Hello,
What change are you actually making here? It isn't a name change.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
Please ensure that you and your team follow https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines . Currently there is no link from @borovac to any projects at osm.wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities that you might be taking part in. The only mention of Microsoft there is in "Oceania, Serbia, South America, Caribbean".
Please fix these issues immediately before any further edits.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.
PS: Documentation on your own private website (which is what github is) does not meet the requirements as set out at https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines .
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group. Please reply here or email data@openstreetmap.org if you have any questions.

Just wondered - is there really a gap between the end of way/217852800#map=19/54.10516/-8.19073 and way/1054424933 ? Both are part of the "Miner's Way & Historical Trail" but there is a gap at
relation/2885025#map=19/54.10533/-8.19065
Best Regards,
Andy

Sorry it's another world-spanning changeset. These changes were genuinely worldwide.

Thanks

Camino Mozarabe?
Shome mishtake shurely...

Hello,
Just wondered, did you do this via a JOSM revert? The changeset tags suggest you did, but the only change https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/1052845128 suggests not.
We (the DWG) have had a number of complaints about people "reverting other people's changes" (including this one) when it doesn't actually look like the net result was a revert at all.
For the avoidance of doubt, changing access=YES to access=yes seems an entirely reasonable change, with the caveat that just removing the tag would make more sense given that it is a footway with a foot=yes tag already.
Best Regards.
Andy (from the DWG)

Привет,
Каков был источник номера дома на way/949343871?
Наилучшие пожелания,
Энди

Hello,
What was the source of the housenumber on way/949343871 ?
Best Regards,
Andy

Coulton, from survey 10/4/2022, tr8728a

@Alex3271 One thing that would help - can you link to roads that have been wrongly classified as tertiary here? For example, if way/186212695 is a problem, click on that link and paste that in here. That makes it easier to understand the problem than having to work it out from co-ordinates.

To be fair, https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1hK4 "went through someone's garden" before these edits, but the fact that that wasn't spotted here suggests that there hasn't been any care and attention to what was actually there.

@Alex3271 Thanks.
@G626 Another contributor has emailed the DWG and confirmed the problem with the road that apparently goes through someone's private garden. Can you please explain these edits?

Thanks - it was supposed to be "pasture", actually.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-ca

Subscribe to the list by filling in the form at that address, confirm the email that comes your way, and then send and email to the list.

I'd suggest that you discuss it with other Canadian mappers on the talk-ca mailing list, just so that everyone is on the same page.

Yes!

For the avoidance of doubt, wikipedia's licence https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/ isn't compatible with OSM's https://opendatacommons.org/licenses/odbl/ . However, its extremely likely in this case that the there will be sources for the names that you have added (that wikipedia has itself used) that _will_ be compatible with OSM.

Hello,
Please use more descriptive comments than just "Correcting name: #somehashtag". Explain what you changed, and why you changed it.
Here https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/relation/1152717 it looks like you're correcting the spelling of a tag that you yourself previously added. No-one's going to complain about that, and if you say what you've done in the changeset everyone will know.
Best Regards,
Andy

"How: via message... obviously!"
Thanks, but that's absolutely not obvious. There are dozens of ways that OSM mappers can discuss things, and an OSM private message is just one.
I'd actually suggest changeset disccussion comments (like this one) is a better option because it means other people familiar with the area can comment too.