Changed from steles to war memorials, as it is their primary task. Can be changed back to steles or be used as multivalue.
The inscriptions for bigger steles, unfortunately, exceed the limit of 255 characters, so I left the URL with all texts. Can be transformed to Wikidata objects with inscription key.

Please see osm.org/changeset/90128911 and https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/Nbhc3DVk8GQrZfC2t7CaTu
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/90311470

Это неверное смещение парковки, старое было правильным. Причина в том, что спутниковые снимки Bing имеют небольшой сдвиг и изначально координаты точки карты OSM и её отображение на этих спутниковых картах не совпадают.
В этом плане лучше спутниковые снимки Esri - поставьте их и убедитесь, что ваши правки по сдвигам были откачены как раз к этим снимкам.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89556194

Добро пожаловать на OpenStreetMap, некоммерческий проект по созданию открытой карты мира!
Пожалуйста, не вносите изменения, основываясь на данных Google, в особенности Google Maps. Политика использования данных Google противоречит принципам открытых карт OSM. В этом смысле самый достоверный источник - это Ваши наблюдения непосредственно на месте.

This shifting of bridge is somewhat incorrect, as it relies on satellite imagery and not real gps data. You can verify it by enabling Mapillary imagery in Map data panel - your tracks appear now as partially "hanging" above water. You can see that this bridge is straight, whereas you've introduced some kind of turn here. The problem here is that Maxar imagery isn't always correctly offsetted, you can even see some tiling artifact at the north end of the bridge - the parts of road are not correctly connected. Esri imagery with default offset is much better in this case. You can see that your Mapillary images align pretty good with these satellite images and error is not more than 1m, can be explained with GPS inaccuracy
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89135597

The building itself isn't named Latvijas Ģeotelpiskās informācijas aģentūra (LĢIA), it's LĢIA, which resides in this building -> 2 features are required - area for house and point for LĢIA with the same address
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89167382

For tagging rows of garages building=garages should be used. building=garage is used to tag single-user garage
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/89137689

The corners of buildings are typically exactly 90 degrees. Unfortunately, it is pretty hard to achieve such result manually. There exists an option in iD editor to square a single corner (point) or complete building (area) by right-clicking an object and selecting according entry. Unfortunately, some manual correction and repeated squaring operation are often required.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88928411

The corners of buildings are typically exactly 90 degrees. Unfortunately, it is pretty hard to achieve such result manually. There exists an option in iD editor to square a single corner (point) or complete building (area) by right-clicking an object and selecting according entry. Unfortunately, some manual correction and repeated squaring operation are often required.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88928650

There is no need to tag simple polygon of a single building as multipoligon with several connected lines
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/88996635

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap! It looks like together with intended edits you've removed some valuable tags, especially building=yes tag. That's why the institute isn't shown as building anymore.
Other questions could be: does this building have no defibrillator access anymore? Cannot this building be called ZM 1 anymore?
Moreover, the address of the SICP node needs to be updated if it has moved into other building.

Was Cita santehnika really closed down?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86675574

Do these new footpaths near the main road also wobble from side to side in the reality or go more or less straight?
In general - a lot of unnecessary points used, 2 points are enough to show a straight part of the road. Of course more can be used to show smoothness of a turn or to trace a narrow bendy footway in a forest. Please consider straightening paths and connecting ways.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86257630

The new way created in this changeset is tagged as an underground tunnel under this 5-story building - is it really so in the reality? As I understand tunnel=building_passage is more preferred for a way through buildings, where only the part under the building is tagged so, not the whole way.
If it was meant to be a way through the shop - I'm unsure whether this way belongs here, maybe tagging both entrances is a better idea
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86367616

http://www.taiseitslatgola.lv/
osm.org/note/1849232

Also, I don't think that intermittent tag change of Sunu lake is correct. I was there last year and it is pretty full of water
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84425776

If you'll look at your changes using other imagery at https://osmcha.org/changesets/84425776, you'll see that what you've done with bing maps doesn't correspond in other imagery
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/84425776

Hi, it looks like you've used Bing maps with a default offset (0,0). This is not fully correct approach. There are multiple imageries available, and if you switch between them, you'll see that the positions of the same objects are not really the same. So it is important to adjust offsets of used imageries before mapping, it can be done at the bottom of background settings' menu. I usually adjust offset to the major roads, so the lines are approximately in the middle of the road. Additionally publicly available GPS traces can be shown to be overlayed over imagery, your own GPS track can be used too.
Also it looks like you've mapped buildings along their roofs. This is cruicial for imagery like Bing maps, because you can see that imagery was taken from some angle. But the roof doesn't define position of the house on the ground, it's basement does! In this case I like to use Maxar imagery for our region, as the photos were taken approx. at the straight angle and you can't see the walls. So a point on a roof will be the same on the ground level.
I hope, this way we can build better and correct map of Daugavpils!

Infos from website www.goodstayhotels.com/viesnicas/dinaburg-hotel/

Hi, it looks like you've messed up coordinates, because the contents of this changeset are shown near 0 N 0 E point in Atlantic Ocean