@NeisBot this change looks OK; the previous one was the problem. You can see that in the area around way/1467064038 in http://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=177219478 . What is in OSM now matches ESRI and is slightly offset from Bing. What was there before matched no available imagery.

In at least one example the deletion here is OK and the previous edit by another mapper was dubious. See changeset/176332487

Hallo padvinder,
Je hebt hier 22 dagen geleden een paar gebouwen toegevoegd, maar die lijken nu niet meer op de Bing-afbeeldingen te staan. Zo is bijvoorbeeld way/1460891851/history verwijderd. Op de afbeeldingen zie ik wel een aangrenzend gebouw dat een andere mapper heeft toegevoegd: way/1466544835, maar niet dat van jou.

Heb je enig idee wat er aan de hand kan zijn?

Met vriendelijke groet,
Andy

Hello padvinder,
You added a few buildings here 22 days ago, but they really don't seem to exist on the Bing imagery now. As an example, way/1460891851/history was deleted - on the imagery I can see an adjacent building that another mapper added way/1466544835 but not yours.
Do you have any idea what might be happening?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hallo Tewuzij, ich wollte nur sichergehen, dass du tatsächlich in Kirgisistan warst, um diese Änderung vorzunehmen. In deinem Änderungssatz steht „source=survey“, und genau dafür sind StreetComplete und SCEE gedacht – für die Bearbeitung vor Ort. Viele Grüße, Andy

Hello Tewuzij,
Just checking you actually did visit Kyrgyzstan to make this edit. Your changeset says "source=survey" and that is what StreetComplete and SCEE are for - actually making edits in person.
Best Regards,
Andy

(Anknüpfend an osm.org/user_blocks/19373)
Hallo, könnten Sie diese Änderungen bitte etwas genauer beschreiben? „Straßen aktualisiert (108 Änderungen)“ beschreibt nicht wirklich, was Sie getan haben und warum. Bitte geben Sie eine präzisere Beschreibung der vorgenommenen Änderungen an.
Viele Grüße, Andy von der OSM-Datenarbeitsgruppe

(follow-on from osm.org/user_blocks/19373)
Hello,
Can you describe these changes in a bit more detail? "Update roads (108 changes)" doesn't really describe what you did or why you did it - please use a better description of the changes that you were making.
Best Regards,
Andy, from OSM's Data Working Group.

Regarding rivers vs streams, I'd definitely suggest discussing it in the forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/us/78 and get a third and more opinions!

Merhaba,
https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/653647238 adresine baktığımda, bina adını neden kaldırdığınızı merak ettim. Yanlış mıydı?

Saygılarımla

Hello,
From looking at https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/653647238 , I just wondered why you removed the building name here. Was it wrong?
Best Regards

They have now...

This one is node/851522242#map=19/51.917125/-0.658083 .
The query is an Overpass Turbo one for all examples of that spelling - it is useful for finding spelling errors where only a few are found.

Thanks for that. However, you've said "the removal was due to us receiving user feedback" but not said what feedback you actually received?
I'm surprised that someone could send a message to a group of editors such as yourselves and have that taken at face value without any checking?

Except just now a bus has picked up at 2050 from EB.
Maybe stand in the middle and be prepared to run left or right?

OK - I've confirmed the name "Middlesmoor" matches the coordinates in the current version of the import spreadsheet that Welshie used (the original had the off by one error in it). I've updated the ref on the "real Micklefield" (which had the right name). The one below that ("MIDDLETON QUERNHOW/STW 54.2012 -1.49001") hasn't been added to OSM yet.

Thanks - I think that this one got missed because I think that people used the name in the overpass query when searching for data to fix!

Thanks!

Thanks. I'll let the dust settle before trying to join this up again - I suspect that there is more discussion at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/heavy-handed-rework-of-barbican-london/140254 to come!

I've removed and redacted the ones that I could find.