typo now fixed, thanks.

Hi 1LM, Could you take care to get familiar with the highways=* and access=* schema when making changes to these bus gate / LTN changes that you're evidently interested in. This access restriction you've attempted to map is already adequately mapped as access restrictions in the correct place immediately North of Glendare St. It also strikes me that you may be using data sources that are incompatible with the OSM ODb license as Bing has not updated their imagery for this area to show the access restrictions.
On a final point, please be aware that edits to highways in many places around the world will have relations dependent upon them and will need checking after any changes. For example, here you have broken the bus route 16 with these edits. I have taken the liberty of reverting this changeset for all of these reasons above. Do please reply if you feel there might be changes you feel are valid which might be implemented another way.

That's fine - thanks. I'm looking to focus on water infrastructure and hoping that there might be some crossover, but I guess gas is that much better signed for safety. Still, the geograph tip was a good reminder to have a look there occasionally - thanks.

Hi, how are you mapping these underground features? It's something I could be interested in pursuing myself but unsure about how to source the information.

I've since had a look around other towns and found plenty of examples where it's mapped as you've done it. The difference is that generally (not always) only one object is named. Removing the name from the area feels like the right solution in this situation where the linear characteristic is slightly more important than the area (i.e it still feels more like a thoroughfare than a square). I think the Broadmead ways would benefit from the same treatment although not sure whether to tag the way or area in that case.

Absolutely, so storing the vehicles is secondary to all that, then. =depot reads as if it's the overnight parking for a privately-operated public transport co.

I understand what you might have intended, but probably more accurate to tag as: amenity=parking, parking=surface, restriction=loading_only, access=private (or =customers if suitable)

I'm guessing the cycle parking was a mis-click or some other mistake?

node/13062236501#map=19/51.452530/-2.584030

Hi, these sections before the bridge aren't busways as is currently described in the wiki: highway=busway as they're partly accessible to cyclists, and the guided way only starts on the bridge.

I guess that would have been me - thanks for tidying up!

Yup, looking good to me 👌

You might have missed a bit of quality control here - just because it's a shop=* doesn't mean it has to have a building=* tag. The same goes for your other 6 recent changesets within Meadowhall

Agreed, have submitted a report this evening.

Are cyclists permitted to go the other direction here?:
way/152262096

Yes, that's relating to squares / plazas (which you could arguably include the Broadmead example).

This thread from a couple of years ago seems to go through the arguments pretty well - essentially just saying pedestrian roads mapped with area=yes are likely from before area:highway=pedestrian was a thing : https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/are-pedestrian-areas-tagging-for-the-renderer/107162/29

Good point, and a good place to start from. I feel those are perceived a little more as a continuous pedestrian area rather than a 'street', though. Still, they probably shouldn't have both the area and way tagged by name - would have to run that past a few other mappers. I guess ultimately it comes down to whether we feel Overton Rd has changed from a street to a 'square' or not

Probably more suitable to use area:highway=pedestrian for the area way, otherwise you've effectively got two ways describing the same object. Also worth removing the sidewalk=* and updating the surface=*? Presumably you surveyed this, as bing doesn't yet show the changes?

Hi Alex, could you use local_ref=* instead of including the indicator in the name=* ? I did as you have done when I started out and am now regretting it! Decent renderers will append local_ref=* to the stop name anyway for users.

It means I've got fat fingers! I've now corrected the typo. Thanks for the help

This is deliberate as the bridge is currently demolished and under re-construction. Prior changeset comments and an existing map note explain the situation.