Nice work!

I re-added the sac_scale= and surface= tagging in changeset/131803007, because I suspect it was dropped accidentally.

If I’m wrong, please let me know and we can edit the paths again. Ta!

I’m another member of this collaboratively edited community project that you’re editing. I am trying to make sure the map is accurate.

I’m very happy to discuss things if you think there’s a problem with what I’ve raised.

Sorry to bang on about this, but how are you measuring ‘correct’? Aerial imagery has offset errors which means that you can’t use it as a source of ground truth for alignment of things. See osm.wiki/Good_practice#Align_aerial_imagery_before_tracing

The only way to actually align a trig point accurately is to take a settled GPS reading off the top of it. Have you done that, or are you repeatedly aligning to newer aerial imagery (which has different, but non-zero offset errors)?

I keep bringing this up partially because you have not yet answered questions about the correctness of your data, but also because the Skiddaw trigpoint was specifically noted as having been aligned to known truthful data before you started editing it.

From the point of view of an outsider, since you haven’t explained your sources or editing process, you have broken that alignment.

Please can you explain the process you’re going through to make these edits, and demonstrate why the Skiddaw trig point is now more accurately aligned, compared to ground truth, than it was before.

Thanks :)

No reply, so I’ve deleted it in changeset/131769652, since it doesn’t match anything on aerial imagery and doesn’t go anywhere.

I’ve just fixed this one as changeset/131736754

Hiya, when you’re adding wikidata links to bridges, could you please add them to the bridge area and not the road going over the bridge? The wikidata links you’ve added recently in the north west have all been describing the bridges, not the roads. So they should be on the bridge area, and not the roads (or railways). Thanks!

Hiya, what’s the highway=unknown feature (way/1135240378) meant to be?

Hi, could you please add useful changeset descriptions to your changes? “.” is not a useful changeset description.

Doing so makes it easier for others to check edits in their area, and to understand your reasoning for making changes and the source of your data.

See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Thanks

Hi, if you’re going to change landuse=farmland to landuse=meadow in the north-west of England, can you please also add meadow=pasture in combination.

‘Meadow’ as a term implies hay meadows, of which there are vanishingly few. Almost all of the meadow land in the north-west is grazing pasture, and should be tagged as such.

Historically landuse=farmland (or, better, landuse=farmland farmland=pasture) has been used to indicate this in the north-west. aiui, recently, the tagging guidelines have been tightened up to discourage this. So transitioning existing tagging to landuse=meadow seems inevitable, but while doing it the tagging can definitely be improved to be unambiguous.

See landuse=meadow#Tags_in_combination

Thanks

Heya, thanks so much for your contribution to OpenStreetMap. I’ve tweaked a few of the changes you made, and added a bit more detail in changeset/131656948.

Please say if I’ve got anything wrong! I’ve been past the campsite a few times but have never actually stayed there, so most of my changes are from memory and aerial imagery.

In particular, I tweaked a few things to remove descriptive names (osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions), and have used description= instead. I hope that makes sense.

Have a good day :)

Hi, just spot-checking a few things, I noticed this changeset drops the surface= and sac_scale= tags from (at least):
- way/161487460
- way/85670296

Was that intentional? Both are important tags for guiding route planning decisions, and I just wanted to check they weren’t being accidentally dropped. Thanks!

Hiya, did you know you can press ‘Q’ when a building is selected to automatically square its corners? It’s quite useful for easily drawing regular buildings :)

Thanks for updating it. That’ll be useful for a lot of people.

(For anyone else following along, the rest of the loop was added in changeset/131607138)

I’ve reverted this (and changeset/131493992) as changeset/131606169 because I don’t think there are cycle paths on most of these roads.

If you think I’ve made a mistake, please comment here; I’m happy to discuss! Thanks.

I’ve reverted this (and changeset/131418312) as changeset/131606169 because I don’t think there are cycle paths on most of these roads.

If you think I’ve made a mistake, please comment here; I’m happy to discuss! Thanks.

Hiya, the Bay Cycleway is already mapped as going along Lindale Road here.

You can see the current route relation here: relation/7024538#map=15/54.1906/-2.9002

Is the Promenade an optional loop on the route, or has the route been completely diverted?

If it’s an optional loop then I guess the railway crossings at Blawith Point and the Memorial Playing Fields should also be added to the route, to join the loop up? Is that what’s present on the ground?

Thanks!

Hi, thanks for replying. How are you determining the correct position? Based on the Bing satellite imagery in the editor, or by a settled GPS reading off the trig point?

Hi, what sources are you using to determine the ‘correct’ position of the summit and trig point?

This is the 4th time in a row you’ve ‘corrected’ the position of the trig point/summit. Which position is actually correct?

Hi, I don’t know if you saw my message on changeset/131418312.

Are you sure these are really cycleways? Apart from some short areas approaching/leaving the roundabout at Newby Bridge, and an off-road lane (the pavement) near Lowick Green, I don’t think there is any cycle infrastructure on the A590/A5092/A595.

Has there been a huge amount of roadworks recently?