Hi after a recent discussion on wiki, we decided to change the camera:power=* tagging to the preexisting tagging electricity=*. See man_made=surveillance for the specifics.

Hi after a recent discussion on wiki, we decided to change the camera:power=* tagging to the preexisting tagging electricity=*. See man_made=surveillance for the specifics.

Hi, I see that you requested review on this changeset. The tags you applied look fine, and I see that you already removed the duplicates from the other house.

If you ever have any questions, feel free to reach out to me or at community.openstreetmap.org. Happy mapping and welcome to osm!

The way you typically address covered drive-throughs is to separate the highway, connect the portion covered to the outline of the building, and add the tag covered=yes. You added the tag layer=-1 to a couple examples here, which implies that the road would be going underground or something. See way/1377086886 for an example.

Happy mapping :)

I'll trust your local knowledge if you say so.

You should look up examples on how prevalent is used since you definitely misunderstood the dictionary definition you gave. One wouldn't describe the breadth of one's knowledge as prevalent; instead you'd use it to describe how common things or practices are, eg "Dr. Pepper is a prevalent drink in Texas."

Happy mapping! :)

I'm sorry, but your reply doesn't make sense. What do you mean "This is prevalent for the airfield in Texas"? What do you mean "There is quite a bit of areas"?

To clarify, my issue is that way/1472523569 doesn't line up with the most recent ESRI imagery from January 2025. It should connect at a right angle with the runway, unless the airfield has been resurfaced since then.

Hi Tony there were a few issues with this changeset. First is that you included two sets of edits from an airfield in Texas and a neighborhood in Florida. Please try to keep changesets as geographically compact as possible.

Next, the taxiway you added to the airport in Texas doesn't seem to match the imagery available. You used bing aerial in the the osm.org editor right?

Lastly, you added a couple crossings in Florida with crossing:markings=yes, but I can't see any sign of markings in the imagery.

I hope this helps!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177869868

I don't know what the UI in osmose is, but it sounds like it was suggesting any tags of the form parking=* and tunnel=* (where * can be any appropriate value).

Looking more closely at way:420442473 where you applied key=tunnel, it would be better to split it into multiple ways where it goes through the building, adding the tag covered=yes to the segment which goes through the building. It seems you added a layer=-1 tag presumably to make an error with it intersecting a building go away.

I hope this helps!

Why did you add the tags key=tunnel and parking=*? I can't find anything about these on the wiki and they seem like mistakes.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177794189

Hi Joe, one important note is that you should keep changesets to a compact area when possible. This one includes several apartment complexes in Houston and Raleigh. These would have ideally been split between two different changesets.

The biggest flaw though was that you deleted the building tag from Bellrock Sawyer Yards and retagged the flowerbed as an apartment complex. Looking at the aerial imagery, it is pretty clearly an apartment building. This may've been a mistake with using the editor.

Additionally, the descriptions you added are copied directly from their websites. Ideally the description should be a short blurb (at most a sentence) that doesn't just repeat information in the tags. These are especially bad since they are just advertising copy.

Hey could you indicate the source for opening hours and change the corresponding checkdate? The facebook page still shows Tu-Sa 09:00-17:00.

Your edits all seem fine, though I would try to keep edits separate where reasonable. You removed the name from the heliport node in Cameron, Louisiana and changed the name on a couple streets in Texas. This makes it more difficult to review your changeset.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/176432528

You should keep the edits you make in geographically small areas when possible. This one goes from a small village in Africa to a cornfield in the middle of North America.

You added your name on a node in that Nebraskan cornfield and added a pedestrian crossing where I can't see any with the imagery you apparently used. You also removed the highway tag from the road outside the village in east Africa. Why?

Your previous edits also seem to be similarly poor quality and should be fixed.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175778876

Black Bayou would probably be classified as a waterway=river for most of the length you mapped. Additionally, you can also add the USGS GNIS ID from the domestic name search, perhaps to a waterway relation.

It looks like you may've applied English Bayou to one or two segments it probably shouldn't go on. I would consult the USGS GNIS domestic name search map for river names. When you pin a stream from the search results it will show the mouth and the source on the map, and you can usually figure out the rest in-between.

Additionally, you can remove all the junk NHD import tags. There are a few that can be helpful when manually reviewing old imports, but here they don't do anything.

Yeah that'll definitely be the end state, though keeping it separate with landuse=construction may be appropriate for the time being.

Are these signed locally with their phase numbers? Ideally the main name tag should be what's observable on the ground, and other possibly relevant names should go in one of the other name tags.

Just so you know, you seem to have accidentally marked the river channel as a storage tank. I have fixed it, but do be careful with your edits.

One extra thing is that road crossings should be split from the neighboring sidewalks and tagged as footway=crossing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174631749

I wouldn't apply the extra "name=*" tag to the yard unless it's officially named as such. I would also consider expanding the "landuse=commercial" to the entire lot since it looks like they're storing other cars and trailers outside the yard.

Additionally, rather than "office=towing" I would probably use "service:vehicle:towing=yes" with "shop=car_repair".
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174627260