Hi sec147. You haven't responded yet, and the change conflitcts with what I know about this road. I have changed it back to it's previous access in this changeset

changeset/132221245

Sorry, looking again, it appears you didn't add them as bus stops, but Naptan data has been there for a while? Still not sure about use of tag bus=yes and public_transport+platform

Hi, sec147. The bus stops you've added in this changeset do not exist. Not physically present, but more importantly there are no buses using them. There is Naptan bus stop data for these sites, but the Naptan data does not necessarily means the bus stop exits in the OSM meaning.

Hi sec147. In this changeset the eastern half of Hollow Lane has been given the restriction vehicle=private

way/1132721898

I'm not aware of a traffic order changing access to this road? Are you sure this is correct. And if so what is the signage?

Hi sec147. In this edit you changed a footway (crossing) to cycleway. The way is linked to below
way/819038103

Assume change done because it's part of a cycle route. But this section is a footway, An example of poor cycling infrastructure. I changed the way back to being a footway in changeset/131618190

The historical background is, from my local knowledge, complex. A very quick check shows that the definitive source for street names, National Street Gazetteer, has junction where I said, but is not a usable source. The recycling bank has an address on Topsham Rd. Not something I can follow up now, I'll revisit this in January.

Hi, I believe the road name here was correct. The junction between Topsham Rd, and Exeter Rd, happens at the "The Retreat Drive" But, there is conflict with the official road name and OS maps. I am away from home so can't access data. Created personal note for myself to double check this local anomaly in the New Year. Did you have a source for the change?

The mapping of Cycle Ways in Cranbrook is a problem. More surveys needed to unravel what is meant to be there and what has actually been provided. A network of "pavement cycle tracks" where meant to be constructed by developers of this new town, but currently only exist as 3m wide pavement. Signage & textured paving not constructed. Devon County Council has on their mapping service shown cycle tracks that should be there, but does not match what's on ground.

I will try and revisit and get more data for cycle tracks that actually exist on ground.

That last "this should been check" was a copy&past error.

The wikidata ID is for the entire sports ground, not just the central activity area. The sports ground is mapped and already has the wikidata ID. way/106053639#map=18/50.61332/-3.40577

Adding it twice is unnecessary? The the object you attached it to is not area the Wikidata ID is referring to.

Adding the wikidata ID when already present should be managed within the maproulette activity, and I don't know why it suggested adding to the internal activity area, rather than the whole ground.

This should been check

Hi, This wikidata ID has already been added to the "Sports Ground".
way/106053639

Looks like there is an issue with the Maproulette challenge. I'll remove the wikidata ID from the recreation ground tag, and ask what's happening on Maproullete

Hi, In this changeset you've deleted the highway=crossing tag for node/342413162 (a Toucan Crossing) , and I think you've done the same for several other crossing. You've added Traffic Signal information but removed crossing information. You've also used the key traffic_signals=pedestrian_crossing when it appears it should be traffic_signals=cyclist_crossing

The crossing tag needs to be retained.
The wiki pages might help

crossing=*

highway=traffic_signals

This junction in Exeter is a bit of a mess so I'll try and edit the whole thing in the next few days.
Jass

Hi, do you have a source for the name "The Sex Bench" given to the bench in your edit?

I've got to disagree with your definition of highway=proposed. There needs to be some form of schedule, and at least high potential for the project to happen. That is not created in the UK by a planning consent. With regard to this highway. When making the edit I was heading for deleting the way, based on Local Knowledge, but I don't like deleting work done by others. This is a small chance the project could be resurrected, but very unlikely. If there is no sign of the plan resurrecting over the next year I was going to delete the way. The result was, even if temporary, was this fudge of a tag. If you disagreed with the tag, or other data within the changeset, you should have made this comment first, then edited later. 

Hi, thanks for whats appears to be one of your first edits on OSM. I've made a change to your edit. There is a more specific tag for a Picture Framers, shop=frame. So I mad this small change. I also added the associated buildings.

thanks, fixed it

I've reverted the changeset - The revert changeset is changeset/124116279

This is a revert of changeset changeset/123475148
Changeset had numerous duplicates and points that appeared to be personal POI. No response from mapper after 14 days.

@lakedistrict There is some useful data for artwork type objects, but overall the changeset is clearly a problem. Looking at it again it appears to have added a lot of data. I agree with now doing a revert. I can add the useful data local to me sometime in the future.

Hi, it looks like this is one of your first edits submitted to OpenStreetMap. Thanks for the input, but... there's a few problems with the data.

You added loads of useful data, but many of the objects you mapped appear to be already mapped (eg node/9880986226), and some appear to be personal info submitted in error (eg node/9880986228#map=17/50.64738/-3.42791).

Also, submitting data for a large area is considered bad practice because it can be difficult to check. It would have been better of each of this points to have submitted as an individual changeset, or as small groups of changes in local areas, where errors can be easily spotted by local mappers.

How do you wish to proceed? You could work through changes using one of available editors. Data your not sure about could be added as note, rather than a map change. It is also possible to simply delete (revert) the entire changeset, but that would involve the loss of useful info.