This changeset added a duplicate building over an existing one, way/654246503/history - I cleaned it up.
Might be worth checking the workflow on how the original building was not spotted.

Šīs izmaiņas aizvietoja tourism=attraction Lauču akmenim ar natural=stone. Lai gan stone tags ir vērtīgs, pats objekts tomēr ir pietiekami slavens, pievienoju tourism=attraction tagu.

Thank you for the response and all the map improvements, it's now much more clear what happened there.

Perhaps it is worth leaving a comment such changesets to see whether the original mapper can improve the situation themselves, and to avoid miscommunication.

I see that most of the detail has been re-mapped, I hope it is of much better quality now.

Sveiki un liels paldies par kartes uzlabojumiem.
Būtu jauki, ja varētu tos sadalīt pa mazākiem reģioniem, un pierakstīt nedaudz detalizētāku komentāru - citiem kopienas dalībniekiem ļoti grūti izsekot izmaiņām, kuras aptver visu Latvijas teritoriju.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

Unfortunately, we had to revert this changeset as it had too many data quality problems.
Please don't be discouraged from further contributions, but do discuss the process with whoever is organising this activity.

uli.l, have you had a chance to look into the copyright status here?

Sveiki, vai ir bijis brīdis paskatīties komentārus pie note/1802021 - par datu avotu un epasta listi?

Hi arcth, have you had a moment to check this topic?

Hi, have you had a chance to look into this topic?
I have also sent you a personal message, please check it at your convenience.

On the note of communication, are you subscribed to the Latvian OSM mailing list at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-lv ? If not, it would be great to join there, we could discuss all the detail.

Thank you for the reply, greatly appreciated.
Given that there apparently was an old park, maybe that name could be moved in the old_name tag?