piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:52:16+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
zuicz (2021-09-22 13:28:00+00:00): Cześć. Proszę nie dodawać fikcyjnych nazw do mapy.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:29+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
richlv (2021-09-21 08:53:16+00:00): Hi and thank you for the great map improvements :)
Unfortunately, this changeset ended up removing a couple of roads in Ratnieki. I've done a partial revert to fix this and preserve your other changes - if you have a chance, please check the revert at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111483252 .

It is also customary to provide a bit more descriptive changeset comments than just a "." - please consider adding a bit more info on what was done in a particular changeset.
zuicz (2021-09-22 13:25:47+00:00): Cześć. Proszę nie dodawać fikcyjnych nazw do mapy.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:03:39+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:59+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
zuicz (2021-09-22 13:34:47+00:00): Cześć. Proszę, abyś opisywał swoje zmiany. Dzięki!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:57:53+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:49:38+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
eggie (2021-09-16 15:32:13+00:00): Dag Sjoemard,

Je vraagt feedback 
De Dijkwachter klopt nu..., maar... 
Je hebt nu de voetpad verbinding verwijderd, maar die is toch gewoon aanwezig in werkelijkheid?
Je edits https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=111274434

MVG
eggie
eggie (2021-09-16 15:35:31+00:00): Wanneer ik op de meest recente luchtfoto kijk van 2021 is de verbinding op Waterschapslaan ook  niet meer onderbroken.
Kijk je nog even.
Daar is nu een wandelpad ingetekend. 
Wat is je bron in deze?
eggie (2021-09-16 15:41:52+00:00): De Waterschapslaan loopt in OSM aan de zuidzijde dood met een noexit=yes
Is dat inmiddels ook al opengesteld?
Gr eggie
sjoemard (2021-09-16 18:54:21+00:00): Dag Eggie, 
Ik vroeg feedback omdat de wijzigingen die ik eergisteren deed mijn eerste waren en ze wat vreemd werden weergegeven (aansluiting Rivierpolder-dijkwachter) zoals nu nog steeds op sommige zoomniveau's.  
Heb daarom gisteren nog een node verwijderd op kruising de Rivierpolder dijkwachter. 
Het voetpad tussen de waterschapslaan en de rivierpolder teken ik er weer in. Evenals de zuidelijke verbinding waterschapslaan.
Ik werk voor de veiligheidsregio / brandweer en heb de beschikking over de landelijke cyclorama beelden. 
Bedankt voor je feedback, ik zet het vinkje aan zodat je even kunt checken of het goed is gegaan.
Groet Sjoerd

.
eggie (2021-09-16 19:40:27+00:00): Oke Sjoerd...  Ik zal zo even kijken.
Er loopt op het forum een draadje over hulp aan de VR's.
Wellicht interessant om daarin te participeren. 
https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=73716

en vooral

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=66876

Wanneer het niet gelijk goed rendert helpt CTRL-F5  (een paar keer toetsen)
Dat is je cache van je browser leegmaken.
Probeer maar.

De standaard editor in de OSM is eigenlijk JOSM. Die heeft veel meer mogelijkheden . Ook met recentere achtergronden. 
editor josm stap voor stap 

https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?id=53710        

 
Mapse,
eggie
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 00:58:01+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
Gisolic (2021-09-23 12:05:27+00:00): Hello Nawfal85 ,
Please be noted that when you have a link between 2 different highway classification you should add the link type with the highest classification as mentioned on the OSM rules Here:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:highway
"trunk_link .... The link roads (sliproads/ramps) leading to/from a trunk road from/to a trunk road or lower class highway."
so all this highway links should be trunk_link:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/447561451
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/447561449
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/447561450
So please Follow this rule in you future edition to keep OSM better.
regards
Gisolic
cquest (2021-09-19 08:15:50+00:00): Il y a bien un stop ici à destination des cyclistes pour le double-sens cyclable (ligne de stop visible sur l'ortho).
Il a été restauré.
Warin61 (2023-07-19 01:21:42+00:00): Hi,
The line (way) tagged as material=rock will not 'work' and has been deleted. 

