Please state the data source. Where did you get the department information from and what license is that data published under?

I am reverting this changeset because it seems to delete a large number of valid objects without any explanation.

I think you should use highway=tertiary less frequently. Many roads you have upgraded to "tertiary" would be "residential" in my opinion, for example the "Strada Berzei"! Perhaps it would be useful to discuss with the Romanian community before you upgrade further roads.

Dear Jaanharis, you are adding a lot of buildings and uploading them with a changeset comment of "home".

1. You can add more than one building in a session, and then upload once you have created a handful. You do not have to upload every single building. As a changeset comment, please do not write "home", but instead explain what you did: "Added builidngs in NAME_OF_CITY" or so.

2. The editor can help you make buildings square with the "Q" key. Of course not every building is a rectangle in reality but some buildings that you have drawn could probably benefit from squaring.

3. Instead of using descriptive names ("rizwan shoe shop"), try to find the proper tag (if you type "shoe" in the feature box it will help you find the right tag for a shoe shop) and then only use "Rizwan" for the name, without "shoe shop" as this is already in the tag. This will also give you a nice icon on the map!

Please also explain what "amenity=yes" is supposed to mean.

Dear Kat Espejo, thank you for your contributions to OSM. The "changeset comment" field is intended for a human readable (!) description of your edits, e.g. "mapped buildings in Grenville" - the hashtag word salad that you have put ("#hotosm-project-17182 #LACH_VC_TC_2024 #BERYL_VC_TC_2024") is not understandable by the majority of mappers in OSM. Please choose a better changeset comment next time. Hashtags can be put in the "hashtag" field.

osm.org/user_blocks/16810

It appears to me that rather than being impolite, I was *too* polite and therefore didn't get my point across.

What I wanted to say is: "fixes" that superficially fix something - like you did here - are unwanted and complicate the *real* fixing. They make OSM worse, not better. Your lecturing about "craftsmanship" rings hollow when it is the other mappers (who actually fix things) of whom you expect such craftsmanship, while not being willing to invest the same yourself.

In the future, when you fix something because of a geometry error, you are expected to use reason to ensure that the whole thing isn't totally fictitious (or a broken import or something else that warrants a different kind of attention than just a geometry fix). If you are unwilling or unable to bring that amount of "craftsmanship" to the table because you can only invest two minutes per "fix", then please refrain from making the edit in the first place, and leave it to someone who can do it with the necessary diligence.

If you encounter something where you believe a proper fix might require local knowledge, the same applies - just leave it to the locals.

Please explain the meaning of your changeset comment "nb nghgnb nb SXSXDDDDDDDDDXXCFGFGGGGGGGGGGGGGTGTTTTTT".

Please explain the meaning of your changeset comment "dersdferaERtq4a 35u7qq".

What is "u7404p+9579++636+21++2+624+-5" supposed to mean?

Hello TyJack, the placeholder in your changeset comment "[Kindly replace this text and share what you've been working on, like adding buildings or other edits]" was meant to be replaced with a meaningful message by you. Please do that the next time you upload an edit to OSM.

Grundsätzlich ist "ich kann den Weg auf dem Luftbild nicht sehen" kein ausreichendes Kriterium für eine Wegelöschung in bewaldetem Gebiet. Bitte Ortsbegehung durchführen, und wo angebracht, "Lebenszyklus-Prefix" verwenden wie oben vorgeschlagen. Ich revertiere die Löschungen jetzt.

Fixed in changeset/158161432

Dear MM_KE_MM, please try to write human-readable changeset comments. This changeset touched an area twice as large as the Czech republic yet anyone trying to understand what it was about will be very puzzled by your comment.

Dear gscholz, in this changeset you have blindly "fixed" a self-intersection of a completely fictional airport that someone had added. Your modification makes it more difficult for other community members to revert the bad edit.

It is good that you are looking out for OSM quality but please keep both eyes open while doing so. If someone sees a horse and maps it as a "kow", and you then "fix" that mistake by changing it to "cow", you haven't actually improved anything ;)

Dear Paweł Walkowiak, thank you for your contributions to OSM. This is the fifth time you have changed this one node: node/12250472179/history - don't over-do it, we're not looking for millimeter precision ;)

Also, you don't have to save every single change you make. Just edit a few buildings and then upload all in one go.

For the "changeset comment" field, don't put tomorrow's date - instead, put an explanation of your edit (e.g. "corrected building locations in CITYNAME" or so).

I have reverted this edit in changeset/157959663 because there was no sufficient explanation for the deletion even after the question above. The information board shown on https://imgur.com/wrJ50Pu seems to indicate these paths do indeed exist.

see osm.org/user_blocks/16781

Please fix the data urgently. There are still lots of objects tagged place=city_block and building=* at the same time, there are lots of industrial landuses named "0", lots of buildings named "casa", lots of objects tagged "place=plot". I will remove this data if it is not cleaned up.