Hallo Witcher,
Why are you replying in the first person to a changeset by user Constantium, who is presently blocked from OSM for failing to give a satisfactory reply where organisational details are needed to be provided? Blocks are to be taken seriously, not to be treated as an annoyance to be ignored and bypassed. You and your team risk a permanent ban for this behaviour.
The Mapbox imagery may be the newest,but it is still out-of-date, where I have analysed the imagery I have found it to be as much as two years out-of-date, and in all cases at least six months. This cannot be relied upon for remote mapping, particularly from the Ukraine, when there is a local and active mapping community in the mapped area.
These communities have been trying for weeks to have meaningful commentary, discussions, and explanation of this mapping.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58506787 where the changeset comment is: Revert Pokemon vandalismus

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58506733 where the changeset comment is: Revert Pokemon vandalismus

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58472413 where the changeset comment is: Restore public addressing info

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58472070 where the changeset comment is: Revert Pokemon vandalismus

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58471637 where the changeset comment is: Undo fake added/changed names

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/58471548 where the changeset comment is: Undo fake added/changed names

I see you have changed your entry back to tourism=hotel, but when I read your `description' entry, you refer to a small guest house with four apartments.
That is not a hotel, and does not at all qualify as one in OSM despite what you may wish, where tourism=apartments perfectly fits your description.
OSM maps the ground-truth, and does not exist to help your Apartments to be depicted and found as a hotel, that is Tagging For The Whatever, Renderer, App, ...
Road-Runner's change to tourism=apartments should be put back into effect.

Andy,
the default newbie editor iD is not the one this user is using, as the few times I have fired up iD before it gets killed off, I see a much more recent one, and I don't know what URL would give me the ancient 2.4.1 which no doubt appears very different than what I can see.
.
Charabor, you have managed to change the speed limit to a default of 30km/h in a single stroke, where previously it had been no more than walking tempo where no road user (pedestrians, children playing, cyclists, delivery vehicles, resident's autos) has priority over any other, which is difficult to guarantee at Tempo 30. Also, you have unilaterally changed the priority at intersections which will come as a great shock to someone arriving from the left where the former living_street suddenly now has right-of-way that was previously absent.
So how are you managing to edit the map, going back in time? Potlatch 1 is no big feat for me, but I'd like to turn back the hands of time meself...

Hallo Michael,
even though this mapper's habits do not match those of the rest of the group, s/he is still editing not on the native OSM website, but via the same portal used by the others with a prehistoric version of iD, which presumably allocates the various tasks and assignments for their contracted participants, but just as I used to be likely to swat bugs anytime day or night, different contractors may choose to work to different schedules or focuses.

This changeset, as seen below, has moved the location of St.Marys Convent over a hundred metres away from the associated catholic church and made it a part of the road.
This sort of vandalism or carelessness has no place in OSM, as it's something not trivial for a beginner to repair and should not even happen in the first place.
I would suggest a total revert of this changeset to restore the correct position and syntax of the convent, despite the SEO plea not to erase, as the integrity of OSM data should take priority over spamvertising commercial interests who just see OSM as another advert platform, but that's just me.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57857991 where the changeset comment is: delete incomplete Pokemon vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57857896 where the changeset comment is: delete incomplete Pokemon vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57857850 where the changeset comment is: delete incomplete Pokemon vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57844782 where the changeset comment is: delete unwanted SPAM

Just out of idle interest, I searched for the BIPA in Sankt Georgen, finding nothing.
Apparently the usual wheelmap.org bug with POIs nowhere near their correct location.
There is no POI for BIPA at the deleted node's address.
way/162280670#map=19/47.93430/13.48874&layers=N
The POI data has some issues -- the addr:city should be `im Attergau' as St.Georgen is not on the lake proper.
The streetname should not be all uppercase, as the above building data shows, although the actual street appears in OSM here as two separate words, Attergauer Str. with the addresses as Attergaustr. Several short parallel or intersecting service drives bear the single word variant.
So Specialisterne, if you want to re-add this node in the proper location, it is best to use a normal editor, with this (corrected) info - I'm not sure what streetname is false. That is probably easier than undeleting the point, shifting it over six timezones and a boatload of water.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57558121 where the changeset comment is: Pokemon vandalism, fiction at impossible elevation

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/57557543 where the changeset comment is: Pokemon vandalism, roads and buildings flooded

Unf0rtunately, the BIPA in picturesque Sankt Ge0rgen is still t0 be found in a library building in Maryland, n0where near Gustav Klimt's summer lake...

Sorry for the delay.
There is probably a wiki page in english about aerial imageries.
Me, I go from experience viewing various imageries all over.
I just got through writing a lengthy analysis of the available imageries in New York, where a poor victim used the default which is nearly ten metres off from all the alternatives.
But when I moved into a nearby town in the changeset, the imageries were completely different from how I described, so every area I have to analyse independently.
.
The reference would be surveyor-grade GPS points and seeing how well they line up. As this is not practical, some sources of imageries will list their resolution and typical accuracy.
In general, the more detail, I expect the more care is taken to be correct. When available, the Bing z20 imageries show such distortions of buildings to make it appear they are viewed from above, that I assume their elevation models are pretty good.
More detail does not necessarily mean better, as I've seen places where the Mapbox detailed imagery shows a 3 metre offset of a ground-level sidewalk between different overhead passes, despite most buildings appearing to be filmed from overhead rather than at an angle.
But as a general rule, I've found the USGS low-resolution matches well the archived Bing aerials as ESRI Classic, and Bing z20 where available, and I cycle through all the available imageries to get a feel for relative age and clarity of each as well as obvious offset.
In your area here, ESRI looks to be older than Mapbox, but both are well under a metre of each other at one building top I checked.
However at ground level, where ESRI Classic matches newer ESRI, Mapbox shows about 2m offset yet is close to USGS position in its blurriness.
The Bing and other DigitalGlobe Standard imageries both are satellite and show significant perspective distortion, which means items at different elevations like a straight line over a hill or through a valley will appear curved.
A 46 metre high building (from the data) shows 16m of offset from base to roof...
.
In summary, for mapping Arlington, either ESRI or Mapbox is the best choice, although I would have to check over a larger area than the three city blocks to catch my interest. The metre or two difference is acceptable, and not worth moving anything for.
It appears that what you have not yet adjusted at North wilson and North Edgewood was aligned to ESRI. South of there at Clarendon you can see the difference. 6m here. If anything, since the Mapbox imagery is newer, most things have probably been traced from ESRI, so I would verify that then align Mapbox as background to match just for consistency, until someone can show otherwise or offers still better imagery.
Okay, I've typed far too much. I'm sorry.