Hi AustinAkaHadiRender,
Thanks for your contributions! I wanted to kindly suggest a couple of best practices that help make edits easier for the whole community to understand and review:
• Please try to keep the changeset size reasonable and focused on related edits, as very large or mixed changesets can be harder to review or revert if needed. More information about changesets can be found here: osm.wiki/Changeset
• It’s helpful if the source(s) you use are clearly stated and specific (e.g., survey, imagery, GPS track) so other mappers can verify and reuse your edits. You can find more details here:
osm.wiki/Map_features
These practices help improve data quality and make collaboration easier for everyone. Thanks again for mapping!
Best regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Youness_ss,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap.
Regarding your edits here: changeset/174344450#map=13/32.83907/13.16162&layers=N,
I noticed that you changed all the road classifications to motorway and motorway_link. However, this change does not seem to fit with the existing route network or the OSM Wiki guidelines for motorway classification:
highway=motorway.
Please note that motorway is a major classification and cannot be placed between trunk classifications
Could you please review these changes?
Thank you again for your efforts and for helping improve the map!
Kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap.
Regarding your edits here:
changeset/174353822#map=16/31.14878/16.58161&layers=N
I noticed that you changed the classification from trunk_link to primary_link. However, this change doesn’t seem to align with the current route network and the OSM Wiki guidelines for road classification:
highway=*#:~:text=lined%20with%20housing.-,Link%20roads,-highway
According to these guidelines, link roads should be tagged with the _link classification of the highest-classified road they connect to.
Could you please review these edits and adjust them accordingly?
Thank you again for your collaboration and valuable contributions!
Kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap. Could you please share the sources you've used to open those segments of road here:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1434396722
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1434396720
My latest imagery (dated 19/10/2025) shows that this location is still under construction.
Kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap. Could you please share the sources for the updates you've made in the following areas?
Examples:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way344758002
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way118719066
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way118719070
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way118719069
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way118719072
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way1333463302
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way571838265
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way1348705952
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way1348705951
My latest imagery (dated 05/10/2025) shows that this location is still under construction.
Kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contribution to OpenStreetMap.
I noticed that you changed the classification to "highway=trunk" in this roundabout:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/176594456
And I think it's not suitable according to the policies. For more information about roundabout classifications, in the Wiki OpenStreetMap:
junction=roundabout
If you have different information, please share that with us. If not
Could you please fix this issue?
Regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contribution to OpenStreetMap.
I noticed that you changed the classification to "highway=trunk" in those ways:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1339462879
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171541135
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171541130
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171541143
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/646459180
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1413586110
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171539012
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1413836107
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/646459182
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1413586111
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/646459183
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171538954
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171539055
And I think it's not suitable according to the policies. For more information about link classifications, in the Wiki OpenStreetMap:
highway=trunk_link
highway=primary_link
highway=secondary_link
If you have different information, please share that with us. If not
Could you please fix this issue?
Regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Abdullah Al Werfalli,
Thank you for your contribution to OpenStreetMap. Could you kindly share your sources for the updates you've made here.
Examples:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1389452241
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1389397293
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1389452240
My latest image is from 26/05/2025, and I notice that some roads in the area are still under construction.
Regards,
salma_ayman

Hi Alsalehq80,
Thank you for your recent edits. However, I noticed that some of the modifications you made in:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1235779668
Do not align with the information presented in the following news source:
https://x.com/PARTKUWAIT/status/1928126143997300773
Additionally, there are several issues that need to be addressed:
Unacceptable dead ends at:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/12830149624
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/12830149613
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/12830119400
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/12830149624
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/12404367459
Deleted ways that should be reviewed:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1234895680
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/47344534
Floating ways that need to be fixed:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/node/11288036352
If you're familiar with the area, could you please help by correcting these issues on the map?!
And if you have any other resources, please share them with us!
Best regards,
salma_ayman

