You've added a new peak here but node/448899243 already exists.

These two nodes need combining: the other one is in the correct place for the trig point so it's probably worth deleting the new one you added and improving the tags on the existing node.

I'd say this is more part of a car park than a driveway. I suspect you could have tagged it better.

I notice the changeset adds node/8358514831 which looks like it might duplicate node/7008337368 and probably relates to note/1475413

Hi. Thanks again for all your work on improving the map. I notice you changed the name of Wirksworth Road to Derby Old Road but left the value of "source:name" as "Sign". This suggests the road has been renamed according to its signage, which seems unlikely. I wonder if Derby Old Road would fit better as a loc_name or old_name as described in osm.wiki/Names - what do you think?

The name of "b" for way/904464087 looks like a mistake

I walked near here today and there's no sign of any footpath here. Maybe there was once, but OSM maps what exists today, not things that have gone away. I didn't want to delete the path without checking with you first though.

Thank you for fixing this. :)

Hi, thank you for improving the map. I'm not certain, but I thought this was "Oakerthorpe Road" with an "R" not "Oakenthorpe" with an "N". The straight road to the west of this going to Bolehill is named similarly.

Ah, thank you for explaining as well as for your continued excellent, detailed mapping :)

Hi, what does "#hotosm-project-24" in the changeset description refer to? I'd assume https://tasks.hotosm.org/projects/24 but this doesn't exist.

Thanks! I already see the rendering fixed at certain zoom levels :)

This changeset adds the tags "natural=water" and "water=river" to way/383695509 so the car park here is now incorrectly mapped as in the middle of a river. I wonder if this change also mistakenly adds such tags to other ways.

Thank you for improving the map! I'm surprised to see way/315882285 has the name "Permissive Path". Assuming this isn't a commonly used local name to describe that path, I suspect it makes more sense to remove this name, tag the path as "foot=permissive" as described at osm.wiki/Access_provisions_in_the_United_Kingdom and "designation=permissive_footpath" as described at designation=*

Hi, thank you for helping to improve the map. It seems a bit strange, and a missed opportunity, to add these parking aisles without a surrounding amenity=parking area.

Yes, I've just had a quick look and it seems much better now. Thanks again :)

Thanks, Cederby. It sounds like you have a more thorough understanding of the situation than I do. I use iD for simple edits, but find JOSM easier to use for things like this. I suspect it's best for you to make these changes, if you don't mind, given that you have looked into this so carefully.

Hi, mot_tom. Thanks for letting me know. Cederby has done a more thorough analysis of the situation on changeset/59091647

I've just edited way/155062565 in changeset/92248442 - it seems odd to have this path mapped along the boundary to me and I doubt all of it is a path. What do you think? I suspect it should be removed.

What was the outcome of the conversation? I notice it was added back a month after you removed it in changeset/59091647 but it seems like it doesn't belong here to me. I left it as is in changeset/92248442 in case there's a good reason for it.

Yes, I agree that way/850859570 looks like a parking aisle and I believe you have tagged it sensibly.

However, a parking aisle must exist within a car park. This one doesn't. There are two car parks nearby at way/227662514 and way/227662513 but neither of them contain this parking aisle.

It's great that you're adding new features to the map, but when doing so please check existing features nearby and think about the effect your changes have on them. I suspect your new parking aisle belongs inside one of these existing car parks, but it's not inside any currently mapped car park.