This alleged 185m peak is sited 100m from a woods given with elevation of 47m.
None of the houses visible in the aerial imagery give any indication of being built on such an incline.
Nor does the angled perspective of the aerial imagery hint at such a ground angle.

No need to be sorry, on the contrary!
I'm very overjoyed and grateful that you have confirmed this to me (and some others), as you are the first to reply out of several whom I have asked.
That said, a warm welcome from me to OpenStreetMap, pull up a bollard!
(I in no way speak on behalf of OSM)
.
Your experience is being echoed by countless others, and it has been merely a guess on my part as to what might be the cause, so it is good to know that for once in my life I've done something right.
This also helps me tailor my responses to others seeing the same sort of problem.
We welcome your continuing contributions, as we know there is still a lot missing from the map around you, and the more people who pitch in, the more complete things will become.
Thanks again, and keep mapping!

Hi,
Nothing of significance in this park has been removed; you added footpaths that were not mapped until now, but which I can see in aerial imagery.
Is it possible you are using Pokemon Go which used to use google maps until a few days ago? This seems to be a significant issue now for supposedly-missing items.
Thanks for adding the new paths to OpenStreetMap!

Speaking as a user who is not sane, if you want to waste your time on a g00gle text search for ' "Motorcycle Swimsuit" "guymon" ' (as I have done, having neither common sense nor sanity), then feel free.
Remember that then you take responsibility for the data you restore, so be triply sure of yourself. A minority-interest retail building the size of a city block straddling a ditch in a field?
I see the extent of this changeset was deliberate vandalism (geofiction) and errors (merged pulled nodes or added unneeded nodes), whether deliberate or otherwise. (iD editor in use, oh. makes it doubly hard to tell)

no it does not,
if you look closely, way/170797445 has been moved and attached to the road Woehrtstrasse at several points, which does not reflect reality
other expansion of Stadt-Garten south appears to be suspiciously close to blindly trusting the bad aerial imagery, like where a tree covers parking, possibly introducing a kink into Im Zwinger (in some changeset), not adjusting Bing for an offset or choosing an alternative.
However these look more like typical iD enthusiastic beginner errors, rather than Pokemon vandalism, based on the few changes here I've inspected more closely.

Ciao Constable,
I see our (my adopted) Kimberly troll has you doing QA and discovering the pitfalls of GNIS imported data.
My suggestion is to treat GNIS data with suspicion. There is a diary post of a month or so ago, where the inaccuracy of the data is mentioned, plus, much data is long-obsolete historical data in addition to errors in location.
Here you see something I witnessed in Nebraska, where the amenity (or four amenities there) are given the identical geo coördinates, here the ghost or abandoned town, there a place almost on the railroad tracks.
The data can probably be deleted (or better lifecycle-prefixed), though I would myself allow the better part of a few hours to view aerial imageries and perform g00gle text searches to try and familiarise meself with the area (plummeting my productivity into the gutter where it belongs).
As we are both armchair mappers/fixers within Europe (I am assuming) I hope the additional info on GNIS and similar imports can be useful -- it took many months before I dared to touch TIGER imported road data, when even today I'd rather keep my hands clean of that or any remote road data.
grazie e ciao!

the URL I instantly recognise as what is now referred to as ESRI or Esri Community aerial imagery, in the last months officially permitted as a source for tracing

Hi ljb,
As an outside observer, may I hazard a guess?
It appears that florinbadita is engaged in a project which includes finding and highlighting inconsistencies and inaccuracies within OSM and the TIGER census road data.
Your work was not singled out, but is simply one of many (probably) thousands of cases where an error or typo has crept into the TIGER data which persists, after you have corrected it within OSM.
I see this quite often in the OSM bugreport database known in english as Notes, asking about roads which appear to be misspelt midway.
Given the sheer number of such cases revealed (which I believe is recently discussed in an OSM mailing list, perhaps talk-us), it is no surprise that each case is not researched with the due care and diligence you have put into it here; that is, to study the full history and familiarise oneself with the area as I try to do with my armchair-mapper backseat-driving commentary from the sidelines.
Thus the `fixme' was added based on (I ass-U-me) the algorithm-spotted difference between your lovingly hand-edited `Falkinburg' and the uncouth unshaven slovenly TIGER data.
(I write without even looking at TIGER)
Disclaimer: Of course, I could be wrong, writing as a total outsider. Plus, I don't know what I'm doing.

