Good job improving upon your interpretation, by recognising that you had mapped two buildings with one footprint. You knew the history of this feature since you mapped it, but just so you know, whenever working with other people's edits you should generally modify them. Objects should only be deleted if they do not exist. 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/172359330

Welcome to OSM. Generally you identified buildings here, but you mapped two pairs of buildings that share common nodes. Please consider the roof shape and shadows of buildings to determine where one building ends and another begins. If you cannot determine, then it's safer to assume they're seperate.

Please do not connect the corners of buildings to other buildings or features such as highways or residential areas. In the iD Editor, hold down the `Alt` key to prevent your cursor from snapping to existing data and accidentally creating shared(grey) nodes. This [video about connected nodes](https://youtu.be/ltn1VOiq5_0) has more information and a guide.

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/

I didn't tag it on the changeset, but I used Mapbox to aid my interpretation here. See how I mapped this area in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172264070 --- Thank you for your contribution.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172261354

Hello, the vast majority if not all these footprints represent buildings. They'd be even more accurate if they were generally smaller. Exclude the shadow a buildings casts on the ground from its footprint. Mapping footprints slightly smaller than pitched roofs accounts for the overhang and helps prevent data issues in dense areas. Thank you for your contribution. ---

You can see how I mapped this area in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172263406
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172261416

The southern footpritns did not represent buildings. There's something there in the north, I think it might be some remains of a building that used to be there. I deleted them all. Did you upload these seperately on purpose? 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/172259597

Overall well mapped, just a few minor errors. See how I mapped this area in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172261662 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/172258418

Hi I'm here to review your changeset.

First, the vast majority if not all of these buildings represent buildings.

Some of the buildings could have been more accurately mapped: exclude the shadow a building casts on the ground when using the roof to draw its footprint. You didn't square the footpritns `q`, though on some buildings this was really no issue at all since you placed the nodes accurately so I only had to square them.

You can see how I mapped here in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172261246

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/

Hello, the round buildings you mapped here are in fact rectangular features. I'm curious... why did you manually draw/modify them?

Basically all the footprints you added represent buildings, however they are generally larger than they appear in imagery, becasue the shadow has been included in the size of the footprint.

See how I mapped these in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172259998

A general comment about mapping buildings;

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the [roofs of buildings](roof:shape=*#Roof_shape), but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag. Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.

Thank you for your contribution!

I mapped a few of these in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172236104 to show you what a good one looks like.

Hello Myles, You identified and mostly mapped individual buildings and generally tagged them correctly.

The footprints you added could be more accurate please watch this short video about mapping building footprints in ID. https://youtu.be/Xs5wX592E1o

Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution.

It looks like you applied the incorrect tags to this area. I tagged it with only landuse=residential. Did you intend to map in Tanzania?

How did you end up mapping in Myanmar? Did you intend to? It looks like there were duplicate footprints here. You need to offset the imagery when the data has a consistent missalignment with it. I deleted this footprint in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172234747 preserving the older footprint.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172223950

Hello, you mapped a building as though it were a residential area. See my resolution in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172233800

Hi Tebby, This footprint you added includes its southern shadow. Please exclude shadows when tracing footprints. This becomes especially improtant when mapping in dense areas and space is limited. Thank you for your contribution. see how I mapped it in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172233071
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172232202

The acuracy of footprints you mapped here is very good. I think the SE footprint represents a rock beside a waterway and that one of the other footprints represents vegetation becasue of its colour. Thank you for your contribution.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172232026

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the [roofs of buildings](roof:shape=*#Roof_shape), but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag. Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.

See how I mapped these footprints in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172229127
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172229006

Hello, the footprints here represent buildings but are generally larger than in imagery.

I think you'll be able to see how I mapped these buildings in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172228835Thank you for your contribution.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172228812

Well done I dentifying this building. It looks like you used ESRI for support which is a good idea. In this area I used mapbox which shows a clear view of this building. See how I mapped it in https://osmcha.org/changesets/172228515 --- Thank you for your contribution.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172228483

This is the correct link to my changeset https://osmcha.org/changesets/172228201

Hello, the footpritns you mapped here all represent buildings. They could better reflect the imagery. Often they were larger than they appeared in the imagery. See how I mapped them in https://osmcha.org/changesets/

The following is a general comment about mapping building footprints;

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the [roofs of buildings](roof:shape=*#Roof_shape), but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag. Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.

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/