Why did you delete this correct relation?

Hello, are you sure it was changed to N° 141?
https://www.giornaledibrescia.it/garda/un-percorso-mozzafiato-sul-garda-riapre-il-sentiero-201-1.3243890

Hello constante.
As I explained you here
changeset/56313051
that your relations are done in a wrong way, I highly recommend to stop your activities. Please don't create new hiking-relations.
Thank you, ciclista

Dear osm_fede, please can you explain what the name "cruising" at a path means?
Nodes with just a name-tag are not useful, seems you just want your "sex-spots" turning up in a map.
Thats not a correct way.
I don't think "FKK Beach Rocca" is an official name.
The only proper tag for sexual activities I know is for a brothel, as long as its official. If your intension is to create a map for sexual activities best way should be to make your own map with an overlay.
But definitely no proper information for the OSM data base.
Please remove these nodes and invalid names. Thank you.
Best regards, ciclista

Dear constante, I really appreciate your local knowledge of hiking-routes. But the way you try to create relations is not right. A hiking relation is a collection of several parts of ways which are all members of the route. Its doesn't work just to draw a new line over existing ways.
Btw., a relation for route 801 already exists. But hiking routes are not shown on all maps. There are special maps, for example
https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=13!45.5643!10.5323
Sorry to tell you, but your edits to create hiking-relations caused a bit of a disaster in the area.
Please inform yourself how to create relations before you go on mapping. Seems a bit confusing at the start, but I'm sure you will be an expert soon.
Best regards, ciclista

Cancelled my revert again, was a misunderstanding, sorry

I reverted this changeset due to a massive amount of mistakes, especially overlapping ways (hiking routes drawn over existing ways) and abuse of the name tag, etc
changeset/56334244

I've reverted this changeset cause its definitely wrong.