I recommend not reflexively lying when people catch you doing something bad. Social interactions don't work like a courtroom where people will say that they can't prove 100% what you did, therefore you are innocent. Instead they will form an opinion of you and this will shape your future interactions with everybody.

I used the word "Please". I can also be less nice.

If you want to contribute to a project, follow basic rules such as treating other members with respect. Letting AI write your texts for you is disrespectful and not conductive to collaboration.

Also, follow project rules. For Openstreetmap, automated edits are not allowed unless discussed before. Refer to osm.wiki/Automated_edits . If you discussed this mass edit somewhere, you need to put the link in the changeset comment.

Please don't use AI to write communications for you, it's really rude towards others.

Für mich sieht es korrekt aus: osm.org/directions?engine=graphhopper_car&route=47.297277%2C8.696419%3B47.299438%2C8.700716

Benutzt du eventuell eine App? Die brauchen manchmal etwas länger bis die Karten geupdatet sind, es kann da durchaus ein paar Wochen gehen.

Why did you change relation/2295971 to a "footway"? This makes no sense.

Übrigens, highway=escape sind diese Dinger: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Notfallspur_(Gef%C3%A4lle)

In einem Spital also nicht so ganz zutreffend :)

Btw for structured data like what is the key col for what mountain, wikidata is usually the better project. And in this case, Piz Linard already has it listed: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q675543

Ah sorry, didn't see that. I made separate commented changes for that, to make them easy to revert if they had an error. You can of course revert the changes and re-do them if needed.

Du hast hier mit way/1419028218 einen kreisförmige Landstrasse über andere Strassen gezogen. War das Absicht? Aus dem Luftfoto ist hier überhaupt nichts zu erkennen.

Hi. Du hast hier das Gleis 11 als separaten Bahnhof in Biel erfasst: node/11769832782

War das Absicht? Ist irgendetwas speziell am Gleis 11 dass es ein separater Bahnhof sein muss?

and I think there is one basketball field too, in the west

sorry, I don't understand the error. Are those fields on the asphalt here not for sports? maybe 2 tennis and 1 football?

An example here of bad data quality on a changeset I haven't reverted (yet maybe). Look for instance at the building way/47410770 it used to have an address on it, but you deleted it and replaced it with node/12368699975 which is a node _outside_ of the building which goes against osm.wiki/Addresses#How_to_map and makes it difficult to access by data consumers.

And there are many similar buildings in this area where the addresses are misplaced.

Now, in one way it would of course be possible to manually correct your import and move those nodes where they need to be.

But it is still very rude to overwrite other people's correct manual mapping with a quick and dirty import that just overwrites data without even checking its quality first.

Can you send me a link to the approvals discussion that you made before the imports?

It is your responsibility as someone who makes an automatic data import to ensure that it is nondestructive. It especially needs to ensure it does not destroy any data that has been manually added by a human editor, and does not blindly duplicate data.

A 30% error rate as in this case is not acceptable for an automated report. I do realize and accept that the other 70% were at least partially positive edits and added to the map. Others of your (unapproved) imports that had an error rate below 10% were left alone by me, I have only reverted those that destroyed a significant amount of human-made edits.

It is your responsibility as someone who makes an automatic data import to ensure that it is nondestructive. It especially needs to ensure it does not destroy any data that has been manually added by a human editor, and does not blindly duplicate data.

A 27% error rate as in this case is not acceptable for an automated report. I do realize and accept that the other 73% were at least partially positive edits and added to the map. Others of your (unapproved) imports that had an error rate below 10% were left alone by me, I have only reverted those that destroyed a significant amount of human-made edits.

It is your responsibility as someone who makes an automatic data import to ensure that it is nondestructive. It especially needs to ensure it does not destroy any data that has been manually added by a human editor, and does not blindly duplicate data.

A 52% error rate as in this case is not acceptable for an automated report. I do realize and accept that the other 48% were at least partially positive edits and added to the map. Others of your (unapproved) imports that had an error rate below 10% were left alone by me, I have only reverted those that destroyed a significant amount of human-made edits.

It is your responsibility as someone who makes an automatic data import to ensure that it is nondestructive. It especially needs to ensure it does not destroy any data that has been manually added by a human editor, and does not blindly duplicate data.

A 46% error rate as in this case is not acceptable for an automated report. I do realize and accept that the other 54% were at least partially. Others of your (unapproved) imports that had an error rate below 10% were left alone by me, I have only reverted those that destroyed a significant amount of human-made edits.

I have reverted this change because it made the map quality significantly worse

changeset/166004560

I have reverted this change because it made the map quality significantly worse

changeset/166004406