Hello,
OK, thanks for writing back.
I’ve been thinking about this again: I have made a small change to the map, that is undeleting the area (it’s useful to have it on the map anyway, because there is a park, whatever its name) and I used the "alternate name" tag for the moment. I have also added some benches and everything I saw there.

Hello,
Thanks for bringing more stuff to the map. Just two things:
1) Please make sure that the map you have been using has explicit permission for re-use. Otherwise, the OSM project could be in trouble if people are uploading copyrighted material. (If you see "all rights reserved" or no indication about re-use at all, then you cannot use it.)
2) Do not invent your own naming conventions. If an object has a name, the separator in the name tag is " - ", not " / ", and we do not mix names like "Maisons Schampaert-huizen" here. Do not worry too much about this changeset, I have tried to clean everything I found.
Have a nice day.

Hello,
The media have announced Schaerbeek’s local council *intention* to name this square after singer Maurane.
I surveyed this square and there is still no trace of this being its official name: no street sign, not a single indication about her.
It is likely that, just like any name change for a street, it takes several weeks before the announcement and the real change, yet you typed start_date=2018-05-08.
OSM is built on the concept of verifiability (osm.wiki/Verifiability) and we usually wait and survey places, because newspapers articles or the official website of the municipality are only words.
I couldn’t find any trace of a ceremony or an official notice for this name change. Perhaps you have more information about this, or pointers to documents confirming that the name change has really occurred.
Thanks in advance.

Hallo,
"operator=Stad Brussel"???
Dit is op Anderlecht → ofwel beheerd door het Brussels Gewest of door de gemeente.

Hello,
I am afraid I will have to undo some of your changes here. There are nodes with "public_transport=stop_position" here which are the start or the end of bus route relations, and that explains why the way had to split.

Hello,
Good idea to add the entrances of the emergency wards to the map, but there were problems with bad tagging. You have used "amenity=hospital" for those points, this is akin to adding new hospitals to the map and it breaks queries.
I have fixed this.

Hello,
Technically you are right, but normally we are supposed to observe the official spelling: both UrBIS street directory and street signs agree to call it "Michel Angelolaan", even though it should normally be written as one word.
I have reverted the change but added the corrected version under alt_name tags (for Nominatim and other uses).

Hello,
I am not sure this should be tagged as a charging station for vehicles: it is not open to everyone, the charging poles are strictly reserved to ZenCar vehicles.
Moreover, the link refers to a charging station located on Leuvenseweg, this is not here.
I suggest we replace this node with this: amenity=car_sharing+name=Gudule+operator="Zen Car"+capacity=2.

Hello,
You have been adding lots of data about speed limits, and you have added "maxspeed:type=sign" on many streets with a speed limit of 50 km/h.
I think this is incorrect. To my knowledge there aren’t any *sign* asking for 50 km/h in those streets, the limit is only derived from the default rule with no sign.
Correct tagging is source:maxspeed=BE:urban.
Probably this is because you use StreetComplete. It is a great tool but use it wisely. (If I recall properly, instead of typing "50" you can also select "There is no sign".)
Feel free to write back if you need some help or advice.

Hello,
When you find streets with the default 50 km/h rule, please do NOT type "50" in StreetComplete → use the "There is no sign" option instead.
This is because StreetComplete also populates the OSM database with information whether the speed regime comes from the default rule or from a road sign on the street itself.

Hello,
Ordinary public transport shelters use amenity=shelter+shelter_type=public_transport.
Sure, a shelter has a roof but building=roof is something we use for other structures. I have reverted the original tags.

Some footpaths (e.g. ways 522560908 or 522560907) appear to have been gone for several years, at least before the major works started. I will try to draw the current situation according to elements that are visible nowadays.

Est-ce que ce périmètre est basé sur une définition officielle ? En d’autres mots, est-ce qu’il y a une définition _unique_ de ce qu’est ce « Grand Bruxelles » ? C’est important si quelqu’un veut utiliser nos données pour faire des queries sur un territoire.

Hello,
Your changes are puzzling me.
Key:access is the recommended way to mention when a street is accessible to some vehicles and not others. For instance, if a street is reserved for buses with C3 signs, like Cardinal Mercier or Putterie, we set "access=no" + "bus=yes".
If one simply removes the access key, as you did, then routing engines will consider the street to be open to all vehicles and get silly suggestions.
I guess from your username that you may be involved in mapping for emergency vehicles; perhaps that was your intention in removing the access tags on countless streets.
Could you please explain what you wanted to do and if we could help SIAMU in a better way than by simply erasing relevant data?
Thanks.

The relations you have created are duplicates of existing relations.

Schuman (7704354) is a duplicate of existing relation/6981109.
Arts-Loi - Kunst-Wet (7704353) is a duplicate of existing relation/6974130.

Did you want to do anything special with those new relations? Otherwise, I think we should delete them.

Hello,
Why did you remove turnaround relations?
We need those because we import OSM data into systems aimed at monitoring subway traffic, and those relations are necessary because trains do not fly from one relation to the other. We normally tag those relations with access=no, so that data consumers will not advertize them to users.

I am afraid there is a little bit of an issue with this changeset. Several nodes for bus stops have been shifted eastwards by 27 meters; it looks like too many nodes were selected when you moved something.
I have started checking the nodes shared with STIB/MIVB routes inside Brussels and reverting them to their original location, but perhaps you should have a look on other stops as well.
Have a nice day.

If that’s a real problem for some users, perhaps it might be worth keeping it. But the question is: do you know what is that third-party app? This will help me to investigate how we can help without breaking things.
Thanks.

Hello,
I have noticed you added level=0 to those two tram stops.
I wonder about the intended purpose: level=0 is normally assumed for every object on OSM that is not tagged otherwise. And tram stops belonging to different routes can be uniquely identified either through route relations or through the route_ref tag.
Could you please tell me whether you need the level tag specifically? (For instance if you run some scripts that require it to be set.) Otherwise I would suggest to delete it.
Have a nice day.

(erratum: "I’ll try _to_ include it")