JunosL, you claimed that landuse=basin is discouraged.
Please note that the tag here is not landuse=basin, but natural=basin.

I'm against these two options:
1) Use wrong tags because a renderer processes correct tags in a wrong way. This is the renderer's problem to fix. (see osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer)
2) Deleting the relation.

I am for:
- Find an agreement what's the correct tag.
- Then use this tag and encourage data users (renderers) to render the tags correctly.

way/1271178553

Hey,
is "Lepena - Dom pri Krnskih jezerih" really the name of the path or is it a description?

Hi,

Thanks for your contribution. Just remember that creating changesets with huge geographical extent is discouraged.

Happy mapping!

Great, thanks!

Hi,

Thanks for reaching out. The residential area relation relation/14869357 (Janezova vas) originated from an area that I did not create or name myself: way/280874901/history

I simply converted it from an area to a multipolygon -- without properly documenting my work, sorry!

I totally share your view that it would be preferable to name the neighbourhood, not the residential area. Feel free to do so!

Ok.

The wiki says that the "ref" key is used for numbers and codes. "PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most" doesn't really seem to be a number or code.

I think that "PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most" could be the name in this case. The current name looks more like a description to me.

+ I think that building:levels:underground should only be used on buildings and means "(total) number of levels that this building has underground". If the thing is inside a building, but is itself not a building, then level=-1 would be correct in my opinion. If it is not inside a building, then layer=-1 would be sufficient, I believe.

Hi,
It think that on node/10973560597

description="PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most"

should be used instead of

ref="PAKETOMAT Podhod mesarski most"

(as I understand the wiki)

Hi,
Just a reminder that foot=use_sidepath (+ sidewalk=separate) is preferred over foot=no on roads where you map the sidewalk separately.

Hi! Thanks for your contribution and welcome to the project!

Just remember to give meaningful comments to your changesets, so others have a chance to understand what you're doing.

Happy mapping!

I've removed the duplicates.

Hi, welcome to openstreetmap!

Thank you for your contribution!

A little hint: We use name=* only if the object actually does have a name. We don't use it to *describe* an object, which seems is what you have done (an object is *described* by other tags, for example the tag leisure=playground already says, that the object is a playground - this information does not go into the name tag).

Many (in fact, most) objects don't have names (many playgrounds, most trees, benches, etc.). In this case, don't give it a name tag.

If you come across objects that do have a name (for example a street, a school or a stream), then the locally used name should be given (not the English translation). English is used as a meta-language in OSM (for example to discuss about things), but the actual mapped object should have its native local name. This means almost all objects in Slovenia will have a Slovene name (those that have a name at all).

Happy mapping!

Maybe you're right and this should be brought to the attention of the larger community. I've created a thread to get others' opinions on this: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/seeking-community-arbitration-in-large-scale-mapping-of-non-existant-railways-in-slovenia-and-croatia/109300

PS: I do understand that you've put in a lot of work into this. I don't have any personal issue with you. In fact, I believe that you acted on good intentions. I just believe that you're not mapping along what the vast majority considers as the project's guidelines.

Hi,

Please refrain from attempts of intimidation. Remember that there is a human being on the other side, even if you can't see them.

I'm sorry, I wasn't aware I was sending mixed signals. Which are the conflicting statements in your view?

No response -> changes reverted.

Cool, thanks a lot!

Great, thanks!

I've added that as source:opening_date

Thanks for your contribution!

Would be great if you could be slightly more specific in your changeset comments so other mappers have a chance to understand your intentions. ;-)

Thanks!