The vast majority of contributions here have resulted in improvements to map data. e.g. Modifying highways and residential areas to avoid overalps. All footpritns are valid and appropriately shaped. Most are accurate. Beware that landuse and highways should not share nodes (the grey ones). --- made some edits to the data here in Changeset: 164833898. --- Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164799268

Most footprintd here outline buildings visible in imagery but they are not accurate. I recommend watching the common beginer mapper mistakes videos on the missing maps youtube chanel.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164407463

You're welcome. I think you've understood me correctly, yes. It tends to be better practice to modify existing features than to delete and re add.--- In the case of the large footprint which used to envelope over a dozen buildings here, I could currently argue in favour of either method. For example, the argument could be made that it didn't actually represent any feature which existed/exists, therefore it can be deleted, and re mapping may be easier. On the other hand a feature may be inappropriately tagged, but the geometry accurately represents a feature and it may be beneficial to just change the tagging. --- However if you can tell that data represents existing features, then it is best practice to modify them, as to preserve their history and meta data. --- Features which you are certain do not exist may be deleted. --- I hope this clarifies.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164770871

The footprints you added here are inaccurate and some envelope multiple buildings. I recommend watching the common beginer mapping mistakes videos on the missing maps youtube channel. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164407390

The vast majority of footprints here are valid, accurate and apprpriately squared. I flagged the invalid and least accurate ones. Good job moving the highway to make room for valid footprints. I think that in this case it would have been a good idea to move the Western part of it to the centre of the highway, becasue it may have blocked your view of a couple of buildings which you did not map.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164771320

You appropriately modified the residential area to prevent it overlappig with the footprint you added in the south. Your original interpretation of the middle of this changeset was valid and more accurate than the new footprint you replaced the old ones with. The new footprint appears to envelope a tree trunk making it unlikely that a building with that shape is present there. Colour is one of the best ways to identify trees.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164771419

You deleted footpritns which outlined multiple buildings; I think this is fine to do, but if you can identify a the feature that existing data was representing then the best practice is to modify the existing data (as you did for some of these footprints, rather than deleting and re mapping. These footprints are generally accurate but could be a touch smaller (shift + -). Two of the footprints which I flagged outline two buildings each.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164770871

These are likely temporal yurts and should not be mapped
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159692864

The two lsmallest footprints here would more accurately be mapped as one round or rectangular building; zooming out provides a better perspective of shape and orientation.

Most of the footprints you added here are valid, accurate and appropriately squared. Some outline multiple buildings. Thanks for your contribution.

The buildings you added here are valid and appropriately shaped. Some are a little small because I'm assuming you wanted to avoid issues with highways: in this project it's okay to move highways out of the way when required. Thank you.

You created nodes shared by highways and buildings here: hold alt to prevent your cursor from snapping to existng data. Move the data or offset the imagery so that features have enough room where necessary.

All footprints here are valid, but could be more accurate. Consider how data representing physical features interacts: You added a footprint which overlaps a highway here. ni this case the highway should have been moved to make space for the footprint.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164177410

Although they could be more accurate and squared (q) it looks like you identified possible buldings under construction here.

All of these footprints are valid and appropriately shaped but generally could be a touch smaller (shift+-/+)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160953964

The highways you added here are tracks becasue their primary role is to provide access to agricultural areas. Unclassified haighways link settlements.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164691168

All the footprints you added here represent buildings but could be more accurate and should be squared (q). Thank you for your conribution; please keep mapping.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164092379

The footprints you added here likely represent yurts as shown in the project mapping guide and should not be mapped. I deleted these footprints.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164092118

Hi, generally isolated dwellings will not have a sufficient number of buildings to warrant mapping a residential area around them, for example way/1371859099. To quote from the project instructions: A residential area is an area of land predominantly dedicated to housing. Draw a residential area around a cluster of five (5) buildings or more. You also moved a node of a building which shared a node with a residential area. You may want to consider drawing a new geometry using fast draw and using the replace geometry function for smaller residential areas; doing so will reduce the possibility of modifying features which share nodes. Thanks for your contributions; keep mapping.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164131336

Overlap issues are usually caused by data geometry. Layer tags indicate that a feature is above or below another.