Hi, thank you for moving the traffic signals to the right place. Although I've mapped quite a bit near here, I never noticed this mistake until you fixed it!

I've improved the tagging further in changeset/128365023 as the traffic signals are primarily there for a pedestrian crossing, not to control traffic at a junction.

I realise that you made this change a long time ago, but thank you for improving OpenStreetMap.

One change that looks wrong to me is adding "natural=wood" to the whole of Banstead Common. While some parts of the common are woodland, some aren't. The existing multipolygon relation/77400 already expressed this clearly.

I've just fixed this in changeset/128349970.

Hi, thank you yet again for improving the map! There's a lot of useful work in this change, but there's also a lot of detail to review.

At a quick glance, the changes to node/2798492005 and node/2798492011 seem odd to me. They're both in an area of woodland and previously contained notes. You've now tagged them as trees. I'm sure there are trees here, as it's woodland, but it seems strange to single out these two. I wonder if this is unintentional.

Thank you for explaining. Why do you believe the roads don't have a common intersection? Having walked past there recently, I'm fairly sure they do.

When you say "the error on OSM" what do you mean? As far as I'm concerned, I mapped this correctly from a survey on the ground, not based on some automated tool or armchair mapping.

Hi, it looks like this change fixes my work in changeset/127714789 but you didn't contact me to discuss this.

I really appreciate you improving my work, but if you had left an explanation as a changeset comment then I would have been able to understand the mistakes I made and how I can learn from them.

It's great when large corporations want to improve the map, but please engage with local mappers when doing so.

Thank you for improving the map. I notice you've tagged way/1032620700 as "name=Air Valve (DVWB)" but this seems like a misuse of the name tag:
osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

If no tags for air valves exist yet, perhaps you might use "description=Air Valve", with DVWB as the operator.

Given that the telephone box is no longer used, "disused:amenity=telephone" seems more suitable than "amenity=telephone". I have fixed this in changeset/125031143

Thank you for improving the map. I think "Seage" on the name of way/961882154 might be a typo.

I notice you have helpfully extended Hobson Moor Road at way/848401168 but incorrectly tagged this as access=private when this forms part of the route of a public footpath. Please tag things correctly to avoid making walkers believe they can't follow this route.

Thank you for helping to improve the map. I notice that you have tagged way/230064541 as a private service road, with no access tagged, but you have also tagged way/822547069 as a permissive footpath although it only leads to the service road. Assuming walkers using the footpath don't have to turn around, I wonder if part of the service road should also be tagged foot=permissive.

Thank you for helping to improve the map. I noticed there were "Cromford Mills" and "Cromford Mill Museum" nodes very nearby for the same thing. I have merged these in changeset/124488855 and added more details to the remaining node.

I also notice Nine Mile Burn was already on the map at way/570736948 - I wonder if it makes sense to delete your more recently added node.

Thank you for all your work on OpenStreetMap. I notice you added node/8585758506 as "Nile Mile Burn" but nearby road signs suggest this place is called "Nine Mile Burn" so I have fixed this in changeset/123673478

Thank you. It would also be worth checking all of the tags used on way/5783065 to determine if any others seem suitable and adding those that do.

You've tagged this road as highway=service which seems correct, but it's only attached to way/5783065 which also has several other useful tags such as access=private applied to it. Do any of those tags apply to this road you added? It seems very likely that this is also a private road given that it can only be reached from a private road.

This looks like a residential street rather than a service road, so I've altered its tagging in changeset/122429221 and added its name from OS OpenMap Local.

Thank you for your work on OpenStreetMap. I note that the Wikidata ID you added already exists at node/245941740 which is on publicly accessible land, whereas the node you added it to is inaccessible, behind a fence on private land. I suggest you revert your change. Also, the node you edited is right next to a trig point mapped at node/9236615456 - it seems odd to have both those features mapped separately.

I've fixed this in changeset/119620181 - please let me know if you notice any problems

I've fixed this in changeset/119620181 - please let me know if you notice any problems