Also: Please also write a meaningful comment, what you did exactly. Also where you got the information from. Is this your home town or have you visited this place, etc..

I refined it in changeset/173976423
so that you get an idea. As you see, the bottom right looks really weird now.

Hello Aldirinaldy,

unfortunately my Bahasa is by far not good enough to respond to you in your native language.

Welcome to openstreetmap.org. However, there are a few little things. If you map from satellite imagery, your source isn't GPS. That would be a GPS trace.
Review requested is good.
Your edit is too crude. What you mapped here is one big square residential area. But there are several properties and residential areas there. This needs to be refined. Residential areas is not the best start. Better start with mapping houses and small roads.
You erroneously closed my error note. But you didn't fix it. Only close them, when the problem is fixed.

Thanks for your service. Brazil needs a lot of mapping.

This was an accident. I will open up an issue for streetcomplete.

Ah, sehr gut. Aus der Historie und dem Changesetkommentar ging das für mich nicht hervor. Sah auf den ersten Blick nach einem Versehen aus.

Auf welcher Basis hast du way/712602909 editiert?

Warum hast du roof:shape etc. von way/28557064 entfernt?

Deine Edits enthalten zu viele Nodes. Der Waldrand ist nicht die Silhouette des Kronendachs der Bäume, sondern die gedachte Linie am Boden.
So wie hier: way/1279983011
Ich habe hier eine Reihe Knoten entfernt.

Das würde nicht weiter stören, wenn es nicht die Bearbeitung extrem aufwändig machen würde.

Ich bin über das hier darauf gestoßen:
osm.org/#map=19/47.81507/12.84598 Das schaut alles schön rund aus, aber es gibt die Optik und nicht die logische Struktur wieder.

Feel free to edit. As far as I remember, this was based on a error note. I've been to this area, but not this specific place.
I always favor convergence of duplicate keys.

And additionally to that, Wilmer didn't remove my contributions after the DWG-guy talked to him. Not even the ones in Venezuela.

Yes, I got in touch, as I mentioned. I also got in touch with the DWG and one of them talked to him diplomatically (forgot, what it was). I didn't ignore previously mapped entitites. Also wrong. There were some national reserves, that were double tagged as forests, which is a bad idea. If I need a cut out from the forest, I cut out the national reserve. So, I separated it. I was mainly mapping in Brazil, touched Venezuela only a bit.
There was nothing, which was removed from the map. Removing massive contributions without change set discussion is absolutely unacceptable. I would never (!) do that. Never.
And up to this day: Not a single person in Brazil though, it is necessary to remove any contribution, I made 4 years ago. They still all exist.
Why did I not get in contact with the Venezuelian community? What for? I gave up on Venezuela. I won't map there. Simple as that.

Beside the fact, that this is total nonsense. Simply claiming "this is right" and "this is wrong", doesn't make it right or wrong. The tiles have several advantages. One of them is, that they can be edited in ID, another one being, that the map tiler has a limited dataset for the calculation of one map tile. Otherwise the map tiler must evaluate a 10.000 point polygon for a map tile of 1x1km. That makes no sense. What Wilmer Osario claims, makes neither from a mapping perspective, nor from a technical perspective sense. But he deleted without (!) discussion and without (!) asking anyting hours of work. I refrain from writing, what I think about this person.
And furthermore: The mapazonia people agreed with my method of mapping. The only improvement would be diamond tiles with four outer lines, each member of two polygon relations.

You changed way/962957146 to the outdated version.

Stimmen die Häuser in Eisenburg (Schnaidweg/Amendinger Straße)? Die Häuser, die im Luftbild zu sehen sind, wurden abgerissen. Ich sehe aber in keinem neuen Bild den Neubau. Ist das der Neubau und stimmt der sicher?

Ich denke, Sie meinen westlich. Östlich sind sie ja angeschlossen. Soweit ich das sehen kann, enden die im Leeren. Was ich nicht erkennen kann und auch nicht in der Erinnerung habe, ist ob am Ende ein Zaun ist.Vermutlich ja.

I did this based on the description of osm.wiki/Simple_3D_Buildings at the very bottom.
The main problem I see here, is the fact, that there is a chaos of 3D-tagging schemes.

Furthermore, the question arises, what 3D tagging makes sense at all. After some point, there should be a dedicated 3D model. But there is no proper 3D-project like OSM.

Ich meine nur, dass die auch liegenbleiben dürfen. Der RSS-Feed würde mich auch interessieren.

Wenn du willst, kannst du gerne die Notes von mir bearbeiten. Ich verwende die nur sehr oft, wenn etwas geändert werden muss, ich das mobil aber schlecht anpassen kann. In der Regel schließe ich die meisten selbst wieder.

Should the chapel in Traunstein really have tourism=attraction as a separate node?