Which are these empty multipolygons?

relation/20455856
relation/20455857

Which are these empty multipolygons?

relation/20455651
relation/20455652

See note/5228278

Please check note/5254266

The same goes for me. I will continue my QA work. If this turns out to be a problem, it needs to be addressed by the DWG.

“not half-ass it and leave it to us to clean up.”
But they can. I’m not a fan of these technically faulty changesets either, but I’m the wrong person to address this problem.

See also discussion in changeset/181170306

That may well be true, but it is not my job to punish someone; that is the responsibility of the Data Working Group (DWG).
https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Ban_Policy

changeset/133106398

No matter how stubborn we might be in these cases, these “SPAM” changesets will never stop. Therefore, it’s better to make use of this data than to keep it as junk in our database. The other option would be to delete the data, which wouldn’t help anyone either.

However, if this continues to concern you, you can contact the DWG at any time.

Please check note/5245934

Please check note/5245934

Thanks for the information. I set noname=yes in changeset/181170851

Is this the real name? Or does these ways have no name? In this case please use the tag noname=yes

Please check note/5244307

Please check note/5244296

Angepasst in changeset/181116531

Ja, das ist etwas knifflig. Die Öffnungszeiten stimmen, aber ohne Terminvereinbarung kommt man dennoch nicht rein.

Daher habe ich nun access=private und appointment=required ergänzt. Somit sind zum einen die Öffnungszeiten vorhanden (die ja nicht falsch sind) und dennoch ist klar aus den Daten erkennbar, dass man nicht ohne weiteres das Gelände besuchen kann.

Siehe auch note/5242250

What is this way? It looks very strange.

Please check note/5226688

Wurde von @Brummelwuff direkt geändert in changeset/178396064

Danke.

Please check note/5204182