Your contributions didn't make OSM any better here - node/5939328847/history

Maxar Imagery not available now but public GPS traces and Bing imagery shows the kind alignments were not needed.

Please kindly watch your contributions.

Adding `name=Abandoned` to random doesn't help. How did you decide to name buildings with "Abandoned"?

You should take responsibility for your contributions. This changeset only makes OSM worst. Kindly avoid these types of destructive contribution.

Hi Goddey,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for mapping.

Don't delete existing features that can simply be improved by aligning them.

Please kindly update your local map/app to avoid adding duplicates. Both of these are duplicates and not townhalls, but villages. I suppose you were trying to map them as towns.

Blindly adding surface information to roads that were traced from old imagery and don't exist on the ground is of no use.

Make sure features exist before pressing buttons on StreetComplete to add tags into OpenStreetMap. There are many occurrences already. See one way/627322219

Better to clean/fix these roads from a desktop editor such JOSM or iD before surveying them with StreetComplete.

Don't tag every single building within an area with amenity=school with the same amenity=school tag. building=school is better.

Instead of completely deleting valid existing features that have been there for years and redrawing anew, use the Replace Geometry function from utils2plugin in JOSM to keep history or use them as part of new features. Read osm.wiki/Keep_the_history

fix multiple place nodes and settlement outlines (clicked too quick, no comments :/)

Use landuse=quarry,
galamsey isn't the operator, it should fit in description.

Where is the naming from?

most the bus stops look far way from the roads, i.e >10m

Use osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

It's over 1 year, please avoid this kind of mapping. I will revert this now.

This is bad, be careful when mapping not to accidentally move existing features to some random position like you have done here.

I am sure it should be moved to Mango Street instead but where?

This is the basic purpose of the Imagery Offset plugin. But this should not be done blindly as the imagery's default alignment might improve with time and using offsets no longer useful.

As at the time of this changeset, if I am not mistaken Bing imagery had the best alignment by default with existing data and GPS traces, which seems to still hold in Version #1 of most these features.

There's a mismatch between merging of images which you can clearly see around node/6005414057 for both Bing and Maxar. Which means when you will need 2 different alignments for both East and West.

The best options would be to look at existing GPS traces in the area, if there are none and you are in this area, go out and record a couple of them. (I am using the GPS Traces imagery layer these days instead of downloading them), also check the Imagery Offset Database plugin in JOSM - osm.wiki/JOSM/Plugins/Imagery_Offset_Database/Quick_Start to get offsets and see if some mapper has already saved something, try them. Save yours too after your finding and what worked best. You can also ask/share on the local mailing list/OSM diary, etc. your observations and what you think is working or not.

addr:city not needed here where there's no addr:housenumber

See addr:city=*

thanks for mapping, only map one feature as one.

Here you have add the name of the guest house to two objects.

I will proceed to remove buildings in water bodies.