GRAZIE! Sei un grande!

"Since when does every single edit someone makes need to be discussed before they make it?" - while it would be nice when you actually __remove__ what others have bothered to add, it is not strictly a requirement, I agree. When you actually go out and do several of these removals in different cities, i.e. you act systematically, and when there are open disputes on the tagging question, one should generally refrain from creating facts before the problem is solved mutually. I agree that this issue is somehow minor and on the edge because of the relatively small number of objects (around 20 if I recall correctly?).
In a system like OSM, where tags basically emerge and get approved by people using them, it is toxic to "clean up" things if it is more than just fixing a typo, and when they do not interact with the people who have put the tags.

I also agree that discussing beforehand may not always be practical (many people not responding, would slow down process and require a high level of structure and coordination from the mapper), but what could be done is sending them a short note, so that they can decide to either revert or accept the modifications, and would send you feedback.

Back to healthcare, happy you agree with
"I don't think it's as cut and dry as you think it is.", and happy you agree that amenity is more suitable than you possbily thought back then. Please also note that "healthcare" is apparently not available to people using the osm2pgsql standard style: https://github.com/openstreetmap/osm2pgsql/blob/master/default.style

the "ground" does not tell you whether amenity or healthcare is more appropriate, and whether one of them must be removed or both could be kept (why not?). Being on the ground means you know the general setting, what is customary, the local culture, language etc., requirements to really participate in a discussion with locals.

See, you write
"People remotely change and remove tags all the time. Almost every edit in OSM is exactly that. It's only an issue in this case because your making it one.

In this case, as I already told you on the Wiki, which you've seemed to ignore for whatever reason, I looked around the website and didn't feel that it was an amenity more then it is somewhere that provides healthcare."

This is exactly the issue. You have removed someone else's tag (in several instances, i.e. actively looking for it with some search engine and putting some effort into it), without any discussion, because you personally felt it "was not an amenity" - despite the tag even being documented in the wiki.

To me it is more an amenity than about "healthcare". healthcare by the dictionary is about "efforts made to maintain or restore physical, mental, or emotional well-being especially by trained and licensed professionals", while a hospice is not about maintaining or restoring well-being, it is about accepting that you have to die and about letting go.

I do not say: only map where you are on the ground, although I believe it is the best. I say do not remove tags from objects, without further discussion with the local community, in places which you do not know and where you do not know the community. Adding things from aerial imagery bears some risk (e.g. outdated imagery) but acceptable, while armchair removing and changing objects without actual on the ground knowledge is a no go.
I am not usually mapping things in the US, I have added occasionally some stuff from aerial imagery or fixed some self intersecting polygon, but I surely wouldn't remove tags to replace them with others of which I suppose they were the same. Don't know about Polar Bearing, SomeoneElse or Woodpeck, but I can confirm they are European.

ich habe den engl. Wikieintrag unter key:building repariert und dem Eintrag tag|building|fire_station angepasst. Der building tag ist immer auf Gebäude bezogen und sagt nie etwas darüber aus, wer das Gebäude aktuell nutzt. Eine ehemalige Feuerwache erhält denselben building tag wie eine in Betrieb befindliche, weil building kein tag ist, mit dem eine Feuerwache beschrieben werden kann. Dafür gibt es amenity=fire_station (auf dem gesamten Areal, alternativ und vorläufig auch einfach als Punkt (node)).

Btw: the tag has almost zero uses because you and others have removed them in the past months. By the time you removed it, there were still much more than there are now.
You are right that we could just add the tag back, but we are having this discussion here because you are a very active mapper and as I think there are some misconceptions I believe it is more effective to solve the issues at the root by raising awareness.

Adamant, I take back the "disguised", and I beg your pardon for having forgotten that we have already talked about it. Still, there clearly is an issue, you are remotely editing stuff in an area which you do not know, removing tags that locals have set, without giving a clear reason. Which part of the wiki is about removing tags that you are basing your reasoning upon? I am not aware that the wiki would justify remote mappers removing tags from objects in areas they do not know about.

zum Thema building und building:part, das ist eigentlich ganz einfach: beide tags beschreiben nur das Gebäude, nicht die Nutzung darin. Für Nutzer braucht man noch andere tags, am besten auf eigenen Objekten (z.B. nodes). Nutzer haben tags wie amenity, office, shop, craft, etc.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

Hi, I noticed you removed the amenity=hospice tag. Can you explain the reasoning?

Hi, habe gesehen dass Du mit dem großen Besen da durch gegangen bist. Wieso wurde der building:levels tags vom Audimax entfernt?

ich kenne zumindest ein prominentes Feuerwehrgebäude in Deutschland, das nicht als Feuerwache genutzt wird: das Gebäude das für die Werksfeuerwehr in Weil am Rhein auf dem Vitra Firmengelände von Zaha Hadid errichtet wurde.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vitra+fire+station+in+weil+am+rhein+germany&t=h_&ia=web

always the same scheme: your representation is "better", this update again removed a lot of detail in favor of a medium scale generalization which could be automatically constructed from the details if somebody wanted. revert.

any explanation why your representation is "better"?

another place where Città dei Palmi has deleted detailed landuse and has replaced it with a questionable polygon that errateously contains a lot of different landuse like landuse=highway and landuse=railway. Revert.

better church representation and also deleting a natural=wood for no reason?

accurate geometry of way/564140923 deleted without any mention in the comment or reasoning.