An aerial picture

The status is "de facto" which is quite usual osm.wiki/Tag:sport%3Dmodel_aerodrome. It was documented 10 years ago, so it's safe to say it's established osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Tag:sport%3Dmodel_aerodrome&action=history. You could probably amend the rocket usage in the wiki to make it clearer for the next affected user (which otherwise needs to search in taginfo as I did)

The "wider variety" is what I'd prefer instead of inventing a new expression from scratch. What's the problem with
model_aerodrome:aeroway=launchpad ? The first part says "not meant for the professional stuff", the second it's about flight (same as for the "big" rockets), the third says which type. There are lots of similar namespaces, it's just that model rockets seem to be a niche up to now. Compare with those values : https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=model_aerodrome. There are 16 032 (big) "aerodromes" in the US (and Canada) https://taginfo.geofabrik.de/north-america:us/tags/aeroway=aerodrome#overview

"Gar nicht von mir zu verantworten" war bei mir auch. Und unzusammenhängendes Geschwurbel. Angeblich soll das wiki "die Bibel" sein. Hat aber nicht auf die entsprechenden Stellen hingewiesen. Sinnvolle Ergänzungen zu überbügeln da sich jemand als Lokalfürst fühlt geht jedenfalls nicht.

Tickt er immer so ?

Das ist nicht "restored", sondern "zerstört". Was soll an der Ergänzung falsch gewesen sein ?

Am Gebiet habe ich überhaupt nichts verändert, habe ausschliesslich Parameter hinzugefügt. Und landuse ist genau dazu gedacht : osm.wiki/Land_use#Mapping_large_uninterrupted_areas | osm.wiki/Tag:landuse%3Dindustrial#Tags_used_in_combination

Found this one : https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/model_aerodrome%3Aaeroway#overview

You're welcome, just stumbled on it. Anyway I think there should be a parameter to search for private rocket launch sites, similar to osm.wiki/Tag%3Aweather_control%3Dlaunchpad or osm.wiki/Tag:military%3Dlaunchpad. But leisure / amenity IMHO doesn't fit. Any idea ?

@Matija : as already mentioned it should have been discussed 5 years ago here : https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036119.html

Check taginfo to get an impression whether you think any tool may use this data (in a structured way): https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=service%3Avehicle%3A#keys

Not really, there's car:parts=yes;used. The question is whether batteries need to be listed separately. It's not really uncommon. In other words, standard

I know, but not as dangerous as arbitrary introductions to the ID editor which create a big mess https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2018-May/036119.html

The reason is that any repair first requires diagnostics ? If there should be anything else meant it should be documented, otherwise it's incomprehensible what this tag means osm.wiki/Any_tags_you_like

Nein, gemäss Anruf nicht. War vermutlich eine (falsch ?-) Info von Facebook

Dann schau doch mal vor Ort, ob die Riedlinger zufälligerweise ein ganz anderes Logo haben als alle anderen

Meinst Du das mit vor Ort ? https://assets.ntz.de/SM/images/2014-10-01/nzwz-69dc8fa7-cffe-4747-b8e2-6342c9ab5dfa_F32.jpg

Here's a documentation osm.wiki/Shop_suffix#Website

For the whole Piedmont : redazione.centrale@regione.piemonte.it

Hi, thanks for the hint. The relation contains several "tracks" which were at least last year still allowed (even for mobilehomes), they charge a toll to enter the valley. There's no general law which forbids offroad riding (unless there was a rumor last year that this would be introduced). I recommend the local Massimiliano Ticli to clarify : https://www.comune.salbertrand.to.it/amministrazione/consiglio-comunale-2 or Info.Bardonecchia@TurismoTorino.org

Simply describe it here which is the "correct logic" / namespace principle : osm.wiki/Key:logistics