You're welcome.

I don't understand. Is there maybe a typo here?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153829531

I think that WAY: 1300051192 envelopes vegetation. When loooking at ESRI you can better see the colour of the leaves.--- The orientation of WAY: 1300051193 seems a little off (could be rotated CCW), view the image at its native resolution to get the most accurate oreintation information. Its size was appropriate---WAY: 1300051191 is oversized.---See Changeset: 158645319 for my modifications.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153710488

All footprints are valid, and squared appropriately. Good job drawing the octagon. I made some minor modifications you can see in Changeset: 158644973. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154576768

Tis footprint is valid, appropriately squared and accurate in orientation. It is also oversized but overall a good changeset. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151799576

Footprints are valid but some are oversized and those with more complex shapes are represented with quadrilaterals.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151842864

See Changeset: 158636332 for my modification of some of the buildings here.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151842146

Well done in avoiding highway/building errors. However some of the building footprints could be more accurate for instance WAY: 1286761664 should be a T shaped building and WAY: 1286761645 an L shaped building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151842146

All but one of these footprints is valid. The footpritns are sometimes inaccurate in size,shape and orientation. e.g. WAY: 1286761082 & way/1286761100 should be mapped as 'L' shaped buildings.---It's good to move the highway out of the way to prevent overlaps however you should include the fact that you modifed the highway in your changeset comment. I recommend that you modify features like highways first if you suspect that they will cause issuses, becasue they can be quite long and lead to your changesets being large and making it more difficult to find the smaller features you've mapped. Thank you for your contribution.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151842017

This footprint is, valid accurate in orientation and appropriately squared, but is oversized due to off-nadir distortion. The fact that it is too large can be seen in ESRI imagery which is closer to nadir. See my changes in Changeset: 158633158.---Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151841926

The northern footprint is a top quality contribution; valid, accurate in shape and orientation, and appropriately squared. Please map to this standard in future.---The southern footprint is valid, but is oversized and the orientation could be more accurate. See how I modified it in Changeset: 158632833.---Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151841897

WAY: 1328787838 appears to me to be vegetation; not a building.--- It appears that you moved connected building footprints. Either select all of the connected features and move them simultaneously or unglue/disconnect the features to prevent unwanted geometry changes.--- I corrected the errors in Changeset: 158631711. Use that as a reference.--- Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158452961

You used a custom tag here and do not appear to have answered another contributor's question about its meaning.--- The meaning of this custom tag perhaps could have been added to the chnageset comment, so that its meaning can be understood. You should be documenting custom tags that you employ. I could not find a proposal for this tagging scheme on the OSM wiki. Reference Document your custom tags section in osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments--- Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133998572

The trees in this changeset could likely have been better mapped using an area.---The building footprints are not very accurate. The building relation you created is incorrect; the buildings here should be tagged individually. Some building footprints erroneously share nodes with other buildings and highways. Buildings and highways should only share common nodes, or overlap in special cases. Use the buildings plugin and hold ctrl when mapping to prevent your cursor from snapping to exisitng elements. I encourage you to reference osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide.---Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156313753

One of the problems with this changeset is that it was not submitted with a comment that's useful to other contributors. No imagery or source has been reported which makes the changeset more difficult to acess and work with.---You have also deleted and redrawn elements that represent the same feature. Please refer to the Good changeset comments and Keep the history sections of osm.wiki/Good_practice#Good_changeset_comments

I have added the tag building=yes to many of the untagged ways created here in changeset/158590458. This was as part of MR project 49486 and mapping errors generated by Radio Castiao Jr could also be included in MR project 58204, maybe others given the area that Radio Castiao Jr has contributed.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146752981

I'd like to start off with a couple of positives. The vast majority of individual trees are tagged appropriately and most appear to be valid. You seem to have identified buildings in the imagery and some building footprints are valid.--- There are however several errors in this contribution. There are errors in tagging, geometry, and the changeset itself.--- I recommend that you use the buildings plugin when mapping building footprints. This plugin helps with both tagging and geometry of building footprints, because it will automatically tag and square ways that represent buildings. If you are mapping buildings remotely, then they should be tagged as building=yes. Reference: osm.wiki/Map_features.---Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133997119

Por favor, traduza meus comentários, se necessário. I want to begin by saying that the effort and time you have spent contributing to OSM is appreciated. The following comments are intended to provide you with constructive critisism of your work, so that your further contributions may be more efficient, of a higher quality, and respect the time and effort of other contributors that interact with your contributions. These comments/reviews may come as a shock to you; I recommend that you process them systematically, then upload some small contributions with request for review, to ensure that the quality of your contributions has improved, so that any mistakes you make can be addressed with minimal effort.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/133997119

Footprints; Valid, accurate in shape and orientation, appropriately squared. Good choice of imagery and to align to ESRI to keep common project alignment. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154582376

Valid, appropriately squared. I don't think there's enough evidence in the imagery to support mapping this as anything other than a quadrilateral. This could have also been aligned with ESRI to be consistent with the alignment of other features in the project. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155006230

Valid footprint, appropriately squared, accurate orientation. Slightly oversized. Be aware that low resolution imagery can make features appear larger than they actually and that squaring can change the size of what you draw. Overall a good changeset. Thank you for your contribution. If you want to experience the OSM community or to get timely feedback from other mappers; I recommend that you attend a mapathon. You can find events here https://osmcal.org/
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156097485