Hi,
you added 409 objects with the tag
"Uploaded=56". This looks like a mistake.
Could you have a look and fix this?

Jan

I removed the remaining useless tags like Base and AltMode.

Hi,
welcome to OSM!

Here are a few remarks:
- please watch out for the correct spelling of tags, e.g. it's 'right', not 'rigt' and 'smoothness', not 'smothness'. I fixed several of these right now.

- I found several nodes with the tags kerb, kerb:both, kerb:left and kerb:right on the same node. There is no need to put all 4 tags - if both sides are equal, 'kerb' is sufficient, if both sides are different, 'kerb:left' and 'kerb:right' can be used. The other tags don't need to be set.

Cheers, Jan

I started removing spelling mistakes in
changeset/58240787

Hi,
could you check the tagging of this way?
way/372094840
There are some strange fire-related tags.
Thanks, Jan

Hallo Michael,
das ist durchaus möglich. Diese Ergänzungen müssen ohnehin noch einmal überprüft werden, die Quelle kommt mir fragwürdig vor:
changeset/58181024

Jan

Hi,
it's a new tag that wasn't used before. I checked the wiki and wasn't able to find any description of it. I didn't find a discussion in the forums, but I also don't speak Dutch.

I'm perfectly fine with using the tag - you seem to have some discussion about it and if you add a description in the Wiki, everybody can use and understand the tag.
When I changed it some weeks ago, it looked like one of the random tags people use because they don't know the actual tagging schemes.

Jan

Could you search for an established tag for this information? Otherwise this information is lost for all users who don't know this tag.
health_person:type=* might be a good choice.

osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Healthcare_2.0#health_person:type.3D.2A_.2F_office.3D.2A

Hallo,
hast du eine schriftliche Genehmigung vom VVM um diese Daten zu verwenden? In OSM dürfen nur Daten verwendet werden, die unter einer mit ODbL kompatiblen Lizenz stehen. Das ist hier laut Webseite nicht der Fall.

Hallo,
hast du eine schriftliche Genehmigung von bwegt.de um diese Daten zu verwenden? In OSM dürfen nur Daten verwendet werden, die unter einer mit ODbL kompatiblen Lizenz stehen. Das ist hier laut Webseite nicht der Fall.

Hi,
all these objects have tags like
"Source:date = 20130720" - in general, keys should be lower case and the date should be in a common format like
"source:date = 2013-07-20" Would you mind changing that?

Jan

Hi,
I found the tag "health_professional=no" on many objects - what does it mean? This key has not been used in any other place yet.

Jan

Hi,
I found the (only) tag "huts = yes" on several objects - what does that mean? This tag is not used by anybody else at the moment.

Thanks, Jan

Hi,
you and your colleagues add nodes like this:
node/5555758243

These should not appear in OSM. I suspect there is some error in your common workflow when doing QA. Could you please check this?

Jan

Hi,
kannst du hier mal nach dem Tagging schauen, das sieht nach einem Fehler aus:
"building:black = good"
way/579894123

Jan

Hallo,
du hast hier zwei Tags benutzt, die es so bisher nicht gibt, ref:color_bg und ref:color_tx. Ich würde empfehlen, auf "osmc:symbol" zurückzugreifen - das wird insbesondere bei Symbolen auf Wegweisern verwendet, und es gibt Anwendungen die das unterstützen.

Hi,
you added the key "arialway" on 58 objects - could you fix the spelling mistake, it should be "aerialway".

Grüße,
Jan

I'm not a user of river and stream data, so I can't say something specific. Only thing I know is that OSM is an international project and all changes to tagging need to be discussed openly with everybody involved. A pub is not the right place, that's why we have the Wiki, whether you like it or not.
There would be much less of a problem if you just added a new tag, but here you're removing an existing and established tag ("alt_name") and replace it by something new ("waterway:alt_name"). Any tool that tries to follow a river needs to be aware of this change or it will fail.

That's exactly what Drafts are for in the Wiki - describing what you intent to do so that other mappers can comment on it. I'm not sure that all users of this data agree with your point of view.

Hi,
could you check this highway? The tag "waterway:name" looks suspicious.
way/210083669

Jan