Hi, bus=yes isn't just used for bus routes. If this is a valid bus platform, it should include bus=yes to indicate what type of public transport uses it.
bus=yes

Hey there, if this isn't a platform are you able to fix up the tagging indicating it as such? I'd double check to make sure that it's not used in any relations or that it's correctly replaced if so.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150518235

Hi, bus=yes isn't just used for bus routes. If this is a valid bus platform, it should include bus=yes to indicate what type of public transport uses it.
bus=yes
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150519173

Hi, is this name currently signed on this location? If not, it should be removed and is more appropriate for OpenHistoricalMap
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150485566

Hi, is there actually a park here? I can't see anything on aerial imagery, and the shape is odd.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150482438

Hi, just wondering if you got the name of the creek from a survey (on the ground) or another source?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150476719

Hey, is this actually a park? It's an odd shape to be a park.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150476139

Hi there, please try and keep changesets to a smaller area, this one crosses the whole world!

Hi JiafuYang, service roads should be tagged as highway=service, highway=unclassified is meant to be somewhat equivalent to highway=residential but for non-residential areas.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150421286

Hey, it's probably best to use a lifestyle prefix to mark as disused, you'd be setting disused:highway=path and removing highway=path. If there's no access signs, probably worth adding an access=no tag too!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150385609

Hi there, the building way should only cover the actual building (and multiple should be created if needed), not the property boundaries.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150336017

Yeah, it's an odd one, multiple expansions that I think most people consider part of the same retail precinct, but somewhat separate to the main shopping centre.

Yeah definitely makes sense in those cases, only obvious exception I can think of is Munno Para Shopping City, that's a weird one!

It's a bit tricky, might be worth looking at some other shopping centers with extra shops in the carpark and see how they handle it.

Hey, I reckon the name and shop tag should probably come off the land use entirely, those would be more appropriate on the building (and it looks like the name is already tagged on something else so that goes against one object, one feature).
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150324901

Should the service road actually be named Kingston RV Park? I would have thought that a separate way surrounding the park, or a node, would be more appropriate, since it seems like an odd name for a road.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150288475

Thanks for catching that, I’ve just fixed it

Hi there, is the road you've edited in this edit open to the public? It seems from a quick look that highway=service was more appropriate.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150108352

Hi there, great work on this! There's a fair few ways I'm seeing with angles that don't appear to match up to aerial imagery. If you press Q while a way is selected in iD, it'll square off all the corners to 90 degree angles.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150107908

I've confirmed we don't have permission to use SAPPA maps, however the DataSA Roads dataset does confirm that these are the current names. In future, please make sure you're using sources we have permission to use.