Great stuff - thanks!

Hello,
Andy from the Data Working Group here. Because of the ambiguity, I suspect that it's best to roll this change back.
Anyone that sees an "amenity=lockers" locally can decide to go and visit it and decide whether it is an amenity=luggage_locker , amenity=parcel_locker or something else. In some areas the operator might be characteristic, in others it may not be.
I suspect that it's not suitable for a Maproulette task because many or most will need a survey. Perhaps have a chat with StreetComplete?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
You've added an "indoor fire alarm box" node/12121514172 that is apparently underwater?
Should it perhaps be tagged as something else?
Best Regards,
Andy

As previously noted:
Please discuss these edits in the forum first. You'll need to persuade people that:
o the data you are using has a suitable licence
o the roads are closed for long enough to make it worth changing.

The massive bounding box is perhaps due to relation edits. The actual edits are at https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155362732

Thanks both!

Spam. Same comments apply here as changeset/154646346

Hola Cubano153,

Como mencioné antes, he revertido y redactado datos modificados por conjuntos de cambios como este que usaba Google como fuente.
No podemos usar Google porque su licencia no es compatible con OSM.
Debido a la naturaleza interconectada de sus conjuntos de cambios, hay algunos ajustes que deberá realizar en esta área. Hágalo, pero no debe usar datos de Google para hacerlo.
Atentamente,
Andy Townsend, en nombre del Grupo de trabajo de datos de OSM.

Hello Cubano153,

As I mentioned earlier I've reverted and redacted data changed by changesets such as this one which used Google as a source.
We cannot use Google because its licence is not compatible with OSM.
Because of the interlinked nature of your changesets, there is some tidying up that you will need to do in this area. Please do that - but you must not use Google data to do that.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Hello Cubano153,
As has already been mentioned, we can't use Google as a source because their licence is not compatible with ours.
These changes have already been reverted, but we'll also need to redact them.
Best Regards, Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Hello,
I've already added this comment to several other "conflict changesets" here.

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
I've already added this comment to several other "conflict changesets" here.

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
I'm adding this comment to each of changeset/155077463 , changeset/155077906 , changeset/155077446 , changeset/155077894 .

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
I'm adding this comment to each of changeset/155077463 , changeset/155077906 , changeset/155077446 , changeset/155077894 .

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
I'm adding this comment to each of changeset/155077463 , changeset/155077906 , changeset/155077446 , changeset/155077894 .

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello,
I'm adding this comment to each of changeset/155077463 , changeset/155077906 , changeset/155077446 , changeset/155077894 .

Accusing each other of vandalism and reverting changes without discussion won't get us anywhere. Please discuss these changes on the forum together. Tags already exist there for https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/armenia and https://community.openstreetmap.org/tag/azerbaijan .

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

I'd suggest discussing these changes at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/undiscussed-changes-to-designation-in-england-and-wales/117463 .

Clearly UCR here is not a name, it is a designation ("unclassified_county_road") . See https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1PLS .
"designation=unclassified_highway" is used in other places to mean the same thing, but people normally tag what is signed and verifiable locally.

What was the source of the change to way/226989350/history here? Does the signage really say "unclassified_highway" rather than "unclassified_country_road"? In some areas the latter signage is pretty common?

You've said "Correcting designation to sign erected in 2022" but can we have a link to the sign?
You've changed way/35030994/history from a UCR to a BOAT (both valid designations, though the tagging of the former varies). If this really was a BOAT I'd expect it to be light red at https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#17/53.13297/-1.80330/H/P , but it isn't. Has the status been changed recently?