The footprint I flagged looks like it envelopes two buildings. The latger building partially obscures the smaller one with its roof.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/166118691

I think that this footprint is still too large and includes multiple footprints or gardens, though I can see why it's more difficult to interpret in this case because of the partial tree cover, and if you're zoomed way in your interpretation can be thrown off. Looking at a zoom level of 18/19 (scale of 50/100 m) will tend to give the best picture (you can see this in the url when editing in ID editor) for interpretation before zooming in to place nodes. You can see how I mapped these footprints in Changeset: 165741655
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165351182

Good job you improved the accuracy of the existing footprint here; I think it's still a little too large as it includes what I think are 'fenced' areas on its southern side (better seen on bing). You added a valid footprint which represents a building that was previously overlalpped by the existing footprint.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165350996

You corrected an invalid footprint which outlined multiple buildings. Both footprints here are valid; the left one could be more accurate if it were either smaller or L shaped.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165350817

Hi, it's awesome if you're adding data you have seen for yourself. When this is the case and you want to let others know use source=survey instead of 'on_the_ground'. You can also add this source tag to your changsets (in the same place the imagery sources are in JOSM on upload).

All footpritns here are valid and most are accurate. 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/159483875

Overall a good quality contribution. 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/164093812

Tagging an area like this will result in a huge building appearing on the map. 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/164088866

Hi, thanks for your contribution. All footprints you added here represent buildings in the imagery, and generally have the correct shape (suare or round). I flagged those which have an incorrect shape. Buildings with blue roofs tend to be square. Some of the footprints could be more accurate.---It looks like you correctly modifed resiedntial areas to avoid overlaps with footprints. I recommend changing your issue settings to everything in view to help you spot potential issues with data beside your contributions. Highways should not share nodes with landuse areas, so feel free to disconnect them (d) when you see this. Hope this helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165223970

The footprints I flagged here outline multiple buildings. Good job trying to map accurate building shapes like the L and T shaped buildings. When mapping T shaped buildings with even 'shoulders' you can select the 4 shoulder nodes and press L to line them up making them even before squaring the footprint (q).
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165176232

You did well to not square way/1372166507. I noticed that you're using JOSM but didn't accurately map the more complex buildings. If you're interested in how to map some of these buildings please check out this diary entry to see how to draw more complex building footprints. @Koreller/diary/404988
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164179767

A valid and accurate footprint. 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/164120633

The footprints I flagged represent the light and dark side of a gabbled roof i.e. you added 2 footprints for one building. Consider common roof shapes when mapping and how they look when lit in different ways.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159483667

Overall a high quality contribution. Thank you for your contribution. Generally the footpritns here are valid and acurate. 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/164178595

Overall a high quality contribution. All buildings are valid, have the correct shape, and are generally accurate. Some of them include the shadow cast by the building in the footprint. Keeping in mind the direction shadows are cast can aid imagery interpretation. 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/164406149

I flagged some footprints which are invalid becasue they envelope multiple buildings or include gardens. It lookos like you correctly deleted an invalid footprint. The footprints you added here should be square: make them so by pressing (q) after tagging. 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/164179970

Generally the footpritns you added here represent buildings in the imagery, some could be more accurate. It looks like you improved the geometry of existing footprints instead of deleting them and redrawing, well done.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/164176423

Resolved in Changeset: 165127791
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159484057

Looks like you identified buildings in imagery but tagged them with a name instead. The name tag is used for the name of a feature e.g. name=Eiffel Tower. 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/159484057

All footpritns valid. Accuracy could be improved and they should be squared (q) after tagging.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/165092936