Hi, this highway appears to go straight through a fence/barrier of some kind according to Mapbox imagery, are you able to verify if this road actually exists/is connected in this way? If the road does exist, it doesn't look like it's been drawn correctly, it should be closer to a right angle to the road with a bit of a kink in it from what I can see.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148229663

Hey there, nice work, I'd just recommend clicking on each building after you've added it and pressing the Q button to square them off!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148227888

Hi, is this whole area a building? If not, then building= shouldn't be set, and the buildings should be individually mapped.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148201738

Hey Evlyn, thanks for fixing that up!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148185674

Hi, is the start_date accurate or even needed for this? Did this business actually open on New Years Day 2010?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147727116

Hi, the address should be placed on the main object, not the entrance node.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148157257

Forgot to set source, survey.

osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads#Heavy_Vehicle_Enforcement has the section on tagging the Safe-T-Cam cameras, and I didn't know about them checking registrations so thanks for that link!

Hey, I don't believe these are actually speed cameras, and are just Safe-T-Cam cameras, do you know if these have changed recently (last couple of months)? If they're Safe-T-Cam cameras, they don't do rego checks or speed, and there's a certain way to tag them listed on the OSM Wiki.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148077272

OSM shouldn't be edited to fix how Kartographer renders.

It seems like either Q23287 actually matches to two objects in OSM (which would be pretty rare) or that the Wikidata tag should only be on one, in which case it's best to actually explain that in your edit.

I'm not from the UK so I don't know the nuances of ceremonial counties and which one would be valid, but if it's valid to be on two relations, then it should be on both and Kartographer needs to figure out how to handle that.

Hi, is this actually a track or is it just a driveway? If it's a driveway (even if it's dirt) it should be tagged as highway=service, service=driveway, and then you can pick an appropriate surface= tag (unpaved is a generic one that would cover it too)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/148026581

Hi Evlyn, thanks for correctly tagging access instead of removing the tracks. If these tracks don't have names (which considering the unauthorised nature, is likely), then the name tag should be removed, not set to "No track".

Already went and fixed it up myself, but in future it would be good if the map builder team would act on feedback, especially if they are adding map builder edits on behalf of their users.

Hey and welcome to OSM! One tip, driveways generally don't extend into a house, you'd just want to put it where the driveway actually is and end it short of the house.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147932124

If you're uploading data into OSM, it's your responsibility to ensure it's correct.

Hi, is this definitely a residential road, or is it just a driveway for a subdivided property?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147913778

There's an [email protected] email address on their wiki page, osm.wiki/Organised_Editing/Activities/Meta
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147837284

Is this definitely a house? Looking just south there's a building that looks more like a house, and from aerial imagery it could easily be a shed instead of a house.

Hi, I've removed all the individual parking areas bar the loading zone, there's already an amenity=parking way covering the whole parking lot, and that's how parking areas should be drawn (see amenity=parking).

I've also tagged the loading area to signify this as well.

Yeah I'd have to agree with disused, and access=discouraged really, if NPWS actively starts removing the track/puts up signs clearly indicating access being forbidden, then the respective tags should change. Until there's no signs of a track on Bing/ESRI and on the ground, the way itself should remain to clearly indicate the current state.