This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/168127729 where the changeset comment is: DWG revert: spam mapping

Hi Falkons and Inapropro,

Is there a relatively up to date and appropriately licensed map that shows the boundaries of the base? The link provided has points in the extended area, but doesn't clearly show a boundary.

Given where checkpoints are mapped and all roads within this area being marked as private, it does seem like relation/18300325 is mapped appropriately, however it would be best to confirm this if possible.

Kind regards,
Andrew Welch, OSMF Data Working Group

I've fixed this up in changeset/168123889, the wikidata and wikipedia tags have been moved to the members of the A6 relation with the name Sir Donald Bradman Drive.

Hi, this shouldn't go on the route relation since the route is A6, not Sir Donald Bradman Drive. The wikidata and wikipedia tags should go on the individual ways that make up Sir Donald Bradman Drive.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168093867

Hi there, the whole area (way/498407441) is already marked as amenity=fuel, adding it to the shop way is just duplicating information.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167980403

Reverted by DWG - Ticket#2025062310000247

changeset/167994217

Hi there, this should be club=sport and sport=rugby_union, not leisure=sports_centre
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167933720

As long as everything in the changeset can be sourced from allowed sources then that's okay, however those sources should be mentioned in the changeset tags.

Are those available under a suitable open license? If not, then we can't use it in OSM and the data added from those sites will probably need to be removed.