I've mapped where it ends and don't see why you are asking.

Only at this point, after the bridge, where it's clearly not bicycle infrastructure. There is a sudden change of surface, smoothness, width and safety and the path stops possessing any qualities of being intentionally designed for bicycles. After the descent it gets wide and more safe for everyone again.

Only the first one is important here and I disagree. I do not define it as kergliiklustee or "jalgratta- ja jalgtee".

There are many paths connected to it, but they don't become bicycle=designated just by being connected to it. Same as this small part is connected to parts which are bicycle-pedestrian ways, but it doesn't become bicycle=designated. Same as the thing teeregister calls Kitsarööpa doesn't have the same surface or width in all of it's parts, this part is not bicycle=designated, while others are.

I've presented my arguments and I'm not backing down from using wiki definition of bicycle=designated. I don't see this discussion going anywhere. If you wish to continue you can bring this to wider OSM community and this may change my opinion.

It doesn't matter

1) This is a different place, I don't question the tags there, only on this small part of the path
2) I've brought this argument as why it's not designed for cycling since it's impeded there and pedestrians can create a dangerous situation when a cyclist uses front break without thinking and looses traction on descent while making a turn.

bicycle=designated tag does not describe how often it's used

I'm leaving it as is, which is being tagged according to wiki.

What would be the benefit of having bicycle designated there?

1) There are no signs.
2) It's narrow and used by pedestrians
3) It's a descent with a turn and unpaved surface which is not safe and cyclists with reduced coordination ability, such as elderly, can get seriously hurt. Not something you expect not on a track in city.
4) Routing is still available there as it's not forbidden to ride a bike there.

In conclusion reverting this change would contradict the description of designated value, which states that it must be specifically designed for bicycles and contradict "on the ground" rule.

We must show the truth, not copy incorrect Tallinn maps.

Two summers ago I ride along a national bike route on a loose gravel road where I've been constantly losing my balance and even got hurt when falling. On a hybrid bike. Was it a bicycle=designated road too, then?

I've removed cycleway from that part of the path

I agree. I don't even see segregation, but maybe imagery is outdated, bicycle parking looks a lot smaller there too.

I'd say there are cases when two ways are ok. When the road is segregated and really wide. Like here
way/858682902

or some parts here when they come together
way/1191470364

But in this case it looks strange.

Paths are used by all routers I know of which support cycling routing since it's an old convention. Do you have an example of router which doesn't? I think Komoot, organicmaps, brouter, osmand all support paths.

I'm not up for reverting things back and forth without a reason. It's not incorrect, but also not more correct.

*on the ground

Tallinn's map is a fantasy map. In the ground bridge connection to the western part is not designated at all.

Hi, please don't change
highway=path
to
highway=cycleway

highway=path is regarded as a more correct value for combined bicycle-pedestrian paths by some mappers and we don't want edit wars.

Here are some tips on mapping cycleways in Estonia

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/mapping-cycleways-in-estonia/104894/4

Please always check for warnings before saving. On the junction you've changed here node/81587170#map=19/59.31236/24.63114 cycleway is not connected to carrigeways it crosses. No routing software would be able to plot a route with a switch from cycleway to carrigeway or vice versa

Is bridge over Ehitajate tee really a cycleway? I don't remember any signs there. Western descent from it is definitely not designated and may proove challenging for some people and some tires.

Nice!

When editing, make sure you aren't removing some else's work and details.

way/486295059

Here, crossing-related tags were removed.

Multiple footway=sidewalk were removed. It's ok to leave them even if it's not a "footway" anymore.

Has anything been changed here?

aerial imagery from March suggests that everything is in place

https://fotoladu.maaamet.ee/etak.php?B=59.35221346053511&L=24.61018345038208&fotoladu

Hi, adding name to this path
way/1225910801
is probably accidental

Hi, do you know if this can be deleted?
node/4242321443
it seems that goods are delivered on ship's deck
https://fi.tallink.com/ostosristeilyt-tallinnaan-old

Hi, do you know if this can be deleted?
node/4242321443
it seems that goods are delivered on ship's deck
https://fi.tallink.com/ostosristeilyt-tallinnaan-old

Hi, does the Uus turg area behind Estonia really count as Tammsaare park? What's the source for this?