Hi, I see that you requested a review. I just wanted to drop you a note to let you know that comparing your edits to the aerial photography and they look great to me.

Please let me know if you have any questions?

Cheers
Chris

Looks good - I don't recommend deleting the name node at the moment as the Standard OSM style only renders the name from the name. So fo now we have both.

Thanks for getting back to me, is it more like an Air B&B - where there aren't any signs on the outside? Locally we tend not to map these.

Yes, I've just checked my notes and have that postcode completely wrong. I've fixed it up now.

HI I'm curious about this Hostel. Last time I went past here, this streeet was just residential flats with no hostels? Can I check what you source is?

I see that you requested a review. Setting the access to private works perfectly here to reflect that this is a private garden.

My only comment is that your description field would possibly have worked better as a chageset comment.

Let me know if you have any more questions.

Cheers
Chris

HI, just wanted to drop a quick note as you have requested a review of this edit to let you know that this edit looks great. (and I'm not seriously considering a trip to visit this tree).

Let me known if you have any questions about OpenStreetMap.

Cheers
Chris

Thanks for geeting back to me. I've also spoken to someone who lives locally and he doesn't know this path as Witchy Woods. So for the moment, I think I will move the name to loc_name - as it's not an official name and it sounds like there aren't any name signs. Hope this is okay?

Thanks - I think we are in Broad agreeement :)

Thanks for signing up and making this change, Cliff and welcome to OpenStreetMap, please let me know if you have any questions.

Cheers
Chris

This feels excessive to me - generally when I see these added, provided the information is accurate then I don't mind the "spammy description"; but there is also a case for removing. My worry with this changeset is that by completely removing the object we remove information that had been added prior to the "spammy" additions. Is there a standard policy on what is considered spammy and what isn't - for example should we be removing all the hilton hotels that would get hit by this?

Excellent thanks for getting back to me. I'm asking because of this note note/1169720#map=17/55.97376/-2.89773&layers=N It does sounds like it is a name that is use. Cheers
Chris

sorry to bring up a question on such an old edit, but we have had a query on the name "Witchy Woods" Can I check what the source for this name is?

Cheers
Chris

Hi Welcome to OpenStreetMap - I was just wondering what your information source for this viewpoint is?

Cheers
Chris

why remove the maxspeed? - also I'm not sure if an area is actually appropriate here. Think that a standard highway tag will be find here.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In case deleting these was as accident (very easy to do), I've restored there objects. Let me know if this is wrong, and let me know uif you have any questions.

Cheers
Chris

Hi Graeme - thanmks for signing up to OSM. It would be really useful if you could add some more details. Ideallty I would suggest adding the outline of the building as well as the full postal address. Also I would add office=photographer

Please let me know if you have any more questions.

No problem - it may be the case that the A91 is signed with Green signs, in which case it may be appropriate to tag it as trunk. - osm.wiki/United_Kingdom_A_and_B_roads#How_to_tag

Hi - just wanted to check what your source/thinkomg for this is. I can't see the A91 on the Trunk Road list: https://www.transport.gov.scot/publication/official-list-of-trunk-roads/

(also thanks for the excellent changeset comments)

thanks that's perfect. My source was on a cycling group on Facebook,