In this case, it seems the reported issues are false positives. The geometries were not changed in a way that would introduce crossings, and the tagging adjustments did not create any new conflicts.

Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks again for your map edits.

Regards,
Pascal

Fixed by changeset/177031752

Thanks @AylinJellybean

Thank you for your map edits.
Looks good!

Best regards,
Pascal

Perfect, Bernard!

Thanks also for removing the spammy description.

All the best,
Pascal

PS: Sorry that I didn’t write your name correctly in the first comment.

changeset/176971343
changeset/176994414

Bernhard, thank you.

I think we should also separate the added POI from the relation mentioned here, correct?

Reverted by changeset/176214045

Reverted by changeset/176214045

Reverted by changeset/176214045

Hallo, danke für die Antwort.
So wie bei den letzten Malen?

#KeepTheHistory

Hi, thanks for your contribution!

I noticed you deleted and redrew some features instead of editing the existing ones. In OpenStreetMap, it’s usually better to adjust the geometry of existing objects rather than replacing them completely.

This way we keep the history, preserve any important tags, and avoid breaking relations like routes or boundaries. Redrawing can accidentally remove valuable details and make it harder for others to track changes.

For future edits, please try to move or reshape the existing nodes instead of deleting them, this helps maintain OSM’s data quality and history. Thanks again for helping improve the map.

Best regards.

Reverted by changeset/176861519

Reverted by changeset/176264474

Hallo,

wenn es nur ein Test war, wird dann das "Test" Attribut auch wieder entfernt?

Danke.

In this case, it seems the reported issues are false positives. The geometries were not changed in a way that would introduce crossings, and the tagging adjustments did not create any new conflicts. I have checked the mentioned elements and can confirm that the current configuration is valid.

Sorry for the inconvenience, and thanks again for your map edits.

Regards,
Pascal

Thank you.

Hi.

In this and some of your recent changesets, you’ve added a large number of features that appear to share very similar tagging. Could you please tell us more about the source of this data and how it was collected? Specifically, I’d like to understand whether this was a data import or derived from an external dataset.

If an external source was used, could you also confirm that its licence is compatible with OpenStreetMap’s ODbL requirements?

Best regards,
Pascal

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In this and some of your recent changesets, you’ve added a large number of features that appear to share very similar tagging. Could you please tell us more about the source of this data and how it was collected? Specifically, I’d like to understand whether this was a data import or derived from an external dataset.

If an external source was used, could you also confirm that its licence is compatible with OpenStreetMap’s ODbL requirements?

Best regards,
Pascal

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In this and some of your recent changesets, you’ve added a large number of features that appear to share very similar tagging. Could you please tell us more about the source of this data and how it was collected? Specifically, I’d like to understand whether this was a data import or derived from an external dataset.

If an external source was used, could you also confirm that its licence is compatible with OpenStreetMap’s ODbL requirements?

Best regards,
Pascal

way/24645764 v6

Hi, welcome to OSM.

In your recent changesets, you removed many mapped features. Some of them were created by you (or at least by a very similar account), while other data had been contributed by other users.

Could you please explain the reason for these (mass) deletions?

Best regards,
Pascal