Hello,
Could you explain what "MINOR: FIX SOURCES" means? This is a changeset with a large area, and it'd be nice to know what had changed without having to refer to third-party tools.
Best Regards,
Andy

Yes, this obviously should be reverted, but thank-you for drawing my attention to the problematical import in Gabon :)

Why did you change "building=Inn" to "building=hotel" on way/4246729#map=16/52.0779/-1.1973&layers=H ?
An Inn has a more distinct typology than a hotel (which just defines function).
Did you actually survey this or are you just guessing?

Bonjour,
Quelque chose semble avoir été très mal avec les données ici. Par exemple, node/4103284300 a beaucoup de tags à ordures sur elle, et fait partie de way/408921740, qui a aussi beaucoup de tags d'ordures sur lui, mais pas de tag "building"
Avant toute importation peut avoir lieu dans OpenStreetMap, osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines devrait être suivi, y compris la discussion.
toute discussion est-elle produite?
Meilleures salutations,
Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse) au nom du groupe de travail des données de OpenStreetMap.

Hello,
Something seems to have gone very wrong with the data here. For example, node/4103284300 has lots of garbage tags on it, and is part of way/408921740 , which also has lots of garbage tags on it, but no building tag.

Before any import can take place in OpenStreetMap, osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines should be followed, including discussion.
Did any discussion take place?
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse) on behalf of OpenStreetMap's Data Working Group.

On way/3063948 you've changed source:prow:ref to source:prow_ref yet there is no "prow_ref" key.

We had this discussion before in changeset/34932460 . Do you not even _think_ about the values that you are changing before doing so?

Here, did you find out why the previous mapper used "name:He" for the key on way/121332059/history ? It might not be as straightforward as a language key.

What has this poor bus stop done to you? 7 versions, 6 of them by you!

Why can't you make your mind up?

Your change to way/174759714 is clearly garbage.
Please revert this and all similar garbage mechanical changes.

@sirmapsalot that link actually says "The Reaker Bridge, ... was demolished in late 2012." and "Burt Road Bridge ... as of July 2012 it was still in place.

Of course it might have been demolished after 2012, but do you know that it definitely has been?

Is node/433743946 really called "The Moon Under the Water" or "The Moon Under Water" (as per the George Orwell essay, which Tim Martin borrowed from when he set up the first Wetherspoon's)?

You've added a "viewpoint" called 91 at node/4172857490 - did you really mean to do this? It seems unlikely.

Is node/4172851190 also really a bicycle rental place next door? If so, what is it called?

What's the actual name of this hospital that you've added here and what actually is it?

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap! You've added an unnamed hairdressers in the middle of the road near Crookes. Presumably it should actually be in one of the nearby buildings?

The second duplicate wasn't down to MAPS.ME; it was a duplicate hospital tag on the main building. The hostpital is already mapped as way/165971552 .

There is no relation/19073167 - see relation/19073167 . There is however a way way/19073167 which is "the island", which is part of an administrative area relation/2015438 .

If you're not sure what OSM data you're changing, then I wouldn't start by adding wikidata links to remote objects - I'd start by actually visiting local things in person and adding them to OSM. That way you'll learn about OSM's data and add to it as you go.

@Unpocoloco What change were you trying to make /
Jaké změny jste se snažili udělat?

Thanks for fixing!

Hej og velkommen til OpenStreetMap!
Jeg ville være meget overrasket, hvis et busstoppested i Blackpool kaldes "Busstop ved Wilko", og endnu mere overrasket, hvis det er i midten af vejen. Undlad venligst at kortlægge virkelige ting i OpenStreetMap, men sted gør ikke op danske navne for dem!

Ah OK - thanks for that.

Hi,
Just checking - as well as being part of the Macmillan Way relation, does way/425677394 really have the name "Macmillan Way" as well? The bits of the Macmillan Way that I've encountered further north don't.
I'm guessing that it might have been named by mistake in the past and this "new" way is just split from an old one.
Cheers,
Andy