Hi!
Please review way way/7712049
It seems you changed that way accidentially.

Okay. What do you propose as correction?

Hi!
Do you know if this way way/216444836 is connected to
node/4692097575 ?

Hi! Please review:
You used the unusual taghighway=nonexistent
to map a way that no longer exists.
way/399401575
Do you know if that path ever existed?
I think either was:highway=path or maybe
histioric:highway=path are feasable.
See osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Hi! Please review:
You used unusual tags like highway="doesnot exist!"
or highway="doesnotexist!"
to map a way that no longer exists.
way/70911839
way/437461426
Do you know if that track ever existed?
I think either was:highway=track or maybe
histioric:highway=track are feasable.
See osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

Hi!
I've noticed this changeset because of the typo highway=Farmington Canal
on way/496240468
You seem to use the name tag to describe the object. This is not good, see
name=*
If you think that a further description is needed you can use description=* or add a note.

I've changed it to height now.

I've tried to correct it, see changeset/51799211

Hi and welcome to OSM!
The ususual tag for this is amenity=weighbridge, see osm.wiki/Tag%3Aamenity%3Dweighbridge
for details how to map

Moin!
Bitte mal prüfen:
Du hast einige Wege mit dem unüblichem tag highway=footpath erzeugt. Sind das highway=path oder highway=footway?
http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/rwm

I've fixed them now, see changeset/51798478

Hi!
Please review turn:lanes=slight_left;through|slight_right|slight_right;reverse
on way
way/481455523#map=14/24.8069/67.0669
It seems you have combined two ways with different turn:lanes values here so that the result is invalid.
Please be very careful when combining ways, there is normally a good reason why they are separated.

Good question. I think whenever you use a tag value for the first time you should try to find a wiki page for it and check taginfo.
So, in this case you might as well use highway=abandoned + abandoned=path
if you like this better.

Hi!
Please review typo oneway=70 on
way/437669283

Hi! Please review typo oneway=RD4
No idea what you meant with this.

Hi!
Please review typo oneway=yes + oneway:bicycle=no+cycleway=opposite
I assume these should be 3 tags,
but cycleway=opposite
doesn't match the changeset comment "bicycles allowed in both directions"

Hi!
Please review typo oneway=Buckner Ridge
on way/521289895

Hi!
Please review typo oneway=surface on
way/26401507

Moin!
Was bedeutet denn oneway=bollard an
den nord-östlichen Stücken der Wilhelm-Hoegner-Straße ? Tippfehler ?

Hi!
Please review way way/409080024
Isn't this a junction=roundabout which would be highway=primary and oneway=yes ?
Current Bing pictures show the roads at very different posotions now.