Hello Andrew Matheny and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Thank you for your valued contribution! OSM lives on the valiant efforts of tireless heroic volunteers such as yourself!! Without people like you, the map would not be what it is today!!!

You have requested no review, so here isn't one:
You have
and have also
which appears to be very
Apart from
My suggestions include
by instead doing
So in summary,
.
We greatly appreciate your first 4660 changesets, and we hope to see another 4660 changesets from you Real Soon Now!
Yours in mappiness,
The OSM non-review Team

I agree with Frederick, this reads too much like self-promoting advertising that has little to do with a geographic database that is OSM, and too little like a short informative description that I would expect to find.
(I wonder if the present 255-character/byte limit that mercifully truncates many of these long-winded rants could be shortened to SMS length. No, wrong design criteria ;-) Same with these changeset discussions, when I have to rewrite my original comment when it exceeds acceptable verbosity)

OSM does not need to be a vehicle to host a lawyer database, nor travel and restuarant reviews, or similar.
For OSM, the primary interest is to record that at this particular location, this lawyer is to be found. Not so much what they do, although I have added a one-word description to narrow down a particular craft in the past.
Such a description would have been covered by the first three words, `Personal injury attorney' (the third being redundant to the osm.wiki/Tag:office=, now that I look at it). The geographic information is conveyed by the location in OSM, and no doubt duplicates the website content where it belongs and which anyone seriously considering these services will consult rather than relying on the description field on a map if it gets displayed at all. The rest of the content adds little to the first two words, other than to exclude me as a cyclist or pedestrian after being flattened by a bus.
If I were to rewrite this advert into a description, for brevity and clarity I'd again use a single word:
ambulancechaser
There. Nothing subjective about that, gets the point across where brevity is important. And goes beyond OSM's remit of a geographic info database without approaching the line between useful additional info and self-serving promotion.
The definition of spammy has nothing to do with factual or advertising, but that it is irrelevant and taken as a whole, hides the original intent and pushes it aside, or drives out wanted participants, as in the original Monty Python viking sketch. A single advert blurb may not be a spam, but no matter how factual, hundreds of them scattered around a city, or filling bug-reports, turns OSM into an advertising platform rather than a collection of objective geographic facts.

This is only my personal perspective after a couple weeks of trawling tens of thousands of items in the OSM bug-report database and closing hundreds if not thousands of them, that obscure actual problems, even if perhaps their content would have been worth the bother of someone to manually transfer it into the description or similar field, which as a volunteer, it was not worth mine.

Hi Jan,
Based on a similar entry on page 2 below starting with Γηπεδο and as a sports pitch, I think it was intended to be name=
and is simply a mistake.
(My greek is poor enough to imPEDE my understanding ;-)

Hi Paul,
It seems the last two items added were in africa where another #annoying #hashtaggy project is occurring, so somehow there must have been some overlap.
The two items before that are in Bangladesh, like those at the start I looked at.
As I've never participated in such a mapping project, I have no idea of the workflow and how one might have come to this.
(if there are additional items in the middle of the list of ways below also in africa, I did not check all, or to be honest, any of them ;-)
Kirsty, the item Paul linked to above is one of your two in Africa (a second rounded building is nearby).
You have drawn there a rectangular outline, while some months ago, a different mapper had drawn a triangular building in the same place. Not so easy to spot without knowing exactly how to get rid of the highlighted outline when following the link Paul gave.
I am pretty sure your summary asking you to overtrace the buildings refers to what you can see in the imagery, and not what has been already drawn, in this case the triangular building. I hope that in your workflow the already-traced outline is clear enough to discern (not only have I not participated in such a mapping project, but I have avoided trying the variety of tools available to know their weaknesses. Plus I have not looked at the imagery in the areas to judge what you are working with, to put myself in your shoes, eating my own dogfood).
I hope that might explain things a bit better, if I am understanding correctly :-)

