Yeah, we should really use overpass turbo or something similar to find all of those and clean them out. There was a point when almost every footway, service road, roundabout and driveway in this local area was called that. I've removed them when I've spotted them, but they always seem to hide in other locations.

Hi Rokeby,

You've got the entire town centre of Purcellville set as a single footpath and sidewalk in this changeset.

I'd guess that's a tagging error? Normally sidewalks are either mapped along roads or mapped as a property of roads.

Let me know if you need any help fixing it :)

Hi Simplyee,

In what way are these features greenfields? I'm Not sure why you would use this tag here.

landuse=greenfield

"describes land scheduled for new development where there have been no buildings before"

Some of the other tagging you have applied is rather unconventional as well...

Okay, but if the building is still used as a school, then it needs to be tagged as a school until it's not. You can add *additional* tags if required, but a school, is a school, is a school regardless of whether 3000 or 800 students attend.

If you want to map the additional pitches and newly constructed "multi-use sports facility on the field" to quote the article (provided you use OSM friendly sources), that's completely fine, but I can see nothing in the article about the school building in particular being re purposed and other sources would indicate it's quite the opposite.

Also, it appears that this school's website is still pointing to the current address, and there is no indication that it is/was closing on any social media or news that I can find - in fact, some of their social media has been updated as recently as a few hours ago

"they are basically sports complexes/multipurpose buildings now, open to public"

That doesn't sound like a park, it sounds more like it should be tagged with something along the lines of "leisure=sports_centre"+"https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:building=yes"

leisure=sports_centre

Apologies for the second comment, but regarding Van Eaton Walking Park - is that the actual name of that place? Is there a sign or some other source you got the name from?

Name= should be reserved for the actual names of things rather than descriptions or other elements that could be described using other tags.

Hi Pine Sap and welcome to OSM (cool name btw).

When we add parking lots, the tag to use is typically amenity=parking rather than leisure=park - they mean very different things!

Anyway, thanks for your additions so far, happy mapping :)

Hi Darklord187 and welcome back to OSM!

Just some feedback on your edit here: way/723893592

It's better to draw these kinds of complex path "networks" using multiple lines joined together at their ends rather than trying to use single lines looping back over themselves.

Would you like to attempt to correct them?

Hi Qianxia,

What source are you using here? You added a building that was almost about the same size as half of Burlington.

Hi Kelsey and welcome to OSM! :)

Thanks so much for your contributions so far.

I just had a question, in the middle of Windermere HS, you have an area tagged as leisure=park (a green park space) - did you mean to tag it as amenity=parking (a parking lot)? It's an easy mistake to make and happens quite often.

Anyway, thanks again :)

So, I was thinking about this last night and my curiosity led me to check other botanical gardens around Australia.

Melbourne's Royal Botanical Garden, carries the leisure=garden tag (way/45422277). I would say that Melbourne is one of the more similar locations to this one

However, some other major botanical gardens have held the leisure=park tag for a long time. I'm not sure if this has just gone unquestioned as (in the case of Brisbane in particular) the tagging on those areas looks like it might pre-date the currently "established" conventions for leisure=garden+garden:type=botanical by a couple of years at minimum.

If a decision comes out of this, it might be a good idea to update other similar Botanical Gardens around Australia to be consistent.

I'm still personally leaning towards leisure=garden being the more appropriate option.

It's probably worth noting as well that the woods and wetlands in the RBG are deceptive in that they are actually heavily cultivated, curated and documented even if it appears that they aren't, even many of the lawn spaces are carefully chosen and designed with the specific species in mind.

I'm not sure where the grasslands are located, but I'd assume it would be the same - likely carefully selected and cultivated (likely indigenous or rare) species grown in a natural-like but controlled manner.

Hi Jake,

Considering the Botanic Garden's significance in Sydney, I'm not sure if this is a change that should be made without discussion.

I understand that there is a blurry line between a park and a garden even by OSM definitions, but considering the primary focus and founding principles of the gardens as a whole are on plants and horticulture (even employing botanists) as opposed simply being a place for outdoor recreation, I personally feel that leisure=garden is a better fit overall, especially when garden:type=botanical is obviously correct and that tag belongs under leisure=garden in terms of tagging "hierarchy"

Hi, these changes seem a little strange? You changed the tennis courts to a lake, added a hospital in the middle of a parking lot, put a church in the middle of high-school, and you put a fast food restaurant right in the middle of a stadium?

Hi and welcome to OSM!

Thanks for your recent additions! :)

One hint: If possible, it's best to try to avoid using the name= tag as a description, it should be reserved for the actual names of things. If a pool was called the "McCabe Olympic Pool" then you would put that name, but the actual details would be defined using other tags such as leisure=swimming_pool

Thanks again :)

Happy mapping!

Hey and welcome to OSM!

Thanks for your recent additions.

You've about a third of Gunn Park crossing the Marmaton River here and covering a fair bit of farm and urban land - are you sure that's correct?

Does the trail actually exist? It might be better to change it to access=private rather than just removing it

Hi Ghostdudes and welcome to OpenStreetMap :)

Parks on OSM are defined in a specific way, and that doesn't typically include residential yards or houses. You can read more on the OSM wiki: leisure=park?uselang=en

Hi Threadgill and welcome to OSM :)

When you add buildings such as houses, it's best to only draw them over the building rather than covering the whole block/plot it occupies, you can see existing examples close the houses you added in this changeset.

Happy mapping!