Hello!
Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55683693

Hello!
Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55683740

Hello!
Thank you very much for your contributions to OpenStreetMap!
I reviewed your changeset on OSMCha and found some errors or elements
that could be mapped in a better way. Feel free to message me
to know more about it or visit http://learnosm.org/ to get started.
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/55683833

Hi, thanks for trying to improve the map. However, OpenStreetMap only accept real-world things, not virtual or fictional ones. Pokemon Go already has plenty of maps dedicated to its gyms and spawns, but OSM is for real life stuff, sorry. I've reverted your changes.

On the other hand, PoGo uses OSM data for its in-game map, so any good improvements to the map will eventually improve the PoGo experience, like they do for all other downstream OSM users.

So feel free to improve OSM data where it doesn't match reality :)

You went a bit too fast on that one ;) Satellite imagery and website from deleted node show it's a campervan dealer, not a camp site. changeset/55527181

On the other hand, make sure that riverbanks are connected to each other, as in sharing nodes rather than being veeeery close (the breagah riverbank needs to connect to the nore riverbank).

You can probably use less segments. The only reason to split riverbanks in segments is to avoid downloading loads of data when you're only interested in one area, for for an area that you're likely to download in full, there's no need.

Also, see the discussion in changeset/52885942

I think iD presented you the wrong tag because that's technically the most frequent use of "ringfort" in the database. There's one prolific user who used the wrong tag more than all other users combined, and the algorithm follows. Pretty rare, but it happens ;)

Watch out for changesets where you've done more than the edits you remember :) (but thanks for fixing my duplicate shop). Not a big issue, it just makes the work of reviewing changesets easyer. JOSM makes what you actaually changes a little bit easyer to see than iD.

Hi ! The proper tagging seems to be

historic=archaeological_site
site_type=fortification
fortification_type=ringfort

rather than just

historic=ringfort

See fortification_type=ringfort and http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/uYD and https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/search?q=ringfort#values

Just giving you a heads-up since you're the one who traced most of those (great work !). I'm going to fix all the historic=ringfort I see.

Removed name in changeset/54731882

I assume naming the Glandalough beach "drop off" is a misshap ? AFAIK this beach isn't named ? I'll revert that unless you want to fix it yourself, or you are sure about the name.

Hum, thanks for the contribution but I have my doubts about the name. Isn't it "College road" or similar ? Can you share a photo ? Using the https://www.mapillary.com/ or http://www.openstreetcam.org/ smartphone app is a great and fun way to do that.

Hum, the new refs on the bypass don't immediately strike me as wrong, given that the M17 opened so recently. The new refs may not be fully signposted on the ground yet. A useful source is the "road schedules" documents, normally published on the county council website. Or if you have doubts on a changeset and can't find the source, comment on the changeset (like I'm doing here) to get the info from the contributor. Oh, and we're all somebody's "unknown user", try to not let that cloud your judgement ;)

Started the discussion in changeset/53011901

Can you share the source for those refs ? Apparently they are not signposted on the ground yet, and other contributors are doubting. See discussion in changeset/53105428

Also, please add comments to you changesets and join related changes in one changeset, this makes reviewing easyer.

I guess that should be a ref, not a name ? What's the source ?

Howdy. Care to comment on note/1068676 ? Thanks.

What's the idea behind these changes ? I don't understand why it'd be necessary to only connect the roads to the roundabout and not to each other. My best guess is some kind of "mapping for the GPS navigation announcement" ?

There are a lot of roundabouts like this with a wide entry/exit, where IMHO connecting them is the best way to match their real geometry (an even more correct but overkill version would be to add a way connecting entry to exit directly without touching the roundabout).

Glenties (both relation/7034764 and relation/7063585) include fairly far-off islands, are you sure they're correct ? This changeset sources OSi Opendata whereas changeset/46761808 sources Irish statute book, maybe add a more precise source to the relation objects ?

Welcome to OSM, great to have some local knowledge in Fethard :)

Watch out when changing a street name: you should edit the existing street rather than adding a new one. Also, a highway=living_street is something rather specific, in Ireland generally only applicable to some housing estates. From the imagery, Watergate Street looks more like residential. I applied both fixes in changeset/47255265

Keep it up :) Don't hesitate to ask questions and check the docs.