Do pedestrians have to jump over it, or can they just walk around it?

Hallo,
Auf node/9101645120 haben Sie "locker=luggage" (was sinnvoll ist) in "locked=luggage" geändert (was nicht der Fall ist).
Was ist das eigentlich?
Mit freundlichen Grüßen,
Andy

Hello,
On node/9101645120 you've changed "locker=luggage" (which makes sense) to "locked=luggage" (which doesn't).
What actually is this?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
node/418063286
is both "foot=yes" and "locked=Yes", which seems a bit contradictory?
Best Regards,
Andy

مرحبا بنيف ،
هل يمكن أن تشرح بمزيد من التفصيل ما هي المشكلة في الواقع؟
مع أطيب التحيات.
آندي تاونسند (من مجموعة عمل البيانات في OSM)

Hello bennaif,
Could you explain in a bit more detail what the problem actually is?
Best Regards.
Andy Townsend (from OSM's Data Working Group)

Hello,
A quick question about way/30661401/history in here - is it really called "Gated Road" (as opposed just being a gated road)? It's ages since I've walked through here (pre OSM, actually) so my memory is no use - but a name of "Gated Road" sounds unusual.

Hello,
What is way/985025915 ?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello ConsPh

A gate on a main road node/9696310368 really don't make a lot of sense.

Please don't add things that don't exist to OSM.

Best Regards,

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

For the avoidance of doubt, your most recent block osm.org/user_blocks/5916 was not because of something that some other mapper said but something that you yourself had said.

Previously (e.g. osm.org/user_blocks/5866 ) we had had reports that you were changing tagging to reflect your point of view; and I replied above that "I can see your point of view, and I can also see the point of view of those who say that you're wrong" I also said "Unlike your profile picture, not everything in OSM is black and white - sometimes we need to discuss things with other people and come to a compromise".

What absolutely won't happen here is that the DWG will choose which of two sides is "correct"; both arguments have merit. What we're asking you to do is to take other views on board when you edit in areas where other people are editing too.

See my comment above (based on your photo evidence) "In summary - I can see your point of view, and I can also see the point of view of those who say that you're wrong".

Ground control, political results and census data have been used to justify the various names used here.

The Iraqi national army has control on the ground: node/248436981

The political status is mixed: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Iraqi_parliamentary_election#Kirkuk_Governorate . Someone defending the Arab name here previously claimed that the pro-Kurdish party vote overestimates the population due to perceived Iraqi government corruption.

There has been no recent census. One is planned to begin in November 2022: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Iraq

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

Zoom in and turn the data layer on and you'll see that they have all gone!

The user that this was a revert of was trying to get around a block discussed in more detail at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/country-based-authorizations/838/20 .

Despite the bounding box, all the objects here were in Ukraine.
An occasional problem with the revert scripts is that if there has been lots of editing, sometimes nodes get moved to 0,0. These were deleted in changeset/120641758 and the remaining ways tidied up in changeset/120641882 .

Hello,
Following on from this change I've amended the cost path relation so it now routes along here and not along the parallel road as well: relation/77964#map=18/51.69844/-4.93649 . Let me know if that's a problem, and I'll fix it.
Best Regards,
Andy

Is node/9711048689 really a building? note/3163283 just looks like a spam note for a club night

Thanks - there has been similar feedback about other edits too.
Revert in progress.

Obviously the names aren't verifiable from aerial imagery - or did you survey these

@Eric No worries - still great to have confirmation.