Hi
You've deleted JQ railway=station node. Please reinstate.

covered=*?uselang=en

Hi
Why do believe this is a grave yard?

Hi
What do mean by walkthrough?

Hi
There are two lanes for the road, the building is a church & there should only be one tag per tram stop. You've created three stop_positions.

http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=1318928

Hi
Could you take a look at NCN 4 which has split in a coupe of places? Unsure which way it's meant to go.

ta

Hi
Before making amendments, especially id tall buildings, to be ware of 'parallaxerrors' & that the aerial imagery is accurately aligned with objects that are close to the ground ie roads.
You've moved this, & other objects ouit of alignment.
osm.org/edit?editor=id#map=19/51.45939/-2.58273
Note it is using the same editor & background imagery as you were.

.

Hi
What's the source of your data?
Does it include address data?
Could you add the data to buildings if they exist. It would improve the OSM database.

way/164199554

Tags for relation outers should be placed in the relation not the way.

railway=stop seems more appropriate as there's no real infrastructure that could be classified as a 'station'

OK, now there's one railway=station, but two public_transport=stations on one of which there's a ref:crs, but I've moved that to the railway=station node, On the other there's a fare_zone tag, also a station=subway, but no railway=station. On the railway=station node there's a subway=yes, but no public_transport=station

The error message is referencing the two stop area relations, not the node stations.

Hi
way/767300457
To check, You stopped the platforms short. Iis the station/cafe building accessible ot the public?

They are renderable without this tag. Please revert.

Adding leisure tags to boundary ways is duplication of data.

Hi Thanks for contacting.
My main aim is to improve the quality of the OSM database. Usually I'd say mapping as polygons is advantageous, but after updating many of the UK's stations tags it's clear it's not true in this case. There appears to be confusion as to the extent that should be mapped. Take Lancaster as an example which extended well South of the platforms. Should its track areas, scrub, disused tracks & platforms all be included? Mapping as a node allows its accurate positioning within the central area of the station, between the tracks & roughly midpoint of the platforms. It can be tweaked to allow clear rendering of the label so it doesn't clash with other entities.

Please note, I've not removed any information*

The wiki page is for the railway=station tag *not* PT2 which is cuckooing in order to promote itself. It is a schema which purely duplicates the original scheme. It adds no extra quality to OSM & has led to many getting confused how to tag correctly.. I think that graphic should be amended.

I believe I've mapped in accordance with railway=station schema.

*Not intentionally, anyway.

PS Are you local? Are platforms 1 & 2 operational? I don't think the tracks should be tagged as sidings if that's the case.

Hi
It wasn't a stop_position until erroneously edited 4 days ago:
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=80050514
It is part of the overground (PDF):
http://content.tfl.gov.uk/london-overground-network-map.pdf
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wembley_Central_station
Wembley Central is two distinct stations as defined by individual Naptan & Tiploc codes, & only one with a CRS code. This is the data you've removed.

node/6022637122

Please note there is an existing railway=station node. Station buildings should have separate tags