I keep bothering you ;-). I also changed the website tag, since there is a specific tag for wikipedia. The website tag would be used for the website of the operator of the feature. Maybe that would be http://www.festungen-zh.ch/joomla/index.php?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Bollizh,
Here I am again :-). The tourism=attraction tag is relevant. I would advise to use this tag only once, at one of the bunkers or the visitor center if that exists. I read that guided tours are available, so the place where they can be started would be good to mark with tourism=attraction.
I also notices some typical MAPS.me name mistakes, which are corrected in changeset/59631164.
Keep up the ahppy mapping!
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Or if you don't want to engage this deeply into OSM, I can do the change for you.

I see you've added some additional information on the names. Unfortunately MAPS.me always does weird things with the name tags that exist for multiple languages. For example, there are now the following tags:
name=Bunker
name:de=Festung Ebersberg A539
If you follow the convention, the name-tag should have the default language of the location, so German too. This is for the data users to have a choice between having local names, or translations.
I've corrected these issues in:
changeset/59630643
If I understand you correctly, the places you marked here are the actual bunkers, not a memorial (typically erected for remembrance only, which a bunker is clearly not). I haven't made the change, because I don't now this place. But by interpretation I think that the following tags are relevant:
military=bunker to mark that this is the actual bunker
historic=yes to mark that it is not in active use
Please have a look at the wiki to inform yourself :-)
osm.wiki/Tag%3Ahistoric%3Dmemorial
military=bunker

Keep up the happy mapping!
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Bollizh,
Thanks for getting back quickly.
Have a look on the OpenStreetMap wiki, where conventions for mapping most stuff you encounter in the field are documented.
For military stuff the following page would be a starting place:
osm.wiki/Military
Sticking to these conventions actually helps maps users to find items of their interest. Maps.me does not fully support the editors with information on the usage of certain tags.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Thanks for responding quickly. I can recommend OSMand for POIs. More complex edits will require you to make notes in the field and work them out with iD or JOSM (if you have a laptop with mobile internet it also works in the field, but a desk set up works more comfortably IMHO :-D).
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

I've made the necessary corrections:
changeset/59629638

Hi OpenBoys,

I can hardly believe that SportXX is a cinema as it's tagged here, since it's a chain of Sports shops. Now this node has two names, name=Maxx and name:de=Migros SportXX.

If both the cinema Maxx and the shop SportXX are here, than that requires two different nodes.

Could you please double check?

Keep up the happy mapping!

Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Could you double check this?

Hi milchbuab,
I notice you changed the name:en/de/fr to 'moment' but left the name tag as 'Les Terroirs'. Should that tag also be changed? And out of pure curiousity, what is the relevance of having tags in multiple languages if the name in all of those is the same wouldn't the name=moment tag be sufficient?
Keep up the happy mapping!
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Lutzllutz1,

