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.

Curious about why you deleted the existing slipway to readd the (same ?) one. Just a mishap ?

Looks like the slipway goes directly into the station building ? Map it this way then, no need to stop the way just before the building.

Also, watch out for changeset comments that span multiple changesets. Each time you click "save" in iD you create a new changeset, so the changeset comment should reflect what you did since the previous time you clicked save, nothing before.

The shed probably isn't what caused a display issue (at least not preventing another building from showing up), so I'd say you should add it back. And if you know it's a shed, do tag it building=shed instead of the generic building=yes.

Seems like you replaced the multipolygon with a simple closed way to fix the rendering ? It works in the sense that the feature should now render as you expect, but you miss out on details that you had initially added.

The better fix would have been to tag the multipolygon relation with the relevant tags (amenity=police, building=*, name=*...).

See osm.wiki/Beginners_Guide_1.3 an especially the "relation" link.

It's a great idea to try out different editors like you did. But Potlatch2 is a bit akward to edit relations with.

Discussion started at https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/55085/find-my-map but doesn't seem to be progressing.

Welcome to OSM :) You'll need to add more tags to your object if you want it to be useful. What kind of a landmark is it ? Check osm.wiki/Map_Features and/or osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide

Also, remember that all data uploaded to OSM is public, editing the same database. For private maps, try for example osm.wiki/UMap . If "Landmark Learning" isn't a mappable real-world feature, please go ahead and delete it.

That didn't quite fix it :p Both relations still included a lone chunk of the R759, and lacked roles on some members. Fixed in changeset/46371835.

As an aside, I'm not sure what to do with way/475267656 : looks like a stream in Bing, didn't spot a boundary there in various OOC sources, but the way it's connected hints at a boundary. Is it just a stream ?

All good :) I've been working away at OSMI's area checks for a few days, I hope to get Ireland all cleaned up, Wicklow and all.

Note that the osm2pgsql devs have announced their intent to become a bit stricter in the polygon errors that they auto-correct (https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-February/077544.html), so an invalid polygon might render correctly today, but not in the future.

Sorry, didn't mean to rush things. I commented using this recent changeset but the first breakage I looked at was a few days old. relation/4167050 (just one example found via OSMI) is a boundary in Wicklow edited 7 days ago and still broken.

Making mistakes is part of mapping, I make plenty myself. Just wanted to attract your attention to these recurring ones, in case you missed them and/or to think whether some workflow change could help avoid future ones. Changing editors is a rather drastic workflow change, so maybe something can be done with Potlatch instead.

Howdy :)

Be careful with your boundary edits : you're leaving a trail of unclosed rings and role-less members (I'm just after fixing a few in bray/greystones).

You can view some of the issues (various levels of importance) at http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-6.22295&lat=53.15156&zoom=10 or http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/byuser/?username=Dafo43 (don't fret at the number of osmose errors attributed to you: they're attributed to whoever touched the object last, not who introduced an error).

You can probably blame Potlatch for making these mistakes to easy to happen and go unnoticed. I'm sure you considered switching editors before ? We'd be happy to handhold you through the transition if necessary, just go on IRC or PM me. JOSM is great for boundaries, but iD works too.

Some buildings geometries were messed up, especially the Educate Together school, so I fixed that. But I used some guesswork as to the proper location of the school, can you check it if you have local knowledge ?

Welcome to OSM :) Some suggestions about tagging:

* internet_access:fee=wlan doesn't make sense, I guess you meant internet_access=wlan, internet_access:fee=yes ? See internet=* access

* level=4-5 should be level=4;5. Also make sure that you didn't actually want building:levels=*

* I'm sure the hotel accept payments other than bitcoin, tag them. If a common payment method is not accepted (cheques ?), tag them too. Think of what information is useful, not what tag will get you listed where.

* addr:city is not needed when the place is within the bounds of a city relation, which is pretty much always the case in Germany

See also discussion in note/483610

Hurray for house numbers, and nice to see a Kilkenny mapper :)

Note you can also use osm.wiki/Relation:associatedStreet instead of addr:street=* . I prefer the former but opinions vary on which is best and you should at least be aware of the alternative.

Watch out, no motorway here ;)

way/464497176/history
way/464497163/history