Removing highway=residential from Calle Los Alpes ( way/146994337 ) stops it functioning as a road for display and routing purposes. This is probably not what you intended to achieve.

Hi, thanks for updating your business on OpenStreetMap. Your opening hours are just entered as "Mond" - if you let me know what they should be, I'd be happy to update them in OSM's format.

I am not convinced that the landuse=orchard was an error in need of correction to natural=wood here. I'm pretty sure @ramthelinefeed knew what they were tagging after surveying it on the ground.

Thanks for doing this!

I don't know if it's in scope for what you're doing, but North London has a lot of source:maxspeed=GB:urban, frequently superseded by a more recent maxspeed=20 mph

If it is no entry at both ends, it would be better to tag it with access=no (possibly with an explanatory note=* tag) rather than delete an object which is clearly visible on the aerial imagery. Deleting something instead of changing its tags may result in someone adding it back from aerial imagery later, without any details of access restrictions only visible on the ground.

If it is just no entry at one end, the oneway=yes tag it had already covered this, as long as it was operating in the right direction.

Would it be worth keeping the man_made=water_tower tag, assuming that it's still in use as such?

Thanks.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding your details.

It would be worth adding a tag to tell data consumers what sort of business you are. From a quick skim of your website, I think you just deliver, rather than sell to the public at your premises?

Perhaps adding industrial=distributor or industrial=warehouse might fit? Descriptions of these tags are at the link below.
industrial=*

You could add the more specific trade=agricultural_supplies, but that is normally used with shop=trade, which you probably wouldn't want.

Thanks. I just commented on their most recent changeset to suggest that place=farm might be better than leisure=park.

They're private, but they probably still want deliveries etc., so I can see why they want a searchable POI.

It probably doesn't help them that TN14 7SF was only assigned this April. Prior to this, the UPRN for their property (10070020199) appears to have been associated with the postcode TN14 7PQ.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding your business.

You have added a POI describing it as a park, which seems unlikely as you put "private" in almost every field the iD editor presented to you (cleaned up by another user).

Would place=farm better describe the situation? There's a link to the documentation below.

place=farm

Thanks for catching this and updating it. As the original mapper put "NOT OPEN TO PUBLIC" in almost every tag presented by iD, maybe it should be access=private?

Please don't remove the building=* tag. A change in the business does not normally remove the containing building.

Reinstated in changeset/137045248

That was an odd one. USRN 8100895 (Numbered Street record, presumably A3211) only extends up the southbound carriageway between the service road under The Mermaid and Upper Thames Street, but covers all of the other carriageway.

Possibly better to map it all as highway=primary, but without adding ref=A3211 to the bit between Queen Victoria Street and the service road?

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding this.

If it's a permissive footpath, it may be worth adding the foot=permissive tag to it.

There's some documentation on the wiki at osm.wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom

No problem. If you just reinstate the area=yes tag on way/534299476, it'll resolve it without losing any of the other highway/building intersections you've fixed (thanks for doing those, btw).

You may find that some QA tools will give a false positive where you have pedestrian or footway areas sharing nodes with buildings.

Are you sure you wanted to change the footway area into a linear (and routeable) footway around its perimeter?

Reverted in changeset/136815350

Reverted in changeset/136815350

Thanks! The alignments looked decidedly iffy around there when I added the USRNs.

The data that you’re editing is shared with everyone else. Please don’t add fictitious motorways or delete areas of woodland which are clearly visible on aerial imagery.

If you’re not sure about what you’re doing, perhaps head over to https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/help-and-support/7/none and ask a question there - I’m sure someone will be able to help you.