OK, still some work to do then.. What's the background to your comment about "possibly too many nodes"?

Is this fixed now? It looks like the night shift got in first and reverted the new boundary, so we are back to the old boundary now.

The admin boundaries and the e/w boundary are derived from official sources with lat/lon coordinates. It is certainly an anomaly, but I am pretty sure it is correct.

Can you please share your source for the changes you have made to these boundaries? I particularly noticed Blackfriars railway bridge which you have moved into the City of London in its entirety...

Hi,
yes, I did view the link... However the fact remains that these two attractions are outside the administrative boundary of the City of London (they are within the London Borough of Tower Hamlets). Sometimes fact is stranger than fiction..
They are owned by the City Corporation, but so is a large cemetery in Newham and many other properties, but that doesn't change the fact that they are outside the City of London.

Sorry, I have reverted this... Neither the Tower of London nor Tower Bridge are within the administrative area of the City of London - they are just outside.

wanna check the edubase number for dixons kings academy? there is a school in kent with the same number...

Ik ben vanavond wezen kijken. Ik heb nu alles rechtgezet overeenkomstig de aanwezige verkeersborden. Wat mij betreft kan de discussie nu gesloten worden.

I stand corrected, I meant Kingsdown (near the coast). As for your question about the duplication, please refer to osm.org/about . OSM is standalone, not an addon to OSSV (or any other map for that matter). Apart from that, when you are thinking about deleting other people's hard work, you might consider contacting them first to understand their rationale for adding it in the first place...

Joe, I just reread your comment... Are you possibly thinking OSM is (just) an overlay to OS Streetview? You should see it as an alternative, with a complete dataset. So deleting stuff from OSM because it also appears in other maps is not the way to go.

Hi Joe, thanks for getting in touch. I notice you have deleted a lot of stuff in the past few weeks, as well as adding new stuff. Are you aware you have just about obliterated Ringwould in this changeset? You have deleted almost all the roads and possibly many other things...
Please ask for help to repair the damage, which you can visualise here: https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=36985172
A good place to start is probably the talk-gb mailing list which you can join from here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
I have already flagged this changeset up, so hopefully some admin type will be able to sort it out this time.
Regards, Colin

actually this whole changeset has caused a lot of problems. Please remember that OSM is not your private map, it is a globally shared resource. If you are not sure what you are doing, please ask for help!

Hi, I think you are probably not aware of this, but some of your recent changesets have been damaging some admin boundaries, particularly between Walmer and Ringwould civil parishes. I fixed it last week and will fix them up this time again, but please be careful in the future.....

kijk goed... de zijweg naar Hoge Weide is access=destination, maar way/384035247 (met access=no psv=yes) begint nu vóór het kruispunt. Je mag dus (in OSM) niet vanuit het noorden op de Grauwaartsingel linksaf naar de Hoge Weide - en ik vermoed dat dit niet juist is.

En HarryS heeft ook nog de access tags gewijzigd waardoor het niet meer mogelijk is om vanuit Grauwaartsingel naar de Hoge Weide te routeren...

Hoi Sander, ik denk dat je je vraag beter aan HarryS kan richten, want die heeft een paar weken geleden deze situatie gecreeerd... Volgens mij moet het gewoon hetzelfde zijn als de rest van de Grauwaartsingel.

You were right, there was an admin boundary tagged as coastline. It is fixed now.

Hi Sander,
I am not changing the coastline, I am changing the admin boundaries. I will check the new admin boundaries to make sure there isn't a coastline tag which shouldn't be there! Both the coastline and the admin boundaries are based on "snapshots" on a survey date, and can change. The imagery date (and the state of the tide) is yet another variable. The admin boundaries are recent and come from an authoritative source, so they are the best we can get. The coastline on the other hand is a bit of a mess, and I have been wondering if there is a downloadable source of coastline data, hopefully including baselines for territorial waters.

fixed!

Hi, thanks for noticing that. It is fixed now - the correct role is admin_centre.