Just FYI,
you refer to 15 000 nodes, while in this actual changeset commentary right below you will see
Nodes (1-20 of 10001) 1 2 3 ... 501

So what has happened is your upload was aborted after ten thousand elements. That means some five thousand did not make it here, nor would the following additional information joining nodes into ways.
Of course, definitely use smaller batches than 10 000.
I can probably point you to a simplified overview at
osm.wiki/Changeset
which may also explain the hour you observed, and for more details,
osm.wiki/API_v0.6#Capabilities:_GET_.2Fapi.2Fcapabilities
which should encourage you to leave enough headroom to permit creating the ways (thousands) from the nodes (several times as many). So that 8000 nodes will probably work at a time; shoot for less just to be sure.
Which I'm sure is long-unneeded info now :-)

Und warum name=Sitzbank ?
Das kennt man schon von amenity=bench ...
Oder heisst es dreimal offiziell Sitzbank?

Pity that these reverts don't seem to have lasted long.
(Kids these days. Why, when I was young...)
(me wonders what the highest revision number is in OSM and if this is an attempt to top that)

Hallo eggie,
If you aren't aware (I am sure you must be), it seems to be a default of maps.me to create a new object, or post a bug report, on an existing node or way.
I see this everywhere in countries that are not so well looked-after as yours...
Thanks for your work in NL!

Hallo Harald,
I was going to post about building nodes, but when visualising this change, I see a whole buncha problems nearby and the name Carleton brings to mind a few controversial #hashtags in talk-ca.
That out of the way, I encountered such building nodes recently, and indeed I am able to create such (and maybe I did to add address info or something, where aerial imagery was too poor or tracing impossible).
So I checked the wiki, and while it appears plans are to deprecate its usage and presently avoid it when possible, I read:
Note about using this tag on nodes : although buildings are better
represented with their footprints (a closed way or a multipolygon
relation), OSM is working by iteration and some areas in the world
don't have good aerial imagery or public datasets offering building
footprints. Therefore, buildings on nodes should be tolerated until
better sources are available.^[1]

and at the start,
may be used on nodes should not be used on ways may be used on areas
should not be used on relations

I can see a lot of cleanup is needed after this misguided project; at present Azriele Pavilion spans multiple tiles for me, one of which shows it as a university, two as parts of a building, and, ugh. A case for a sandbox if I ever saw one.
Again, talk-ca posts of the past day or so, if you have not yet read them.
I only wanted to point out your choice of wording, ``have to be'' (must be, as opposed to should be, or is best as).
Carry on, as you were.

Hello Constable,
I've quickly reviewed all changesets by this user, and none of them are worth keeping in my eyes.
The only one to give me pause was the nearby village? tourism? about which I commented -- it also was turned into a park, but I'm sure there is a better category to attract tourists but not a squirtle.
Of course, a complete review by someone else is needed, do not take my word for it.
Thanks!

Hi Cathy,
I see that user SK53 has corrected this.
What Phil was referring to is what I see far too often in english-speaking countries where the app, maps.me, is in use.
That is, far too many items are given a default to be a tourist attraction.
In other-language countries, other defaults appear far too often where they have no place, like alpine huts in coastal cities near the equator -- I have been trying to clean up after some of the damage this app has spammed.
I suspect that the proper way to repair this cannot be done with maps.me, but by use of a more advanced beginner editor on the OSM website, which will allow you to do many things not possible from the maps.me app.
I have never used the app, nor, having suffered through the damage it's done, do I have any interest, so what I write here is largely conjecture.
I hope I have explained a little bit about what is the issue.
And thanks to the other user, you need to do nothing more here!

Hallo Harald,
Might it be a highway sign similar to
osm.wiki/File:CIMG0360.JPG
?
I've seen this fairly often in, for example, Wien in Austria, so I'm surprised it's only mentioned as a ``funny'' sign, while apparently implied for default values in some countries.
(Disclaimer: no familiarity with this mapped region)