I can see the shelters in the SDFE aerial imagery, so I have moved them a bit

Jeg har rettet dette

Hvorfor har du placeret denne her på en mark lige nord for Slagelse?

I've been trying to spot this in Mapillary (https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/7ArTocvr8wQJPjKW1e7r8q), but so far without any luck. What should I look for?

I have reverted this changeset. Please note that the imagery you used here, appears to be old and badly aligned. When mapping in Denmark please use the national danish SDFE aerial imagery which is refreshed every spring

Jeg har tagget bygningen her, som bygning igen (Jeg formoder det skyldes en misforståelse at du slettede building=yes tagget)

I stedet for at slette f.eks. bygninger og erstatte dem med nye, ser vi gerne at man (som JOSM bruger) anvender osm.wiki/JOSM/Plugins/utilsplugin2#Replace_geometry_.28Ctrl.2BShift.2BG.29

På den måde bevares historikken.

Please note that I have moved the church back onto the building.

Bemærk at de punkter du har flyttet ikke er indgange, men derimod adresser og at vores bot automatisk flytter "vildfarne" adresser tilbage til deres positioner i DAR

Why are you adding names in german to objects in Denmark?

Please note that I have reverted this change. Please take note of comments on your changesets as well as private messages. You didn't respond to any of several comments on your recent changesets

Super. Tak for rettelserne :-)

Ja, jeg opdagede det da jeg kiggede på nogle ændringer, som en svensker har foretaget med et værktøj.
Tak for svar. Det er godt lige at have en fornemmelse for om fjernelsen har skyldtes en misforståelse eller en teknisk fejl.

Jeg tror lige jeg bliver nødt til at gennemgå det her. Der er en del af disse ændringer, der ser ret uheldige ud.

osm.org/way/27933767 og osm.org/way/194271498 ser ikke rigtige ud

Du kan få lov at studere https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=75934511 :-)

Hvorfor slettede du de her wiki tags?

Welcome to OSM and thank you for your contribution :-)
I basically changed some of the turn restrictions:
* osm.org/relation/10273853
* osm.org/relation/10273856
* osm.org/relation/10273855
This allowed me to scrap several of the turn restrictions you created. The situation here should now be much easier to understand and eventually edit further.

I have simplified the turn restrictions here

I must admit I don't get their conclusion. In my experience there's very rarely any real need for links to both a category and an individual image. I always use either one or the other.