I'd draw an area with natural=bare_rock and that would 'work' in OSM. 
and
tagged as natural=bear_
SomeoneElse (2021-09-16 08:11:47+00:00): Hello sbelemey,
Here you've said "removed broken restriction on Boulevard Charles de Gaulle. According to Bing. #mbx_france_roads" but haven't explained what the problem is or why you think that there is no "no u turn" restriction here.  Please do explain.
Best Regards,
Andy
sbelemey (2021-09-17 13:22:16+00:00): Hi!
thank you for your feedback.
I see that in this changeset it is clear that the geometry of the roads has changed, and that the links to the circular movement no longer intersect, and therefore no more restriction is needed. Correct me if i'm wrong.
Best regards!
Vinber-Pro (2021-09-23 08:27:02+00:00): Salut,, parce que parfois horaires, téléphones, accès ne sont pas les mêmes on peut aussi séparer les 2 "fonctions" hotel et restaurant. Et dans l'adresse la ville et le code postal ne sont pas utiles, c'est déduit par la position géographique. Ce n'est pas "important" de ne pas le mettre, mais ce n'est pas utile :D.
Bonne carto
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111277612
literan (2021-09-16 17:58:58+00:00): и зачем вы посносили subject:wikipedia?

верну к стабильной версии
acubens71 (2021-09-16 11:58:17+00:00): Bonjour,
Il ne sert à rien d'ajouter "crop = grape" sur les parcelles de vigne (malgré ce que peut en dire l'éditeur iD) ; par définition, la vigne produit du raisin.
Hedaja (2021-09-17 22:54:07+00:00): Hi
has the junction really been that heavily modified? In Bing Aerial Images it's still visible with the separate turn lanes. What proietary source did you use and is it even compatible with OSM licence?

If that's the case, than check out the turn restrictions. There seem to be a few broken left over ones: https://ahorn.lima-city.de/tr/?zoom=19&lat=39.770598&lon=-104.971619&layer=Grayscale&overlays=FTT
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111277885
pmarkina_lyft (2021-09-20 11:38:47+00:00): Hi, Hedaja! My name is Polina and I am a mapper in the OSM team at Lyft. Thank you so much for paying attention to this. The geometry of the intersection 38th Street and Walnut Street has really changed recently. To make edits we use proprietary features created by Lyft, specifically the street-level imagery from Lyft’s drivers taken during rides in various markets. That means our evidence fully complies with the OSM requirements. This data is updated frequently and we try to make edits based on the most recent data.
As to the discussed case, we used the image from 2021-09-14 for this edit, taken from Walnut Street (39°46′14″N, 104°58′17″W) - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1tPeoHslg863-6kRyl8tlLN_fG1jbpBOB/view?usp=sharing 
 and  image from 2021-09-10 taken from 38th Street (39°46′14″N, 104°58′20″W) - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1H42NN_90KO3yfkLclayj4lUlghFURJOw/view?usp=sharing 
We also have the opportunity to see the frequency of driver’s rides on the roads and can make a decision by indirect signs about to remove secondary highways and tertiary links - https://drive.google.com/file/d/1P3pcj5MkAPfJFqayLRD8nuXJAw2TNyx_/view?usp=sharing 
Indeed after remodeling the intersection there have been left a few broken turn restrictions. And you are right that these turn restrictions should have been reviewed.
So I removed them in the OSM changeset (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111443775). 
I apologize for any inconvenience these edits may have caused. Thank you so much for your input in the OSM!
Best regards, Polina
Hedaja (2021-09-20 16:40:40+00:00): Hi Polina
Thanks for the open and detailed communication and for keeping things up to date and being forthcoming in dealing with issues. Appreciate it a lot.

Have a nappy day, Christian
Mateusz Konieczny (2021-09-16 09:48:26+00:00): Note that this edit damaged data, see https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/2846064/history

See also https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-it/2021-September/072960.html
DianaDemchuk (2021-09-17 07:44:30+00:00): Thanks for the quick response fix. I am sure that you know this territory better.
mariotomo (2021-09-16 14:34:34+00:00): :+1: gracias.
marczoutendijk (2021-09-30 18:58:58+00:00): DWG revert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111930813
CjMalone (2021-09-16 09:30:09+00:00): Hello and welcome to OSM.

Just a heads up, mapping driveways is valid in OSM. And we try not to delete things others have mapped, without a good reason.
Lee Carré (2021-09-17 09:47:18+00:00): 👍 thanks (from a Channel Islander). I saw the same video, and wondered if OSM was up-to-date.
marczoutendijk (2021-09-30 18:57:57+00:00): DWG revert:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111930798
woodpeck (2021-09-16 10:29:07+00:00): I have reverted this edit in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111284153 - please do not change the names of this water body without prior discussion.
streinger (2021-09-17 19:01:27+00:00): зачем рисовать еще один светофор рядом, правку откатил.
map per (2021-10-20 19:30:33+00:00): Hallo Carto-Students,

ist wirklich das ganze Gebäude ein religiöses Gebäude oder ist das vor allem ein Parkhaus (https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/472892008/history)?

