Hi Peoebe/catgirlseraid,

The problem, as I see it, is where do you draw the line?
I saw some Canada geese in a pond last week, should I tag the pond with geese=yes?
Pigeons often land on my neighbour's roof, should I add a tag to the roof with pigeons=yes?
I saw a deer in a field a few days ago, should I add deer=yes to the field?

It doesn't make sense to me.

And I didn't suggest ducks=intermittent. Quite the opposite, in fact.

All the best,
Matt

Hi Jarv,

ducks=yes ? (way/1159700186)

I don't think that this is useful detail to add. What if I pass that way tomorrow and the ducks weren't in the pond? (Please don't say that ducks=intermittent is the answer) ;-)

Best Regards,
Matt

Hi Gladgrip,

Why did you change the brand/wikidata brand of Go Outdoors Express (Q131862654) to Go Outdoors? ( Q75293941). The former matches what the shop is actually called so I don't see why it needed to be changed.

Best Regards,
Matt

Hi andy_dodd, and welcome to OpenStreetMap. Thanks for adding the address, but it looks like you have a typo in addr:street.

All the best, Matt

Hi eteb3,

I also recently cycled this way and meant to check the tagging here, so thanks for the question!

The path from North Street under the railway has a CYCLISTS DISMOUNT and a 951 no cycling sign, so IMO way/308865423 should be tagged with bicycle=dismount to match way/231497671 and way/514226246

If the no cycling sign wasn't there then the "cyclists dismount" sign would be advisory, I guess the intention was to prevent cyclists from clattering their heads on the low underpass (or more cynically, to prevent them from blaming the council if they did have an off).

So it's a cycleway, until it isn't. Clear as mud, no? Either way I agree with your view.