Hi, The NS section is a public highway, if it is ploughed up the status remains, you can still walk it as I have many times. You should report it to NCC.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Your residential area is a strange shape and also self-intersecting. Secondly, this area is within an existing large residential area, this one:- relation/14008874#map=14/51.4459/0.0953&layers=N
Thus the new area is not needed (it's duplication) so I've removed it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap, a live worldwide database from which many maps are compiled.

I've reverted this changeset because it contains obvious fiction. Please only upload genuine verifiable features to OSM. You can keep your study project offline without corrupting OSM.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your addition placed the business as for the whole building which I don't think is correct. It also dragged the building outline out of shape.

I've reinstated the building shape and made a POI of the business. Please check that the POI is correctly positioned in the building.

Hope this is OK, Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've removed the duplicated and fiction roads.

Hi, I see you are still adding fiction, (a very short motorway in a residential area), So I'll now revert the changes.

Please don't spoil our map.
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

OSM is a live worldwide database from which maps are compiled. Please don't add fiction, you can map fiction or personal data offline without uploading it.

Thus I've removed your test features.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your new highways don't match any aerial imagery. Are they perhaps test additions, features for your own personal reference, or maybe just fiction? If they are not true on the ground features then they should be removed. I can remove them for you if you wish.

You can map personal features and keep them offline, they should not be uploaded to the live worldwide database.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, There are several warnings of problems with the mapping of this path as listed above. Could you have a look, please?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've joined your footpath to the highway at the south end.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, May I please refer you to my comment on your previous changeset?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

May I ask what reasoning makes this a footway rather than a track? The reason for asking is that it is tagged as motor_vehicle=private which indicates a highway status greater than a footway that accommodates vehicle traffic.

I am aware of the Highways Act 1980 definition of a footway but for OSM purposes it is usual to tag a highway as for its greater purpose. Thus a track or road can be a tagged designation=public_footpath while being tagged as a track or road. The fact that the way is a public_footpath does not automatically mean it ought be tagged a footway.

On aerial imagery, the way looks like a track and is actually drawn as a track on Ordnance Survey maps.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, If as you suggest on the Resolved note #2992283 and your edit in this changeset, Saint Athanasius Coptic Orthodox Church (116611783, v7) is now rebuilt, then the tag "razed:building=church" ought be removed.

I can't verify the rebuilding so I'll not amend the tagging.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, It looks like there is something wrong with the mapping of the tee area and the three tee nodes. Tee area is Way: 1125234227, three tee nodes are Node: 10267793109, Node: 10270112217 and Node: 10270112218.

Could you have a look and remedy, please?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, When you add to a route relation (State Highway 220), it is OSM practice to use the existing sections of highways rather than making new sections to add to the route. Actually, the new highway sections that you mapped were made such that they duplicated the existing highways. Thus routing was completely disrupted.

I've removed your duplicated highways and amended the route relation.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've repositioned the traffic feature.

Duplicates removed.

A few more this morning now repaired, looks good now.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You've added lots of nice footpaths which is really good for OSM. Unfortunately, a lot of them are not joined to themselves or the greater highway network. Thus the new paths cannot be used for routing purposes. (Where they cross over themselves or existing highways is actually incorrect mapping.)

I'll try to correct things where I can. But it would be good if you could go over your work so far and make corrections.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I just wanted to point out that the area you changed from landuse=construction to building=residential was in fact the whole construction site. I've amended the building outline to the Bing imagery. I think what was mapped as a wall is now incorporated into the building structure.

Could you check the Starbucks is still in the correct place, please?

Regards Bernard.