Your changesets from this one up to and including #50415884 have been reverted in changeset/50713440 because they are a blind import.

Your changesets from this one up to and including #50416733 have been reverted in changeset/50713297 because they are a blind import.

Your changesets from this one up to and including #50417642 have been reverted in changeset/50713151 because they are a blind import.

Your changesets from this one up to and including #50418858 have been reverted in changeset/50712764 because they are a blind import.

Your changesets from this one up to and including #50418874 have been reverted in changeset/50712483 because they are a blind import.

You're practically just dumping the GRB buildings in OSM! Could you please do some more checking? The buildings in the mapped construction site have *obviously* been removed. And those next to it too, they're going through a way. This means JOSM would have given a warning, and you ignored it!

Another useful tool is JOSM's "Improve way accuracy" tool. It makes working with existing ways a lot easier, so maybe you won't have to redraw it in the first place.

You're removing ways and redrawing them, discarding all history.* This is a bit rude because this makes it seem you were the original author. You can use the Replace Geometry tool of the "utilsplugin2" plugin to keep a way's history.

* You're doing it in separate changesets, which makes it even harder to track changes.

The water outlines on the GRB are outdated near Cotton Island.

water=riverbank is not an existing tag. Stop it.

Accidental comment on wrong changeset ↑

water=riverbank is not an existing tag. Stop it.

Rickyjones was hier niet duidelijk in. Het leek inderdaad alsof hij de naam van de brug zei.

Straussbrug is het type brug, niet de naam.

Hi, for stuff under construction, the convention is to tag *=construction and put the normal value for highway/railway/building... in the tag construction=*.

So for example for the building way/368995264 you marked as under construction: [building=construction] [construction=commercial]

Doing [building=commercial [construction=yes] makes it more confusing. This has been called "troll tags" by some users. Data users would have to check all objects for construction=yes, proposed=yes, planned=yes, disused=yes, abandoned=yes, historical=yes, razed=yes, removed=yes, demolished=yes, dismantled=yes ...

More information on the wiki: osm.wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts

Is this building still under construction now? If so, could you change it? If not, of course the construction=yes should be removed.

Cheers!

Same as changeset/46138468#c152839

highway=construction

construction=residential

Hi, for stuff under construction, the convention is to tag *=construction and put the normal value for highway/railway/building... in the tag construction=*.

So for example in this case: [railway=construction] [construction=rail]

Doing [railway=rail] [construction=yes] makes it more confusing. This has been called "troll tags" by some users. Data users would have to check all objects for construction=yes, proposed=yes, planned=yes, disused=yes, abandoned=yes, historical=yes, razed=yes, removed=yes, demolished=yes, dismantled=yes ...

More information on the wiki: osm.wiki/Comparison_of_life_cycle_concepts

Is this rail still under construction now? If so, could you change it?

Cheers!

For your information: you marked a too big way segment as oneway, breaking the routing. I've fixed it. In the future, could you split a segment when necessary before applying oneway=yes? Thanks, have a great day.

Ah wacht, je hebt het apart getekend fietspad ook weggedaan. Laat maar

Dag JanFi

Met cycleway=track op de hoofdweg, als het fietspad al als een aparte weg ingetekend is, wordt het verwarrend voor routers. Het verband tussen parallelle wegen is namelijk moeilijk automatisch te bepalen. Daarom bestaat bicycle=use_sidepath, dat is de correcte tag als het fietspad apart gemapt is. bicycle=use_sidepath