Wow, you did a lot of details to Hillsboro! Thanks for making this area look awesome

The size of the changeset is because I modified Monongahela National forest's tags (added GNIS feature_id)

Okay, it's still in Greenbrier County. well, this county is huge.

Makes sense in this case. Thanks for the help. Even huge radio masts seem to have the proper tag (mast or tower)

So, for communication tower I understand "cellphone tower" as I interpret, because the communication tower is a broad term. It can be a radio mast, TV mast etc. Okay, as far as I know there is "Mast" and "Antenna" but most radio antennas are masts.

So what I can suggest is to rename the preset which should contain "Big communications tower (>100m tall)" or put presets where the options are already set, like "Cell tower" for it, for example, so we can save time on thinking what should we choose, you get it. This can be the case with TV / Radio antennas too since when I'm mapping landcover I sometimes discover unmapped cell towers and radio stations, so a good tagging preset is always handy :)

Hi skyper,

No, there is only one tower at the location, and I was using the JOSM internal preset (Big communications tower), just I wanted to trace its shape. I can just either delete my change there or retag it and use the utils2 plugin for replacing geometry.

+ changeset/131567356's conversation

Discussion link: https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C3LJ03BCY/p1674504150801339

Alright, as Zeke suggested in #local-vermont in OSM US Slack, I tried to revert the changes, but before uploading, please have a look at it (I pinged you there) and please tell me if there's something wrong with it which should be fixed / still reverted etc.

"We had also communicated which areas each of us was working on. So that is doubly frustrating for me. This could have been avoided. " Yes, actually you're right in this case. Sorry, my bad!

Okay, then we should probably leave the changeset as is because then it would create a lot of conflicts then + unnecessary redrawings of what I did, so it would cause more damage. But if your opinion is different, let's go with that but I won't deal with the amount of "merge" conflicts for sure

My method to map forests are to map over track roads since I don't see any sense of mapping those woodland parts separately. (But this is me)

Yes you can revert the changeset, but then please finish the rest of the county, I'll move back to doing WV then.

I used NAIP too but I didn't write into the sources since NAIP was used for checking.

+ Esri World Imagery Clarity (Beta) to determine where it's wooded more or not in the past

Hey Shyshka! Thanks for improving Greene County, PA's forest landcover. I actually created a tasking manager project back in the day(~2-3 years ago) for that, so we mappers can follow where the project is currently at. If you want to use it, please mark where you mapped, so if other mappers want to map in the area, don't overlap with your areas.

Keep up the good work! :)
Ottwiz

The link for the Tasking Manager project:
https://tasks.openstreetmap.us/projects/257/tasks

Oh hey SamuelH123000!

Welcome to the OSM! Thanks for improving Ohio!

If you want to get to know the OSM community more and get some tips and tricks on mapping, I suggest both the Discord and OSM US Slack community as a starting point:
https://discord.gg/openstreetmap
https://slack.openstreetmap.us

No landuses were mapped, just I used a predefined changeset comment in JOSM and forgot to remove "landuses" :)

The reason for this big changeset is that I aligned the riverbanks of Connecticut river. Still there needs a lot to be aligned. I also used Esri World Imagery for tracing to compare the status of the river and it's way off than what's in GIS data portals &c.

*multipolygon, typo