Re note/161072 , I'm not sure what the original issue was. 10 years ago it was like https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2fP3 . Since then way/763513258 as been added. According to local authority PRoW data it is a public footpath: https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#16/52.6415/-0.9379/H/P , but so are many others.

OK, I've changed that back in changeset/174879700 . The previous conversation was in
changeset/174120016 - the author of that is the person to talk to about where it really goes!

Thanks!

Thanks - this matches my recollection.
A remaining problem here (from well before your edit) is that way/195774187 seems to go across a wall and back, but that's entirely unrelated.

> would this be considered sufficient?

Thanks - I now have one more object to keep an eye on, and something to point at when it changes.

> @FILszew/history is one just appeared BTW

Again, the same questions - what have they changed that does not match the Polish community's majority view of what road classes should be in Poland, and why?

Above I said "saying explicitly what is wrong with the way each user tagged them, why it was wrong, and if relevant where the Polish community decided that that tagging was wrong".

Unfortunately, "more unexplained undiscussed nonsense trunk category changes" et al does not answer that.

You have linked to exactly one OSM object above - https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/41189769 - and I presume you believe that "secondary" is correct there? Can you explain _why_ you believe that the majority of the Polish community think that and link to some documentation that I can read in the forum, the wiki or elsewhere?

Did that information take the form of an image or a site plan? If so, what was the licence associated with that? If not, what form did it take?

Please use meaningful changeset comments. "fix" doesn't really help anyone to understand what you were doing.
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments should give you some ideas.

Hello,
What made you think that way/304255640/history was an unclassified road?

Please tell us what source you used, otherwise we will have to revert this.

Hello,

For info I have asked these accounts to contact us:

osm.org/user_blocks/18959
osm.org/user_blocks/18960
osm.org/user_blocks/18961

Can you please give us an examples of problems with any of these users that you may be familiar with? It would help to refer to specific OSM objects (perhaps from the list in this changeset) and saying explicitly what is wrong with the way each user tagged them, why it was wrong, and if relevant where the Polish community decided that that tagging was wrong. Currently we have enough information to say "please contact us" but not any information about what they have done wrong.

Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Just checking, is this OK?
A local mapper remapped it recently to reflect some realignment due to ongoing work on the A30.
Appently it changes fairly regularly so I guess it might be back to this again...

Thanks!

(from survey)

The English wikipedia is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frauenkirche,_Dresden and actually matches my recollection of English name usage. "Church of Our Lady" is in brackets on the first line as a translation, but the name Frauenkirche is used as the name subsequently.
That approach is similar to other things that aren't translated into English, like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pont_Neuf .

Also Leeman Road in York.

Hello,
I think you accidentally added tracking information to the website - utm_source=local&utm_medium=organic&utm_campaign=oldbury .

Oops - the "website" added here seems to have tracking information in it "sc_cmp=ref*yg*stc*2428&utm_source=yext_google&utm_campaign=local_Express_&utm_medium=organic". Maybe just a cut and paste thing?

Hello,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here. Please don't add tracking links to OSM. As you will have noticed they get removed pretty quickly.
Untruths in changeset comments ("Added more information abou the store ") is also not appreciated.