Hi ff5722,

I was wondering if the edit the aeroway_aerodrome at around 21.037368894590145, 105.89369391438186 was intentional. It seems to extend into a golf course based on available imageries.

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi garryking,

I've noticed that you've added water bodies that are not seen in imagery. Could you provide what type of sources you used for these edits?
openstreetmap.org/way/764614563
openstreetmap.org/way/764614562
openstreetmap.org/way/764614566

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi Edivaldo,

I believe you have tagged a whole area as a building (way: 654569104). Your edit included a lot of information so I decided to let you know about it instead of deleting it.
Thanks,
Jesspher

Hi Ferati Lendrit,

I was wondering if you used any other imagery sources for drawing the similarly squared shape buildings in this area? Example: Way: 676052066

Thanks,
Jesspher

Ahh I see, perhaps it'd be better suited under the address tag instead of name tag?
addr=*

Hi amithchell18,

I was wondering the reasoning behind the name values you're using fo the name=* tag? For example: way/653265393. The name is MZ D LT 8.

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi Z Polaris,

I noticed that POI's here have multiple language names under the name=* tag. I was wondering if that is the proper tagging scheme for name tags in this area? One example way: 800759742

Thanks,
Jesspher

Hi Fredrik,

I was wondering if this playground is actually shaped like a fish? Way: 713942947

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi, I believe the best solution is to use the loc_name key. name=*#Values

Hi Jiachen,

May I know the reason why the area for way/794906877 was tagged as building=yes.

Thanks,
Jesspher

Good day wolfgang8741,

I noticed that you digitized a new water relation within an existing water relation/10165450 for Dog Lake. I was wondering if this was intentional? Or if this is the proper convention of tagging this water body.

Thanks,
Jesspher

Hello Hungarian_user,

Thanks for trying out RapiD! Most of the digitized roads from your changesets look great. However, I noticed from this and other changesets that some of the roads were left disconnected/ incomplete. For example, way: 788999692 could be extended a bit to connect to way: 614886392. When tracing highways, ensure you are zoomed-in sufficiently. As a starting guide, set the scale to about 20 meters, and trace the road so that your tracing has sufficient points in it to keep it on, or very close to, the road you can see in your satellite imagery. The RapiD editor also comes equipped with a validator, which gives warnings about potential errors. While AI is a great assistant that starts us off with the geometry of the roads, the standard rules of OSM still apply.Love your continued support of OSM! Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Jesspher

No worries Libithina! Thanks for explaining

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi AsianHistory,

I hope all is well :) I was wondering why you removed the alt_name:en=Liancourt Rocks and the name:ja=竹島 tags for relation: 6646538

Here is an OSM Deep History link of your edit: https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/relation/6646538

Hope to hear from you soon! Regards,
Jesspher

Hi Libithina,

I was wondering about the reasoning with the deletion for Way: 673276843 (tertiary road). This major road exists in most of the other imageries.

Thanks,
Jesspher

Hi Thregren,

Thanks for trying out RapiD! Most of the digitized roads from your changesets look great. However, I noticed from this and other changesets that some of the roads were left disconnected/ incomplete. When tracing highways, ensure you are zoomed-in sufficiently. As a starting guide, set the scale to about 20 meters, and trace the road so that your tracing has sufficient points in it to keep it on, or very close to, the road you can see in your satellite imagery. Also, some of the road taggings are a bit off. Most of the roads you tagged as highway=resediential should be highway=track. Here is a resource for the specific tagging guidelines for this area: osm.wiki/Chinese_tagging_guidelines#Highways
The RapiD editor also comes equipped with a validator, which gives warnings about potential errors. While AI is a great assistant that starts us off with the geometry of the roads, the standard rules of OSM still apply, and we encourage users to validate things like connections and road tagging. Love your continued support of OSM! Let me know if you have any questions.

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi JJIglesias,

Thank you for bringing this up. We've recognized this error and have reverted the changes. Here is the reverted changeset: changeset/81603811#map=17/-20.64592/-67.04370

Regards,
Jesspher

Hi Kovoschiz,

Thank you for bringing this up. We've recognized this error and have reverted the changes:
changeset/81565535#map=15/22.4331/114.0048&layers=H