In general we cant use firms websites to add stuff to OSM, UNLESS they have given us permission. A number of firms have done this.

There are, however, a lot of other useful sources of info which can be used. For something like this case what we usually do is add a note saying something like "All shops branded as Bunnings now reverted to Homebase with a link, say, to a press article". This alerts people who live or work locally to check. You may find that there are some notes about which Homebase stores are closing already (e.g., note/1589983). You can use overpass-turbo to find locations (e.g., all Homebase: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/Eaa), so that you can often avoid referencing a website.

There are two schools of thought about updating stuff remotely: some think it's a no-brainer, others think that having out-dated information makes it more obvious that an area needs a comprehensive overhaul. If you see a BHS store you immediately know that no-one has checked the area for a while, whereas if only that was updated many other changes would be missed. Probably the community is split 40/60 on this issue.

There's an occasionally updated wikipage on UK Retail chains which tries to collect information about proportion mapped, closures etc. osm.wiki/Retail_chains_in_the_United_Kingdom.

In principle we could also alter data as a post-processing step, so that the map data would remain until re-surveyed but the for making a map we could, for instance mark chains which have closed as XYZ (closed). However no-one has done this yet.

HTH in terms of scratching a shop mapping itch.

Noted a prominent Toys R Us store from the train over the weekend. Someone not knowing the chain was in administration would look for this as a prominent marker.

Hi, You requested a review. I think in your first attempt you accidentally overwrote the information about your town. The second node added with just the office=advertising agency is fine. I apologise that I deleted it when putting back Faridkot as a town. I've now restored it. It should show up shortly as a blue dot, and should also be searchable.
Regards,
Jerry aka SK53

Did you change the direction of this way based on aerial imagery? If so this was an error. The direction of the road was reversed in November 2016 (as the previous changeset said).

Hi & Welcome,

Just wondered if this is "Wyes Waters" or "Wye Waters"? The Food Hygiene list gives the latter name http://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/en-GB/258330/Wye-Waters-Tea-Room-Granby-Road. I will add address info from the this source anyway.

Regards,
Jerry (aka SK53)

In this change you made the roads which are part of the A614/A638 junction S of Bawtry all 70 mph. They dont look like dual carriageways to me, and I would certainly never drive at those speeds on it. Furthermore having higher speeds on a junction seems dangerous. Do you have any rationale for the higher speeds?

Hi,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thanks for updating this data.

I think you inadvertently moved the location to behind Experian on the other side of Clarendon Street.

I'll put it back for you.

Cheers,

Jerry

Hi,

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I'm a bit at a loss as to what you intended with these edits. As far as I can see each new feature duplicated something which was already present on OSM (e.g., Lace Market Car Park, Broadmarsh, Coco Tang, Caffe Nero etc.) However, your addition on the former American Apparel shop with "SUBJECT PROPERTY" suggests that you may be wishing to annotate the map for a specific purpose.

If this is the case, the main OSM database is not the place to do it. All the data you added are now live and will show up in searches of the area (so 2 new cafes, a new car, a additional tapas bar etc). They probably will not show up on the main map because the upper case labels will clash with other labels & be removed. (Side note upper case labels are rarely used in OSM)

As I will now remove this data because it duplicates existing information, I have extracted your data and added it as an overlay on umap: http://umap.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/martife_254379#17/52.95160/-1.14307. I think this is probably close to what you wanted to achieve.

It's a shame your edits were duplicates because you obviously managed to make use of the shapes of buildings etc in a way that shows you understood how the editing worked.

If you have further questions we can continue the conversation here, but it is in public, or you can send me a message via the OSM messaging system.

Yours,

Jerry
SK53

The whole point is that these are mapped as points because there is no clear consensus about their boundaries. Any area will be approximate and not guaranteed to be one that others will arrive at. Such subjective information just doesn't belong in OSM. Just because it is possible to add information to OSM does not imply that it *should* be added.

As I said in my original post, wikipedia or wikidata are potential places to store such values (where they will usually be backed by some reference source).

