I very much doubt that the security guard checkpoint at the entrance to the Boots site has its own housenumber. Furthermore the Nottingham City Council GIS (which contains all Nottingham addresses) doesn't have any entry for "1 Thane Road". I'd be interested to know what your source was for this information.

Please dont add postcodes which dont have real geographical content to such buildings. There are probably hundreds of postcodes co-located at this building, none of which correspond to the postcode for the building. By adding such postcodes you will make it very difficult for people who use postcodes for routing, or for identifying post code districts, areas and sectors. I wrote extensive notes about this issue here http://sk53-osm.blogspot.co.uk/2013/12/british-postcodes-on-openstreetmap.html. (For reference Boots main postcodes are in postcode area NG80, but please don't add these either).

Yeah, what I wanted apparently was ref:signed=no, but I couldn't remember it as its not something I've used, but its useful to show that the ref is not available even after ground survey

This is not a correction, it is the conversion of one tag into a different one with a different meaning. unsigned_ref contains a known ref value which is not signed. The tag I added had the meaning that the ref was not known because it was unsigned.

Knew there was something missing

Thanks, was highway=stile.

Good spot; I imagine they are trees! They'll be London Planes too.

OSM can never be regarded as wholly reliable: anyone using any map as the sole navigation aid for paths in mountainous country is just asking for trouble. For instance for several years we had a path marked on the Hoernli ridge of the Matterhorn, and people mark Via Ferrata as paths to enable them to appear. Hikers must take responsibility for themselves, and that means informing themselves of local conditions.

Another example: things marked paths around Diavolezza http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/ckc

I would suggest a sensible, albeit not entirely satisfactory, approach would be to add something like "(Perigloso)" after the path name.

The problem with doing what locals want is that often they want things not to be displayed for many reasons other than safety. I can make no judgement about this is this case.

Great to see some tidying up of footpaths around here: they were added long ago from 1940s maps in the hope of surveying them. Turned out there's far too much to do closer to N'ham. If the one you have added is a public right of way it helps if you also add a designation tag, see OSM wiki for values: designation=*#Rights_of_way_in_England_and_Wales

Thanks for adding yourself to OpenStreetMap. I dont recall any 1 storey buildings located precisely in this area, nor can I see them in aerial photos. I would have last surveyed here around March 2013. I notice that there are numerous other tenants located in Ayr Street Workshops, and that the postcode centroid is located over the 3-4 storey former mill/factory building adjacent to this site. If this the location then perhaps you are better mapped as a node in that building. The building I mean is on the LHS of this photo http://openstreetview.org/available/935d58529b544208c4d3a3067f1bf58e7f703cb3-large.jpg

I would just like to add that deleting 'dangerous' paths is not an activity of which I approve. Accurately tagging such paths yes, deleting information about something which exists Working to render paths which are not suitable for the ordinary pedestrian would also be helpful. There is a whole comment thread on this point on Github: https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues/1500.

I see that you are a relatively inexperienced contributor and might not be fully aware of OSM's ethos: if it's verifiable on the ground it can be mapped.

Also consider that roads with cars generally are much more dangerous for pedestrians: would you delete these too!

You deleted a lot of data in this edit, at least some of which appears to be valid. You may have wished to remove some things shown on the main OSM map, for a map needed for your own purposes. In which case you were probably unaware that in doing so you removed data shared by everyone.

We will most likely revert your edits to restore all this lost data, but would appreciate some idea of what you intended.

Yes, do please. As most of the edits were shops I wouldn't have guessed exactly what it was immediately.

Fixed

A direct link would really help instead of having either a) to cut-and-paste the value, or b) step through the edited nodes. In fact I can guess fairly straightforwardly that this should be highway=asl and that the key 'b' should have added source=Bing.

As you haven't been in touch. I have now reverted all your edits. This is done to avoid having to reinstate all the previously existing data by hand. As you might imagine this involves contributions by several people over the years.

Hi, You seem to have deleted from OpenStreetMap many of the main points of interest in Inverary. I imagine this is because you thought you were editing a private copy of the data. You weren't, so now no-one using OSM worldwide can find features such as Inverary Jail, or even the place itself.

Please respond speedily to this message letting us now what you intended.

You need to stick a building=yes tag on this for it to show up.

You seem to have deleted lots of roads in King's Heath. I'm sure this was either by accident, or because you are not aware that edits on OSM affect everyone. This note is just to let you know that I am undoing this edit.

I should add another reason for adding sources & using OSM tools is that it is far faster for other mappers to check that a change is reasonable.