Viele Grüße
map per
datendelphin (2022-01-29 17:27:26+00:00): Guter Beitrag. Es handelt sich um die Einfahrt, darum passt parking_entrance noch etwas besser. Gutes mappen
Dimacn (2021-09-16 16:37:35+00:00): Ограничения поворотов устанавливаются соответствующими отношениями и тегами, а не выдуманными названиями на точках. Пожалуйста изучите wiki osm перед редактированием карты.
Dimacn (2021-09-16 16:44:43+00:00): Сорри, не увидел правильное отношение. Но название на точке лишнее.
kapazao (2021-09-16 14:40:20+00:00): Hi, have you checked if there is no driking water here?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111280515
Mateusz Konieczny (2024-02-02 13:16:45+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/9097231451/history has access:hgv that was added in this edit (if I checked things correctly)
Would using hgv access tag (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hgv ) be fitting at least equally well?
LemonEarlMapper (2024-02-05 16:36:56+00:00): Hello, I saw that you commented on my colleague LakeVelence’s changeset. They are no longer active so I will be handling this on their behalf. After reviewing the OSM wiki pages for this tagging, it appears the use of access:hgv=* is discouraged and alternatives like hgv:conditional=* are now recommended instead (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:hgv). Modifying these tags to match this preferred tagging format would have a positive impact on the OSM data. Thank you for your contributions and Happy Mapping!
SekeRob (2021-09-16 15:09:24+00:00): Hi,

Polish user interface mapping details in Central East Italy using StreetComplete which is for local --surveying-, says so every change more than 50 meters away from actual location, so I suppose you are here and not doing this from 2000 km away. :O)

PS Why did you tag the svincolo Bari with maxheight=default and not the main A14 passing under the same bridges? Did SC not flag those?
witkoo (2021-09-17 19:42:33+00:00): Thanks for showing interest :)
Yes, I have been traveling in Italy for 11 days and I only mark what I can see from the car windows or while walking or relaxing . 

"PS Why did you tag the svincolo Bari with maxheight=default and not the main A14 passing under the same bridges? Did SC not flag those?"

I don't remember this place but  in SC I have only  a question is there a sign limiting the weight of vehicles .
 regards

witkoo
SekeRob (2021-09-18 08:49:25+00:00): From A25 e Roma you turn A14 Bari, which is the turn south bound. I've tagged the motorway too maxheight=default. All Autostrada is maxheight=default, never seen a sign anywhere. Some motorway ramps have signs hgv:conditional 7.5t @ snow, otherwise only legal limit.
Enjoy the sun
SomeoneElse (2021-09-16 15:07:32+00:00): You've deleted the relation here, but from looking at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1be3 it's easy to see what the original mapper intended.  Are you sure that there really is no relation here, or did you delete it because it was currently invalid (last edited by your Mapbox colleague DzmitryBachkarou 3 months ago)?
Diana Soldatkina (2021-09-16 17:32:54+00:00): Hello, SomeoneElse! Yes, I've deleted this relation because it was currently invalid. Thank you for your attention to this case.
SomeoneElse (2021-09-16 17:47:16+00:00): Should there be a relation that forces you to go straight on if you're coming from the southeast?
If so, to fix the problem you'd need to re-add that, not just to delete the invalid relation.
Diana Soldatkina (2021-09-17 13:13:52+00:00): I carefully looked through the aerial photos and Mapillary images for 2018 and did not find the Only Straight sign. Therefore, I have no legal sources on which I could correct this relation. Perhaps there is a parking entrance here (to the right) and then it will be inappropriate to use Only Straight On restriction here. I will leave a note here so that local users will pay attention to this section of the road.
SomeoneElse (2021-09-17 13:32:29+00:00): Thanks!
user_12625593 (2021-09-23 18:08:20+00:00): Hoi, maak je wijzigingenset ajb wat kleiner, deze en nog een bestrijken half het land.
ipoac_nl (2021-09-30 13:55:33+00:00): He daar,

