What do you think is wrong with it?

(FYI: A map of the Public Rights of Way in Foxearth Parish can be found at https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/essex/braintree/foxearth/ .)

Definitely shop=bathroom_furnishing; now fixed thanks!

No indeed. Now fixed, thanks!

Please go ahead and correct it, if you know it should be a Sainsbury's Local. :-)

In this changeset, you added the node node/11851040809 and tagged it as a Sainbury's supermarket. Do you remember if it was a full-scale supermarket, as opposed to a smaller-format "Sainsbury's Local"? (The latter would have different name and brand tags.) Thanks!

In this changeset, an AED was added at node/11828184669 . But there is already an existing AED mapped very close by at node/8789578124 . So I'm wondering if the new node is a duplicate. Is it possible to ask the user to confirm?

Yes, I would have meant that. (Presumably the auto-complete I was expecting didn't complete it for some reason.) I've now fixed the way in question. Thanks!

I see you've tagged node/11803317484 with office=newspaper. This would be the tagging for a newspaper company's office. Is this right here?

If it's actually a newsagent shop, then shop=newsagent would be better. In the note at note/1910268 it's suggested the shop may also be a post office, in which case it could also be tagged with amenity=post_office.

I know this edit was a while ago, but the tagging on the resulting node at node/254000591 is somewhat unusual, and I'm wondering if it's correct.

It's currently tagged with:

* amenity=telephone
* emergency=defibrillator;phone

That says that there's a public phone, a defibrillator (AED), and an emergency phone all inside the same red telephone box. This is possible, but typically AEDs are installed in old phone boxes after the public phone has been removed, and I'd find it odd for an emergency phone to be added.

I don't suppose you have any local knowledge of survey notes/photos from the edit do you?

Hi there King_Rockhammer,

In the tags for this changeset you specified the source for some of your changes as "Google Maps". I'm afraid that we're not allowed to use this as a source for OpenStreetMap. (The information contains Google's Intellectual Property, and we need to make sure OSM is free of any third-party rights.) So if you have used this as a source, it's likely that your changes will need to be reverted.

Would you be able to confirm if, and to what extent, you made use of Google Maps for the changes you made here?

Of course, it's fine to use local knowledge and any other information you've gained by checking things yourself on the ground. If you are local, perhaps you'd be able to contribute to OpenStreetMap in this way instead?

Best wishes,

Robert.

Great thanks!

Hi,

In this changeset, you edited the node node/7065117081 , changing it from an amenity=bank named "Lloyds Bank" to a shop=optician named "Specsavers". However, you left brand=* and brand:*=* tags still referring to Looyds Bank.

Can I check that you did indeed intend to remap a former Lloyds Bank as now being a Specsavers optician? If so those brand tags could do with being updated too.

In this changeset, you added a node at node/11712190310 for an AED (defibrillator). However, there is already an AED mapped a few metres away at node/5256160703 .

Are there actually two AEDs here, or should there just be one?

In this changeset, node node/11151936875 was tagged with both emergency=defibrillator and waste=dog_excrement . Are both of these tags correct? (If there's a bin and an AED at the same place, I'd use two separate nodes.)

@paceban532 way/1257185613 is clearly not correct. You do realise that you are making changes to the live OpenStreetMap database don't you? You should only make changes that reflect the reality of what is on the ground. There is no such military base in Norwich, so someone will now have to take the time to undo your changes.

Many thanks. I've restored the highway=track tag .

As per the standard usage of the "not:" prefix, it means the object doesn't have a particular ref that's present in The Circuit (typically despite its proximity to the location in The Circuit of that AED). It's usage confirms that the OSM object isn't a match for that entry in The Circuit, and helps ensure other mappers won't add that ref by mistake in the future, or spend time checking it again later.

I presume we're talking about way/50904221 .

I just left the previous highway=* tagging when I added the PRoW tags.

The highway=* tag is usually more about the physical state of the route than, rather than usage. For shared-use cycle paths I normally go for highway=cycleway, as I think that's a better fit. (I don't subscribe to the whole highway=path thing.) That route is also tagged as part of the National Cycle Network, so it would make sense for cycling to be permitted on it and for it to be tagged as a cycleway.

In this changeset you added an AED at node/11432902393 . However, there was already an AED mapped by the village hall at node/10814728047 .

Do you know if there are indeed tow AEDs this close together? Or is there just one, and if so is your location the right one?

Could you check on the AED you added at node/11434856969 ?

The location description says "newbold revel reception", but that location would seem to fit this node instead: node/11434847270 .

Also, there's already an AED mapped nearby in this village at node/321766503 . Is there actually another one at node/11434856969 ?