Is way/315901396 really a river? As mapped it seems to flow uphill into the village, around, and then down again, which is surely wrong.

OK; I'll revert on that basis.

As to how to go forward, any mechanical edit will need to be discussed as per osm.wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy . Where there's no change to the meaning, I'd be surprised if there was opposition (e.g. X=deciduous to leaf_cycle=deciduous). Where someone has mapped wood=deciduous it may often have been a synonym for "broad_leaved", but you can't assume that. In some cases you may be able to ask the original mapper or importer - there probably aren't 441 pages of ways that need to be dealt with individually.

You haven't done what is suggested on that page. That suggests that on new objects "type=deciduous should be migrated to leaf_cycle=deciduous". You've done something entirely different - added a "leaf_type" key based upon information about the leaf cycle.

Hi,
In this changeset you have removed "deciduous" and added "broadleaved" to objects such as way/154600188/history . This assumes incorrectly that deciduous trees are necesarily broad-leaved, which is not the case. See for example http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larch which says "Although a conifer, the larch is a deciduous tree and loses its leaves in the autumn".

Also, it looks very much like a mechanical edit - where was it discussed beforehand? Some of the objects changed don't seem to have been changed beforehand, and perhaps an OSM note would have been a better way to proceed. way/204041143 for example has a waterway=stream tag, which is presumably in error - a non-mechanical edit would have picked this up and added the stream tag(s) correctly.

osm.wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy is very clear. Discussion should take place on "Either the international, English-language list
or the international, English-language imports list, for fixing of previous imports
or if your edit affects only a small number of countries, the national-language mailing lists, forums, or other standard communication methods for the countries or areas affected by the change".

Very few people read the tagging list; even fewer read a proposal page that you've just created. The reason for wider discussion is twofold - (a) so that people who may be affected by your change get a chance to comment on it and (b) so that people know that the change is happening and can change their data extraction or map style accordingly. 22 people voting on a wiki page is a tiny, tiny, percentage of the people who map in OSM.

A couple of nodes in here need a "main tag". What are node/3262388733 and node/3262386995 best described as? Some sort of shop or office, or something elese?

Would it be possible in future to use slightly more descriptive changeset comments than "General Fixes" (and also to create changesets that are smaller in area)?

That appears to be a message from you on the tagging list. It is not "
Either the international, English-language list
or the international, English-language imports list, for fixing of previous imports
or if your edit affects only a small number of countries, the national-language mailing lists, forums, or other standard communication methods for the countries or areas affected by the change"

You edited osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Tag:man_made%3Dpipeline&action=history to say "substance" instead of "type". Where was it discussed? How would someone who uses pipeline data from OSM or has a map of pipelines know that they should now be looking for a "substance" instead of "type"?

test

test

Please don't make mechanical edits like this without discussion first. As you've seen with this changeset, you can't always extrapolate from the local to the global in this way. See osm.wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy for more details

This looks very much like a mechanical edit. Where was it discussed as per osm.wiki/Mechanical_Edit_Policy ?

The changeset comment here says "typing error corrected", but what was the typing error that was corrected?

This changeset has just popped up in a "whodidit" RSS feed - it'd be much better if it was a bit smaller so that it was easier to see what had been changed and where.

Is there any reason why you've joined the two sections of Evans Road at node/594317144 ? There's an access=no barrier there (also visible on the imagery) - has the situation on the ground changed?

I'm guessing that "bridge:movable transporter" is probably not correct for way/52722313 as it's disused; presumably the "disused:bridge:movable=transporter" tag from 4 months ago does the job?

I notice that you've changed the tags on way/38482991/history - did you discuss with the previous mapper (SK53) whether your change was actually correct? They've already reverted one mechanical edit there (by Rovastar).

Hi, I notice that you've changed a tag on way/113047270/history#map=15/53.1333/-1.0581 . Upon what basis have you chosen landuse=forest rather than natural=wood here? I'm familiar with the area - it's part of the old extent of Sherwood Forest - some bits are actively managed nearby but some bits are not. Did you actually visit the area to see what would be the most appropriate tag? If not, I cannot see any value in the edit that you've performed there.

Thanks - I'm guessing that the issues list might be https://github.com/OpenSeaMap/online_chart perhaps?