The changeset is from a while ago, and was made using Potlatch. The wpt_*, ele, and name keys indicate that I'd used a feature of Potlatch to import waypoints from a GPX track I'd recorded, and then manually adjust them.

wpt_description=G is my shorthand for a gate. It looks like I've added the correct tagging for that, but then forgot to remove the other automatic tags from the GPX file. I'll remove them now.

Many thanks for confirming. That presumably means that https://www.specsavers.co.uk/stores/derby is the store website for both units.

In this changeset, you created the way way/890977659 and mapped is as a branch of the stationery/craft/book chain "The Works". It seems unlikely this chain would have a shop here given its location, so are you sure this part of your edit was correct?

Hi Analyst221,

Could I ask what you were trying to do in this changeset?

It appears that the only change you've made is to remove the highway=track tag from way/171665338 . This change would only be appropriate is there is no longer a physical track present on the route.

The route is also a Public Bridleway, so I don't think it's likely that it's no longer a track, even if there's some access restrictions now in place.

Hi,

In this changeset you seem to have added some leisure=picnic_table tags to an existing emergency=defibrillator object, which is located inside a building:
node/3536172639/history

This seems a rather odd combination of tags, particularly if it's inside a building. Could you check if this is what you intended to do?

Hi John,

In this changeset, you appear to have added emergency=defibrillator and defibrillator:location=* tags to the cycleway way/28851463 . Presumably this wasn't intentional, and those tags should have been added to a separate node somewhere.

Could you take a look and see if you can fix it? Many thanks!

Hi, I was just wondering if way/1199453157 is actually a Biergarten (as you've tagged it) as opposed to the British concept of a "Beer Garden" (which is something different). See amenity=biergarten .

The main issue is that "The Circuit" (as a name) might not be globally unique. Including the GB in the OSM key, gives users more a a clue as to what the underlying dataset might be. Yes you could use geolocation - but then what's the point of ever including the country code in a ref key?

AIUI, those UUIDs are actually generated randomly, so I don't think they're technically guaranteed to be unique. But in any case, it's a GB specific data-set, and I think that's the important thing for the OSM key.

If I don't know that the next edit will need the same changeset comment and source tags, then generally I save straight away. This avoids, either overly general comments, or accidentally attributing the wrong comment/source to an earlier edit.

Hi mintsoft,

You've tagged the building/store relation/15949142 that you added in this changeset with both "Iceland" and "Lidl" information, but only given it the name "Lidl" Is this some sort of single combined store, or are there two separate stores? If so, it would be better to map them as two separate OSM objects.

Equally, if one is a concession within the other store, then it would still be better to have two separate OSM objects.

Also, I'm a bit curious as to why you've used a multipolygon for the store building here. Perhaps the previous combining of the Lidl and Iceland stores from way/199077828/history and way/199077829/history was done by accident.

Could you have a look and see if the mapping needs adjusting?

Yes definitely! Not sure what I was doing there. Probably either an auto-complete mistake, or I didn't realise all the buildings were still selected when I was trying to add amenity=bar to one specific object.

There's also brewery=various on the same objects. Perhaps it was an accidental replication from node/6712715881/history ?

In this changeset you added an AED at node/10820165606 . But a few minutes earlier you'd added another one almost in the same place at node/10820142007 .

Am I right in thinking that this was an accident, and there should actually only be one AED at this location?

In this changeset, you added a Defibrillator at node/10857037358 . However, there was already one mapped a few metres away at node/4681850123 . Do you know if there are genuinely two AEDs this close together here, or should there just be one?

Looking at aerial imagery, it's presumably an auto-complete error, when I intended to tag it as oneway=yes . Looks like it's already been fixed by someone else though:
way/27547919 .

There is no gate here and no legal restriction on deliveries using this road. So I have removed the erroneous tagging added to node/27509634 . I'm not sure exactly what "driver feedback" could have led to it.

The only restriction on this road is a the (already correctly tagged) height limit of 2.2m under the railway bridge.

In this changest you added a node node/10555428087 with name=Pure Gym and not:brand:wikidata=Q18345898 .

The latter tag states that the gym is *not* part of the "PureGym" chain described at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q18345898 , i.e. isn't not part of https://www.puregym.com/ .

Can I ask if this is correct? It seems odd that someone would be able to call their gym "Pure Gym" if it wasn't part ofhte chain. It's possible that the tag was added acidentally by mis-clicking something in the OSM editor.

If the gym is part of that chain, then I think the name should be "PureGym" (no space) and it would be good to add brand:wikidata=Q18345898 to capture this.

You've got the wrong changeset here. shop=discount_store was added to the original node in changeset/126859411 by a different mapper. This changeset was just merging that node into the building polygon.

But anyway, I'd say discount_store is probably synonymous with variety_store, and certainly is in the case of this brand. So I've fixed this instance.

Thanks - I've added a "fixme".

In this changeset, you added "Poundland" brand tags to node/420783189 but left the name as "99p Stores".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/99p_Stores suggests after Poundland bought the chain they changed the branding to "Poundland". Do you know if this is the case here, i.e. should the name also be updated to "Poundland"?