Hi, what's your justifications for changing these sections from unclassified up to secondary, a significant jump?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157949137

Hi, what's the justification for changing this quiet road from unclassified all the way up to secondary?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157949011

Hi, paved is a generic catch-all option for roads that have been properly surfaced, these roads do look like they are asphalt and should be tagged as they were before.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157948805

It does seem preferred so you can still specify what type of rail it is.

Would it be better to tag this as railway:preserved=yes? Seems to be more popular and there's been pushes to depreciate railway=preserved in the past.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157943624

Hi, is this part of a chain of computer repair places? If not, the brand tag is wrong and shouldn’t be set. You also need to format the number correctly, it should be +61 494 068 255.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157737597

I've restored them in changeset/157733483
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157705336

My head's probably a bit stuck in some related but not as similar issue outside of OSM, thanks for confirming!

Hi, my only concern then, that website is under copyright, I'm not sure if that would be an acceptable source for edits.

Hi, this change covers a good portion of the world and involves changes to roads in Australia, what's your source for the etymology of way/36871107 and way/76808134?

Not a problem.

I'd still recommend engaging with the community just as much for a global change as you would for a more local one, you'd just obviously be able to focus on local communities instead of the global OSM community for feedback.

Revert undiscussed automated edit

changeset/157646853

Absolutely good food for thought, but it’s the kind of thing that needs community feedback first, or to be done on a one by one basis by reviewing aerial imagery, and confirming that other data (I.e. the route relations) isn’t where the fault actually is

And looking at that forum post, busway=designated isn’t an access tag, you’ve replaced non-accesss tagging with access tagging, removing information to satisfy a QA tool, I think this changeset should be reverted.

Hi, has this automated edit followed any of the guidelines, a forum post with 5 hours notice, that’s not even on the main OSM forum, isn’t how you propose an automated edit.

PTV's GTFS feed and Vicmap Transport (both permitted data sources) have it as Wattle Glen.

Also, has the old building actually been demolished?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157603476

Hi, this doesn't look to be valid for amenity=college. College in a name doesn't inherently make it amenity=college.

Hi, same as the primary school, amenity=school, and no building tag. It also overlaps the primary school, these should be separate and touching at most, not overlapping.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157601976

Hi, you've included a portion of the road in the school boundary, as well as set the entire area to be a building. It should be tagged as amenity=school, with no building tag, and the way should be separate from the roads
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157601931