@grin If you believe that "surface=gravel" (rather than, say, grass or ground) can be inferred from context please make a small change with a description that includes that context, not (as here) a worldwide change with a misleading comment (surface=u).
It would also help to explain to some of the users of the "odd" tags what has happened (as I've done with a couple of "Earthen") ones

Привет и добро пожаловать в OpenStreetMap!

Не могли бы вы объяснить, какой у вас источник для ваших дополнений? Я уверен, что добавленные вами имена не видны на аэрофотоснимках.

С уважением,
Энди

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap!

Can you please explain what your source for your additions is? I'm sure that the names that you have added are not visible on aerial imagery.

Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
Back in changeset/27640524 we talked about using meaningful changeset comments.
Unfortunately, a comment of "fix area" doesn't really help anyone to understand what change you made, or what source you used.
Best Regards,
Andy

There are a few 50/50 calls in here. For example, way/15252260/history might be "ground" or "gravel".

@grin Even worse, this changeset isn't just "fix invalid tagging (surface=u) " - it contains a mixture of "just removing tags you don't understand" (wrong for all the reasons described above) and "reasonable guesses about what the original mapper meant" such as "surface=as" -> "surface=asphalt". I've rolled that latter ones forward again in changeset/115466850 .

The comment here should have been:
Reapplying a surface=as -> surface=asphalt change that was hidden in the tag deletions in changeset/113327203

and the source:
Previous OSM data.

For context, see the discussion on changeset/113327203 .

Hello Zaman Nazari,
You've changed "surface=unpaved" to "surface=Earthen" on way/520617964/history . When adding more detail to surface tags, it helps to look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values to see what other values other mappers and data consumers will expect - I'm sure that there's a better synonym for "Earthen" (which another mapper has since changed to "earth") higher up the list.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello Ajmal Takhnikyar,
You've changed "surface=unpaved" to "surface=Earthen" on way/580896441/history here. When adding more detail to surface tags, it helps to look at https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/surface#values to see what other values other mappers and data consumers will expect - I'm sure that there's a better synonym for "Earthen" (which another mapper has since changed to "earth") higher up the list.
Best Regards,
Andy

Normally this would have been done from the SomeoneElse_Revert account.

لقد قمت بإزالتها لأنها ليست مواقع تخييم عامة.

مرحبا،
من الواضح أن node/9370620925 (والذي يُترجم كـ "منزل") ليس موقعًا للمخيم. الرجاء عدم إضافة محددات شخصية مثل البيانات إلى OpenStreetMap. إذا كنت ترغب في إضافة إشارات مرجعية في MAPS.ME ، يرجى القيام بذلك.

Hello,
node/9370620925 (which translates as "house") is clearly not a camp site. Please don’t add personal markers like as data to OpenStreetMap. If you want to add bookmarks in MAPS.ME, please do that.

way/965042783/history is another one that does not connect to anything and has been reported to us as probably not existing. What was the source?

Does way/967666499/history really exist? It has been suggested to us that it doesn't. It doesn't connect to anything. What was the source?

... and one small gap in the Kintyre Way in Cambeltown. Nothing in between.

I've used https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1eup (the relation from 2016) to fill in some gaps here.

Hello, I've joined way/1000817343/history to the north to fix a gap in the Fife Coastal Path here. Presumably "foot=designated" means that there is a public right of way here. subject to https://www.mygov.scot/scottish-outdoor-access-code ?

It seems odd that way/1006304014#map=15/49.0992/25.1083 is residential? It doesn't look like residential on the imagery.

@grin - Andy from OpenSrteetMap's Data Working Group here. We've received a complaint about this, and other similar changes by you.
For the avoidance of doubt:
1) If you don't review each case it _is_ a mechanical edit and _does_ need to be discussed beforehand.
2) Removing an obviously invalid surface tag from e.g. way/988283137/history does _not_ improve data quality in OSM, it degrades it.
"invalid" data is easily ignored by routers and renders but is really useful to other mappers and people doing QA. For example, "surface=u" is surely just a misspelling of something, and a simple email to the original mapper of that tag would find out what that something was. Removing the tag makes it impossible to fix the data.
We'll need to review and revert this series of changesets.
Best Regards,
Andy