Hi,
I'd suggest hitting refresh on your browser, or looking at the OSM raw data as this very changeset added back the Shell Select shop:
node/11699271343

From my survey photos, I can only see the green EVSE battery storage units, not any yellow Amazon lockers - are these inside or on the back of the shop please?

Happy Mapping,

James

Hej Niels,
A useful discussion with the UK community and research exposed problems with the obvious tagging, and that it wasn't actually useful - something I didn't know.

I hope the changes help - and might be useful across countries.
Tak,

James

Hi Niels,
Two community discussion threads on this subject may interest you:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-May/030407.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2024-February/031142.html

In summary, these large sites offer a wide range of services from day-passes to attractions, pitches for caravans/ tents/ motorhomes making one overall tag like tourism=caravan_site or tourism=chalet meaningless, especially without specific activity tags.

I'm leaning towards adding specific usage tags, and tourism=holiday_park (more neutral across several activities):
tourism=holiday_park
caravans=x
tents=x
motorhome_stopover=x
static_caravans=x
permanent_camping=x
internet_access=wlan
landuse=commercial (belt-and braces)

This approach gives the specific services for data-consumers. The local community discussion is continuing, so edits will wait for more of a consensus.
Happy Mapping,

James

Apologies - wrong link for Talk-GB:

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Niels,
Can I ask why believe these two locations are not caravan sites please?

From the basis of *many* ground surveys, these sites contain no permanent customer buildings, such as tourism=chalet.

They instead house static caravans with wheels which are moved every few years as pitch rentals are updated.

I can see the utility of adding an extra tags like permanent_camping=yes
static_caravans=yes, but not chalet as these are permanent features.

Can I invite you to engage with the UK community at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/osmf-talk please?
There are *many* UK sites with the same tourism=caravan_site tagging (operator=Havon, operator=Parkdean Resorts UK Limited, and many more) and discussion is always best before mass edits.

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi again,
The hard bit was finding the context of Spencer Road in the industrial estate!

Bing/ ESRI imagery suggests the bollard on the E end has been removed, so map updated.

(FYI - Google information can not be used for updates due to copyright. Bing, ESRI and some others explicitly donate licensing clearance to OSM.)

changeset/144964480

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Open Street Map is a project created by a community where we work collaboratively to improve the overall map, so it is disappointing not to hear back from you about this change set.

I note you continue to map (Changeset: 140190692) across the US, UK and even the Faroe islands, suggesting you are relying on aerial imagery alone.

For many years the Cramlington Town Plan has been to connect Beacon Lane to Lancastrian Road (i.e. over the ECML and completing an inner ring-road) making this alignment much less likely.
Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
As your changesets cover large areas, and you seem to map globally, here's a link to the way in question:
way/678662401/
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi 19timber96,
I notice you've joined up The Fairways access from the W with the S expansion of Beacon Lane and wondered what your source for this was please?
I conduct regular ground surveys of these developments and only see a few dump truck tracks on the ground.
Thanks and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Excellent!
The history is the outer secondary used to run around Seghill Colliery, up the middle of the current site, and was re-routed to the East when the school was built.
It was a mine, so Pit Lane makes a lot more sense to me than 'Pitt'. I surveyed all this area years ago, so don't have recent ground imagery, and sadly NPE / OS Open don't show anything.

My survey imagery is here, but again doesn't show the Station Road junction where signage might be.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=317178264074852

(there's also been a re-baseline of imagery so lots of this area is ENE of the accurate OSM cadastral parcel data)
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Again,
Looks good to me - thanks for making the update.
OSM is a bit like learning a language at first with the tags, but its great that you've added surface=* / smoothness=* as it helps routing especially for groups like wheelchair users, and roadies/MTB/gravel/plain old commuters.
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Adam and Welcome to OSM!

Can I ask you to review the additions you've made to Gallagher Park as you've tagged a large number of ways as highway=steps.

From imagery and past surveys in this area, I'd suggest highway=footway surface=grass or surface=paved might be a better choice as there's not *that* many hills here!

Thanks for contributing to OSM, and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Thanks for spotting the corrupted tag text - JOSM seems to slow down after longer sessions and fail to keep up with a macro keyboard giving occasional strange tags.
I might have to create custom validation as slowing the keyboard code hasn't fixed JOSM's apparent slowdown.
Fixed:
changeset/138090862
Thanks again, and Happy Mapping,

James

Hi,
Looks like JOSM isn't keeping up with my macro keyboard again. :-(

Recent releases seem not to like the Linux JVM and slooow down with a memory leak after a few hours. If only validation would pick these up.

I've run manual searches to look for the bad tags you've kindly spotted - and after removing them, don't see any untagged ways (e.g. removed a bad tag, leaving no other).
I'd appreciate a double check, and will add additional delay to the macro.
barrier=hedge/fence/wall are possible issues in this rural landscape.
Thanks again,

James

Hi,
It's a particularly garbled tag error caused by my macro keyboard occasionally going faster than JOSM can keep up with!

Thanks for spotting the error tag - both should be fixed by:
changeset/130507290
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi user,
It's a cut-and-paste error into JOSM - thanks for spotting it. Dumb tag removed!
Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Emilius123,
You talked me into it... :-)
changeset/117915598

PS My survey imagery is now processed if you're curious (several new homes have sub-addresses suggesting the plan changed):
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=656061858932333
Happy mapping,

James

Hi again GinaroZ,
That's a pretty crap bit of copy-pasta from 130m to the SE!
I can remember unpicking a nest of ways joining the footway to the fire_station, so must have got over excited with CTRL-C CTRL-V.

A good spot - thanks!

Fixed:
changeset/117885985

Hi Chris,
It's unfortunate that you've not replied - I'll assume your SPAM folder has eaten the reminder emails.

Open Street Map is a project created by a community, so communication is important to allow us to work collaboratively to improve the overall map.
After checking Mapilliary imagery, I can see no reason for the change in highway type for a whole 68m, so have changed back to highway=trunk:
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=295053742265197

I'd suggest being careful when accepting editor defaults - they may well be plain wrong, or unnecessary (e.g. adding motor_vehicle=yes to a highway=trunk - not needed, it's a trunk road!).

changeset/116818894

Happy Mapping,

James

Hi Mountain Monkey,
Can I ask that as well as splitting forest relations, that you also check heath relations as well please?

This change removed a chunk of relation/13417952 in the NE corner near Rowantee Hill ( changeset/116734954#map=14/55.3243/-3.0160&layers=N) , meaning a large area disappeared:
relation/13417952/history#map=11/55.2439/-2.8715&layers=N

The relation will now show as continuous as I've created a new way and added it to the heath relation, and JOSM shows the outer role as being a full loop again:
changeset/116734954#map=14/55.3243/-3.0160&layers=N

Unfortunately, given the number of HUGE landcover relations in this area, and the way they are intertwined, this is ridiculously difficult to avoid.
I know - I've fallen foul of similar excessively large relations, and it took me a couple of days to find, split into (slightly) smaller relations, and fix. :-(
Happy Mapping,

James