Last one and again no remarks. Just a reply to close the review request.

Opnieuw pardon... Ik ben niet zo geconcentreerd blijkbaar. Ik zag de discussie waarop de changeset gebaseerd is. Verder heb ik geen opmerking, ziet er goed uit.

Again no remarks. Just a reply to close the review request.

Oh, plaats een reactie in de verkeerde changeset... Pardon.

Inhoudelijk: De tags zien er goed uit. Op zich hadden de tags in dit geval ook wel op het gebouw gemogen. De beschrijving is namelijk van het gebouw zelf, niet de functie die het nu heeft.

Again no remarks. Just a reply to close the review request.

Again no remarks. Just a reply to close the review request.

Again no remarks. Just a reply to close the review request.

No remarks here. It looks fine.

You could add a access=private tag for the backyard pools.

No remarks here. The changeset looks fine.

Looks good, no remarks here.

No remarks here. It all looks fine.

No remarks here. It all looks fine.

Again I think the numbers on the name tag are better off as a reference on the ref=* tag.

I don't think Bouwjaar/ Geplaatst 1880 adds anything to the name. It simply means built/placed in 1880, which is already represented in the start_date tag.

Again a small remark on the name tag of this artwork: node/5314505751

I doubt the artwork is actually called horse. Please consider using description:en=* instead of name=*

Small remark here: I see you added a name to the waste baskets here, but I doubt they are actually named a number. ref=* is probably a more suitable tag than name=*.

This review request was still open. I've got no remarks. It looks fine.

This review request was still open. I've got no remarks. It looks fine.

This review request was still open. I've got no remarks. It looks fine.

This review request was still open. I've got no remarks. It looks fine.