Just to let you know, I was advised to send an email to the Data Working Group so they can perform a redaction (all copyrighted information will be permanently deleted from the database). For this reason I would recommend that you do not modify anything in this area until this is done, to make this as easy as possible for them. You are of course welcome to edit things elsewhere in Stevenage in the meantime :)

Now some small pointers - for an apartment building, use building=apartments, not landuse=residential + residential=apartments. You can see on the map that they are a different colour to the rest of the buildings you added.
- Use 'Q' to square buildings
- highway=unclassified is for rural roads, in a residential area use highway=residential for normal roads and highway=service for thinner access roads serving a couple of houses.
- way/1442117777 has been traced slightly incorrectly, it should be a perfect rectangle, but you have followed the roof line which has been projected by the imagery, which is at an angle. In reality this roof doesn't extend out in a triangular shape. If you are editing tall-ish buildings you will notice how the imagery can distort their shape slightly, it's a good skill to be able to counteract that!

I hope that's all ok for now, let me know if you have any problems editing in the future, I would be happy to advise/review. As you can see, there's a lot of blank areas in the rest of Stevenage that also need attention!

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for helping to add some detail to your local area! Unfortunately, the source you've used (Herts CC webmap) uses Ordnance Survey maps which are Crown Copyright, which means they cannot be used to help edit OSM in any way. Sadly this means that all the addresses and other names/details you've added from this source will need to be removed. The buildings can stay as I can see they have been traced from Esri. Currently the only way we have for adding addresses in the UK is walking around and entering what we can see. For this I would recommend an app like StreetComplete (android only) which makes it easy to add housenumbers while walking around. Please let me know if you're happy for me to remove these addresses and make some corrections (I would be happy to give you feedback about some things that could be improved.) Thank you.

Hi, I've removed amenity=pub from the Hoops Inn as it's still being refurbished, the tag should only be re-added once it officially reopens. The website says this will be in early 2026.

Please, what is the meaning of these dense grids of footways and service roads? For example, here, way/1334960642 the ways you have added bear no resemblance to reality. It seems like you are adding these ways for some kind of project? If so, you still need to follow standard mapping guidelines, other people use this data too.

So unfortunately if you look at addr:city=* , it should be used for towns too. In the UK addr:city usually uses the 'post town', which Gillingham is. So a village next to Gillingham would still use addr:city=Gillingham.

Hi, why have you mass-removed addr:city=Gillingham from lots of houses, and added addr:city=Gillingham to others?

Reverted due to broken road geometry and addition of historical nonexistent roads changeset/172370101

None of these buildings are rendering now because they're tagged incorrectly - each building should have building=yes. The relation containing all the buildings is incorrect and should be deleted.

Why not just split the buildings before you upload them and save someone else a job later, there's nothing wrong with doing things right first time. I don't see why I should be the one to split these, when you're the one importing these inaccurate buildings that are going to cause problems down the line when other users go to survey addresses here with streetcomplete, for example.

Thanks!

Why do this? Someone is going to have to come along later and split these buildings into semidetached houses, it's easier if places with semis or terraces are just left blank to be drawn from scratch instead of having to remove or fix msft ai buildings first...

Hi, was ref=TQ 3133 8823 actually signed on this substation? I removed it because I thought it was incorrect to have a grid reference set as the ref, but there seems to be several substations tagged like this in London and Southend, so if it was wrong to remove it let me know

Hi, was adding not:brand:wikidata=Q922344 (i.e. not Morrisons) to the petrol station named Morrisons an error, or is this actually not a Morrisons petrol station?

I have a very strong opinion that a clear corridor or embankment isn't grounds for a closed railway to be present in OSM, but that's a discussion for another time :)

I went ahead and added building=train_station and abandoned=yes to the former train station building, so that should be much clearer now what it is.

Geniunely, what is the point of mass-importing microsoft ai buildings if you don't do any checks for quality????? Look at this social facility way/1426417390 in what world is it acceptable to import a building shape that innacurate from microsoft AI buildings???? You're creating a lot of work for other contributors who are going to have to come along later and clear this mess up!!! Additionally, adding 'clumped' buildings is totally unhelpful, like this one way/1426417426 which should be 5 detached houses, not one massive blob!! Someone's just going to have to delete and redraw a majority of these semidetached and terraced buildings to create a map of usable quality! Have you ever tried using streetcomplete to survey addresses where all you are shown is dodgy building footprints that bear little resemblance to reality??? PLEASE consider the quality of the buildings you are importing, *some* people have standards...

Hi, I was trying to deduplicate the tags that were also on the nearby Ardglass station node (11009056412), but maybe it could do with building=train_station + abandoned=yes. (and perhaps a clearer name). A lot of this historical info in my opinion is better placed in OHM, for example the branch line here is tagged as 'abandoned' despite being closed in 1950 and there is likely no physical remains of the track/trackbed etc. It would be nice to have some kind of tagging standardisation for (extant) historic railway infrastructure, because there is a lot of overlap in the use of disused: abandoned: razed: and historic: currently

This is unbelievable... I have no words...

Hi, thanks for updating these roads, do you know what road number has been assigned? If it's an A road it should be marked as primary, if it's a B road then secondary. If you know the number it you could add it under ref for all the sections of road it applies to :)

Why would I put a comment on a changeset that is nothing to do with me or the concerns I have?

What do you mean April 10th Mankind is free???