Thanks

What was the source of the data added here (ref, length, etc.)?

I didn't notice anything the last time I went past the end of way/1112454343 , which was 4/1/2020, but it may be that use has (re)started since then - earlier imagery (Bing in iD) shows a hedge; later imagery (Bing in JOSM, Maxar) shows a gap in the hedge.

@MikeN - I've asked the user to reply here via osm.org/user_blocks/6545 .

@archpdx - I've asked the user to reply here via osm.org/user_blocks/6545 .

@Adam Franco - I've asked the user to reply here via osm.org/user_blocks/6545 .

Thanks

I did wonder about "Roman Road" but I don't think that's an actual name, just a description. You can see similar descriptions on old OS maps for the other Roman roads round here, like the current A659, but I don't remember any signage for any of them.
If something doesn't have a name, it just doesn't have a name. There's no need to make one up.

I can definitely see something on Bing aerial imagery where you removed it. Would you like to borrow my glasses?

In OSM we try and give people the benefit of the doubt. Unfortunately, that can only go so far. https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=13341565 shows a litany of problems with your edits where you are basically making stuff up and being called out on it.

Following on from changeset/128756509 where I tried to give you the benefit of the doubt I can only assume that here you're either (a) deliberately falsifying data or (b) simply not engaging your brain.

To be clear, the bridleway way/167215245 is NOT called Colton Lane. Colton Lane runs from Colton to the South and joins what is now the A64. OS OpenData have that marked as Colton Lane End, though that name isn't used so much now. If I remember correctly, one of the garages at the top end used to have that in the name too, but that's going back a couple of decades.

The "other" Colton Lane (from Copmanthorpe) may be called that, but compatible OS sources don't list it, and historical ones don't, and I don't remember seeing any signage along it the last time I walked it (though Hallcroft Lane the other side of the crossroads is signed, I think). It might be called Colton Lane because it's how you would get to Colton from Copmanthorpe.

The bridleway from Colton Lane End to the east does not go to Colton and so logically is unlikely to be called Colton Lane. I can vouch for the fact that when I last walked it there was no signage, beyond the bridleway and Ebor Way signage at the west end, which I added at the time.

> going off of OS OpenMap and google

(at the risk of stating the obvious) we can't use Google here.

OS OpenMap Local and OS OpenData just have the current A64 as "A64" which fits with the (lack of) local signage.

> I figure the name would continue to meet York Road at the original Bramham Crossroads

We can't just guess (or worse, make things up) like that.

I travelled along the current A64 and its precursors pretty regularly over the last few decades (and for a period in the late 1960s was driven every day to school through here). I have no recollection of "Leeds Road" being mentioned at all, apart from the bit in Tadcaster by the brewery, already mentioned.

> I think we can agree that this stretch of the A64 existed before the Tadcaster Bypass, likely not as a dual carriageway

Please don't just guess! Some of us can remember when Bramham Crossroads actually was a crossroads.

Please revert the name changes in this changeset where you have just guessed them, and in any other changesets where you have similarly guessed names.

What's the source of the name "Leeds Road" on way/42084602 here? I've never seen it signed. There may be some signage at the top of the A162 by John Smiths brewery, but I've never seen any signage out here.

oh - and any other OSM questions, please don't hesitate to ask!

Hello XenoSpam, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
"Falsernet" is basically correct here, and from looking at https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/33708991 it appears that this has been considered as primary since 2009.
If you think that's wrong, I'd suggest asking about it in a wider discussion, perhaps the talk-gb mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb .
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I suspect that "continuos" here is a typo for "continuous". There are a few here:
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1nFC
Best Regards,
Andy

Maybe my memory is failing me, but is there really a shoulder on the westbound carriageway here? I don't remember one. As far as I can remember, there's the separate cycleway on the other side of the road, and maybe a bit of a gap between the white line at the left of lane 1 and the verge, but I don't rememember anything wide enough to be called a shoulder.
Or am I misremembering?

@archie The revert I did here went back to the start of the year.
If any older changeset need looking at please comment there - it would help to see where e.g. invalid brand information has been pulled in by osmose.

In osm.org/user_blocks/6515 I wrote "Your interactions with other mappers here suggest a consistent 'I am right and everyone else is wrong' attitude".

You're still doing it, aren't you? You are criticising the quality of mapping from the Ukrainian community when there is an actual war going on there. Putting this very simply:

HOW DARE YOU

I suggest that you go and have a long look at yourself in the mirror and see if you like what you see. When you're ready, you please come back and apologise.

> I really don't think it should apply to these maintenance-style fixes

The comments above are exactly why osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct applies to fixes like this. While in many cases removing a redundant tag might make sense, in others it absolutely does not, and a discussion would allow people to look at the edge cases.
I fully agree that "A renderer not correctly displaying data should be fixed" - but the only way we can understand that is to have the discussion and find out why some people think the tag is needed.

> I seem to not get any notifications when I get a message here.
Check the email address which you have registered in your profile.

Hello joihoin,
You really shouldn't use osmose from an "armchair", as https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr makes clear: "In no case Osmose-QA should provide you the absolute right way to map, always keep a critical eye."
Please do not remove e.g. "access=unknown" as that means that another mapper has tried and failed to find out what the access rules are, as opposed to no-one having even tried.
Best Regards,
Andy