I see you have changed this railway from abandoned to disused. Abandoned means that the track has been removed but is clearly where a railway was. Disused means that the rails are still in place, but are just not used or fallen into disrepair. Are you sure this is the case on this old loop?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109882483

Hi Dave,
Not sure if you are aware, but you deleted the old way and replaced it with a new one. In the future could you try to retain the old ways when possible to preserve its history please.
Thanks,
Thomas
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109748706

Hi Jerry,
I haven't walked this path in particular. Although I have cycled up Broad Fen Lane upto its end. Can't remember seeing anything of note where the model airfield is suppose to be.

This is a bridge, there are no level crossings here.

Hi Mark,
I've recently done a bit of work mapping Maderia Drive, I've provided both a pedestrian "area" as well as a footway, so routers should have no issues selecting a suitable path.
The oneway tag is a bit of a tricky one, but mostly there to avoid confusion if someone looking at the map data was wondering if the cycleway was oneway like the road adjacent, of course this tag isn't needed, but a nice to have.
With the surface and slippiness, I've never had an issue with it since it was done, however if you think this is an issue you could add "hazard=slippery" to the way
hazard=slippery

Hi and welcome to OSM. Not entirely sure what you are trying to add to the map here. The South Downs Light Railway is already on the map, has something changed such as it being closed?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107909621

Hi shelbe, thanks for your edit, however it doesn't quite look like you've done it right. the noexit tag is normally used for roads that are not through roads, rather than at a blocked point. I presume the gap between the points youv'e marked as no exit is still able to be used by pedestrians and maybe cyclists too. If this is the case then it would the bit between the two points should be mapped as a footway or cycleway. The points can then lose the noexit tags, or get a barrier tag if there is a physical obstruction here such as a bollard or gate.
Hope this helps, if there are any question feel free to ask in the discussion on this changeset.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107917445

Hi mark. Not too sure if these changes for the cycleway on Madeira Drive area good thing. I know for fact that there isn't a prohibition on pedestrians, although "use_sidepath" could be applied in this situation. Also access for horses shouldn't have to be specified since it would be a bridleway instead of cycleway if they were allowed.
oneway was set to no, as the adjacent road (which technically is on the same carriageway) is one-way.
Wih surface tags its better to keep to known ones unless they are no describable as commonly used tags, so in this case asphalt is the best used.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107926450

no worries

Hi Mark, how is the dog access restricted?

dog=*
If you follow this guide it will say what to tag the paths or park as.
Hope that helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756006

Hi Mark, this change set seems to be okay at face value, however "incline" tag is usually set to up/down (going forward on the way), or it can be set to a % of the incline or decent.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756321

Hi Mark, these ways are correctly tagged to have contra-flow cycle traffic. If there are marked contra-flow lanes (i.e. a painted line on the ground to segregate contra-flow cycle traffic) from with-flow traffic then you can add "cycleway:right=lane"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107756080

If there is no central reserve then it must be mapped as a single way. Doesn't matter how wide the road is or if there are traffic islands or a wide hatched area.
Mini roundabouts are not the same as roundabouts, again it doesn't matter how big they are, if there is no central island then it must be tagged as a way.

highway=mini_roundabout
osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway#Not_dual_carriageways

Would you like to make the changes back, or would you like me to do it?

In this change set you have appeared to of deleted some ways only to replace them like-for-like with less tags. Could you explain why you have done this? This ultimately removed the 18+ versions of history of these ways and made tagging worse. It would also break any relations that used those ways such as bus & cycle routes as well as banned turns.
Also in this change set you have replaced mini roundabouts with regular roundabouts, this is incorrect.

example way replacement: 8134667 -> 963253266
example roundabout: n/243880847 -> w/963253259
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107758716

Hi Luke.
In this changeset you have made Langney Rise &
Willingdon Drove dual carraigeways at some junctions. As well as making so mini roundabouts into roundabouts. Have the roads here actually changed, the imagery suggest not and I was here about 12 months ago and it wasn't like this, so have recent works changed this?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107775408

I don't think that the entire footway on the southwestern side of the road is designated to bicycles as well. By the looks of it the sections around the edge of the roundabout is shared. Its very badly designed.
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2261338
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107319971

Is the phone number you added correct? It doesn't match the one on the website.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107198787

While smoothness is very subjective, there are some which I'd disagree with. For example ways 36136287
& 511766889 (among many others) you have marked as "intermediate", however these were recently resurfaced and I'd tag it personally as "excellent", although "good" would still be okay. Also way/210216720 is tagged as "bad" which I'd tag as "good" (but not "excellent"). I certainty would take my road bike along all of those roads which suggest it is "good" or above.

By tagging these roads any worse than "good" it will impact on routing software for bicycles (especially road bikes).

Please check the smoothness tags that you have added. Some road have been tagged with "bad" or "intermediate" when they are "excellent" or "good".
Have a look at smoothness=* if you are unsure what to use.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107053288

If this still called a TA centre?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106943513