its one of these controversial things that the community hasn't really decided on. personally. i think limiting residential areas to blocks gives extra information that makes the map easer to read

Hi there Edit,
I've seen a few of your changeset pass through in the last few days and I would just like to saying that your mapping is very good. I would like to make a couple of recommendations:

first houses should be tagged with building=house. you can then add extra detail with house=detached/semi-detached/terrace.

I can see you've already added a few address and the tags look good. I would encourage you to add more address since they are possible the single most useful thing that can be added to osm.

Thanks for contribution to OSM and feel free to ask any questions you may have.
Kind regards,
Kits :)

Hi there,
correct me if I'm wrong but as far as i can tell all these structures and roads are still standing, just unoccupied at present. I dont believe they should be removed unless they have been destroyed.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155218638

Hi there,
why did you remove all the block level residential areas and replace them with a wide area one. the normal target is to eventually replace all wide area residential areas with block ones.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155221969

Hi Patrick,
I've just made a changeset overriding some of your changes mostly due to the tags on these paths being very messy but also some of your changes do not match the present signage on the bridge. the south path is open to foot and bicycle. the north path is open to foot bicycle and mopeds. you also had conflicting tags on the north path, the paths leading to the bridge had foot=yes but the path on the bridge had foot=no.
kind regards,
Kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155192151

Hi Shaun, Thanks for contributing to OSM and openAED.
there is a UK wide database for AEDs called The Circuit but I cant find this one on there. it may be simply that is too new or something similar. If you can could you look on the AED for it's circuit id, its should look like this "2DCCBD4D-5D05-4FF7-B5BA-6DB094803BDC" if you can find then you can add it to the node with the tag "ref:GB:the_circuit".
kind regards,
Kits

Hi BlackpoolGuides,
Can you please explain why you deleted this entire area?
kind regards,
kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155094015

Hi there editid0,
You may not be aware of this but there are two standards for mapping sidewalks(pavements) on osm. One uses tags on the road way and another maps them as separate ways like that ones that you deleted. The ones that were deleted were rather poorly done and and out of place so so there nothing really lost by deleting them in this case but you should add a sidewalk tag to the roads as a replacement so no detail is lost. you can read more on the wiki here:
osm.wiki/Sidewalks
sidewalk=*
hope this helps and feel free to ask any questions you may have,
kind regards,
kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/155096899

i've added a relation and change the service road back

to expand on what i just said, i just looked up this route. Its not a full NCN route but a "Link Route". No one has create a relation for these routes here, the lack of a relation is most likely the reason why its not appearing in your renderer of choice.

then that is a fault of the renderers and the renderers should be the one to fix it. It is bad practice to tag for a particular renderer, please see: osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer
NCN routes very regularly follow roads, this is not a rare case and it being a service road doesn't change anything and ncn routes should be tagged with bicycle=yes or bicycle=designated and also have a route relation.

osm.wiki/Ordnance_Survey
osm.wiki/Google

Hi there, OS maps and Google Maps cannot be used in any way when contributing to OSM. This is due to their licences being incompatible the OSM licence and could make OSM open to being sued for copyright infringement.

Hi, I believe this change is incorrect, its is a service road up to the gate. if this is part of a ncn route then it should be a service road with the tag `bicycle=designated`
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154814426

Oh and i forgot, in ID, the OSM website editor, you can press `Q` to square ways to make them look a bit cleaner

Hi andrew,
Overall your changes look good. only one tiny mistake, on the last section of track where it meets the house, you have it tagged with `width=0` which doesn't make sense. Only suggestions I can offer are minor. you could tag the house as `building=detached` instead of `building=house` to be more specific. you also add a gate node to the start of the track and lastly you could possibly tag the track as `access=private`
Hope this feedback helps,
Kind regards,
Kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154532399

ye sorry, I saw it while I was adding them but forgot to fix it before committing. i'll fix it asap.

I do apologise, I was rushing and made a bad assumption since I've never seen mixed voltage pylons. In hindsight I'm not sure why I change the voltages, should have tagged the ref and left the rest alone. Thanks for fixing it.

Hi there Will,
Welcome to OSM. I would like to make a few comments about this changeset. firstly, landuse=farm is a deprecated tag and should not be used. the original landuse=farmyard would be more appropriate here. Secondly I can see you've added crop=grass to a field, this is perfectly fine if this is specifically a field for growing a grass type crop. however if this is actually a grazing field for animals then it should be tagged with landuse=meadow instead of farmland. farmland is specifically for growing land.
Hope this helps,
Kind regards,
Kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153904407

Hi there Case,
just a small tip, correct tags for fields is landuse=meadow for grazing fields. and landuse=farmland for growing fields instead of natural=grassland.
hope this helps,
kind regards,
Kits
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153762053