SHARCRASH (2021-10-03 11:25:05+00:00): Of course i take the feedback serious! Wouldn't that be weird if someone gives me a bad rating and I should not consider the reasons whereas i don't want to tamper with OSM's data and disrespect other contributors... Isn't that obvious?

About my mergings... What's the point of separating a big farmland in smaller portions if there is no difference in the tags? The elements i merged didn't have any tag difference. If they had different crops detailed, i would find that relevant and very useful but they were not. It's like if several portions of highways are split with the same tags or split hedges are side to side, it would be useless to keep them separated for nothing and even considered a bad practice. I consider this as data duplication. The next contributors will even have harder time to make their edits whether it's for editing routes, tags, etc. I should have merged even more fields since some don't correspond anymore to the exploited crops seen on latest imagery but I tend to edit more than I intended at first and lose my first intentions, so I stopped.

In extra, as I said in my previous paragraph, fields are not fixed entities. Farmers have agricultural techniques to rest and develop soil's nutrients and they also their adapt fields to demand depending how the year sold. So accordingly they change the sizes and crops time to time (yearly or bi-annual). Many contributors leave so many areas fields without any difference for so many years. In the meantime, fields structure have changed, so if people care about this separation without checking reality, they will rather be deceived. There is no point really. Example where fields changed of perimeter and of purpose 5 times between 2010 and 2019 (see Geoportail.lu photos year by year): 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/128482572 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/128482574 
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/348401124 

As for meadows, i find them more permanent and useful to differentiate. Yet, they may also change, even converted to another crop than grass (should then be tagged as farmland) and change perimeter. In this example, the farmer merged several fields separated by a fence, a meadow included, in one bigger farmland mono-culture when you compare from Geoportail.lu 2019 Winter layer to most recent: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/873210020 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/873210015 https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/873210022 

All in all, these arguments explain why i do this. It's not bad practice and certainly not vandalism. Hence why i find those multi-fields not being relevant, not useful, even deceiving and so data consuming (OSMF having new extra server needs each year), add to that, mostly when there is no specific tag differentiation. OSM rule wise or of good practice, I should recall you: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features 

You gave the argument of parcels, sorry I don't find that valid since OSM is not a land registry. As analogy, OSM contributors neither split residential parcels, even if there is a retail store on the ground floor of a big building but the rest of them are apartments. You gotta have more logical and relevant arguments compared to mine to convince me i should stop such mergings.

If you worry about OSM, it's very confusing that you pay more attention to this futile detail instead of several landuse elements overlapping and conflicting in terms of data, which I corrected. These risk to be rendered differently from layer to different layer depending how the code of each is built or give erroneous data statistics if collected... Again risk of misleading.