What is your source for this apartments you added in Pejä. Are these actually holiday apartments that tourists can rent?

Thanks for the response. Be careful, as many of these POIs no longer exist. With regard to this example, the road no longer looks like the 2016 Google Street View capture. There have been roadworks to widen the road, and I am not sure the water source still exists there. I did not notice water there, and I am traveling by bicycle and looking for drinking_water nodes to map.

Another issue is that many of the amenity=drinking_water nodes in Montenegro are on private land, so they are not accessible to someone traveling by (cyclists and trekkers are the major consumers of OSM data on drinking water). These water sources should either not be mapped at all (probably best), or set as access=private.

What is the source of these natural=spring nodes that you have added all over Montenegro. For example, 43.2094618, 19.4707112.

Today I traveled by some of these, and I was unable to verify the existence of these natural=spring or amenity=drinking_water nodes that you have added.

I was worried this would happen -- the sun was bright and I could not see my phone screen well. Unfortunately, I have no opportunity to use JOSM for the next couple of days. Could you please revert this changeset completely? I will make the necessary changes again in a future changeset.

Be careful when adding buildings from geoportal.gov.pl. Check first to see if a building was added to OSM earlier, but then deleted because it was demolished. In Brzeg you erroneously restored to the map a building in Plac Dworcowy that no longer exists -- it was demolished last year to build the new Plac Dworcowy park.

highway:path is often regarded as a more modern tagging for combined footways/cycleways and it is now the preset in Vespucci and JOSM. I am concerned that your reversion to highway=cycleway could affect pedestrian routing.

Alongside Tervola's roads are combined footways/cycleways and they were tagged accordingly. Why have you changed them instead to just cycleways?

Was he given a list from the municipality and told that he could use it for OSM, or did he simply copy on his own from the municipality’s new playground map that has been in the news recently?

What is the source used for your updates to Cluj playgrounds?

What is your source for the name "Parc Amos Francu" for this playground in Andrei Mureseanu?

In these cases, you might add motor_vehicle=private instead, so that foot routing is unhindered.

Be careful adding access=private to driveways without doing a personal survey of the area. In Cluj I can see that you have added access=private to some ways that are actually access=customer, because there is a business inside the building served by the driveway.

Please provide a source for your edits. As you may remember, in the past the number of POIs all over Romania you were adding, led to concerns about possible copyvio. You seem to have returned to the same editing activity, and still it is not clear how you know all this information.

I didn’t edit the house number tags of this POI, I only removed the generic from the name. I might map on Strada Horea in the coming weeks, and I can check then what the right house number is.

With regard to Strada Lăcrămioarelor 4, Cluj, please do not create multiple nodes with the same addr:housenumber for each scară. These are considered bugs in Osmose, they add to all the things that need to be fixed in the Osmose layer.

Instead, please tag the entire building itself with a single addr:housenumber=4, and then create entrance=staircase nodes (placed on the building way) for each scară.

Please don’t add separate address tags "Sc. I" and "Sc. II" when the address tags share the same house number. Instead, there should be a single address tag on the building itself, and you can mark the Sc. I/II/etc. as entrance=staircase nodes on the building outline.

I didn’t mean to sound too negative. Everyone makes the occasional mistake when tagging, I know I myself have made loads of tagging mistakes in my time.

With regard to this bug, it is readily visible if you open Cluj in Vespucci and then turn on the Osmose bugs layer.

These changesets of yours in Cluj six years have caused big problems: ways (streets, footways) are not supposed to bear addr: tags. Adding addr: tags to them generates an OSM bug. If you look at Cluj with the Osmose view turned on, you can see that nearly every way in the city is tagged improperly. I have been undoing some of the damage, but it would be great if you could help as the original editor.

decisively

Today the trend on OpenStreetMap is moving decisely towards adding sidewalks as separate ways, as this allows for more fine-grained tagging of wheelchair accessibility, etc. I will do some mapping in Campia Turzii and will likely restore at least some of the sidewalks which you have deleted. Just letting you know.