A building in this changeset is comprised of excess nodes. You can press shift+y in JOSM to quickly simplify ways removing such nodes.

Some of the shadow is included in the footprint, also.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141768030

The building I flagged is slightly oversized, becasue it seems that you included part of the wall in the footprint. Mapbox in this region shows the South and Eastern walls of buildings. Take care to idenetify if and how the imagery is off-nadir to aid/improve your interpretation. I hope this helps thank you for your contribution.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141768030

Well done you correctly identified a building visible in the imagery. In future please press q to square footprints after tagging them. Check Changeset: 159784507 to see my modifications.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159649454

WAY: 1336959789 has an inaccurate orientation. It should be rotated ~45 degrees CCW like the footprints you deleted WAY: 1318104353. When viewing low resolution imagery it helps to zoom in and out to determine building shape and orientation.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159476445

These buildings were added using outdated imagery. In this case the imagery capture date is Sep 22, 2010. You can check this here https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/wayback/#active=10&mapCenter=161.28107%2C-10.23859%2C17. I rectified this in Changeset: 159464621. 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/159441418

It looks like you enveloped two buildings with this footprint. A quadrilateral on the left and an L shaped building on the right. The building on the right may appear odd because it appears that not all of its corners are square looking at the adjacent highways can help you to determine this. Zooming in and out helps also. 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/159386115

Most of the building footprints you have added are valid. Please press q to appropriately square the corners of building footprints after tagging them. --- Building footprints should not share common nodes with landuse areas. Hold alt to prevent your cursor from snapping to existing data or filter out data that you do not want to interact with using the map data panel on the RHS of ID Editor. ---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/159295686

To get you thinking about good changesets lest look at WAY: 103138423. Previously it was tagged as a building; you changed it to a roof. Why? Did you see something in the imagery to confirm it? Have you actually seen it yourself? If it was previously mapped as a building, then it's possible that a future contributor will map it as such again. If they look at the history and find a good explanation for why it has been mapped that way then they'll be less likely to change it. If they do change it (and it is in fact a roof) then it'll be easier to rectify and maintain. Please keep this feedback in mind when contributing in future.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155794282

Going forward please start logically structuring your uploads/changesets and submit USEFUL comments with them. A useful comment tells other users what you did, and why you did it. This is important because it makes working with your changesets significantly easier and saves contributors time. If a changeset is well structured and has a good comment I may not have to view it visually to understand it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155794282

WAY: 451577827 and nearby highways added by you in this changeset (and possibly others) appear to be fictional. They seemed to overlap and now overlap more features vidible in imagery. To be as generous as possible I'll assume that you did this to 'improve' router functionality. Now these highways are in the way and hinder mapping. In future, please structure your uploads such that fictional edits or guesses are segregated from valid data; that way anything you're unsure about will be significanlty easier to address. Be sure to state what you're doing in your changeset comment to make this obvious.

I think that WAY: 1286821109 & WAY: 1286821110 are invalid footprints.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151854871

WAY: 1286823792 envelopes a building and part of another. Beware that gabled roofs may have a dark and light side. Please keep this in mind in your future contributions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151855233

You correctly identified buildings in the imagery. Beware that buildings like those enveloped by WAY: 1286250850 are likely to be two buildings.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151767554

The northern footprint is certainly valid and both footprints have been approprately squared. I think that the northern footprint is oversized. You can cross reference this by checking esri imagery. See how I mapped it in Changeset: 158994181. Hope this helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151792618

These footprints are valid but the imagery allows them to be more accurate. check Changeset: 158956046 to see how I mapped it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151848703

WAY: 1286728871 appears to be longer in imager and its orientation would be more accurate if it were rotated clockwise a little. Thanks for providing changeset comments by the way.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151836765

All footprints outline buildings and are appropriately squared. some footpritns envelope multiple buildings e.g. WAY: 1286732060 & WAY: 1286732059. Some building footprints could be more accurate e.g. WAY: 1286732031 & WAY: 1286732034 should be L shaped. Hope this helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151837635

All of these footprints envelope buildings and have been appropriately squared. The accuracy could be slighty greater. Overall a good changeset. --- I think that WAY: 1286730702 is actually L shaped and that WAY: 1286730704 should actually be represented with two footprints. Check Changeset: 158954385 to see how I mapped it.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151837175

I think that it would be best to map this with two building footprints. Check Changeset: 158954016 to see how I mapped it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/151799208