Hi, I tagged the gate as a barrier to the road and removed the name.

Regards Bernard.

Removed fiction name.

Hi,
I've removed one box from the highway centre line onto the grass verge. I remove fiction names and tagged the boxes correctly as amenity=post_box.

I returned a solar panel you dragged out of position as well as a highway node.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've tweaked some of the path lines. Joined others to road lines rather than residential area outlines.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I joined your gate to the highway otherwise it would be a barrier to nothing.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

The path you deleted was never said to be a public path, it was a short section of track (used by agricultural vehicles) outside of the residential property that was used by many folk with no let or hindrance as a path. It was at one time a permissive path under a countryside stewardship scheme. Due to the fact of it being used with no let or hindrance for an extended period, it is in my opinion a public highway. The piece of land in question comprises the track only, separate from residential land at west and the small parcel of land directly east. As for your statement "this is a private path", yes of course it is, all land and paths in England are private, some have public rights bestowed by statute or public use.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Features added to OSM must be verifiable, please see :-osm.wiki/Verifiability
I am wondering how this POI can be verified by a passerby? Can the address/position be ascertained on the ground by folk? The website doesn't give an address. Is the tag addr:housename=c/o Curtis Brown, Haymarket House, 28-29 Haymarket actually the address? If so it should be tagged correctly as an address. Is this a house, flat, shop, office or is the business online only?

Surely it can't all be magic!
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I think you've got the wrong impression of what OSM is. OSM is a live worldwide database of on the ground factual and verifiable features. Your dog walk, unfortunately, doesn't meet the OSM criteria for adding to the database. In that, it's not a factual on the ground feature, nor a feature that others can verify. Your mapping also impinged on lots of other mapped features. Thus I've reverted this changeset, all is back as it was.

You actually did quite well at adding the Dog Walk so I hope you'll consider contributing geniuine features to OSM.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
If Bulrush Terrace is open for use to access the properties then the tag construction=residential should be removed. similarly, if the house is now occupied please remove the tag construction=residential.

I've squared uo the building outline to make it neater. I see you reduced the building block outline down to a singles house. Could you please map the other houses in the block you reduced? Need any help please just ask. How many houses are in the block?

Good first mapping, Regards Bernard.

Hi the numbers on the public footpaths are actually council reference numbers so the tag is ref=1234 rather than name=1234. I've changed these three.

Regards Bernard.

My thoughts also but I wanted to check first, thanks!

Hi, I see you added address details and moved te POI. Can you say where the info (address and position) came from as I can't see any of this info on their website.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You actually dragged a huge section of riverbank out of alignment. I've reverted this changeset to remedy it.

Regards Bernard

Hi, Sorry but there's another couple of problems. OSM appreciates your trying to correct the mistakes but trying to drag areas back doesn't always work out. There were then different areas out of shape.

Also if I may point out it's always best practice, if a feature needs amending/correcting, to correct the original feature. Thus the complete history of the features mapping history is maintained. In this case you had deleted Way: Cerne Abbas Giant (660725451) and redrew it anew in your rectification. Thus you inadvertently lost the history of the original mapping of the feature. (When you correct/amend a feature without deletion your correction history is added to the database along with the previous history.)

So I've reverted your changesets 96497811 and 96472180, the mishapes are now rectified. All features are back to their original state, alls now well.

I hope you don't mind my helping and I hope I've explained the reasons.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Sorry to say your adjustments have somehow really messed the outline up dragging thigs out of shape. Also deleteing the historic=archaeological_site area completely. I think you were trying to lineup the outline with an image that was not originally used to make the outline. If you look at the Maxar imagery you'll see it corresponds quite well to the original drawn outline.

May I respectfully suggest the changeset be reverted. If you need help please just ask and I can revert it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Your footpath addition was a duplication. The public footpath is on the service driveway which is tagged as designation=public_footpath
foot=yes. So I've removed the duplicate way.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You placed several sections of these highways ontop of existing highways. If a way needs correcting or amending it's OSM practice to do this to the existing way, thus saving all history and avoiding the nuisance of duplication. I think I've removed the duplications, and tagged the existing ways as foot=yes.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I've amended and added to your POI, this to suit OSM practice and enhance your POI information.

Are you sure you've correctly positioned the POI. Please have regard to the traffic calming hump seen on the imagery nearby. Also I've terraced the houses so you can be precise, or if you occupy the whole house you could put the data on the house outline.

Regards Bernard.

I've reverted the changes that dragged features out of shape. I managed to save most of your new features but a few may have been lost if they joined the dragged features.
By the way greens and fairways can be tagged surface=grass, bunkers natural=sand. Please see leisure=golf_course for OSM golf tagging.

Regards Bernard.

PS It would be best not to make further changes/additions to the area till the above problem is resolved.

Regards Bernard.