You never added the name! (done now)

It would be better if both of you respected the judgement of two very experienced OSM bicycle mappers who both regard this as route=mtb. See the mail by Richard Fairhurst to talk-us about this https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-us/2016-May/016206.html, and the comment by Simon Poole on OSM Help.

Both names seem to be old names of the former CP of Wanstead. I seriously doubt if they have any relevance now http://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/essex/vol6/pp317-322

Sorry wrote that w/o seeing that you are a new user. So a belated welcome.

There are a lot of OSM contributors spending a lot of time doing really detailed mapping of public rights of way (PRoW). Here's something I wrote up about this a couple of years ago which might be of interest http://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2014/04/10-years-of-footpath-mapping-for.html.

Suggest it might be worth adding designation=public_footpath tags to anything which is signed as a public_footpath. It really helps a) reconcile against official data (if available); and b) makes clear which paths one has clear right to use.

You deleted way/169640838/history in this changeset, but there are isolated stiles appearing around Round Wood. I know some paths mapped in this area suffered from inaccurate GPS traces, but I'd like to know why an apparently surveyed path got zapped.

Yes please use something like umap. Unless the local planning application summary (reference & address) are explicitly provided by the council as open data they are not suitably licensed for OpenStreetMap. Even if they are such relatively ephemeral (and hard to check) data is something which we tend to avoid including in OSM. Another point is that as I dont believe Peckham is address complete there is a danger that non-open sources might be used to add data. FInally we dont use ALL CAPS in names, we dont include comments or the address in names either, there are perfectly sensible tags for these. By adding all this extra stuff it becomes much harder for people who want to use the data (for instance finding a Costa on Peckham High St) if there is lots of extraneous info in the name.

Must say I'd really appreciate a description with each of these changesets. It's much easier for other mappers to view the changeset description than to have to look at the objects edited & try to find what has changed.

Can I just also add my request that such changes be at least passed by local mappers. The Grantham canal is a disused canal with a wide variety of different status throughout its length. It is non-trivial to map even with a survey. In this case one of the most active mappers in the world (kevjs1982) lives no more than a kilometre away. He mapped a lot of detail along the canal when the A46 road was widened. There have been no significant changes to the area since then.

I must say it concerns me that MapBox user feedback might be treated more seriously than diligent active local mappers.

Don't worry too much about this: everyone copies the old changeset comments from time to time (or accidentally changes the c/s comments w/o saving each piece of work). It's certainly useful to do what you have done to clarify comments, but not essential.

I'm sure this track is shown on Ordnance Survey maps and plans. OpenStreetMap is no different we try & show what is observable. We do not censor the data except in cases where we may required to do so by laws (e.g., military areas). So I and others DO NOT accept your statement that it "should not be shown on maps"

No doubt this driveway is obvious both on aerial imagery and when passing on the public road. The likelihood is that someone will add it back at some stage.

What we do recommend in these circumstances is to add access=private which should be obeyed by routers and shows up on the OSM website with pale red dashes.

In addition making use of in-copyright Ordnance Survey Maps is also not allowable for OSM.

Also a) you have mis-transcribed the name, its Smooth Beck Foot; and b) mislocated it. It won't be the bay, but exactly what it says, the foot of Smooth Beck. The names are shown on OS StreetView Open Data (which is usable for OSM mapping & which is probably the source of the name on Google).

Yes indeed please no mapping of volcanic origin rocks as volcanoes. There may be some mapped this way in Germany but I've complained about these particular ones in the past.

Mapillary explicitly provide the rights to use its images to add stuff to OSM (just as Mapbox & Bing allow their aerial imagery to be used). The personal license relates to using the Mapillary images & website for purposes other than contributing to OSM. So Mapillary is definitely the best we have as a Google Streetview alternative. Many of us find it quite fun to make sets of pictures and add them to Mapillary: the problem is that as yet coverage is patchy.

1/ It was visible on the OSM map (and is still visible).
2/ You can only use the take-a-way.co.uk site if you have permission from the owners of the copyright and they are aware of the terms under which OSM data is distributed.
3/ Any use of Google Maps violates the Contributor Agreement which you assented to when you signed up to OSM, and also violates the T&Cs of Google. Adding data sourced from Google makes OSM vulnerable to taken down notices from Google. In the past we have sought permission to use Google aerial imagery but this has never been granted, at least in part because Google themselves do not own the rights.

OSM is principally about the contribution of field surveyed data: not scraping websites to create another directory.

Please if you add data to OpenStreetMap check if something has already been mapped. This particular chip shop has been on OSM for around 6 years.

I would also like to query the source for your data as you have made edits all over the country. Please note that we have particular requirements if you are adding data through some automated method: osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Yes we dropped the idea of having to enter stuff that way a long time ago, and all shared your feeling too.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. It's very nice seeing another new editor in this area as there's been a lot of change which we (existing contributors) haven't been able to keep up with.

Certainly an expensive cafe last time I was in there even in it's new form (i.e., since the original place folded).

Local knowledge wins every time!