The overwhelming majority of OSM contributors are hobbyists or, slightly better-sounding, volunteers - you don't have to say that each time you write a changeset comment ;)

Hello, why have you set the "name:ar" tag of osm.org/node/6369206439 to "گوڵاڵە" which is clearly not Arabic?

I cannot see a castle on aerial imagery at osm.org/node/5058776734 - is it possible that this was an accident? I am exasperated at these useless auto-generated changeset comments; if this were a human-written comment we could compare the content of the message to the actual action, but with the message simply being deducted from the action, it loses this value altogether.

Dear Tomiii, in this changeset you added the name "Cigánytelep" to a street in Zámoly. We have received a message from someone in Zámoly saying that the street really does not have a name, and that this is a mistake. Do you know the town and this street name yourself, or do you remember if there was a street sign... or is it possible that this was indeed a mistake? Thank you - Frederik (DWG) (Ticket#2020010210000116)

Perhaps it would make sense to use old_name=something?

Was it wise to remove the name "Tung Chung Valley" in this changeset? It seems to be a placename of relative importance (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tung_Chung#Tung_Chung_Valley) - if it is not a "suburb" then surely it is something else, and could have been fixed instead of being removed?

Gerold, kannst Du bitte mal zum Inhalt und nicht zur Form Stellung nehmen? Ist es Deiner Ansicht nach nur ein "vermeintlicher" Fehler und soll deshalb so bleiben, oder ist es ein "tatsächlicher" Fehler, und wenn ja, wirst Du ihn korrigieren, oder wartest Du, bis es jemand anders macht? Immerhin war es ja Dein Ziel in diesem Changeset, "dummen Schwachsinn" zu korrigieren - wer sowas schreibt, von dem darf man doch mindestens erwarten, dass er es dann richtig macht, oder?

The reason for this revert is that these automated edits have not been - as far as I could see - discussed before. Several users had complained about station names like "123 km" being transliterated/translated into a multitude of languages (e.g. 14 names in osm.org/node/3781302157/history) even though we have a clear rule that we don't use name:xx for transliterations/translations.

The ESR code was added by the same undiscussed automated process so I removed it too while I was at it, though I'm happy to reinstate it if the community agrees it is useful.

osm.org/user_blocks/3326 for continuing to upset people long before the discussion has come to a conclusion. To be crystal clear: It is good to have a discussion. Until such time as the discussion clearly comes to the consensus that a certain solution is better than what we had before Verdizulo started changing name tags, the name tags we had before Verdizulo will stay in place. We will not apply any of the "ideas" raised in the discussion before we find a solution that works for all, or at least a sizable majority.

Can you explain why you have changed a few objects that are clearly schools to universities in this an neighbouring changesets?

This carpark osm.org/way/729184813 and this osm.org/way/729184810 intersect with buildings. Was there no QA/conflation done in this import?

This wall goes through buildings and a river: osm.org/way/753459719

These two buildings osm.org/way/740565056 osm.org/way/740565057 are extremely deformed and do not look like buildings on aerial imagery at all. What was the QA process in this import?

This wall goes through buildings: osm.org/way/753459676

How can it be source=survey and then so wrong? solmaps2, were you actually there to check, or was your source=survey incorrect?

Wo kommt der Name "Eichsfeld unteilbar" her. Ist da ein Schild, das diesem Garten den Namen gibt? Ist der vor Ort so bekannt?

Diese Grasflächer hat sicher nicht den Namen "Grasfläche mit Kolpinggedenkstein". Siehe: osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

osm.org/user_blocks/3309

Thank you.

http://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=70533121 shows the deleted power line (in red). I tried to find evidence for this power line on aerial imagery but saw nothing. Sowa1980, can you specify the source for your mapping of this power line last year? You wrote "source=knowledge" but surely you do not know the exact geometry of a power line. Perhaps these existing power lines osm.org/way/320746060 osm.org/way/320735774 replace the one that has been deleted? @sqrr can you say something about this?