fortera_au's Comments
| Changeset | When | Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 176285210 | 9 days ago | Hi, you've added these as just name=Sump, what are these actually meant to be? The name tag is for signed names, not descriptive names.
|
| 176163579 | 11 days ago | The name is what I'm asking about, because if Extension isn't what is signed or part of the actual name, it shouldn't be included. |
| 176163579 | 11 days ago | Is the new road actually named Ison Road Extension, or is it just an extension of Ison Road?
|
| 176135487 | 12 days ago | Is Aston Hills actually a suburb, or just the name of that residential development? You haven't mentioned a source other than aerial imagery, something like this really needs one.
|
| 175970625 | 16 days ago | Hi, Bing Imagery shows the driveway on the other side of the building, did you use different imagery for this or should this be corrected?
|
| 175790635 | 20 days ago | All good, it happens! |
| 175826351 | 20 days ago | Hi, you've added these tags to the building for the office, not to the caravan park site itself. The building and office tags should be restored, and the name, brand:*, addr:*, tourism and website tags should go on the way covering the whole park. |
| 175790635 | 20 days ago | The colon should be before the two slashes, I'll correct it for you.
|
| 175480080 | 24 days ago | Hi, please don't add fictional information into OSM. The farmland here should be drawn as individual plots, and the name and operator should only be added if this is (real) publicly known information.
|
| 175604975 | 24 days ago | Hi, this looks pretty good, the only thing I would add is that it would be best to split the way where the tunnels are, and remove the tunnel=yes tag from any parts that aren't tunnels.
|
| 175139648 | about 1 month ago | Hi, this seems like tagging for the renderer. Is this actually water, or is it meant to just be a wetland?
|
| 175192533 | about 1 month ago | DWG revert - using copyrighted sources |