Hello,
I don’t think that "Fontaine" is a valid official name of this facility. There is no need to add a name just for the name of filling a text field.
node/12208814601

Hello,

Are there really 2 places named Mystical next to each other?

There was this: node/11510928353

And you added this one: node/12186412112

If you want to add schools or amenities, please create separate nodes for them. Do not change existing address points. Also, please observe that in Belgium we do not add postcodes or city names on addresses, we don’t need that because the database already contains all the postcodes areas.

way/240038021/history is a building. You should NOT retag it into a landuse area. Please use correct tags for schools, do not remove buildings from the map.

Hello,
Why do you suddenly add ALL-CAPS names to the map? We don’t do that in OSM.

Don’t worry, we are here to help.

Hello,
The address is already on the container building. OSM is a geographical database, addresses should not be duplicated on multiple objects, this is absolutely not necessary (and not wanted). Thanks.

Thanks but please do not repeat the address on the restaurant itself. I see you are using the iD simple editor, which presents text fields for the address. → You can safely ignore those fields. ;-) Addresses of places are usually computed by proximity or through relations.

Thanks but next time please do not erase objects from the database. Instead, just remove the relevant tags. I fixed this → retagged as vacant.

Please do not trace water bodies on aerial imagery, you are unnecessarily distorting good shapes in a futile attempt to match pictures that will show something completely different a year from now.

Please open the PICC numerical imagery as a background (in Wallonia) and trace from there.

Your edit has been reverted.

If you want to tag a drop zone, please use the correct tags. What you have added here is an ordinary bicycle parking (i.e. stands). It does not match your changeset description.

Please do not use the "unknown" values for access tags, it creates unwanted results for navigation. It looks like you are using the text boxes of the iD editor. It’s better to type tags directly or, better, rely on default values.

⚠️ Vous avez changé les permissions d'un chemin pour l'ouvrir à tout le monde.

1 - Votre changement semble étrange car le tag "access=yes" signifie l'ouverture à tous les modes de transport, y compris automobiles.

2 - Le garde forestier s'est déjà plaint que ce chemin était incorrectement encouragé sur la carte alors que c'est une zone protégée.

Il faut toujours inspecter l'historique des objets avant de les modifier. way/851817930/history
Version 6 de l'historique indique ceci

Version #6
voie non légale, régulièrement refermée mais la signalétique est arrachée par les usagers. N.Bronchain service public de Wallonie gestionnaire du site
Edited 11 months ago by Nico_forestier

Hello,

Is the name of this place really written is lower case?

ERG est sur la carte depuis 2012
node/2009770801

Votre changement est incorrect, il ne faut pas répéter le nom de l'école sur le bâtiment, ce n'est pas comme ça que fonctionne la base de données OSM.

@VLD549: We have explained this to you a huge number of times. I am afraid I’ll be forced to do it again. And apologies in the tone seems a little harsh, we are a little tired of explaining this over and over.

Please read carefully, this is important.

Any object in OSM can be changed several times. When something seems wrong, it is important to inspect the "history" of an object. This is the way to know WHO committed a change and WHEN.

To say it otherwise, the last user who touched an object is not always responsible for a mistake. Shaming an innocent user through changeset comments—which are public—will make you look like an disrespectful and incompetent individual. I am sure you are a kind person, so please make sure to use your skills properly. I understand that your job requires you to monitor name changes of some objects on the map, so if you think you have spotted a mistake, make sure to "hit" the person who did it instead of calling random mappers and ask them to "justify their changes".

From what I can see here, user VLD548 (obviously your colleague at Meta) is the last mapper who touched this object… but this changeset only fixed an obvious mistake with a capitalisation issue, to transform "boospoort" into "Boospoort". This is because the name of places (streets, parks…) are expected to start with a capital letter.

About the history: you can open any object in OSM. If you click on this strange object named "Porte de bois - Boospoort", you have a "View History" link at the bottom, it brings you to this page: way/891811623/history

Read it from bottom to up to understand how an object changed and WHO did it and WHEN.

In version #1, the path was named "Orée du bois" by user Supergreg. Then, in version #2, Supergreg renamed it into "Porte du bois". In version #3, Tommy3009 renamed it into "Porte du bois - boospoort", then in version #4, VLD548 fixed the capitalisation issue caused by version 3.

It looks obvious to me that the suspicious name was introduced in version #3. Incidently, I have already spotted several dubious changes by user Tommy3009, such as pseudo-translations with obvious language or spelling errors. As you can see, the changeset number is a link which you can click. I suggest you address your comments to the mapper who created version 3 instead of here.

Créer un multipolygone est inutile et incorrect
relation/17997966

"building inside building" → please fix asap.

Hello,

Just one thing: when a user writes cycleway=opposite_share_busway, they mean that in the "backward" direction cyclists may use the bus lane.
This tag does not convey any information about the "forward" direction. (Which is incidently a very good reason to get rid of this tag.)

Instead of changing it into "cycleway=share_busway", I think "cycleway:left=share_busway" is a better option. This is clearly the situation for this road.

⚠️ Ne pas se baser uniquement sur les presets de l'éditeur iD, ça fonctionne mal avec les règles belges, svp conservez le tagging existant qui est correct.