That's quite understandable. Unlike most other nodes in OSM, place=* nodes don't represent a physical object and can appear in odd places which are hopefully a good approximation to the centre of the area they represent. I've undeleted it in changeset/165933187 - as you have local knowledge which I do not, please feel free to move it if you feel that another position better represents the centre of the St Dunstan's are.

Good luck creating the walking tour! A couple of my friends volunteer at Tower Hamlets Cemetery Park and would probably be interested.

Thanks for doing this! Tidying up Trafalgar Square had been on my TODO list for about 6 years, but as it's somewhere I'd rather avoid on a run it's never quite floated to the top.

The dragged bench in Canterbury was restored to its original position in changeset/165891923

Did you mean to delete the place=suburb node for St. Dunstan's?

node/29731117/history

@DaveF Interestingly, I can't get Rapid or iD to make the moronic suggestion changing Borough tube station to Elizabeth Line. This user's automated edits (accepting every editor-suggested tag "upgrade" without question) were bad enough. An armchair mapper in NZ deciding that some or all of LU has been rebranded is even more unacceptable. Hopefully all of their UK edits will soon be reverted by DWG.

Although no reply was made to this comment, it is obvious that it was read, from changeset/165357243

Thank you for confirming that you read the comment on changeset/165325288

I note that you have added branch=Foodhall to an M&S Food store. Branches of shops tend to be named after their location, not a previous mappers mis-remembering of the sub-brand.

way/828606337

I see that you have changed "The Oasts Business Village" from office=administrative to office=government. The original tag isn't in the wiki, but replacing it in an automated edit with a value which is obviously wrong is unhelpful.

node/5060905412

@spiregrain - their source is blindly accepting every tag "upgrade" suggested by Rapid - see https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposed-automated-edit-removal-of-crossing-markings-yes-tags-introduced-in-undiscussed-automated-edits/129614

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

According to Hertfordshire County Council's public right of way data and previous tagging, the full length of St Johns Lane east of the church is a public footpath. Regardless of other access or ownership considerations, public footpaths are tagged as foot=designated - they cannot be foot=private.

Has the legal status of Great Amwell FP 35 changed?

https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/herts/east-herts/great-amwell/

Thanks for connecting this.

If you're looking at other public rights of way in your area, you might find this resource helpful.
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/kent/sevenoaks/sevenoaks-rural/

Hi, just a quick question about this. The access tagging on the barrier node has bicycle=yes, but the note and changeset comment say that bikes are prohibited.

As far as I can tell from the traffic orders, only motor vehicles are prohibited in this LTN:
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4158081
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/4452381

It might be worth adding traffic_intervention=modal_filter to the barrier node - see traffic_intervention=*

The other, more serious, problem with users adding short-term restrictions for roadworks as if they were permanent is when they don't bother to reverse it on reopening. Breaking motor vehicle routing unnecessarily for 6+ weeks was less than helpful.

Fixed in changeset/165837061

See also https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposed-automated-edit-removal-of-crossing-markings-yes-tags-introduced-in-undiscussed-automated-edits/129614

@Numbergod - I've commented on several of your changesets where it's abundantly clear that you accepted Rapid's (incorrect) suggestion without question. That is an undiscussed automated/mechanical edit. You have not had the courtesy to reply to any of my changeset comments, or made any attempt to fix any of the errors which you introduced.

(Review requested)

Thanks for updating this. I've made a little tweak to the address tags.

(Sorry, I see you've already done that! I must wait until the coffee has rebooted my brain before looking at OSM.)

(Review requested)

If you wanted to add the log itself, you could add a node (point) where it is on the track with the tags barrier=log + check_date=2025-04-30 (or whatever date you visited). The links below might be useful.

barrier=log
check_date=*
obstacle=*#Fallen_tree

Thank you! I'm sure it happens to every OSM contributor, it certainly has to me. Happy mapping.