Adamant, I take back the "disguised", and I beg your pardon for having forgotten that we have already talked about it. Still, there clearly is an issue, you are remotely editing stuff in an area which you do not know, removing tags that locals have set, without giving a clear reason. Which part of the wiki is about removing tags that you are basing your reasoning upon? I am not aware that the wiki would justify remote mappers removing tags from objects in areas they do not know about.

zum Thema building und building:part, das ist eigentlich ganz einfach: beide tags beschreiben nur das Gebäude, nicht die Nutzung darin. Für Nutzer braucht man noch andere tags, am besten auf eigenen Objekten (z.B. nodes). Nutzer haben tags wie amenity, office, shop, craft, etc.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

strange, another town where you removed an amenity=hospice tag? There is no reason to remove it, you did not set a different amenity tag. I believe this is part of a disguised undiscussed edit.

Hi, I noticed you removed the amenity=hospice tag. Can you explain the reasoning?

Hi, habe gesehen dass Du mit dem großen Besen da durch gegangen bist. Wieso wurde der building:levels tags vom Audimax entfernt?

ich kenne zumindest ein prominentes Feuerwehrgebäude in Deutschland, das nicht als Feuerwache genutzt wird: das Gebäude das für die Werksfeuerwehr in Weil am Rhein auf dem Vitra Firmengelände von Zaha Hadid errichtet wurde.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=vitra+fire+station+in+weil+am+rhein+germany&t=h_&ia=web

always the same scheme: your representation is "better", this update again removed a lot of detail in favor of a medium scale generalization which could be automatically constructed from the details if somebody wanted. revert.

any explanation why your representation is "better"?

another place where Città dei Palmi has deleted detailed landuse and has replaced it with a questionable polygon that errateously contains a lot of different landuse like landuse=highway and landuse=railway. Revert.

better church representation and also deleting a natural=wood for no reason?

accurate geometry of way/564140923 deleted without any mention in the comment or reasoning.

another example of detailed landuse replaced by a gigantic and untrue landuse=meadow. Please stop replacing detailed landuse. Please check the meaning of landuse=meadow.

Buongiorno Città di Palmi, ho notato che in questo changeset hai cancellato una serie di alberi che sembra ci siano. Vorrei far notare che l'inserimento di un natural=tree_row non comporta l'eliminazione di singoli alberi.

Un saluto,
Martin

PS: Ti chiedo di essere più rispettoso con gli oggetti che già ci sono. Non è accetabile cancellare geometrie perché tu ritieni con molto meno dettaglio le cose sono rappresentate a sufficienza. Se qualcuno ha investito il tempo di inserire oggetti (che esistono / sono osservabili "on the ground"/ in loco) non è accettabile che qualcun'altro li cancella senza discussione e accordo.

non sono del posto, ma per le fermate (compresi i capolinea) dovrebbe essere semplice trovare il nome: c’è scritto sul palo/cartello. Invece qualora ci fossero varianti nel orario stampato/in rete, quel nome va in “ref_name”
https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/ref_name

thank you for the discussion on the Italian telegram channel.

Why did you remove the names from the sidewalks?

sì, tempo fa alla DWG che ha emesso un 0day block:
osm.org/user_blocks/4647

als Tore existieren sie nur noch als „Echo“/Spuren, im Sinne dass sich die Stadt (Straßen) danach orientiert, aber unter den Tübingern existieren sie als Orte durchaus. „Lass uns am Haagtor treffen“ versteht jeder...