This does not look like a park to me. Can you point to an online resource that mentions "Downtown Park"?

Dear Artifactor, please stop adding leisure=park to the Dothan Area Botanical Gardens. If you believe that tagging them as "garden" is wrong, please write a comment here and explain why.

Bitte Changeset-Diskussionen auf das beschränken, was unmittelbar den Edit betrifft. Für allgemeine Diskussionen ist das Medium nicht geeignet (besser: Mailingliste, Forum).

Ich habe einfach die Changeset-IDs in den Reverter geschmissen, ohne genauer hinzuschauen. Wäre aber kein Problem, den Stand von Dir wiederherzustellen, wenn der ok war.

Hallo felkel1982, es wäre wirklich gut, wenn Du Dir angewöhnen könntest, zu jedem Changeset auch einen (gern kurzen, aber aussagekräftigen) Kommentar einzugeben. Viele Rückfragen können dadurch vermieden werden, und es gehört einfach zum respektvollen Umgang mit den anderen, die Deine Edits anschauen, dazu. Siehe auch: osm.wiki/DE:Good_changeset_comments

You drew a somewhat circular (oval?) way in this changeset but didn't apply any tags; also the way doesn't conform to anything visible on aerial imagery. Can you check and possibly correct this?

You have drawn a few strangely shaped objects that bear no resemblance to aerial imagery in this changeset. Can you please delete these objects or correct them?

Hello gamulea4, I'm afraid I had to revert your changes because they violated our import guidelines (see osm.wiki/Import). These guidelines mandate a previous discussion with the community, which would among other things have helped avoid the obvious issues pointed out by user_5359 above (adding duplicates, using wrong tags). Using the wrong tags means the data is "dead" in OSM and would not show up on any map which certainly isn't what you intended.
This does not mean we don't want the data - it's just that adding it to OSM requires a little more work than simply hitting "upload" in the editor! I hope that this initial misstep doesn't discourage you from contributing further.

Dear spietsnaz, you are adding lots of Italian names to objects but you are not saying where the information comes from. Please make it a habit to provide a proper source tag. You have in the past used Google maps and maps from regione.fvg.it, both of which are not legal sources to use in OSM. So please be diligent, only use legal sources, and document clearly which source something comes from. Thank you for helping to keep OSM clean of copyright violations!

Dear Liju Thomas, the roads you have added in this changeset are clearly not "unclassified" but "residential" roads, because they lead right through densely built-up areas!

Also, the "source" that you are specifying is not a "source". Valid source tags would be, for example, "Bing Aerial Imagery", or "own survey", or "public domain data set XYZ" or something like that.

It is good that you explain what you think you are doing ("Attempting Vehcle Routing...") but perhaps your user profile page would be a better place for that. It appears that you and your colleagues Greeshmag, facas123, Favas007, Halloween123 et al. are working on a common project or for the same employer. Please use your user profile pages to explain what you are working on and especially, what your source material is. If you are using GPX tracks then that's commendable, but it makes sense to look at the aerial imagery in addition to the tracks.

It appears that you are fixing intersections world-wide. Please explain which QA tool you are using to find these intersection, and on whose behalf you are making these edits. Are you a member of the GISua team, or working for someone other? It would be good to have this information on your user profile page. Thank you!

Hallo fell3, einige Leute wundern sich über die von Dir hinzugefügten Details. Kannst Du mir ganz konkret sagen, wo zum Beispiel diese Hecke herkommt. "private Wegaufzeichnungen" wohl kaum (oder zeichest Du einzelne Hecken auf?). Aufzeichnungen von Radelfreunden? Auf dem Bing-Luftbild ist nichts zu sehen. "Bing Maps" schreibst Du, aber das ist ja keine zulässige Quelle. Bleibt "Cuzk.cz" - hast Du die Information aus den tschechischen Katasterdaten?

Schon gesehen, die Edits sind bislang harmlos, aber beim ersten "recreation ground" fliegt alles wieder raus.

Hallo! Ein Wohngebiet wird nicht zu einem "recreation_ground" oder "park", nur weil es dort ein paar Wiesen oder Basketballfelder gibt. Bitte orientiere Dich beim Mapping an der Realität und nicht an einer Imagebroschüre des Stadtmarketing. Ich werde das jetzt zurück ändern und, solltest Du auf der Eintragung falscher Parks, Naherholungsgebiete usw. bestehen, Deinen Account sperren müssen.

Why do you make edits in the south of India and tag them "#Tanzania" and "#TanzaniaDevelopmentTrust"?

Kennst Du Dich in den Gegenden aus, in denen Du diese "nach suburb verschoben"-Änderungen machst, oder ist das rein algorithmisch nach dem Motto "finde den Place-Node und richte alles danach aus"?

Indeed, the revert script had a bug where those nodes that it wanted to delete (because they were deleted before, and had been re-activated in the changeset to be reverted) were instead moved to 0,0. Thank you for fixing this.

Did you read the block message? Thousands of un-attributed and un-used nodes, often re-using node IDs from across the globe that were long since deleted, re-activating these buggy notes without comment after they were deleted by a community member, and not reacting to questions asked about these issues are reason enough for a short-term block to find out what happened. (No response from the mapper so far so we still don't know...) - This seems to be a recent phenomenon, all previous edits of that mapper seem ok.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/56782000 where the changeset comment is: remove vandalism

They were added by a SEO company (using 4 different throwaway accounts that will not respond to comments, and are not interested in learning how to make correct contributions to OSM). The SEO company took care to get all the contact data right but there wasn't a single shop or amenity or other tag that would actually tell us in OSM what these were about. What they did was just "write a name on the map" without caring for how we here in OSM work with data. I was faced with a choice of either finding out the correct tagging and spending my free time completing the shabby job a paid company has done, or rejecting their input. I chose the latter. I would have acted differently had this been the work of a newbie but from a company taking money for adding data to OSM, I expect that they don't cause more work for the volunteers.