I've able to log on to TM on pc, but not phone.

way/1235220487/history

Hi @Firefishy,
We've been doing some HOT mapping in this area and I've come across this razed railway route.
It looks to me that this should now be highway=unclassified as other highways connect to it. I'm not sure how to treat the railway aspect - was:railway=razed? Also would this damage the relation record?
Adrian

Hi @mueschel. Yes, now corrected, thank you.

Adrian

I am going to deleted this feature as there is no physical evidence in any imagery> The tags do not make sense either.

Hi DominikFehervary

I don't understand why you have mapped this rectangle highway=river. way/1453542678#map=18/7.050723/9.476636 Highways are for roads, a river is a waterway. However, what is this rectangle representing with the name of fi? It's a ditch in a tidal river according to your tags. I see you have only made two edits, so I assume this was a mistaken test?

Adrian

Thank you Frans.

Hi Frans. I suspect I would have picked that up in my OSMI/OSMose QA checks. Did you make the change to unclassified? Are you advising that I should do so for this or just in future?

Hi WT Hundu. While mapping some waterways, I noticed very small residential areas in a larger residential area here way/1389490341/history#map=19/7.342733/9.705768 This is not usually correct.
Then I noticed that they appear to have the names of people living there. This does not follow the rules of OpenStreetMap, described here. osm.wiki/Mapping_private_information. The small residential area should probably be removed. However they could be replaced with individual rectangular or round buildings with building=yes, but no personal information. If you personally know they are houses, then use building=house. If you have any questions, just reply to this comment.
Regards,
Adrian

Hi jajanja3,
Great work mapping the drives and gardens around Istead Rise. The changeset description mentions houses. I wondered what you did? I thought I'd mapped them well.
Also, I think the footways along the roads should also be tagged footway=sidewalk, see osm.wiki/Sidewalks#Sidewalk_as_separate_way
Adrian

The line has service=siding, but a rail way can't cross like that.

Hi @tadcan You appear to have modified a bit of rail way that may duplicate and crosses an existing line. I can't see a second line (one is a bit of a challenge!) here in the recent DRC imagery. Do you think the second piece should be deleted?
Adrian

You also have what appears to be a duplicate highway going south west from Buyamaba. You mapped it first in 2021, and again this month.

The duplication exists for other residential areas in the general locality.

Hi hebolz. 22 days ago you appear to have created a duplicate residential area way/1427170300over way/532079122. While yours has more detail, I think the OSM preference is to edit existing features, not replace.

Adrian

Hi Robert,

Good catch. I had it next to the wrong gateway. I've now replaced some hedge with fence to the west of the error and relocated the AED appropriately.

How did you detect my error?

Adrian

Hi, I was wondering why the brand:wikidata tag has now been prefixed with not: The value is correct for the brand.
Adrian

Fair enough Jan. Nice to know it's a common trap :-)
Adrian

Ah my apologies Jan, I put the source in the next changeset. I used https://metar-taf.com/metar/GB-0843. It looks like a weather station reference. So perhaps the node should be tagged ref:metar_taf=* of even a separate man_made=monitoring_station node with the same ref? Advice?
Adrian

Apologies for my tardy response John, poor email management on my part. It was no problem for me, I just came across it while touching on the longer relation (effectively a longer route) this footpath is part of.
Adrian