(SE) Hold alt to prevent the creation of shared nodes. Press d to disconnect them.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167812000

All buildings valid. Try to map them a little smaller than the roof next time. Good job spoting the C shaped building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167812000

you identified buildings in the imagery. Map them slightly smaller than the roof next time. Good job spotting the C shaped building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167812000

Welcome to OSM! Most building footpritns have a regular shape. Please press o or q after drawing their approximate shape slightly smaller than the roof. 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/168405189

The building footprints adjacent to what you mapped as a construction site share nodes and overlap with it even though there appears to be a path wide gap between them; these fetures should not share nodes nor overlap hold alt to prevent the creation of shared nodes. The highway should be adjusted as to not overlap building footprints. The SE footprint has been unnecessarily mapped using a pair or lines and a multipolygon relation when it could have easily been digitsed as an area. The imagery allows for some of these building footprints to be more accurately mapped. 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/168262764

The footprints I flagged clearly contain the buildings' shadow in their size. Take care to not include the shadow while mapping the shape and size of footpritns. I recommend that you map footprints slightly smaller than the roof seen in the imagery becasue of the likely overhang. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+) after squaring or circularising them.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168509457

The L shaped footprint you mapped is more likely to be two seperate buildings.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168509657

A valid extension of a waterway. It appears that this stream is also intermittent.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168179315

Hi, while this waterway looks to be atrificially made, I think this is too narrow to be a canal. Personally I would tag it as a drain.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168179286

This changeset looks like it was traced created using an imagery source other than ESRI. Was it?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167726263

This changeset looks like it was traced created using an imagery source other than ESRI. Was it?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/167110815

The buildings here are close enough to be considered one settlement; only one area is required to envelope them. The two smaller areas use the correct tag of landuse=residential but the larger one does not. Populations can be estimated but to get the actual number you'd likely have to conduct a survey or use other sources of information than aerial photos. 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/168396405

Do you know how many people live here? Just becasue a tag can be applied doesn't mean it should.--- this area should not have been added and is incorrectly tagged. It should be yellow when correct. 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/168396225

Do not delete local information like this unless you're sure it should be removed. Unlike most other features which should be deleted if there is evidence of their non-existence. Place names can still be useful even if the settlement they were named after is no longer there.--- Fret not; I restored this element and tagged it as a locality. See my resolution in Changeset: 168421426. 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/168396986

Welcome to OSM! This residential area does not envelope a settlement and is incorrectly tagged. There is no accompanying place POI. 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/168397388

You correctly identified and tagged both the POI and Residential area. If the residential area were more accurate that'd be excellent. I find that adding an extra node on some corners can make the areas easier to draw accurately.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/168397384

An improvement over the previously crude geometry and an appropriate tag change. 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/168398423

Check Changeset: 168411254 to see how I replaced these with the footprints of individual buildings. 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/168396369

You mapped individual buildings as settlements. 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/168397498

These are not hamlets. Though there are buildings at the two sites I flagged, they are likely communication infrastructure so the landuse wouldn't be residential. 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/168397751