Hi & welcome to OpenStreetMap,

Just a note to say I don't think this edit ended up as you intended. For some reason it's ended up over an epispocal church in Nottingham, England.

I see you've added it in the right place now (node/6481743770), so I'll remove this edit. (I may also enhance your other edit so the church building stands out as in this location in Nottingham).

Best wishes,

Jerry aka SK53

Hi Jothirnadh,

Thanks for getting back to me, and in particular as a supervisor.

I owe you & your team member (rkmreo) an apology as it was not them who mapped the areas covered by the added roads as buildings (it was another mapper concerned with having geolocated names: a local taxi provider), but the addition of roads through buildings completely threw me, and would in any case be wrong. I suspect this is an exceptional edge case for your methodology & therefore nothing to worry about. This particular case (roads passing through buildings) would get flagged on various QA tools (e.g., OsmCha), and should be flagged in the ID editor itself. I don't know how frequently your team encounters such issues, so I don't know if it is appropriate for inclusion in training. It may be as more remote teams are adding missing data that such cases may become more common.

As I happened to visit this location a few months ago & had some photographs available so I took the opportunity to enhance the mapping of the village, and incidentally, add another missing road (Tower Farm opposite).

It's not entirely true that road names are not available for this kind of thing, but the sources available are probably too complex for the type of workflow you use. I used various sources of open data, my own photographs & Mapillary images to adjust the names and transfer names to the roads. I believe Microsoft have a listing of missing road names, but I dont have a link for it immediately to hand.

Many of these small roads such as those here may not be public roads and therefore do not show up in many sources.

In the end these additions by your team led me to further improve OSM here, and remove the old unconventional mapping.

So once again my apologies.

Regards,

Jerry

Hi, We noticed that you added these new roads which is very welcome, but you did it in a highly unconventional way which suggests that something may have been missed in the training you received. Please always add road names on the actual way tagged with highway. Do not add them to a large inaccurately mapped building. If you need to add a building for address purposes either add it as a way using the appropriate address tags and building=yes or as a node with just the address. There are countless examples of good practice all over the world.

In these edits: Manor Court & Manor Farm names need to be moved to the roads. Manor Field should be tagged using addr:housename not name & the building should actually correspond to the building visible on aerial imagery.

Regards,

SK53

Why are you adding a peak tag to objects which are not peaks. You provide two links which show that this is a historic signal station and not a peak. We have noticed a large number of erroneous edits of this type by you and others. Please could you tell us what your objectives might be?

Hi Nick,

Welcome to OSM.

Really pleased you spotted this as I didn't do it when I had a little wander just over a year ago. We (local Nottingham mappers) don't tend to get up to this neck of the woods that often.

Cheers,

Jerry (aka SK53)

In general I think we should use the most widely used local name, i.e., Y Gelli and perhaps use official_name:cy or alt_name:cy for formal names which don't have widespread usage. (At least we can avoid what the French OSMers have done in Breton-speaking areas and insist on the official French name for communes & hamlets which are signed locally in Breton).

You are joining ways together which should not be joined as they are parts of relations. This damages other peoples work, can you please be more careful.

Can I also ask you to use a meaningful comment for your changesets: "local details" is not satisfactory.

But it is not a public road so highway=unclassified is wrong. Personally I'd trust dudone to know if something is a driveway or not, and I would also agree with him - it is not unusual for farms to share a driveway in this way (or for houses too).

Good catch I was in process of removing the beach as an MP, but obviously forgot a bit

This way you created back in 2015 never got tagged way/374624109. Is it perhaps a better outline of the perimeter of the castle site (currently the cliff lies within the perimeter)?

It would also be good to add the Wikipedia tag if it exists: far easier to sense check a Wikipedia entry (one click rather than several to get to the same place) and the Wikipedia entry is often more useful for mappers than the wikidata one. Jerry

Can you please review all the wikidata tags added here for sense checks. Oldmoor Wood is not a human settlement, and consequently I have removed the wikidata tag as it downgrades the quality of OSM.

Good opportunity to say I've added a few others in NI & East Mids but haven't necessarily added a repd:id tag or updated the main list

Hi Dan, digits swapped for sure.

Surely Enatherm is a power station. This was the former site of Climadef, a power plant for a district heating scheme, which blew up in March 1994. Not long before I started work at Blvd Mission Marchand.

I've just come across this changeset. The first 3 examples I've looked at included a museum and two universities in the middle of streets. From this I would have thought all the relevant objects could have done with being properly scrutinised.

Great that you had your notes to hand. I've fixed my bit now.

Hi Will,

I'd be grateful if you'd check any notes/photos regarding location of 35/35A/37/37A Melford Road. Starting from 1 I get 35 one pair of semis down (hence duplicate 15 & 17), and 39 & 41 are also missing from the numbering. NCC Streetlight data doesn't help (it's all over the place on this stretch). NROSH does have 41 in the right postcode, suggesting this is the last house on left before Caincross Road

I'm sure it's not needed know. Looking at the history I probably drew part of the building as a separate building way with the fixme on, and ended up (perhaps) merging them in the same changeset. You can see that the node count goes up at the same time. So I suspect it's been redundant from the outset. I would guess I anticipated moving over to JOSM for merging such things, but obviously didn't.

Jerry

The wiki IS NOT the definitive guide to tag usage. It usually represents the opinions of a small number of people and may well be not representative of actual practice of mappers on the ground.

highway=service with area=yes has 3000+ uses on OSM in the UK (see https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/keys/service#combinations), many of which will be service yards, private driveways when an area has been micromapped,, or, in this example (way/165123160) a specific use-case (a map for a legal case). Removing data which is reasonably accurate & meaningful is very poor practice on OSM, particularly if you do not know the area or why things were mapped. Not every use is the same as ones own, for all we know the person who originally mapped these might have been interested in measuring surface sealing not in the routable road network.