Opening a note would probably be better in future, as those tend to catch the attention of active local mappers who can help out

Thanks for your efforts to clean things up :)

Hi, thanks for contributing to OpenStreetMap.

OpenStreetMap exists to map everything, even things which are not publicly accessible. This access road was correctly mapped as access=private (meaning it’s only allowed to be used by authorised people), so deleting it was not appropriate.

As stated on previous notes around the Bradford Pothole Club, the data from OpenStreetMap is sometimes used by satnav software to suggest places to park. Up until a couple of months ago, the access tagging for this car park was not correct on OpenStreetMap, so satnav software may have inappropriately used it to suggest parking here. That has been fixed in OpenStreetMap, but it may take some time (months) for people’s satnavs to update. Deleting data from OpenStreetMap will not help that process, unfortunately, you just have to wait.

Happy to clarify further if you have any questions, just comment here. Ta.

(Changes reverted as changeset/148055438)

That is the name for this plantation, though, according to OS open data. How is it suspect?

I’ve re-added it in changeset/148007232

Please, split your changesets into smaller geographical areas when touching multiple unrelated objects. This changeset spans 5 counties.

See osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets for why this is helpful to others

Hiya, thanks for all your edits around Grasmere and Elterwater recently. In future, could you please use more descriptive changeset comments than just ‘details’. See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments for some information about why this is helpful for others. Thanks :)

Hiya, thanks for your attention to detail at Sellafield. If you press the ‘Q’ button in the editor while a building is selected, the building’s corners will be automatically squared. This helps with keeping things neat :)

Hiya, if you’re deleting overlapping ways, please check to make sure that the public right of way tagging is appropriately copied across to the remaining segment. Otherwise you break routing on the footpath/bridleway network. Thanks.

I’ve fixed this one in changeset/147509148

👍

(For anyone who comes across this in future, see discussion on changeset/147216449)

What’s wrong with linking to that Wikipedia page, or continuing to link to wp:National_Express, which redirects?

It looks like National Express is undergoing a slow rebranding to Mobico. Deleting data from OSM because of that doesn’t seem like the right solution.

Using network:wikipedia=Mobico_Group would also work imo.

This looks like a removal of the network:wikipedia tag, not an update. What’s the reasoning for that?

Vandalism reverted as changeset/146986777.

Reverted as changeset/146986777.

No matter how many times you create a new sockpuppet account, your vandalism will be caught and reverted. Give it a rest.

Hiya, welcome to OSM and thanks for your contributions around the Wyre area recently :)

If you’re going to focus on improving alignment of things, please make sure the aerial imagery you are using is aligned to a source of ground truth first. Frustratingly, aerial imagery is not guaranteed to be aligned, and its alignment varies over time as it’s updated. It also varies across the country. In some places it can be up to 3m misaligned from (say) a GPS reading, in both directions.

The most convenient way to align the imagery is to turn on the ‘OSMUK Cadastral Parcels’ overlay in the ‘Background Settings’ panel on the right of the editor. It will turn on some thin blue lines which correspond to Land Registry parcels. Adjust the ‘Imagery Offset’ below until those lines consistently line up with obvious boundary features on the aerial imagery, such as fences or road edges. Fence junctions are particularly useful.

For example, around the west of Skippool it looks like the correct alignment offset is 0,-1.49. Note that this will be different in other places.

There’s some more information about it here: osm.wiki/Property_extents_in_the_United_Kingdom — I’m also happy to answer questions you might have about it.

Sorry for the long comment. It seemed to me you were making a lot of alignment improvements, and I thought it would be better to tell you about this slight complication sooner rather than later!

Happy editing :)

Hiya. Are you sure this change is correct? It says the maximum allowed height of vehicles in the car park is now 1.1m. That’s shorter than almost all cars. Is it a typo?

Thanks for your prompt reply. I guess this is a case of an accidentally dragged node then. Thanks for fixing it.

There’s a ‘Highlight Changes’ tickbox in the ‘Map Data’ panel on the right which can be useful in double-checking what changes you’re about to submit before you save a changeset.

Have a good evening :)

(For anyone coming across this in future, it’s a revert of changeset/146601729)

What was the intention of this edit? The church isn’t that shape (unless they’ve built an extension recently?).

Please leave a more descriptive changeset comment than ‘.’ to help others understand what you’ve changed and why.

There’s some guidance about it here: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Ta

I’ve change it to a footpath in changeset/146511267. If it’s possible to connect through to the canal towpath, please say or edit the map to extend the footpath as appropriate. Thanks.

Hi, is this change for routing reasons or something? There isn’t actually grass in the carriageway. Perhaps adding a path from the road to the towpath would make more sense?