Hi "osm_saint-louis",
Thank you for your contributions to mapping.
I noticed that the source you used for your recent updates is an outdated Bing imagery compared to the Esri imagery. This may lead to inaccuracies in mapping. For example, you can observe differences in the following locations:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1355343742
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1355343685
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1355343709
I recommend cross-referencing with more recent imagery sources, such as Esri. Please fix that.
Best regards,
salma_ayman

Hello "ABDULLAH AL WERFALLI",
Thank you for your contributions to OpenStreetMap, particularly your recent updates. I noticed that you added new tags, specifically "from" and "to". I would appreciate it if you could provide some insight into the reasoning behind adding these tags.
However, I’d like to bring to your attention that these tags do not appear to align with the OSM Wiki policies for these keys, as outlined in the following links:
from=*
to=*
Additionally, I observed a spelling error in the "from" key, which can be seen in this link:
way/35893854
Please let me know if you have any clarifications regarding these tags.
Thank you for your time and effort!
Best regards,
salma_ayman

Hello Okainov,
Thank you for reaching out.
I added the access tag based on my understanding of the military area's restrictions for public access. I appreciate your clarification regarding the comment and your efforts to review and remove tags as needed.
However, I would like to kindly request the removal of the access tag from the following links to ensure that the route through these ways remains open:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1109212744
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1109212743
Additionally, I request the same for the segments between these nodes:
node/4992986574 - node/4992986573
node/9603811039 - node/9603811040
node/2006375898 - node/9603811043
Thank you for your time and assistance in resolving this matter.
Best regards,
Salma Ayman

Hello osm_saint-louis,
Thanks for your mapping, but the modifications you made here: way/210367535
doesn't match the OSM Wiki Policies on the secondary_link classification as shown in the following link:
highway=*#:~:text=lower%20class%20highway.-,highway,-secondary_link
Could you please check it and fix it?
kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello mappinglander,
Based on updated satellite images, These roads appeared that there was road construction. (There are several obstacles across the road.) and We couldn’t find any news or video indicating that the road operation has started, so we will revert to the road construction.
Whenever a comment is made, it includes the modified changeset. This is the reason for sending multiple comments. Especially since the modifications are in different places and require separate feedback from you about each area to ensure the changes were made correctly.
kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello mappinglander,
Thank you for your mapping, but the modifications you made here
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154680183
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154680185
don't match the newer satellite imagery.
Would you mind sharing your modification source with us?
kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello mappinglander,
Thank you for your mapping, but the modifications you made here
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1153860694
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154539685
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154539686
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154539689
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1154539690
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171625863
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171625865
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/171625877
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/310166022
don't match the newer satellite imagery.
Would you mind sharing your modification source with us?
kind regards,
salma_ayman

Hello mappinglander,
Thank you for your mapping, but the modifications you have made here
(https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/way/1253547901) don't match the satellite imagery. Would you mind sharing your modification source with us?
kind regards,
salma_ayman

Correction: The source used was Maxar SecureWatch Imagery 2024-03-12

Hello Q8Maps,
Thank you for your quick response, I appreciate it.
Regards
salma_ayman

Hello Q8Maps,
Thank you for your mapping. I've noticed your recent updates in Kuwait through the changeset, so I wanted to share a few guidelines to support your mapping, referencing the OSM Wiki policy.
The following links relate to different cases, so we should edit each one separately:
1: This area includes some green areas, so it should be mapped as a multi-polygon. In this case, we should avoid using the "area" tag.
(https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1327238840)
as shown in OSM Wiki policy on multi-polygon.
osm.wiki/Area#Multipolygon_area
2: Since this one doesn’t contain any green areas, adding the "area" and "highway" tags here would be suitable.
(https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1327238834)
as shown in the OSM Wiki policy for pedestrian squares and plazas.
highway=pedestrian#Squares_and_plazas
3: Here, you’ve used the tag footway=sidewalk. According to the OSM Wiki, this tag should be used for footways directly adjacent to roads, tagging them as sidewalks on the main highway.
(https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/671327430)
as shown in OSM Wiki policy on footways
footway=sidewalk
Would you mind reviewing these points and adjusting the edits as needed?
Thanks again for your contributions and for considering these suggestions!
Regards,
salma_ayman