I noticed you added a few water_wells at pickick places. Are these drinking water points/fountains like you see all over Switzerland from flee flowing ? In that case it is likely that it should be mapped as amenity=drinking_water, instead of man_made=water_well.
Have a look at the wiki pages to see the difference.
amenity=drinking_water
osm.wiki/Tag:man made=water well
Keep up the happy mapping!
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Bollizh,
I noticed you added four tourism=memorial, all with the name 'Bunker'. I can hardly imagine that there are 4 memorials witing 100 m that all have the name Bunker. Maybe tourism=memorial is not the best tag. If these are military bunkers they can better be tagged with military=bunker. The name tag should only hold its official name, not a description of what it is.
I'm looking forward to understanding what this is.
Keep up the happy mapping.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Toroboro,
Shouldn't the museum be tagged with tourism=museum?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Alexheel,
Thanks for getting back on this topic. I'm not sure why I couldn't find the rtsa_scale on the wiki, since it's clearly there. Must be a typo on my side. Maybe you can make a wiki page for key:westra_ref as well, so other people also understand what it means. I see the westra_ref is used even more frequent, is it also for mountain peaks?
Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Andree,
By coincidence I noticed you added the rock south of the Uetliberg viewing point. I totally ignored that this was not on the map the many times I passed it, good job! I noticed some improvement possibilities today and made some changes. Let me explain the reasons.
The natural=cliff tag is directional, the left side of the way is the top of the cliff, the right side is the bottom. You applied it the other way around, which comes down to mapping a steep hole in the ground :-). Additionally the cliff way should follow the top of the cliff, not the bottom.
You also added the area=yes tag, but a cliff is by definition a line, not an area. If you want to map rock area you should use natural=bare_rock
You added an ele tag, which has two problems. You should follow the syntax, and just add the number in meters, or you should follow the syntax as described ele=*. Additionally the elevation of 880 is definitely not correct. The Uetliberg peak is higher than the rock you mapped, and has a verified elevation of 869 m.
Please read the wiki page for more info :
natural=cliff
What I have done: (1) I reversed the cliff's way direction, so the top and bottom are following the definition (and displayed correctly), (2) I moved the way to the top of the cliff, based on the Canton Zürich 2015 imagery, (3) I opened up the cliff way on the north side and added a path to ascent the rock (which is there if I remember correctly), (4) I've made a multipolygon relation for the natural=bare_rock and added the same ways as the inner role of the landuse=forest relation. This creates a gap in the forest rendering and fills it with bare_rock rendering. I see you are rather new to OSM, and understand applying relations is quite hard the first time. If you are interested, you can read more at osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon. (5) I've removed the elevation tag and moved the description tag to a new node with tourism=viewpoint tag.
You can find all my changes here:
changeset/59591294
and visualized here:
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=59591294
Keep up the happy mapping!
Cheers, dikkeknodel

Hi PeetTheEngineer,

You state that for this changeset you used Schweiz Mobil as source. As far as I am aware the data at the Schweiz Mobil website is copyrighted data from SwissTopo, which is not allowed to be re-used in OSM. This would mean adding the data is a copyright violation.

Could you please clarify how you used this source?

Cheers,
dikkeknodel

Hi Alexheel,

If I understand correctly, you added the Russian name to mountain passes in Switzerland, Austria, Italy and France. I also see you added the tags rtsa_scale and westra_ref. I notice you give the website of Westra as source for these edits. I can't read Russian, but assume Westra is the Russian Mountaineering association, or similar. Their website mentions a (c) copyright symbol, so I see a potential issue here with if the data is allowed in OSM.
About the tags you added, I don't see anything on wiki.openstreetmap.org about these tags. For these tags to be relevant to all users, not only insiders, it is relevant to make a proposal for these tags on the wiki and discuss about it in my opinion. Now most people won't have a clue what is means and how to use them.

Could you please address these two concerns?

Keep up the happy mapping :-)

Cheers from Switzerland,
dikkeknodel

I meant 2015 actually :).

Hi mtc,
A few months before you created the the Cape Wrath Trail relation I've hiked the southern part of this hike myself. I remember that there are no signposts, so the route is not visibile on the ground. Following the OSM consensus to only map what is visible on the ground, the route relation should not be in OSM.
Had the route been signposted by August 2016?
Cheers, dikkenkodel

Liebe hecktor,
Kannst du versuchen weniger Änderungen in einen changeset zu machen? Jetzt ist es fast unmöglich zu sehen was sich wirklich geändert hat, sicher wenn das Kommentar nur "Korrekturen lwn Einsiedeln" lautet weil es Änderungen in der ganzen Schweiz gibt.
Liebe Grüsse,
dikkeknodel

Hi Adrian,
This happened ages ago, so you probably already know this by now. You tagged way/34945932 and some others next to it as:
highway=cycleway
cycleway=track
The last tag is not correct when the highway itself is already a cycleway. It is meant to be used when the way is a road that also allows cars and there is a separate parallel cycleway (lane or track).
I have changed this today.
Keep up the happy mapping.
Cheers,
dikkeknodel