sheldonelectric, please stop doing this and seek a consensus in the German forum before you continue. Your use of the "name" tag to describe the operator and location is not appreciated in Germany, and there is no consensus on mapping the "charge" (and you haven't specified a source for this information).

appears user deleted their own contributions?

In response to osm.org/user_blocks/20083 I have received the response that this is indeed a name used locally and unless I hear otherwise from a local, I'll trust the mapper that his is correct.

Die DWG schaut sich das an. Rainero kann aber mit dem Revert weitermachen, das kommt sich mit einer eventuellen "redaction" nicht in die Quere.

Aerial imagery seems to support this deletion.

Dear Municipality_of_Tuzi_Official, this undiscussed and buggy import has been reverted. You must discuss any data imports with the community in advance. Had you done this, the community would have alerted you to many problems with your plan, such as duplicating existing roads, or that we don't want a "FID" attribute in OSM, or a source attribute on every object, or a "name_en" that simply duplicates the local name. Please follow our rules on imports osm.wiki/Import if you want to import data into OSM.

Ich habe gestern persönlich mit dem Benutzer EinEngener gesprochen und ich denke, dass er verstanden hat, worum es geht, und sich künftig bemühen wird, Missverständnisse wie dieses hier zu vermeiden. Konkret sind die Einträge hier wohl auf einer längeren Autobahnfahrt enstanden, source=survey wäre also korrekt gewesen.

Hallo Jakob48, ich habe keine Ortskenntnis aber ich hatte wegen der Marienschlucht Email-Verkehr mit der Gemeinde, dort teilte man mir vorgestern bezüglich dieses Weges hier folgendes mit: "dieser Weg bleibt vorerst gesperrt. Hier müssen noch einige Arbeiten vorgenommen werden und die Zuständigkeiten geklärt werden. Er ist im Moment nicht begehbar." - das klingt für mich nicht nach "dauerhaft gesperrt", aber es kann natürlich noch ein Weilchen dauern...

Aerial imagery seems to support the technical infrastructure that was mapped here, and that was deleted by Purumi. Purumi, please explain which of these edits were "malicious" in your opinion.

This is an undocumented import and will be reverted. Please follow the import guidelines (osm.wiki/Import) and discuss your import with the community before you continue.

looks legit - micro landuse cleanup

Edits look legit.

Block on Soós Péter extended to 10 years (and a request to contact DWG to get the account unblocked) for circumventing a block by sock puppetry.

osm.org/user_blocks/20033

Please urgently improve your changeset comments; "fixing stuff" or "auditing $PLACENAME" is not a good changeset comment.

Dear boocha34, would you please comment on the alt_name in node/13196374343 - is that supposed to be a joke or is there a source for this?

Dear OpenStreetMapLover2026, please take note of the above comment. You have been active since, but you haven't fixed this issue yet!

As a general remark: The fact that a Wikidata entry links to an OSM object is NEVER a reason not to delete or renumber the OSM object. OSM mappers are not responsible for updating Wikidata; linking to hard-coded OSM IDs is not recommended for precisely this reason.

Dear AdamVista, aerial imagery does not show any construction going on here. It is possible that imagery is outdated but you will have to provide sources that show there is actual construction going on.

Der AdamVista, a "proposed" highway cannot come from satellite imagery, you need to specify the source of the information.