Hello VARVAR8,
Your changeset comment here is "#Kaart OSM Inspector. Approximate ways fixes [te.ua]". Can you explain what that means?
What sort of issues were you using OSM Inspector to detect, and once it had found one, what on-the-ground sources were you using to detect what was actually correct?
What does "Approximate ways fixes" mean? Does it mean that you're doing half a job now and are going to finish it later, or someone else had done half a job, and you are finishing their work?
What does "[te.ua]" mean?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello Shanmugamrsd,
You were free to continue as soon as you'd read that message, that's why osm.org/user_blocks/5473 says "Ended about 22 hours ago". However, please do answer the questions that I asked there - reply to the other comments at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=12711928 as well as this one, and also could you please explain your workflow? Something like way/1006046175 simply makes no sense. Also, editing as part of a wider project, and if so, what project is that?
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks - done.

There are some bits where I can't remember the actial route, but I'm pretty sure that it goes over Fan-y-Big rather than taking the (very damp!) straight line.

For info - mapper has replied to previous comment by private message

Hello jpotas,
Can you explain in a bit more detail what you mean by "resplined lake"?
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks - I think that the three in changeset/35584356 have the same issue.

Note that many of the spurs shown by https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=7342961 appear to be legitimate, as the go to "way stations" on the route.

Hello Shanmugamrsd,
Something has gone wrong here - this service road is not joined to the road at either end!
Looking at the imagery, it actually looks more like a split at the end of Lake Encino Drive rather than a distinct service road.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello Ethan1988 and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Would it be possible to use more explanatory changeset comments than simply "updated" every time?
Best Regards,
Andy

Unfortunately I've got no Garmin waypoints for either that or way/135476622 - that might mean way/135476622 was done from a "vague recollection" driving past. At least once I parked at node/1488775432 (and I do still have a mental picture of that!) and walked east and south; the other time might have been from node/667211805/history .
I'd agree that way/176856973/history doesn't look a service road from the available sources to me.

Great - thanks.

Hello AmmoBox,

I hope you don't mind me asking about something added to OpenStreetMap 5 years ago. You added a "source=Google Maps" tag on way/429892977 here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here. We'll need to remove data that may have come from Google.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello Zoomie,

I hope you don't mind me asking about something added to OpenStreetMap 3 years ago. You added a "source=Google Earth" tag on the runway here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here. We'll need to remove data that may have come from Google.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello Czech,

I hope you don't mind me asking about something added to OpenStreetMap 8 years ago. You added a "source=Google Maps" tag on Gregory Lake here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here. If a compatible source can't be found, we'll need to remove data that may have come from Google.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello maven149,

I hope you don't mind me asking about something added to OpenStreetMap 6 years ago. You added a "source=Google Earth" tag on the buildings such as way/388164236 here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here. Unless a compatible source can be found, we'll need to remove data that may have come from Google.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

Hello Barry McLane,

I hope you don't mind me asking about something added to OpenStreetMap 6 years ago. You added a "source=Google Earth" tag on the peak here. We can't actually use that as a source in OSM because the Google's licence doesn't allow it to be used here. If you can't find a compatible source, we'll need to remove any data that may have come from Google.

Best Regards
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group

This node was originally added 9 years ago from Google Maps. I've deleted it.

A source for some of this was https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1dho , which I used to see where people (back in the dawn of OSM) joined ways that shouldn't be joined, resulting in the relation going where it shouldn't.

Hello,
I think a merge along the river went wrong here - Graney West and Graney East were no longer valid multipolygons. I've split the river a bit west of the bridge and removed some duplicates: relation/4580960/history#map=20/52.90060/-6.78641 . The JOSM validator should be able to flag where this sort of thing happens by accident.
Best Regards,
Andy