You have combined the remaining fragments of the city walls "to form one long one", but they aren't combined, these are all fragments which have been disconnected by cutting through with roads. I am sorry that I have discovered this so late, I will revert this changeset now, thereby restoring 8 mature ways with their history.

Barrier=sally_port for porta Flaminia seems completely off, you can walk through the city gate any time, it is no barrier at all.

You have also declared the Arco degli Argentari as a city gate which is equally wrong (or I am interested in learning about the reasoning, but in any case, a city gate requires a city wall in the first place, no?)

You have added historic=city_gate to the Arco di Giano, which seems completely off. Can you explain which are your sources?
Cheers,
Martin

Ciao iLaw,

in questo changeset hai aggiunto "place=square" ad un centro di una rotatoria. Non ha senso il tag "place=square" quando non vi è abbinato un nome (name)=*, perché questo tag viene utilizzato per indicare una piazza, un piazzale, un largo, e simili.
Quando viene disegnato come area dovrebbe comprendere tutta la piazza (normalmente fino ai confini delle proprietà confinanti, condomini, ecc.), non solo il centro di una rotatoria.

Spero di esser stato utile e di aver fatto cosa gradita,
Ciao,
Martin

The other modifications are retagging from leisure=garden to park, this is probably rooted in a misunderstanding of the meaning of the word "garden" in the context of OpenStreetMap, still, not useful.

Hai messo un parco sopra un parco, senza ulteriori attributi come "nome" ecc., quindi purtroppo ho dovuto rimuovere il duplicato grezzo.
Ti chiederei gentilmente prima di caricare modifiche di verificarne il senso, avere lo stesso identico oggetto (Parco) mappato due volte per noi è un errore.

Grazie,
Martin

in this changeset the Obelisco Matteiano was relocated from its position to a place where it is not.
Probably no intentional vandalism because review was requested and user has very few edits
node/260770350/history#map=19/41.88577/12.50161

And the French Consulate in NYC seems to have been a hotel before: way/266894764

Another question, I also saw that you tagged Haus Sommer at Pariser Platz in Berlin as "apartments". This seems rather strange to me, as "it" once was a bank, then the building got destroyed and after the reunification it was rebuilt, and the reconstruction is still housing a bank. Can you explain why you tagged it as apartments?

way/38360826

Cheers,
Martin

Hello,
I have just noticed that you added building=apartments to the Biblioteca della Pontificia Università della Santa Croce in Rome.
way/525109737/history

Do you recall how you came to this conclusion?

Cheers,
Martin

Tra altro ne abbiamo già parlato tre anni fa: changeset/50453873

Salve, ho notato che hai cambiato il percorso way/488627565 da footway in pedestrian. Da anni noto che ci sono mappatori a Venezia che eliminano qualsiasi differenziazzione dei percorsi, taggando tutto come pedestrian. Vi chiedo di non farlo, questo percorso come tanti altri non sono strade pedonali, sono percorsi stretti pedonali. In questo caso estremo, non si passa neanche o forse appena con un passeggino, pedestrian non è giusto per questo tipo di percorso.

Ciao,
Martin

Ciao Michele, ho notato che in questo changeset è stato cambiato crossing=traffic_signals in crossing=marked qui: node/304150466. Penso sia una riduzione dell'informazione, perché "marked" può essere qualsiasi segno. Suggerisco di utilizzare "crossing=zebra" e "crossing=traffic_signals" per i principali tipi.

Un saluto,
Martin

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! I noticed you have marked the whole of Villa Ada as building :)
No worries, I have already fixed it, but please be careful when uploading and check the modifications that are shown for something unusual before confirming.
Thank you,
Cheers Martin

Hi, I saw that you removed area=yes from this way: way/27591708/history

You should not remove area=yes tags when it isn’t clear from other tags that a closed way is meant to represent an area.
Thank you.

Understood. I would not see the name without a typological tag as “senseless”, but rather as incomplete and waiting for someone to amend it. As long as it isn’t wrong we should keep information, even if it is still incomplete or will be filtered out by most current data consumers because it presents the information in a way that is hard to consume or make sense of

Hi, I have just noted that you removed the courtyard name with the comment "correct wikipedia notation"
way/27591708/

Hi, I just saw you added wheelchair=no to the main basilica of Rome, San Giovanni in Laterano. I have not been there recently, but I cannot believe that this is true. While not all entrances may be accessible due to stairs, there are 2 main entrances, and I believe at least one is accessible.
Another issue: you added wheelchair=no to a way which has no other tags, but is part of a multipolygon, maybe you wanted to add it to something differently?

Hi, I just saw you added leisure=garden for a completely paved inner court of an administrative building (Chiostro di San Giovanni in Laterano). I am reverting this to highway=pedestrian area=yes.