Dear user CanvecImports, I am a little concerned by the speed and volume in which you upload Canvec data. As you are certainly aware, you are expected to be diligent when importing Canvec - checking existing data against what you upload, making sure data is aligned properly, comparing with available aerial imagery etc. - are you really doing all this? We have had many issues with blindly uploaded Canvec data in the past and we prefer a slow but thorough process over a fast and sloppy one...

It appears that the only change made in this changeset was to rename the "Matterhorn" mountain to "Cervino". The changeset comment is "Correzione dati da rilevamento" which - correct me if I'm wrong - means that you surveyed something. How did you go about surveying for this name change?

This changeset appears to be an un-discussed and undocumented data import from a source which is likely not ok for use in OSM. Has this import been discussed anywhere before it was run?

It appears that about a million buildings have been imported from RUIAN without this ever being listed in the import catalogue, or on any English-language page on the Wiki. Could this be fixed?

The import has passed review on the global imports list. If changes have been made later, then the changed proposal needs to be discussed on the imports list, and then the import can be performed. You cannot document one thing and execute another.

There appears to be a problem with this import, as it imports obejcts that were explicitly not planned to be imported. See "imports" mailing list. Please do not continue the import until this is resolved.

There appears to be a problem with this import, as it imports obejcts that were explicitly not planned to be imported. See "imports" mailing list. Please do not continue the import until this is resolved.

Wie bist Du bei dieser "Adressenkorrektur" genau vorgegangen? Warum hast Du beispielsweise die Bären-Apotheke osm.org/node/69226060/history#map=19/52.51071/13.39092 verschoben? Sie hat zwar die postalische Adresse "Friedrichstr.", der Eingang ist aber von der Leipziger Str., so wie sie vorher auch eingetragen war. Hast Du diese Änderungen ohne Ortskenntnis allein anhand der Straßennamen vorgenommen? Dann sollten sie komplett revertiert werden.

This appears to me to be an un-discussed and rather useless import, since the roughly 4000 nodes carry no tags that mean anything in OSM. Can you explain?

Dear user drakopineda, please explain what leads you to assume that there is indeed a lake where you drew "Holoi Lake". Please understand that OpenStreetMap is a shared database of facts, and has no place for fiction.

Dear user drakopineda, please explain what leads you to assume that there is a city here. Please understand that OpenStreetMap is a shared database of facts, and has no place for fiction.

I have reverted three admin boundaries that were clearly imported and over-attributed.

Frankly, no - is *any* of these web sites more than a database of transliterated place names? I saw hotel listings, tour operators, and weather pages, all obviously using a generic catalogue of transliterated place names. These sites would generate a place page for any remote village that has a hotel or a weather station. Just because you can write a name in the cyrillic alphabet doesn't mean the place *has* that name. Actual humans have to know the place by that name for that to be the case.

What is the source of these names? For example, Russian names of "Swadlincote" or "Great Dunmow"? Is there any evidence of these places actually having a name in Russian, or are these just transliterations?

Hello StephenDavis, as you probably know all data imports to OSM are subject to our import guidelines (osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines) which include, among other things, that a public discussion is required before the import. I cannot immediately see the discussion of your LINZ import. Please explain.

Hello Omnific, as you probably know all data imports to OSM are subject to our import guidelines (osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines) which include, among other things, that a public discussion is required before the import. I cannot immediately see the discussion of your Charlotte import, or a mention in the import catalogue. Please explain.

I second Amaroussi's concerns; can you give a reason for making this change? Else I suggest it should be reverted.

I have reverted this changeset. Please do not modify Gibraltar territorial waters at this time; Data Working Group are looking into the situation and will recommend a solution.

What is the practical use of a railway track marked highspeed=yes when this duplicates information from a relation? Is OpenRailwayMap unable to make the link between the relation and the track? -- Your maxspeed argument misses the point. If a road is tagged maxspeed=65 then I can legally go at 65 unless traffic or weather prohibit it; however what we're discussing here is sections of track that cannot be legally used at high speed but are still tagged as such.

Leider ist nicht der Inhalt Deiner Löschungen das Problem, sondern die Form, die Du mit "Sorry... gehen leider nicht anders" nicht entschuldigen kannst.