Du hast dem Killesbergturm ein Mansarddach verpasst in Höhe des gesamten Aussichtsturm, aber der Turm hat gar kein Dach.
way/306362151

Eigentlich ist das auch kein "building", weil es keine geschlossenen oder überdeckten Räume gibt.

thank you

Yes, for this particular changeset it is too late for a revert, what is unfortunate because of the many deleted objects.

I am returning to this undiscussed import, because I just noticed how many objects have been unduely appropriated by deleting and recreating them, e.g. the Pyramid of Caius Cestius, highways with many nodes and high version count. More than 200 ways have been deleted.

I also use this occassion to renew my interest in learning about the sources for this import.

thank you for removing these tags. Of course they should not have been uploaded in the first place. I also agree you would not have had to discuss this as it is a revert of an undiscussed mechanical edit, but it would have been nice to send a short announcement anyway to talk-it. Again, thanks for dealing with this.

Danke, aber der Edit bezieht sich nur auf allgemeines Wissen, er bezieht sich nicht auf einen aktuellen survey ;-)

the changeset converted indiscriminately footways to pedestrian, apparently all existing footways in a bigger area, while they do not correspond to the pedestrian definition (too narrow, one I surveyed myself is actually just 50cm wide between 2 buildings)
way/488627565

the Amundsen–Scott Station is off by almost 5 degrees of latitude.

this should be deleted, it is a duplicate and has a questionable use of the name tag and poor tagging in general

if you are local in Rome, we are meeting every last monday at 20:00 in Garbatella (currently).

I just saw you also removed leisure=park, the park tag. Sorry, just noticed you are a new user. If you need help, I can recommend the osm wiki (wiki.osm.org) and the italian osm mailing list. There is also a telegram channel.

as I just asked your brother, Legitfly, please be careful when modifying the existing data. You have added a natural=wood tag to the park, but the wood and the park are 2 distinct objects in this case, and the wood is already mapped in a different object.

You have connected the park to the road centerline, please do not extend the parks beyond their actual extent.

please add meaningful comments and be careful about the objects you are editing. You have changed treecovered areas to parks, e.g. here way/204040555/history but there is already a park where the trees are inside.

regarding the uniformity of tagging: in part this is also because the situation on the ground is different, some have a clearly visible or well known name, others don't. We should not seek consistency "within Italy" by filling out values for all possible keys, but consistency by treating the same kind of situation everywhere the same.

@luschi the names can be updated by local mappers (and should) according to a survey. Please let's not introduce even more problems by importing more MISE mess. Their database is like openstreetmap without a community ;-)

I certainly wouldn't have objected to bridge=<something>, although I believe we need at least 2-3 attributes to state the kind of bridge (load bearing concept / structure, material, amount of sections, ...). I have been adding wikidata and wikipedia references to a few bridges (to the man made bridge objects / outlines) as well as the start_date and structural engineers.

Hi, I have noticed you added bridge=yes to a man_made=bridge at Ponte della Magliana, but these objects are actually bridges. The tag bridge=yes is a property that says something is _on_ a bridge

Oh no, you must not use Google Street View, see the legal [FAQ](osm.wiki/Legal_FAQ#2a._Can_I_trace_data_from_Google_Maps.2FNokia_Maps.2F....3F), this means your edits based on StreetView must be redacted (wiped without trace from the db). Can you provide a list of edits based on StreetView?

Marcello, can you please comment on the changeset? Which sources have been used?