I know it's quite some time ago, but I wondered if the footway (way/29261170#map=18/53.24775/-4.15419) which you mapped in this changeset is actually a public right of way (public footpath or similar) as indicated by the description? I think since that time we have started using designation=public_footpath to show these, It would be nice to update them if possible.

Please dont do this it is completely unnecessary. OSM stores geographical information: it is trivially easy to calculate the area. Furthermore as OSM gets improved incrementally areas may change, so if you used OSM to calculate the area the value you added might be wrong in the future. If you used some other source such as Wikipedia then you may also be wrong (what is the area of the Aral Sea), but in that case you may be violating the Ts&Cs which you agreed to when signing up.

Lastly fixed sizes for large sea areas are not useful because there will be multiple likely definitions (this is one reason why many of these are mapped as nodes not areas).

Areas should be avaialble on Wikidata. That is a suitable platform for this type of information.

Good spot. No looking at the aerial imagery it probably is not (also comparing with GSGS 4136). I suspect I added the stream tag before I cut the way into pieces. It is certainly a stream where it goes under the R241 and the upper road, as I ground surveyed those locations). I've removed the stream tag.

I'm reverting this edit because the building as formerly mapped is correct. As the name of the garden implies it sits on the roof of the building, which is built into the hillside and stepped down on the N side. I should know I worked there.

Track way/49166766 doesnt look consistent with aerial imagery (or lie of the land). Might it go in a slightly different direction?

Hi Will,

OSM Inspector is complaining about the Shipley Country Park relation. I think the issue is the wood over Coppice Pond marked as an inner which touches the outer way. The map on the DCC website indicates the private area round the pond is smaller than the wood, so it may be an issue of refining the mapping or the polygon needs some tweaks. I was going to do this, but realise I;m not familiar with that bit of the park.
jerry

I'm not sure of the best way to map gangways & stairs in the stadium. Probably use highway=footway (not pedestrian) and highway=steps. If these are a large area use area:highway=footway or steps in conjunction with a routeable way (steps in particular may be wide with many handrails to provide safety from crushes. I would only map the actual circulation routes (not the way to individual seats. For internal circulation inside the stadium indoor=corridor etc. For much of this very detailed micromapping it may be sensible to use domain specific tags, e.g., stadium=*. The logically completion point is when all seats are mapped.

I have no problem with micromapping details of stadia, for instance adding numbered areas of seating/rows etc, but they are not routable pedestrian areas. I have changed these to stadium=seating (no idea if the tag is in use, but seems sensible, and keeps the information) and altered the name to ref.

The polygons could be used with building:part to enable modelling of the stadium as a simple 3D building.

An aside for @bryanhousel: as I wrote this wikipage (osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Section) some years ago I'm definitely in favour of the basic idea.

I'd stick with the more familiar name "Britannia Stadium", although it's complicated because that too was a sponsorship name, but the Britannia name lasted for nearly 20 years, whereas the bet365 may be more fleeting. For older stadia not built with a sponsor with naming rights, the old name should always be preferred as this will be what it is called.

I'm afraid this is a huge mess. You have added a vast number of pedestrian highways in a stadium, which is incorrect and probably tagging for the renderer. These are presumably banks of seating. I doubt that you got this information from anywhere other than the website of the stadium or some other copyright source. Even a stadium hopper is not going to sit in every bank of seating. As others have said: your edit rate is too high for your level of understanding of some OSM concepts with the result that you are inadvertently removing good data and replacing it with data which may not be compatible with OSM. The very large number of edits may make life too hard to restore data you deleted and keep your edits.

You obviously have a specific project in mind: as SomeoneElse has said you need to add something on your profile about a) your goals & project; and b) sources of information you are using.

Hi, I've just come across the amazing detail of indoor mapping at the RNIB on Judd St. Someone from Guide Dogs for the Blind wants there offices to show separately. I plan to split the building along your indoor ways, but have no way of knowing if I've done this correctly (particularly the rooms on the Hastings St side). I'd appreciate if you can look over the change once I've made it).

Jerry