this is clearly a bad edit, and while I am not sure if it was performed on purpose (vandalism) or because of ignorance (not reading the hints and docu, doing some tests and rather than discarding the changes uploading them), I will revert it instantly.

I think there is a misconception, don't be offended, you are just beginning to map and it is clear that osm has quite a steep learning curve. The comment you added is for the changeset, that is the entirety of all edits which you uploaded in this edit (and which happens to deal, in your case, with the route 651, but reading the comment it wasn't even clear to me that you were referring to a hiking route). Anyway, don't mind, it is not so super important, it would simply have been better if you had written something like "route 651", but it's not worth discussing too much;-)
Have fun mapping!

See also here for reference: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Yes, I was not questioning the number, my suggestion was to add a comment like "created hiking route 651 from survey" or "modified hiking route 651 because it was recently changed", or "improved hiking route 651 by adding trail blazes" or something similar. Just the number requires other mappers to analyze your edit in order to understand what the number refers to.

this is an automated edit and should have been discussed beforehand. Clearly the tag oneway=yes is not wrong on ways that are oneway. The tool "Osmose" should rather be fixed instead of performing huge scale automated edits.

please add a meaningful changeset comment. "651" is not helpful to anyone else besides maybe yourself.

please, use a changeset comment that describes what you have done, and why. "note" does not make sense

In the name tag there should go only names. If a path has no name, simply leave the name void, or ad a tag like "note:it=nome ancora definito". You can also add the tag noname=yes to confirm that the path really has no name (useful for automatic tools).

it's good to enter this kind of information, but there are no tags that tell on a semantic level what this is (e.g. information=trail_blaze?)

non ha senso questo oggetto, suggerisco di andare su openstreetmap.org o wiki.openstreetmap.org per capire di cosa si tratta.

benvenuto in OpenStreetMap. Suggerisco di aggiungere un tag per descrivere a livello strutturato di cosa si tratta (probabilmente office=<qualcosa>).

sarebbe meglio aprire una nota invece di comunicare via "changeset comment", perché quest'ultimi si legge soltanto chi guarda l'edit. Comunque, benvenuto in OpenStreetMap!

there are quite some problems with this (newbie / first edit): the housenumber is likely not valid for the whole polygon, as is the name and the name has also capitalization problems. The building:levels tag cannot have different values, you have to split the building into different building:parts in this case.

sorry, I take the post office back, it was indeed not at this position, so this was correct.

I have reverted this changeset because it has deleted a lot of information without adding any significant benefit, e.g. removed the post office, removed the details of 2 building outlines and a fence in Via Zaniberti, removed the details of Da Baffo, moved some bus stops to the middle of the road thus removing the information of the direction, ...
Although this is a lot of damage, I will asume good faith (new mapper) and an unsuitable editor (iD), unsuitable for a detail rich mapping like it was already present in this area.

checking this again, I'm not convinced of vandalism any more, it's likely just a bit careless editing by a newbie, probably in good faith. Another editor (Germana Massullo) had traced in sometimes questionable ways (geometries and tags often not precise) and this edit by the Ace had removed those and a bit more then necessary.

the Todis was already present (this edit created a duplicate), the Tuodì is not inside the building and the operating company of the Tuodì is not "Tuodi" (no need to repeat the name tag btw). My suggestion for the Tuodì is to add the name also as brand (as soon as the name gets changed into the real name of this branch).
If you know the name of the newpaper office, it would be really helpful.

reverted just now due to a problem in the reverter plugin.

this changeset is clearly vandalism. Deleting of valid stuff is not tolerable, even if you recreated the things later, it is still violating object history. I'm going to revert this changeset.

looks like vandalism