Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why? "Yes" tells me nothing.

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why? "Yes" tells me nothing.

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why? "Yes" tells me nothing.

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why?

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why?

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Please leave more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why?

You can read more about changeset comments here:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143887577

Please use more detailed changeset comments to explain what you did. You can read more here:

osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

'This changeset has been reverted since these "private" paths are visible on aerial imagery. Access tags should be used instead. You can read why we won'"'"'t remove them here:
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property'

changeset/143996918

'Regardless of whether it is on private or public property, research indicates that this indeed exists in this location. therefore, this changeset is being reverted to readd the cemetery.

https://www.newshorehamri.gov/DocumentCenter/View/576/Pocock-Cemetery-4-PDF'

changeset/143996776

nodes should not be named like this. access tags can be used instead on the road/path.

New road looks good on the map. Thanks for your edit!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143698750

When adding peaks, please ensure you put the altitude into the correct tag, not the name tag. I have corrected this for you in this instance.

Access tags should be used instead (already present). Descriptive names that belong as a tag should not be placed in the name.

It looks like they added a bunch of other questionable features.

What happened to the Sprint store?

Welcome to OSM. It looks like you made some of the common pitfalls when mapping golf courses on OSM. Specifically, golf cartpaths should be tagged as cartpaths, not service roads. Additionally, areas should not partially overlap. I have gone ahead and fixed these. Please review to avoid these mistakes in the future.

Read more here:
leisure=golf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

Each parking area should be grouped per lot, not by bunch or group of parking spaces. You can read more here:
amenity=parking#:~:text=Each%20parking%20area%20feature%20should%20be%20mapped%20as%20a%20contiguous%20area

In addition to the one lot for the parking area, you can map each individual space using the following tag:
amenity=parking_space

And don't worry, I made the same mistake when I first started. I've gone ahead and merged some of the areas in this region.

Each parking area should be grouped per lot, not by bunch or group of parking spaces. You can read more here:
amenity=parking#:~:text=Each%20parking%20area%20feature%20should%20be%20mapped%20as%20a%20contiguous%20area

In addition to the one lot for the parking area, you can map each individual space using the following tag:
amenity=parking_space

And don't worry, I made the same mistake when I first started. I've gone ahead and merged some of the areas in this region.

Please use more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why?

Please use more detailed changeset comments. What did you change, and why?