Is the name for way/273331791 really "Rhyl Funfair (now demolished)"? I'd have thought not, if following the guidelines at osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only .

Thanks for that - we (the Data Working Group) already tried to contact Mustafa earlier this week. Do you know where the width/height data comes from or does it just come from directly from PIE Mapping?

For info, I've now removed the "Driveway" names, removed the duplicate node, and re-added the "amenity=post_depot" tag back. See changeset/34812248 and changeset/34812259

As with changeset/34448963 , DPD here seems to be duplicated both as way/103637287 and node/3798145588 . There should only be one thing in OSM for each thing in the real world - see osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element , otherwise it'll look like there are 2 DPD entities here and not just 1.

Hello - as you can see from the exclamatory comment above, something went a bit here. You tried to add address details for your business, but unfortunately instead of adding a new thing to the map, you actually changed the city of Orem itself (see http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=198900 for details).

OpenStreetMap isn't a business directory, so the "Welcome to Real Estate Investor TV...." note doesn't belong here, but real-world address data such as 1491 E 1110 N does.

What I suggest that you do is to use http://onosm.org/ to locate your business (probably easiest to search for "E 1100 N Orem UT"), move the marker to where it actually is, fill in the details and then click "done".

Hello again - "improving street network for routing" really isn't a helpful changeset comment. It doesn't explain what change was made, or what the source of the new data was.

Previously you've been contacted on several changesets, such as changeset/34040216 , changeset/34388054 and changeset/34674719 .

OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project; we need to work together to create the best map possible. This means that when other mappers ask you questions, you need to answer them.

You have been blocked in the past - osm.org/user_blocks/815 and have not responded to the questions raised there - most importantly the provenance of the data you're adding.

Best Regards,
Andy Townsend (on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group).

One more thing - "Improving road network" really isn't a helpful changeset comment. It doesn't explain what change was made, or what the source of the new data was.

Previously you've been contacted on several changesets, such as changeset/34039817 (which you replied, to but not with any useful information), changeset/34347292 , 34465062 , changeset/34530227 (and probably others) which you haven't replied to or corrected errors in.

OpenStreetMap is a collaborative project; we need to work together to create the best map possible. This means that when other mappers ask you questions, you need to answer them.

You have been blocked twice in the past - osm.org/user_blocks/816 and osm.org/user_blocks/818 and have ignored those warnings. Specifically, you do need to also answer the questions raised there - most importantly the provenance of the data you're adding.

Best Regards,
Andy Townsend (on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group).

Hello, you've added "maxweight=2.0" to way/315560990 . Are you sure about that? 2 tonnes is lighter than some private cars, and certainly very unusual on English roads. Does it really apply to the whole section, or just the bridge over the stream?

For info, I've stuck a link to here on changeset/25083701 so that the person who did the mechanical edit is aware of the effects.
Cheers, Andy

For info, see changeset/24584589 where one of the adverse effects of this mechanical edit are being discussed

Ah - so you haven't actually surveyed it (and I'm sure that the person who extended it won't have either). Never mind - I'll have to do that myself at some point.

What role should way/239796445 have within relation/1074897 ? Is it an inner, or something else entirely?

Just checking - are you sure that "Tan y Craig" and "Sgwâr Victoria" join here? The Bing imagery's in shadow so you can't really see from that. The OS OpenData "StreetView" data suggests that they don't join. I presume that someone contacted Mapbox and said "these roads really do join"?

I don't believe that the name of way/374470441 is "Former Bowling Green". See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only .

I'd definitely try and upload "all changes in a local area" together. That way if (say) there's a change in Scotland and in London, people in all of England won't wonder what's changed near them. :)

Hehe - perhaps there should be a buoy at "null island" to stop people adding stuff by accident there :)

I've added a note to changeset/34686849 explaining what went wrong and trying to help them add the campsite in the correct place.

Oops, something went a bit wrong there - the campsite got added at latitude 0, longitude 0 (off the coast of Africa). If POI+ lets you, perhaps you could try again - or add an OSM note (and let me know the note number here) so that I can transfer the details of node/3789889360/history to it?

It might also be worth letting the people who wrote POI+ that this happened, too.

It's a while since I've been there, but I don't recognise the car park at Threlkeld from way/175921082#map=19/54.62094/-3.05722 at all - I don't remember 2 parallel "service roads".

Also, what does "& kEEPFIX ERRORS" as a changeset comment mean? It would also be useful to use changesets with a much smaller bounding box so that it's easier for local mappers to see what's changed.

Whilst tidying up values like this, it's worth having a closer look at the data. For example, way/373847620/history has a node in the corner tagged as a church too, and also "denomination=Roman_catholic" which presumably you'd also want to decapitalise.

This is a changeset with a very large bounding box. What does "clear validation errors" mean? How am I, as a local mapper overlapped by this changeset supposed to know what you changed and on what basis and where?