Looks like a big mistake... can you please revert your changeset?

Which access Tag is in your opinion correct?
we will not disclose the reporting person to the public in the changesets.
what exactly will you delete? are you willing to talk to us in person?

we will take a look how we can improve the quality without canibalizing the user experience. thank you for your valuable input.

I deleted the mentioned node. we will take a look how we can improve the quality without canibalizing the user experience. thank you for your valuable input.

I agree.

done

for safety reasons i added this tag: be aware, access tag is recommended, not mandatory.

I deleted defibrillator:location as well because that was not the correct location.

access=yes seems legit during opening_hours. access is a little bit of a discussion in combination with AED. See: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/access-no-auf-defibrillatoren-in-der-schweiz/118013

Please see: This entry seems reasonable to me. We take the focus on defis, not the world world around it, a missing container wouldn't be in our focus and we trust local osm communities/mappers to improve the map as well. The normal app/website user isn't an OSM user.
So how should we improv the OTG Rule? I quote "OSM data should, as far as is reasonably possible, be verifiable. The principle applies to tags and other aspects of data representation and essentially means another mapper should be able to come to the same place and collect the same data ("verify" the data you have entered). This principle excludes hypothetical or opinionated data like personal ratings."

It seems that this entry can be proved on point.
How would you do it, if you were us?

This entry seems reasonable to me. We take the focus on defis, not the world world around it, a missing container wouldn't be in our focus and we trust local osm communities/mappers to improve the map as well. The normal app/website user isn't an OSM user.
So how should we improv the OTG Rule? I quote "OSM data should, as far as is reasonably possible, be verifiable. The principle applies to tags and other aspects of data representation and essentially means another mapper should be able to come to the same place and collect the same data ("verify" the data you have entered). This principle excludes hypothetical or opinionated data like personal ratings."

It seems that this entry can be proved on point.
How would you do it, if you were us?

I called and asked about it. The defibrillator is located on the second floor of the building in one of the wards. So the location is correct. Why indoor=no was suddenly set there is beyond my knowledge. That also answers your question about the level.

But I would like to address one more point regarding putting in more effort. What specific suggestions for improvement do you have? We are open to any feedback and will try to implement it if possible.

Please check the description tag. It seems to be a Defi in the office of the chief of construction site... maybe it's like a container that isn't mapped?

Looks like data vandalism to me :(

@the_third_man i deleted the defi because abandoned seems not right to me.

Ich habe den Defi proforma gelöscht. Sicher ist sicher. Ich wollte ihn auch nicht nach Bern verschieben.
LG Christian

Das kann ich mir erklären. Wir hatten in einer Version der App mal einen Bug der die GPS Location nicht überprüft, resp. nachgezogen hat.

Das kann ich mir erklären. Wir hatten in einer Version der App mal einen Bug der die GPS Location nicht überprüft, resp. nachgezogen hat. Diesen Defi habe ich nun zur Sicherheit gelöscht.

Die Öffnungszeiten erscheinen mir plausibel aufgrund einer Turnhalle. Vermutlich wird nach dem letzten Training dann die Halle abgeschlossen.

Ja das war ein User-Input. Das wird nicht vorgegeben über unser Formular.