. I certainly would not assume that "building=residential" was necessarily correct
Best Regards,
Andy

Well, that took a while :)

It'd be great if some of the excellent points above were discussed a but more widely. Perhaps https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/tagging/71 might be a suitable place?

Also, I'm sure that there's some "low hanging fruit" among the reverted data that "obviously isn't any sort of reservoir". I've done a couple of the more obvious ones from earlier in the series of series of reverts, but the 394 nodes (including at least one mobile phone shop!_ on changeset/136672560 are surely worth a look.
Best Regards,
Andy

PS: Other reverts of changes by this user are still ongoing (currently changeset/136671982 - there will likely be a couple more in that series too), as we have had what might be a record number of separate individual complaints about their edits.

"... both to this POI".