Aldwark, not Aldfield STW, surely?

Flaxton not Flawith, surely?

ok, when did you survey it then?

It is not possible to "licence wash" data like that. Where did you obtain the data from and under what licence? Who or what is "LocationCapture By ATXLDN"?

Under what licence is the housenumber data for e.g. node/440214686 released?

No, I'm afraid you really don't yet.

Please learn how things are mapped in OSM before making statements like that.

> the reversal of the set of changes is false

Jesús López was correct to revert this. I can guarantee that I've been to bits of the Canary Islands that _weren't_ sand.
I'm sure that everyone involved in OpenStreetMap would encourage you to become a little more familiar with how to map things where people are suggesting you aren't getting it right (as mentioned at http://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=16957800 ). If in doubt, please ask - https://community.openstreetmap.org/ would be an excellent place to start.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello obyrnegps,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here. Whether you "consider driveways are hyper-detail" or not is irrelevant, changing one from joining the road to not joining the road is wrong: way/709660601/history .
Also worth bearing in mind (and I speak from experience here) is that driveways are incredibly useful to wheelchair users and their helpers - there are far more of them than there are dropped kerbs at "official" crossings and they are just as useful.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here.
For the avoidance of doubt, adding "access=no" to a footway tagged with "foot=designated" such as way/931132223 adds no value and may in fact just confuse people. Please don't do it.
Best Regards,
Andy

@LockOnGuy which name:ar tags were changed here? Taking https://osm.mapki.com/history/node/7309162027 as an example, this changeset adds a name:ckb tag but does not change the existing name:ar tag.

Hello rileyfreeman,
What I think the previous comment means is that you've merged lots of different sections of road into one, and they actually had different tags before - compare for example way/889222870/history and way/889222867/history before you deleted them.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=124953626 shows that in this changeset you'd made the whole road one big bridge, which it obviously isn't.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello Traaker_L,

Just to confirm - does the source here "Kaart Ground Survey 2020" mean that you definitely surveyed all of these on the ground? The reason that I ask is that some of these ways (such as way/568421816/history ) had names from a source that isn't compatible with OSM. If you've actually surveyed e.g. "Jalan Ixora 2" here, then we won't need to remove the name, but if you've only expanded it from "Jl. Ixora 2" then we will.

Best Regards,

Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

Hello again Angelica D,

Please do use better changeset descriptions than just "#hotosm-project-12825 #OSMBD #Bangladesh #BangladeshFloodResponse2022 ". See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments for more information.

Best Regards,
Andy

Given what happened on Discord, I'd suggest staying away from memes altogether.

Sorry - osm.org/user_blocks/6282

One more thing - please use changeset comments that describe what you are actually adding and what source you are using.

Here you have just used some hashtags ("#hotosm-project-12867 #afghanistanearthquake2022") which means absolutely nothing to most people. See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments .

Hello Angelica D,

Andy from OSM's Data Working Group here. We've received some complaints that you seem to be mapping things very fast, but not very accurately.

Looking at way/1088788123 , this does seem to be the case.

Please do take a little more care when mapping things, especially buildings. If a building is rectangular, please make sure that you make it properly rectangular by pressing Q.

If you have any questions please email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of "[Ticket#2022082410000087]".

Best Regards,

Andy

This edit doesn't seem to match the information at https://www.cheshireeast.gov.uk/highways_and_roads/roadworks/major-projects/north-west-crewe-package-nwcp/north-west-crewe-package-traffic-management.aspx whereas the previous edit by a local editor does. What was your source for this change?

Hello,
It might be in this changeset, I'm not sure, but it looks like some gaps got introduced in some relations here. I've filled them in in changeset/124990481 .
Best Regards,
Andy