Note also OSM expects names to be fully expanded, so "Dr" should be "Drive". A better source would be the latest TIGER data available as a layer in the editors

I wondered why you have removed the name tag from the University of York Heslington Campus. Using name:en is not a substitute for the name tag but something over & above.

We dont use Google Street View for verification! There is a risk that such uses makes OSM a derivative work.

I suggest you check changeset source tags when doing this kind of edit.

You could also have dropped me a message or a note to the effect that the more widely used tag is bookbinder. I much prefer that approach than just changing tags without asking the original mapper.

Not to worry, but really big edits can be a sign of other problems which can be really confusing (someone recently dragged the corner of a building from Finland to USA).

Someone has commented (note/356195) that the footpath connecting Mill Place and Fairfield Place edited in this changeset doesn't exist. To me on Bing it more looks like some kind of service road behind the bigger buildings on Mill Place. I see you are still actively editing in the area, wondered if you'd be able to check.

Can you be careful about not editing very large areas in changesets. I'm sure a parcel of farmland in Scotlands is not necessary for humanitarian mapping in Nepal.

Also please use the tag farmland or farmyard, not farm.

Great thanks for replying.

My information, based on March 2014, was that the road was "There are no Cars, only Motorbikes, between Dhikur Pokhari and Manang." and in particular that a bridge was missing between Bhratang and Dhikur Pokhari.

I know the road has been under construction for quite a while.

It would be great if you could check with your friend for more details. Also if they have any photos showing the condition of the road, perhaps they could upload them to Wikimedia Commons.

Hi thanks for contributing to OSM Mapping for Nepal.

I wonder why you changed the track into Manang into an unclassified road. My latest information from 1 year ago is that there has been little progress with the 'Chinese Road' and no bridges are in place. Unclassified road is only suitable if the road is used by 4-wheeled vehicles. As far as I know this is not the case in the valley around Manang.

If you have some more up-to-date information please let me know.

I've now reverted this change. not:name is a) important to show that official maps have the incorrect name and thus allow feedback to them; b) show other mappers that names on open data sources are wrong; and c) is important in derivation of statistics showing missing road names.

Usually the best way is to find a suitable tag. So a haulage yard typically fits with landuse=depot (not obvious I know). For the lagoon I'd move this over to a description tag rather than a name tag. If you call it locally "The Lagoon" then use a loc_name tag rather than name tag. As an example see this pub: way/96318682. What's the difference? The name tag should usually be easily determined by any mapper; a loc_name really requires familiarity with the local area to a) either know a place has a name; or b) to know such a name is in use.

Thanks for adding info to OSM.. You might also like to add amenity=dentist, so that things like a search for "dentists near cambridge" will also work.

Two things with this change:

1. You have removed information that this used to be a sports centre. We find such information useful in Nottingham, particularly when using Open Data from the city which may not be completely up-to-date.

2. I have no particular objections to the tag lesiure=fitness_centre, and appreciate the advantages it has over amenity=gym. However by altering one element you have introduced inconsistency in tagging these objects in the Nottingham area. You have also therefore broken the view on OSM-Nottingham which shows gyms/fitness-centres. It's always best to ask about such things before making the changes.

Accessibility is not the same as permissible to use as a source for OpenStreetMap. Both Ordnance Survey mapping and Google Satellite images are fully accessible to anyone, but in neither case are these sources suitable for OSM. I'm also not clear what you mean by the Derbyshire Land Registry: The Land Registry of England and Wales is the cadastral authority, but context suggests that you are referring to Derbyshire as the Highways Authority.

Lastly I'd like to check that it is Castle Drive which is shown with a gate in the picture & not Castle Lane.

Welcome & thanks for editing OpenStreetMap. Unfortunately I don't think these individual paths are named "The Big Track" because they could equally be called "Trent Valley Way" (which also runs along these paths). Because of this we have a mechanism for naming routes which follow a path. This uses a relation of type=route. The Big Track has been mapped this way for quite a while: see relation/1387699. When the The Big Track followed Lenton Lane, the name was that of the street. The regular Standard rendering does not show this information, but if you click on the Cycle Map layer you can see the track clearly labelled.

Adding descriptive names (such as "footpath") is unnecessary, all such information is included in the tags and can be added if desired by data consumers. They do not belong in the main database. It's worth having a read of the Good Practices page on the wiki osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things.

SK53

PS. You have mis-spelt Towpath in later edits.

thanks, think I've fixed a few (caused by focus of editor being on tag window not edit window). Several probably could do with tiger_reviewed=no being removed

Hope I've caught them, mainly where "y" replaces a key value.

Thanks for the warning.

Hmm, had a quick search and cant see anything particularly dramatic, other than one or two ways with y=Texas, MO. This tag should be deleted (it's one of the useless TIGER Tags). Perhaps you caught any real nasties.

Shame its another yurp person doing the spotting!

Appears to relate to this closure notice: http://derbyshire.gov.uk/applications/rights_of_way/TempClosures/TC2129.pdf & https://derbyshire.gov.uk/leisure/countryside/access/rights_of_way/path_closure_register/search_the_register/details.asp?AppID=4807&men_1975=Swarkestone

There are several simple rules of thumb which you ignored:

1. Am I improving the semantic value of OSM by changing a tag. Moving something to a note does not do so.
2. Has the tag been accepted by other mappers. In this case several mappers had made changes to the object without changing the maker key.
3. If it aint broke dont fix it.
4. If the meaning of a tag is obvious (as this one is) and you do not know of a more widely used alternative leave it alone.
5. If you are not clear about the intentions of the original tagger, ask them! That's why we have a messaging system & changeset comments.
6. Local knowledge and mapping things by visiting places results in better mapping than global edits. Informing people in an area of possible alternatives to tags they use, helps everyone.
7. Tags with low usage numbers are not intrinsically wrong, just not used very much.