The procedure for "I received the data from X" data is generally osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines .
I'd expect discussion to include whether the data is accurate (presumably yes) what tags are best, and does anything else need mapping at the same time. It likely does need discussing though.

Hello VLD319 - please take another look (see e.g. https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#21/51.42443/-0.01403 which has updated - OSM Carto has not yet for me). There's a crossing there at node/8257543236/history that is disconnected from the two new ways that you've just drawn.
There are also a number of missing driveways in this area - if you're going to add separate sidewalks, you really do need to finish the job.

If anyone would like to discuss this with the DWG please email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of “[Ticket#2025102210000455] 177962210” .

Actually - I suspect it might have been rerouted. See relation/2293737#map=17/55.647246/-4.813637 . I asked the person who added the new names in the earlier changeset.

Erm - "office=goverment" for a "building=houseboat" way/1410525442 ?

What actual evidence do you have for that any part of way/470459862/history is controlled by China?
AS I said at osm.org/user_blocks/19719 you really should discuss this in the forum .

Thanks!

I've fixed the two most serious problems in changeset/177845809 and changeset/177846221 .
The "30mph limits that should be 20" obviously need someone to survey them properly on the ground.

Hello,
Is there really a gap in the Ayrshire Coastal Path at relation/1756394#map=19/55.432354/-4.713113 (perhaps a rockfall or something)?
Best Regards,
Andy

That explains it - I've restored the original post office node node/5743772095/history and moved it to a likely location.

Thanks!

Isn't that what the OSM tag is for, though?
We don't include the word "restaurant" in the name of every reataurant.

For completeness, see osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only . No name shows on https://www.comune.castelfrancoveneto.tv.it/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/aree-di-emergenza.pdf , just the reference "R".

Many wiki pages just reflect the view of the person that wrote the text and are never effectively reviewed - this appears to be one of those.

I am sure that most people would agree that having a name on a `man_made=bridge` object makes sense. I suspect where fewer people agree is about removing related `bridge:name` tags on the ways over the bridge - there are > 100k uses worldwide.

Raise a topic in the forum and see if you can get agreement with your edits to https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/111682889 .

Actually, ticket Ticket#2026012710000541

Hello,
Andy from the DWG here.
@misterte Please don't argue about something as ridiculous as this. According to https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/way/111682889 someone added a name to way/111682889 . That name makes sense; it matches way/369428486 . You removed it. Someone added it back, and you removed it again. Please don't do this.
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Hello,
I've nudged node/3236462244/history slightly south to make relation/4280408#map=20/52.6479168/-9.3162372 a valid multipolygon again.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I wonder if the `checkpoint=hiking` tag has crept onto node/12086089044/history by accident?
Hiking checkpoints checkpoint=* aren't much of a thing in the UK (the only other one is at the Hay end of the Offa's Dyke Path).
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
Andy from the DWG again:

More feedback from the locals - apparently the northwestern part of way/1469590576/history is "gorse/woody shrubs and rocky outcrops" (so perhaps natural=scrub in OSM) and the southeastern part "is indeed a grassy field" (which would actually suggest meadow in OSM rather than grassland, to be honest).

Best Regards,
Andy