Heya, thanks for your recent surveying and edits in Windermere!

Regarding the fixme here, I don’t think this defibrillator should be removed from the map. It’s listed on The Circuit (https://osm.mathmos.net/defib/progress/LA/), and even if the wall box is in poor condition, the defibrillator inside should hopefully still be working.

OSM is here to map what’s visible on the ground, which in this case is a visible defibrillator box. We’re not here to test and maintain defibrillators! If it subsequently gets removed from The Circuit due to not being maintained, then it will be straightforward to automatically remove from OSM due to the ref:GB:the_circuit tag linking the OSM object to the database.

Where did this data come from? It looks like it’s been badly copied and pasted into OSM. The new addr:housename= and website= for a couple of these pharmacies contain a full address and something which is not an URL.

addr:unit= should be used instead of addr:housenumber= to specify commercial property unit numbers.

Please also split large changesets so they don’t span multiple countries, as that makes them hard for local mappers to review. See osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Super, cheers :)

Why remove the name?

OK, ta.

I’m confused. In changeset/150711518 you said it was private parking for residents. Thus the amenity=parking (with access=private) was correct.

Was that incorrect?

Hiya, thanks for updating this. As a tip, when somewhere’s closed down it’s better to mark it as disused (using a lifecycle prefix, osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix) and change name=Snooty Fox to old_name=Snooty Fox. This allows people to see that it’s closed, rather than have the map look like it never existed in the first place.

I’ve made these changes in changeset/151887233

Thanks and happy mapping :)

Someone needs to survey it to find out the ground truth, before deleting any existing information (such as the amenity=yes tag) from the map.

Yes, what you suggest might well be better than place=neighbourhood. Feel free to change it, thanks :)

Reverted as changeset/151662883. natural=shrubbery doesn’t make sense as these areas are human-made, not natural.

Can you please stop making mechanical tag updates without local knowledge?

Thanks for the confirmation!

The wiki says “*verify* if it could be tagged with another tag” (emphasis mine), it doesn’t say “remove the tag without replacement” :)

Tagging fixed/updated in changeset/151574258 and changeset/151574399

@DorneyLake123, please don’t change ‘invalid’ farmland/meadow tagging without local knowledge of what’s actually cultivated there and how, otherwise you’re likely to lose information from the map.

Indeed, this change is not correct.

This land is not *natural* grassland, it’s cultivated, and so should be tagged as landuse=meadow meadow=agricultural. See osm.wiki/User:Gurglypipe/landuse

That tagging is different from how I tagged it 2 years ago because my understanding of grass culture has improved, and I think the tagging standards around farmland-vs-meadow have solidified in the general OSM community a bit.

Heya. According to note note/4252354 and MapThePaths, the road running through the caravan park *is* a public footpath where it links the bridleway and footpath.

Given the recent note, I’ve changed the access tagging to reflect that in changeset/151573670.

Given that you surveyed it a year ago and marked it as access=private I guess there might be more to it than MapThePaths suggests, though? If it really is access=private and foot=private then it’ll need updating again and perhaps a note= adding to explain the situation. Ta

Hi, are you local? This looks like you’re removing information (that this area is a public amenity) from the map, without adding in better/alternative tagging. Please don’t do that.

Several of the ones I noticed being changed were crags, which could probably more specifically be tagged as natural=cliff, for example.

The other ones which are knolls/rises probably still should be natural=peak if they have a name, since natural=peak is more specific than place=locality. You could add a prominence= tag (prominence=*) to them, if the prominence is known and suitably licensed for inclusion in OSM. That could be used to highlight or downplay them in the rendering if needed, in future (I don’t think it affects the rendering at the moment).

Heya, Why change a load of things which, from their name, look like hills, from natural=peak to place=locality? place=locality isn’t very specific tagging.

See osm.wiki/Roads_in_the_United_Kingdom