Hi, the eastern fooptint you added here duplicates and overlapps one you mapped previously. If you can tell what features existing data represents then modify it instead of re-mapping. 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/170697901

Why did you position the footprint in this way?

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/170697732

A valid footprint. It could be a touch smaller; roofs tend to overhang walls. 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/170697671

Looks like you included some of the building's shadow in its footprint resulting in it being slightly oversized.

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the roofs of buildings, but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag.

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/

A valid and accurate building 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/170697663

Welcome to OSM. You generally correctly identified buildings in imagery, but they are ever so slightly oversized. I noticed you looked at various imageries, when a building appears the same on two imagery sources you can trace it using the higher resolution one.

When mapping buildings, please trace the shape accurately. Accurate building footpritns aid population estimates and prevent issues like data overlaps. Zoom in so that you can see the outline of the building and mark the corners carefully. Exclude shadows and yards when tracing the footprint. Keep in mind that you are looking at the roofs of buildings, but mapping their footprints. Depending on how the scene is lit, pitched roofs may have light and dark sections that belong to one building. Generally pitched roofs overhang the walls of a building, so a footprint slightly smaller than the roof is accurate. You can scale selected features in ID with shift+(-/+), or JOSM with ctrl.+alt+Lclick & drag. Take care to make contributions that others can build upon.

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/

Welcome to OSM. You created overlapping footprints here becasue the orientation of the one I flagged is inaccurate. Zooming in and out can aid interpretation of shape and orientation. 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/170696958

Overall the building footpritns you added are accurate, however the one I flagged actually envelopes 2 buildings. The landuse you tagged as farmland would more accurately be tagged as orchard. The track you added looka like it may not be a highway, becasue it appears sloped inward toward its centre like a valley. 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/170695946

See my resolution in https://osmcha.org/changesets/170696301
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170695954

Welcome to OSM. You correctly identified a building and its shape. Remember to square footprints (q) when appropriate, and only apply specific values like house if you are certain about them. When mapping remotely usually the tag building=yes is used. 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/170695954

Welcome to OSM. You correctly identified a building in the imagery, but mapped its footprint inaccurately becasue you did not account for the fact that a part of its roof is obscured by vegetation. See how I mapped it here https://osmcha.org/changesets/170696131 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/170695959

Hi Annabel, well done, it's clear to me that you are begining to grasp the concept of correcting a footpritn's position when mapping using imagery captured at an angle. There are a few inaccuracies in this changeset I have mapped these footprints as an example in https://osmcha.org/changesets/170626506. --- Before mapping take a moment to (litterally) note two fundamental properties of any imagery you're looking at;

1. The direction from which the scene is lit or shadows are cast.

2. The angle at which the imagery was taken i.e. which sides of buildings you can see.

It appears to me that you did not account for the off-nadir imagery when buildings were close together and obscuring one another's walls. In cases like this either another imagery source which was captured from a different angle should be used, or adjecent groups of buildings where the base of at least one of them is visible should be selected (shift+LClick) before accounting for off-nadir and moved (m) in usison to position them more accurately (this works best if the height of the builings is similar). In OSMCha click the map icon and select ESRI which is closer to a vertical photo and see how some footprints are positioned well with respect to it while others are inaccurate. 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/

Thank you for the context of the place import.

I don't know if a tool already exists, but I agree that it should be possible to do it in a more automated way. I used the balloon tool to create the geometry and replaced an old way per closed loop of the relation to preserve history. Then deleted the excess ways and the type tag needs to be deleted. All of which I think could be semi-automated.

Modifying relations tends to be much easier in JOSM. I don't expect you to go back and change them all or anything like that (especially in ID). It should make it easier to map using simple areas in your future contributions.

You're welcome!

I have a question regarding the removal of GNS tags. Do they not serve any purpose, and so is it valid to remove them in general or are there conditions for when to do it?

It's just a hunch of mine but, I thought that maybe they could prevent future imports from creating duplicate data, so thus far I have not been removing them; maybe you know something I don't. Then again, the place names and source date tags probably should suffice to allow for prevention of duplication.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170431193

You're welcome! Thanks for fixing the issue, and the info regarding GNS and location accuracy.

Hi, I'm just pointing out that I spotted an Ikpai 1.5 km SW that's been there for years. Seems like you added a duplicate to me. What do you think? Maybe you had more info, otherwise I recommend using the OSM standard layer to see place names or downloading places in the nearby area to preserve their history. I am not confident about the location of the older POI and the settlement between the two seems to have no name currently.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169397600

Hi, I'm just pointing out that I spotted an Ikpai 1.5 km SW that's been there for years. Seems like you added a duplicate to me. What do you think? Maybe you had more info, otherwise I recommend using the OSM standard layer to see place names or downloading places in the nearby area to preserve their history. I am not confident about the location of the older POI and the settlement between the two seems to have no name currently.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/169397600

See https://osmcha.org/changesets/170413012 for my resolution of the residential areas mapped using multipolygons.

While we're chatting, do you know to make Ovum the alt name of Owom? Just because they're similar words?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134375807

Thanks for your informative and swift response. I was asking to see if I had missed some other reason as to why it would be better to map it the way you had. It great to have confirmation.

I forgive you and accept your appology ;)

Now I'll tell you about what I presume to be a fairly unknown feature in the ID editor, to make mapping similar features with simple areas that share nodes much more convenient. The two buttons you need to know are F and backspace. This works with lines and areas.

Say we were to re-map the residential areas here using parts of the forest geometry. Select area (3) and click on a node you want to be shared by the residential area and forest, then click another in the direction you want to travel along the existing area. Now press or hold F to add shared nodes and use backspace to remove them. You can also click to add (non shared) nodes freely and follow multiple existing lines or areas. No need for splitting or messing around with relations. I hope this helps and is easier than the methods you are currently using. For a full list of ID shortcuts press "?" They aren't all discussed in the help section, so you may want to experiment and see what's possible.