Hi, another duplication of highways. Track Way: 910971576 placed exactly on top of Way: 910971571. Could you please correct this? If you need help just ask.
Thanks.

Hi, I waited while you made amendments.
Looking at it just now the only thing I added was horse=yes to the gate in the middle, because horse access is allowed up to the gate on each side. All is OK.

Regards Bernard

They are live in the OSM database for download immediatly. The software or data renderer you use will determine when you'll see the changes OSM map is almost immediate for highways. Other software could be hours days or weeks. Remember also that not all zoom levels are re-rendered at the same time. Empty your browser cache if you don't see the change on the OSM map.

Regards Bernard.

Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

It certainly looks like you are correct in part. The track does not extend at the west end to meet public footpath 050. But looks like existing from Little Tring Road to the farm. The western end is part of public footpath 051.
Another problem with your deletion is that you've misaligned other mapped features.

I've reverted this changeset and made amendments to what I can see is correct from available sources. I tagged the track as access=agricultural. You could tag the farm use only section as access=private, though frankly, all land is private.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You've inadvertently duplicated the name. The name and all details of the school are tagged on the school's overall premises outline. This is as per OSM practice as explained here:-building=school and in more detail here:-amenity=school

I've removed the duplication for you, need any help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, you duplicated a section of Wrenbury Heath Road. I've removed it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've removed the motorway junctions. Please don't upload corrupting fiction to meet your personal desires. If there is a barrier here or some traffic restriction please map it correctly. If you need help please just ask in the comments here.

Regards Bernard.

Unfortunately, you have the bridge, (layer=1) which is part of the highway joined onto the riverbank (layer=0 implied), this is incorrect. The bridged highway should span (go completely over) the water to join solid ground. You have also tagged the water area as natural=water
water=river this is incorrect the river area should be tagged waterway=riverbank. You've also joined the track onto land area outlines, wood, meadow and forest which is not good practice

There are many more problems with your past mapping that I've commented on in the changesets. Please see here:- @conifermapper/history#map=12/51.1435/-1.6397&layers=N load all changesets to see about 40 comments.

Thus it might be best and easiest to just remove problems like this.

No response so POI removed as I see nothing to verify it.

No response so I've amended all the buildings tags.

OK nothing corrected so I've made corrections.

No response so I've amended the tags. Repositioned POI as best I can.

Your track Way: 899610681 crosses a pond and river with no indication of bridge or ford. It is also joined to landuse areas, the river and river banks and the pond banks. This is incorrect mapping. Can you please correct this or shall I just delete it?

I removed a path from in the river.

You've tagged the river areas incorrectly. The water area should not be tagged natural=water
water=river. The tag waterway=riverbank should be used instead. It's all stated clearly in wiki pages. I've amended these.

I've removed the drain, it doesn't exist.

I've allowed the bridges to properly span right over the water areas.

I've unjoined many highway nodes from waterway nodes.

Please take a little time to learn OSMs best practices as regards tagging.

Thanks.

Hi, Sorry for not mentioning that I'm sure the problem was inadvertently caused. It's the sand area here:- way/259039062#map=19/50.41095/-4.20709 The area each time was changed to make the outline self intersect. This time the area long line of the triangle was transformed into an L shape (the line doubling back on itself). Because there are a residential outline, coast outline, and a mud outline using the same three nodes I'm not able to determine exactly what caused it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, This is the second time the area of sand Way: 259039062 has been corrupted. I've again repaired it.
Regards Bernard

Hi, Thanks for responding. I couldn't find your map on Facebook but I've heard folk are having problems with it. They then often create more problems because data is uploaded to OpenStreetMap which isn't always to OSM best practice. Not to worry though I've mapped the field as a meadow with hedges around. The tagging of the park feature would be leisure=dog_park but as it's not yet in operation I've tagged it as proposed:leisure=dog_park. The "proposed:" can be removed when the park is in operation and there'll be a nice paw icon. Need any more OSM help please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi,
Is this really a park? Can it be verified? How, where is the entrance? It actually looks like a stock field.

Regards Bernard.

Those two paths do exist, they are drawn on the councils' definitive map. You are allowed to walk them even if they are obstructed. Obstructions should be reported to the County Council who have a statutory duty to have the ways made fit for purpose. They should be shown on OSM and the obstructions also mapped.

Regards Bernard.

Hello, Please understand that if features are visible on the ground (by any means), then they are valid features for mapping to OSM. Even if they are private roads inaccessible to the public. Because a route is closed and fenced off is not a justification to delete it. I've therefore reverted your deletions.

Regards Bernard.