Hello huanzai, what is a "lanelet" relation, what is "role=regulatory_element", and why do your ways have approximately one node every 5 meters?

What do you mean with "change road rev for Rand McNally maps" - you are not copying data from Rand McNally are you?

Why did you delete the country node for Palestine?

Why were village names deleted in this changeset?

Dear RB, I am slightly concerned by your choice of words: "Thank you for your opinion". I might not have made myself clear enough. When I asked you to stop importing data, that was not an opinion, but a request of the OSMF Data Working Group that you would ignore at your own peril. I think the question of whether you deleted any data is not an "opinion" either; look at the list below this comment and you will see that this changeset alone has deleted 1 relation, 33 ways, and over 3500 nodes. Also a before-after comparison like I did in my image shows that detail was lost in the process.

Hallo "vorsignal", OpenStreetMap hat einen Benutzer in Dresden wegen massiven Fehlverhaltens dauerhaft gesperrt, Bitte trage daher keine "Korrekturen im Auftrag eines unbekannten Users" ein, denn es dürfte sich dabei mit an Sicherheit grenzender Wahrscheinlichkeit um genau diese Person handeln, die auf diese Weise versucht, ihre Sperre zu umgehen.

RB, the wiki page you cite is not a carte-blanche for undiscussed CLC imports. You are expected to discuss your import on the imports mailing list nonetheless. Many people are of the opinion that CLC data is too old to be valuable. You appear to have deleted a large amount of data, partly forest polygons that were drawn from aerial imagery and much more current and detailed compared to what you have imported, for example see this area:http://www.remote.org/frederik/tmp/deletion.png. Deleting and replacing data is NOT the right approach to "harmonize new data with previous existing polygons" - you are destroying careful and valuable work that people have invested and replacing it with older, less accurate data. Please stop this import immediately and repair the damage that you have done.

This appears to be an undiscussed and faulty import of data that's more than 10 years old, with partially overlapping polygons. Can you explain?

Please explain where the required discussion about this import was held before the import was performed.

See https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2016-July/076296.html

Could you point me to the forum or mailing list where this changeset is being discussed? Only a few days ago I received inquiries from user "tuxayo" about this and I can hardly believe it is accidental that several people stumble across a year-old changeset?

Please explain why you have made this revert. Also, what does source=survey mean in this context?

I am now reverting these edits since I haven't had any reply from you.

Dear user asdfqwer51, there is a suspicion that you are using unsuitable third-party sources to enter your data. For example this changeset created two schools, but these schools do not exist on the ground - construction has not even started. Apart from the fact that it is wrong to tag schools where only plans exist, how do you know that there are plans? Please specify your sources. The "Bing" aerial imagery shows only fields where you are mapping roads and buildings. Please note that, should it turn out that you're using copyrighted material e.g. aerial imagery or maps from Naver, we will have to remove all your edits made with these sources.

A simplified, auto-translated Korean version follows.

우리에게 당신의 데이터 소스를 알려주세요. 은 "빙"이미지는 농업을 표시하고 당신은 도로와 건물을 받고있다. 당신이 그린 학교는 존재하지 않습니다. 당신은 다른지도 나 네이버 이미지에서 정보를 복사 할 수 없습니다.

In this and a couple nearby changesets you seem to be re-adding data that was removed by DWG because it was illegally copied from a copyrighted source. What is your source for adding this information?

Hi, are you sure the source of this is Bing? Frankly it looks like you might have been using a third-party source, for example how does Bing tell you to subdivide a building like this: osm.org/way/381036028 ? Please comment.

Dear zohre2109, please don't draw rectangles tagged just "area=yes", they don't mean anything! Please also try and use a better changeset comment - as a rule of thumb, any changeset comment that fits all of your edits cannot be a good one! I told you so in this changset comment osm.org/changeset/39556453 10 days ago.

I would appreciate it if you could use more precise changeset comments. I can see from the changeset that you edited a waterway but what exactly are you "fixing" (and, preferably, why - as you probably know, we do not usually start retagging everything just because the consensus on tagging changes!)

Dear zohre2109, thank you or your contributions to OSM. Please do not put house nunbers in the "name" tag, they belong in "addr:housenumber". You have also put house numbers in "addr:city", this is not correct either.

Please try to find a good description of your chnages when you upload; "ya ispravila zdaniye po karte bing" is not a good description because it is the same for every edit you make.

Please do NOT add house numbers into the name tag. Also, it would be helpful if you could group several changes into changesets instead of uploading every change individually, and then use a proper changeset comment instead of labelling every single one of your edits "ya ispravila zdaniye po karte bing". That would make it easier for others to understand what you are doing!