“(no comment)”

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Smaller changeset areas, please.

There's a lot of such changes need doing.

Should probably add shop=convenience to the node, too (for the benefit of data-parsers).

I recall there also being a car-wash at the site.

The whole thing probably needs an overhaul.

A couple other points;

Be mindful that aerial imagery isn't aligned accurately. In Jersey, we haven't yet got enough GNSS traces (e.g. of roads) to determine an offset accurately (which is probably why there are none published in the imagery offset database). So, when data doesn't match imagery, don't assume that the data is wrong. To see for yourself, compare imagery from different sources; notice that they don't align with each other (let alone the ground (or, rather, GNSS position fixes).
Using imagery for geometry (shape) should be fine, but until more work is done (as described above) its position will have a systemic offset.

Although your changeset comments are much better than most newbies, they assume context, so I'll cite osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments for your perusal.

Regardless; good effort for a first changeset. Plus that I presume this to be your local area, which you know well (rather than starting with something well-known which many people would notice). Local details are often what's missing.

Hello, welcome to OSM.

Some feedback on your first changeset.

The ways for the playground aren't quite right. There's duplication, and one seems to double-back on itself. The tagging is a bit of a mess, too.

For proper tagging (especially name=* and playground:theme=*) please read the documentation in the wiki (follow the Help menu at the top).

I would suggest starting simple, such as with tagging (before modifying or adding ways). Otherwise producing data of dubious quality is more likely.
A great way to start would be with using StreetComplete (asks simple questions, while out surveying). It doesn't require knowledge of OSM internals. Then, once familiar with tagging (by examining the changesets it produces) you can be more confident in trying ambitious changes.

Presuming that you're local; there's a handful of us working on Jersey, but no formal ‘community’ as such (like there is for larger nations). Feel free to contact any of us with questions or for advice. For context, I strongly tend to do out-and-about surveying, while the others prefer ‘armchair’ mapping.

Smaller changeset areas, please.

Much smaller changeset areas, please.

Changesets with world-spanning bounding-boxes appear in everyone's local list of changesets.

For disparate areas, use separate changesets.

Smaller changeset areas, please.

“(no comment)”

What makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

From changeset #15197688

“15 and 17 were bought in the early 1900s and the Post Office built there.
The RBC/States are 19-21. I've corrected this now.”

Awesome; thanks for the clarification. Will mark as good via OSMcha.

Though, I'm now even more curious about the mysterious source (‘secret sauce’? 😋). I'm suspecting old, out-of-copyright maps and similar.

I noticed changeset #109795734 which now seems the better place to reply.

@GuyToronto

StreetComplete works differently to other editors. Among other things, it hides much of the internal clockwork from the user (which makes it good for newbies).

The only way to avoid large area changesets from SC, currently, is to either not use it while travelling, else to upload frequently.

The former is undesirable, while the latter isn't always possible.

So, this isn't the user's fault (e.g. being careless).

For node #2178471595 (originally RBC on Broad Street), from where did the addr:housenumber come from? This changeset doesn't specify a source, nor does the node's tags.

Now that it's offices for the States, the addr:housenumber they give is different. See, for example, http://www.gov.je/Government/Consultations/Pages/RegulationOfChildrensSocialWorkAndMentalHealthServices.aspx

Given the quality of your work on this map (thanks very much, BTW), and the reputation of the States, I'm inclined to think that they're more likely to be incorrect than you are.

Yikes; smaller changeset areas, please.

Which warnings, fixed how?

There's a lot to verify in this changeset.

http://www.gov.je/Government/Consultations/Pages/HillStreetScheme.aspx

http://www.gov.je/Government/Consultations/Pages/RoyalSquareHillStreet.aspx

Hmm, and the (other|way) was changed from landuse=military to leisure=park.

I had assumed good-faith, and that it was just a newbie's first changeset, but now I'm wondering if this is actually (intentional) vandalism, or carelessly playing around (as is seen on the likes of wikipedia).

Seems that nothing in this changeset is good and it should be reverted.

How's this an improvement, precisely?

The tags you removed from the building (relation) do actually apply to the building.

PoI nodes are used either when something is very small, is a feature within a building (short of doing proper indoor mapping) or as a quick & dirty method of marking something significant (e.g. because its host building hasn't yet been added).

Replacing building-tagging with node-tagging makes little sense.

Also, what makes for osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Keep the area of a changeset as small as possible. Instead of one large-area changeset, use several smaller ones.

Small areas are much easier to verify.

A large area will cause the changeset to appear in the list of changesets for many mappers checking their local area.

Keep related changes together, but disparate changes in separate changesets.