Good morning,
Thanks for letting me know. I'd be happy to mark this street as open, or you can make the edit yourself if you prefer.

Thank you for your feedback.

Saludos,
Marqué estos caminos como servicio porque su único propósito es proporcionar acceso a una estación de combustible, como se describe en la página wiki highway=service.
Gracias.

Greetings,
Thank you for your patience with my comments.
The motorway_links you drew in this changeset, way/770623208, way/764195095 are not supported by any imagery I can find, and do not appear in public GPS traces. Are these highways currently under construction? Again, can you provide a link to a resource that supports these edits?
Thank you.

Greetings,
The motorway_links you drew in this changeset, way/769434588, way/769434589, way/769434590, way/769434591, way/769434592, way/769434593, are not supported by any imagery i can find, and do not appear in public GPS traces.
Additionally, i cannot find any imagery or public GPS traces to confirm the bridge you drew at way/769434608, way/769434609.
Can you cite a resource for these edits?
Thank you.

Greetings,
When you modified way/764170972 and way/15525399, you disconnected these ways from way/184435160, producing a dead-end. Esri shows these roads as connected. What is the reason for this break in the road? Can you cite a resource for this edit?
Thank you.

hi 4004,
I moved the barrier:kerb tag to node/1790569474/node 3643504632 adjacent. The barrier:kerb page barrier=kerb says "Combining with highway=crossing is usually a mistake; include kerb=* on the crossing node, but *not* barrier=kerb as there will usually not be a kerb across the major highway".

Greetings Carlins,
Can you provide the resources you used to create the proposed highways here and the motorway at 34.8678347, 33.5972538 in changeset/74037499? I can't find any resources that confirm these are real highways or real planned construction.
Thank you.

Esta edición se revirtió con la autorización del Data Working Group: changeset/71793409

Saludos, Wleiva.
Tengo curiosidad acerca de varios aspectos de los cambios que han hecho aquí.
- Teniendo en cuenta el gran número de vías y nodos afectados, representa esto una importación de datos externos? ¿Cuál es la fuente de datos?
- ¿Cuál es el significado de los nombres que ha adjuntado a los nodos (por ejemplo, RPT011, RPT1203)?
- ¿Sabe que en muchos casos ha duplicado carreteras ya existentes (como en el caso de way/555538219 / way/689241370) y cuál es el propósito de esta acción?
Por favor responda a la mayor brevedad posible.
Gracias.

Greetings Marych_,

What specific ways are you concerned about? I made these edits in an attempt to make the Tashkent road network more logical; I apologize if my edits were inappropriate.

thanks for catching this; i've fixed the directionality on that way.

My apologies. My logic was that because this road does not provide access to any cities or large towns, trunk classification is not appropriate.
Let me know what you think, and please feel free to make any changes.
Thanks.

Greetings,

I understand that it was necessary to revert bad data created by a now banned user, but redundant geometry seems to have been created at way/26395615, which overlaps way/623893283. No unique data appears to be stored in the tags on this way. Would it be acceptable to you for me to delete way/26395615, or would you prefer to do this?

Thanks for pointing that out.

Thank you for pointing that out. I was basing the edit on OSM highway policy. Is there a place where I can find specific policy for Kazakhstan?

Thanks for pointing that out. I was basing the edit on OSM highway policy.

Greetings.

I don't fully understand why you repeatedly mark Shahristan ko'chesi and other city streets as Primary_link. This street is not a slip road or turning lane, and does not match the criteria laid out in the wiki at osm.wiki/Highway_link. I also note that you have marked segments of the side streets touching Shahristan ko'chesi, such as way/655872388 and way/655872386, as Primary_Link. Would you please describe your reasoning for reverting my edits?

Understood, thank you.

I understand your reasoning and accept your reversion.