It's already "labelled" in the sense that node/3678988022 is a "building=air_shaft". "What things to actually show on the map" is normally left up to renderers (of which there are many - not just the 5 you can get to from the osm.org main page). Conversations about what does and does not get displayed on the "standard" style take place over at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues . There has been discussion about how to render different sorts of buildings (currently churches have a "special" rendering and everything else is just a "normal" building).

way/373627696/history has an implausible sac_scale on it. Any idea what would be appropriate for it?

Given that the pub alongside the beer garden at way/199741726 is now a Sainsbury's, any idea what the beer garden is now?

Hi, is way/367865483 really called "Air Shaft"? If that's just a description of what it is, there's no need to add a name for it. See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only for more info. Hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help. Any questions please don't hesitate to ask.

Looks like you also expanded the name of the church at way/388696707/history too here. (re https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/19609/saint-or-st-is-there-an-official-osm-policy I guess it's not a placename?).

... and also moved Brian's milestone to the edge of the road from inside a field.

Thanks for fixing (never understood why it was that order to be honest).

Hi, can you think of any reason why way/357471821 shouldn't be man_made=reservoir_covered?

Can you think of any reason why way/337856541 shouldn't be man_made=reservoir_covered ?

Just wondered, are there really two pharmacies so close together here ( way/370349176 and node/448149207 )? The node was added 6 years ago; I guess it was misplaced.

@geozeisig OSM's great strength is that it allows people to "just map stuff" without reading pages and pages of instructions first. They follow their mental map of "which things are like other things", not the one of someone with no knowledge of the subject area at all. When it comes to "making that first edit", we really shouldn't be fussy.

However the reason that I commented on this changeset wasn't because of the quality or otherwise of the original tagging, it was because you changed it without discussion. There may be a very good reason to change a tag (e.g. highway=ford on a way to ford=yes and highway=something), but it's important that people using the data for any purpose know about the changes that are being made. If we fail to do that OSM data will just be seen as "unreliable" and "untrustworthy".

Hi,
Could you please start using changeset comments and explain what the source of things that you are adding is? There's no information on what the source of the changes in this changeset was.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend (SomeoneElse) on behalf of OpenStreetMap's Data Working Group.

Hi - hope you don't mind, but I changed a couple of "shop=card_shop" in Ashford to "shop=card". See http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/search?q=shop%3Dcard for the current usage of the two tags. I'm assuming that there's no subtle difference in meaning between shop=card_shop and shop=card that I'm not aware of - let me know if there is.

Rather than guessing, perhaps it's worth asking the previous mapper* what the best tag is here? Preumably they've been there and you're several thousand miles away. If that doesn't work, adding an OSM note to ask someone to check might help.

*you may already have done this of course, in which case my apologies; but I didn't see a comment on the original changeset.

Thanks for fixing (and happy Christmas)!

Hi, just wondered what the source of the ref on e.g. way/305687241 was? I'd imagine that it'd have a bridge ref, but that doesn't look like any bridge ref that I've ever seen.

Here you seem to have made an assumption that the person whose phone number was listed is the sole operator of the church, and in doing so have removed information form OSM that the listed phone number was for an individual, not for an organisation.

Please don't make changes like this - it devalues the work of everyone else who contributes to OpenStreetMap.

How exactly can Youtube be described as a contact mechanism?

Here you've deleted node/3804495798/history . Did you visit the are to check that it wasn't just a case of the imagery being out of date?

In this changeset you've changed a bunch of towers from "man_made=lookout_tower" to "man_made=tower". Regardless of the rights and wrongs of that, it would have been only polite to let people know who try and render specific rural stuff that the change was happening, so that if they're rendering or extracting "lookout_tower" they know to change their rendering.

Openstreetmap is a collaborative project; we need to work together to create the best map. By making changes like this without letting people know you're failing to do this.

Cheers,
Andy