Not sure I understand what you mean. That taginfo is for road=*.
When I look at street=* in https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/street#chronology I don't see something similar, actually I see a significant clean-up at the beginning of 2021.

Thank you for the prompt response. Vicmap uses an ODbl license if I am not mistaking, so that should be fine. It does however require that you attribute the source: see https://opendata.victoria.ca/pages/open-data-licence.
Your long time additions and mapping efforts are well appreciated, keep on mapping !

Not only, we where afraid it was some import or organised editing but seems to be more widespread. We found a major culprit with road_name in Taiwan but that is already getting resolved by reverts.
On road=* see this for global problem since 08-2020: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/14ye

Yes, just did and left a comment on the HOT OSM project page #9511. The number is quite large and doesn't seemed to be noticed, or not done in HOTOSM validation. We have seen numerous others in Tanzania, contributing to a large spike (from 700 to over 2200) the past half year in incorrect use of the road=* tag.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Sorry, just noticed it was done in a previous edit, sorry for the inconvenience.

Hello,
Many of the buildings you created have the tag road=yes on the way outline. This is not good practice.. Can you delete the road=yes from the buildings please.

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Could you change or delete the road_name key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Thanks for the tip ! I will contact him. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello,
Your recent changes contain 1997 nodes with the key road_name. It was detected as a various serious undocumented change. The road_name is different from the name of the highways. Please explain. If the crossings have a different name you should just use the name fields, not road_name since it interferes with our quality tools. If they are added by accident, please delete them. In case you need any help, please reply to this comment or contact me direct.
Automated translation:
你好，
您最近所做的更改包含鍵名為road_name的1997個節點。它被檢測為各種嚴重的未記錄的更改。 road_name與高速公路的名稱不同。請解釋。如果路口使用不同的名稱，則應僅使用名稱字段，而不要使用road_name，因為它會干擾我們的質量工具。如果是偶然添加的，請刪除它們。如果您需要任何幫助，請回复此評論或直接與我聯繫。

Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Is this a result of an import ? Could you change or delete the tags containing road in the key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Is this a result of an import ? Could you change or delete the tags containing road in the key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Is this a result of an import ? Could you change or delete the road_name key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Hello, in some recent scans we did regarding the use of road and road_name we noticed this changeset. Is this a result of an import ? Could you change or delete the road_name key please, it doesn't seem to add additional information as already in the name key and it interferes with quality tools.
Greetings,
Bert Araali

Sorry, hope you resolved that issue now. Those things happen to many. Thank you for the reply and enjoy the mapping !

Hello again. In this case you missed one feature: one of the highways is not connected. Always try to solve these kind of warnings.

Hi, always great to see new mappers becoming active in Uganda. Did you consider to use Maxar imagery instead of Bing ? Maxar is much more up to date then Bing which can be up to 10 years old. In this case if you switch to Maxar you will see that you missed more then half of the buildings. But still nice job, nothing essentially wrong with your mapping.
In case of any questions or you need help, please feel free to contact me.

Hi, always great to see new mappers becoming active in Uganda. Very nice job you did here.
In case of any questions or you need help, please feel free to contact me.

Hello, thank you again for helping to improve the map of Uganda ! Some improvements you can make::
1. Please use Maxar imagery instead of Bing, Bing is 10 years old, Maxar about 1 year. So many of the buildings you mapped are no longer there or moved. When you use Maxar, please don't forget to align the imagery with the existing roads before you start mapping.
Thank you and keep on mapping ! Gr. Bert Araali