Hei!
Ta en titt på relation/7513926 Her ser det ut som at navn har kommet inn i natural-taggen. Er det noe i kildedataene, eller noe feil i importen?

Welcome to openstreetmap :)
You requested a review on your change, so here it is:
To start, your changeset comment is very good :)
You changed a building=yes to building=Schuur. I guess Schuur is the dutch word for shed?
I think then maybe building=shed would be a better choice as most tags should be in english and lowercase.

best regards

Thanks.
Better now?

What do you think is the most important property of this railway? The fact that it is a museum railway with sporadic traffic, or that it is 891mm rather than 1435mm wide?

Regarding route planning: There are better mechanisms for route planning for railways than changing its tagging (The operator could publish a GTFS f.ex.)

In the mean time, your edit has now evolved into 8 ways of 'narrow_gauge' and 27 smaller ways of 'perserved'. Plus the bit of dual gauge that must remain as railway=rail...

I don't want to start an edit war, but can I revert both your edits back to railway=perserved (seasonal, museum), please?

I think tagging narrow gauge railways as railway=narrow_gauge is just as silly as tagging a way with highway=steep just because it is steep (yes that was a thing in the early osm days). Such things as steepness and gauge has its own tags and should not interfere with the main tag (this case railway=*). So it it my opinion that Hultsfred-Jenny should be either railway=rail or railway=perserved (depending on amount/regularity of traffic).

Regarding the dual gauge section from Jenny to Västervik, this is already correctly tagged.

Any particular reason why you changed one out of over 30 ways of "Smalspåret" railway=preserved to railway=narrow_gauge?
(way/25580533).
I would argue that railway=narrow_gauge should not be used at all...

Changeset comment incorrectly says 1211, Jondal is 1227

Hei Jonadahl!
Velkommen som bidragsyter i OpenStreetMap!

Ser du ønsket å legge til m.o.h på en adresse. Men det ser ut til at det bare var navnet (Vidsyn Lodge) du også la til som kom med.

Den korrekte taggen for å angi m.o.h i osm er "ele" (for elevation).

Kanskje du også vet hva "Vidsyn Lodge" er fornoe? Er det et hotell? Eller et bolighus med kallenavn? Eller noe i mellom?

Spør gjerne om det er noe du lurer på.

-gorm

Hei bilde2910!
Velkommen som bidragsyter til OpenStreetMap!
Ser du er godt i gang med gode bidrag.
Spør meg gjerne om det er noe du lurer på!

-gorm

Hei Jens!
Velkommen til som bidragsyter til OpenStreetMap!
Det ser ut til at du er godt i gang med gode bidrag. :)
Spør meg gjerne om det er noe du lurer på.

Hei 3s4d!
Velkommen som bidragsyter til OpenStreetMap!
Ser du har "test-tegnet" en skog midt i Valevatn i Sirdal.
Du fikk det til! :)
Men nå kan du kanskje ta bort testen din igjen, siden det dukker opp på kartet for alle...

vennlig hilsen gormur

Hei Semtex72!
Velkommen som bidragsyter til OpenStreetMap.
Ser du har lagt til en park i Holteveien 1. Sikker på at det ikke er et hus eller hage der?

No. But it isn't an official name either. Added a note.

Kraftverk og rørgate ble duplisert med dette changeset-et.

Most, if not all, of these houses are not closed ways. They have duplicated nodes in one of the corners. Import gone wrong? Or did you draw them by hand?

The peak is named "Gråkallen", and has nothing to do with the tram system in Trondheim...

They look totally fine to me. They do touch eachother in real life too.
And by the way: I only updated the addresses in this changeset. Someone else drew the houses before me.

Can you please link to one example building with a problem?

But why change to a node?
If anything, it could have been expanded to a circular way, roughly the size and shape of the bay. Now there is no information about the size of the bay...

Yeah.
There is no road named Vågavågen, perhaps a path at best, but certainly no named street.
Vågavågen is the name of the bay next to the adresses.
But the adresses are correct. They come from the official (very accurate) norwegian adress register (legal source, imported).
What is wrong here is the highway=water tag that obviously was a hack. If anything, that tag is the one that should be removed. After all, it is just to mute some inspectors that can perfectly well be ignored.
Regarding addr:place: I can see the idea, but I personally don't like it. It just makes it harder to keep the adresses updated and harder for data consumers to use them.

If you want to remove the highway=water, I won't be offended :)