Ik zal er op letten. Ik had de wijzigingen in StreetComplete gemaakt, dus ik had niet door dat ze op deze manier gegroepeerd zouden worden.
user_12625593 (2021-09-23 18:10:59+00:00): Zie https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111282506
Noen (2021-09-17 18:45:03+00:00): Her kunne du lagt til felt tagger. Da må du nesten bytte kartredigeringsprogram til f.eks JOSM, siden ID ikke viser frem disse på noen god måte.
Å legge til en parallell vei for vært felt er ikke måten å gjøre det på.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111282829
Noen (2021-09-17 18:48:51+00:00): Jeg sjekket i JOSM, og tagger for kjørefelt er allerede på plass.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/go1p7xcweln9zvh/Skjermbilde%20Hvervenmoen%20kj%C3%B8refelt.png
Johnwhelan (2021-12-15 22:32:16+00:00): b=Nonwe ?

name=Nonwe?
Shaun das Schaf (2021-09-16 11:57:45+00:00): Hallo Michael,

ist (fast) gut soweit.
Nur den Namen hast du jetzt vergessen :-)

Viele Grüße
Shaun das Schaf
Shaun das Schaf (2021-09-16 11:59:25+00:00): Mein Fehler, du hast den Namen ja nachträglich noch hinzugefügt.
Dann passt es so.
pio2_122 (2021-09-16 10:58:23+00:00): Aby na pewno hotel jest już otwarty?
Nie znalazłem żadnej strony z rezerwacją miejsc w tym miejscu.
lukbas (2021-09-16 21:03:13+00:00): Inwestor zakończył budowę. Status obiektu został zmieniony z w budowie na ukończony. Obiekt czeka na otwarcie.
pio2_122 (2021-09-16 21:23:29+00:00): Jest dość spora różnica pomiędzy zakończeniem budowy samego budynku, a otwarciem hotelu dla gości (dobry przykład to Ikea w Szczecinie). Zresztą, ten budynek był już oznaczony jako ukończony - miał inny tag niż building=construction.

Tylko sam punkt odnośnie hotelu miał, jak widać nadal aktualne, oznaczenie construction:tourism=hotel. Dopóki nie zostanie faktycznie otwarty, to w praktyce nadal jest "w budowie", która może oznaczać np. wyposażanie wnętrz, prace wykończeniowe, itp.
Ewentualnie można zastosować tag disused:tourism=hotel, ale OSM-wiki trochę inaczej określa jego przeznaczenie: „Closed hotels, with traces of hotel remaining”. (dla hoteli, które wcześniej działały, ale zostały zamknięte [upadły].)

W związku z tym, dotychczasowe oznaczenie powinno zostać przywrócone, aby nie sugerować, że jest tu aktualnie czynny hotel.
pio2_122 (2021-09-16 21:33:39+00:00): Przy okazji, jakie jest źródło dodanego kodu pocztowego?
Strona Poczty Polskiej podaje inny.
lukbas (2021-09-17 06:13:54+00:00): Zgadzam się. Ponieważ występuje nieścisłość w OSM zapytam Accor o stan obiektu. Zresztą openstreetmap nie zapewnia miejsc noclegowych :) 
Dane poprawię po odpowiedzi właściciela.
pio2_122 (2021-09-17 09:15:31+00:00): Jasne. Wielkie dzięki :)
lukbas (2021-09-22 06:46:57+00:00): Odp Accor po kolejnym zapytaniu: "...w naszym obiekcie są prowadzone intensywne prace budowlane." ... "Chcemy nasz hotel udostępnić jeszcze w tym roku." Czyli wymijająco. 
Proponuję zmienić status obiektu na w budowie bez zmiany nazwy. Jeżeli ok, to zaraz zmienię. Brand wstawi się po otwarciu. Ok?
pio2_122 (2021-09-22 10:35:45+00:00): Pewnie.
Będzie to więc zmiana tagu tourism=hotel na construction:tourism=hotel.
martinst (2021-09-16 17:43:43+00:00): Hallo, magst Du den Schreibfehler "Prtnachtklamm" noch korrigieren?
Gruß Martin
matx17 (2021-09-17 09:47:17+00:00): Erledigt. Danke für den Hinweis.
ir_map (2021-09-28 10:10:30+00:00): This is why it has changed to the Arabian Gulf
If you look at Google Maps, it is the Persian Gulf
MrMoehritz (2022-02-08 20:50:15+00:00): Hey Hans, schöner erster edit, ich hab die Firma mal in einen eigene Punkt überführt (die nimmt ja nicht das gesamte Gebäude in Anspruch, oder?): https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/117176741 Hast du noch mehr infos zu der Firma (Kontakt, Öffungszeiten etc.)?
Noen (2021-09-17 18:40:42+00:00): Mente du piste:type=nordic? Taggen ski=x-country var ny for meg.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111284280
itineris (2022-02-18 21:15:41+00:00): Hi,

oneway=-1 is not welcome. Please reverse the way and use the proper oneway=yes tagging.

