Ok. The junction used to be a bit different some years ago. The turn restrictions were probably not adjusted. Now everything seems to be fine.

Hi. As far as I can see on mapillary these turn restrictions seem to be incorrect anyway. If they were correct I would only adjust them to make this left turn possible. But as I said, I see no reason for the restriction you mentioned and the following one in the first place. osm.org/relation/5334041

Ok, how do I know where this is?
In your recent change you mapped two ferry routes sharing nodes which breaks routing. I have fixed that now together with some other changes. Could you please check that I did not interfere with the protected area?

Hi, I think aeroway=parking_position would be better for parking positions than aeroway=taxiway

Why are you tagging squares as parks and why are you connecting them to the highways?
leisure=park is definitively the wrong tag here. I will revert your changesets.

"[...] This rule also means not to map [...] objects without a fixed location that are easily or regularly moved."
Source: osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features

Für sowas habe jetzt leider keine Zeit. Wende dich bitte an eine Mailing-Liste oder ans Forum um da mal Kund zu tun, dass 628 (77%) der Flughäfen in Deutschland falsch eingezeichnet sind.
https://lists.openstreetmap.de/mailman/listinfo/berlin
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-de

Neuling bei OSM aber schon wissen, was alles falsch ist? Das sind immer die, die am meisten Spaß machen.
Ich wiederhole mich noch einmal. Hier ist alles richtig, dass das Symbol nicht angezeigt wird, ich gehe mal davon aus, dass Carto gemeint ist, ist definitiv nicht dem Mapping geschuldet.

Was bitte soll nicht funktionieren?

Das stimmt ja mal hinten und vorne nicht.
osm.wiki/DE:Points_of_interest#POIs_in_OpenStreetMap
osm.wiki/DE:One_feature,_one_OSM_element

The wiki can be changed but there should be discussions about it and first of all these runway sections needed to be added in the first place. There have been suggestions a long time ago: osm.wiki/Talk:Aeroways#Sections_of_a_runway
I suppose that those guys just tagged the runways in a way they thought was appropriate. Did you have a look at this at a global scale?
'observe how things are done' - of course. That is still my suggestion to new members and most of the time it is the right way to go but what I did not mean was observe how things were done 5 years ago. There are a lot of deprecated features that might not be wise to use anymore. Keep in mind as well that OSM if full of errors.
Back to the runway sections. In my opinion these ends are part of 'both' runways as you would call it, because in emergency use of a runway they may serve as overrun areas. That is to say that all sections might be used in both directions, but some only in emergency use of a runway which is still a valid use.

Just so that you don't get me wrong, 'new user' was not supposed to sound negative.

To be honest this blast_pad and displaced_threshold thing was not widely spread. I stumbled about it at some point of time and I then added way more than there have been before to airports around the world. There is no rule for these appendixes of runways but they are officially part of the runway, that is why I added them as ways and not as nodes.
The wiki says that runways should be tagged with both numbers. I know that some runway ends have been tagged only with one number but there were just a minority on a global scale.
If you don't know taginfo, check it out. You can display the tags on a map if you click on 'Overpass Turbo' in the top right. It is a cool and very useful tool. https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/?key=runway&value=displaced_threshold#overview

1. OSM will never be accurate enough for air traffic.
2. There is the rule that for one physical object there should only be one element in OSM.
Have a look at the wiki: osm.wiki/Tag:aeroway%3Drunway

Your account is quite new so I suppose that you are new to OSM. Some new members tend to make drastic changes to the data because they think that things are done wrong, but usually those changes to more harm than good. To begin please observe how things are done and check the wiki if you are not sure. You also have the option to ask on your local mailing list or the forum.

I fixed some things but I don't see why thresholds and blast pads should not carry the full name of the runway.

Joa, könnte man so sagen. Danke für den Hinweis. Die Regel ist ja aber eindeutig erkennbar, ich werde es kurz anpassen.

Hi, definitively no import here. Sorry if I made a mistake. I did only delete airports tagged as nodes and polygons at the same time, but prior to that I copied the information form the node to the existing polygone. Maybe I oversaw those brackets. I don't think that I did copy that info from wikipedia including brackets. Please fix this if you know better.

OSM is a database, not a map. You can render a map from this database and that is what Mapnik does. There are a ton of things that are not rendered by Mapnik at all. But those might be rendered by others. Just because Mapnik does not render parking_positions you should not tag them incorrectly to show up in Mapnik.
Just continue reading the site I showed you: "Don't deliberately enter data incorrectly for the renderer." This is what you are doing.

Tagging for the renderer is commonly disliked in OSM. This means that you should not use tags to make things show up on a specific map. If you want a certain thing to show up on a map then you need to create your own map with your own renderer. Just because nobody did notice before does not make it right. There is a tag for parking positions so there is no need to use a wrong one.
osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Hi, why do you keep tagging parking_positions as taxiways?

@FreedSky: I don't know to whom you are referring to as "you" and "he" and I don't think that "the definition" exists.
@Austin Zhu: If you have read a lot of books then you certainly know more about this topic than I do, I only got my info from Wikipedia. I still would not consider these areas as part of the runway but if you do that is fine for me as long as you don't just want them to be rendered in grey.