Thank you,
Ákos
SomeoneElse (2021-09-16 13:50:47+00:00): Hello,
You've deleted https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6058814/history - was it really broken https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1bdF ?  What was wrong with it?
Best Regards,
Andy
jmty8 (2021-09-17 08:13:32+00:00): Hello, Andy. I've deleted because it was not working and I didn't have the ground truth to fix it. It didn't affect the routing and the map itself.
It's all because of wrong "To" role part. You can see it here on OSMCha https://osmcha.org/changesets/111285085/
If you know well this place should we bring it back and make it work? Could you give me an advice for such situations due to your experience, please?
SomeoneElse (2021-09-17 11:55:34+00:00): From looking at the history https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/6058814/history , it looks like it was originally "no U turn from https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/173696670 back on to itself", which does make sense.  I don't understand why another mapper changed it in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37893249 - maybe you could ask them, or maybe they just made a mistake?  Looking through their earlier changes in this area, such as https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/37893189 , they did explicitly add some "no U turn" relations (that changeset has the comment "Demi-tour interdit".
jmty8 (2021-09-17 12:14:00+00:00): Thank you so much, now I see where I've made a mistake. You're absolutely right that maybe they've made a mistake. I will make two separate no u-turn restrictions. Again, thank you so much for your help!
jmty8 (2021-09-17 12:20:07+00:00): I will be more careful.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/111335254
Dimacn (2021-09-16 16:11:54+00:00): Если дорога закрыта для транспорта то нужно было добавить соответствующие теги на участок дороги, а не лепить параллельные проезды.
Noen (2021-09-17 18:34:51+00:00): Her hadde det holdt i massevis med taggen motor_vehicle=private.
Du trenger ikke legge til access=no, for å så hvitliste både gående, syklende og ridene.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111285713
KVI0n (2021-09-16 11:43:00+00:00): Corrected comment: Removed broken restriction no_straight_on on the road Avenue A.F. according BDOrtho IGN.#mbx_france_roads
KVI0n (2021-09-16 11:39:08+00:00): Corrected comment: Removed broken restriction only_straight_on on the road D506 according to BDOrtho IGN.#mbx_france_roads
SteMue (2021-09-29 13:46:12+00:00): Hallo, Du hast den Flughafen Tegel wieder aktiviert und die highway:service auf Aeroway:runway geändert.
Soweit bekannt ist, fliegen hier keine Flugzeuge mehr, diese würden auch mit den Autos auf der Startbahn kollidieren.
Snusmumriken (2021-09-16 12:08:59+00:00): Den här borde inte finnas i OSM, det finns ingen park där idag.
HansWesterback (2021-09-16 13:20:05+00:00): Jag har lagt in flera gator som är proposed eller construction, och försökte hitta nåt liknande sätt att lägga in planerade parker och torg går det på nåt sätt? Gäller även t ex Tvätt-Malins Park och Tummens Torg
Snusmumriken (2021-09-16 19:27:27+00:00): Vad jag vet så finns inga taggar för parker som är på planeringsstadiet. Du får lägga fram ett förslag om sådana. Men som det nu är taggat så är det felaktigt
Snusmumriken (2021-09-19 08:29:27+00:00): Hej

Kom att tänka på att mailing listan Tagging är en bra plats för att diskutera hur saker och ting ska taggas eller föreslå nya taggar
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/tagging
HansWesterback (2021-09-19 08:53:05+00:00): Tack, Kan vara intressant, ska kolla in den!
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:01:06+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.
SomeoneElse_Revert (2022-01-10 01:00:56+00:00): This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 115957299, 115961929 where the changeset comment is: Following a report to the DWG, removing some allegedly unsourced maxheight changes.  Several attempts to contact the mapper failed - see https://www.openstreetmap.org/user_blocks/5581 and previous.