I'd preferably leave out anything if it's not directly related to the object, like the organization a person's worked in. It usually doesn't sufficiently describe said person.
In that case, you may have a better, shorter description which you can fit in as a description or subject:description tag or whatever you prefer (ATYL; Any Tag You Like)
"remembers x, category y in place/time z".
Alternatively, you could add said wiki page yourself, but there's no need to do so of course.

The primary "wikidata" tag without any prefix-:-es as I understand it is only meant for the object itself, not for its subject, owner or the etymology of the object's name -though you could choose to leave out that last one if it is already described on the object's wiki page-. It's more appropriate to keep them apart.

Thanks for the reply. I didn't take time to check this.

Do you agree the wikidata entry I mentioned is the relevant one? You can add it if you want to.

If you get warnings, you get them from the editor, they usually concern your edits and not your changeset comments (read: descriptions).

You have been for a long time and are continuing to use the same changeset comments even after replying to my comment.

If you do not understand my reply, have encountered an issue in any of your changesets or need one reviewed, tell me. I can not help you if you do not communicate sufficiently.

Use the feedback provided. Any further bad changeset comments may be considered intentional -and as such your edits may be considered bad edits-.

Other mappers can't and won't continuously ask you what you changed, we should know from your changeset comment what you generally changed, not just "I edited this area or street for the this-many-ith time". This is inappropriately re-using old comments which don't even describe your changes in the first place.

To help you, in this changeset, you "removed the natural=spring tag from a holy well". You can literally put this as your changeset comment if this is the only change.
For multiple changes to i.e. a street, you can use "added", "changed", "moved", "removed"- and "tags", "nodes" or "ways" for example, just to name a few words. You don't have to explain in detail, but you have to give a short description which represents the changes in your changeset. "update" is what you can be said to do with every edit, it's not helpful or descriptive.

No problem. Some location information can be derived from other data, but address tags are always useful to have.

The node you mentioned could use the addr:housenumber tag, though if you're not sure what the housenumber is you can skip it.

Hey Anne,

The tactile_paving tag does not apply to traffic signals. It only applies to i.e. footways and highway=crossing nodes (where i.e. footway=crossing and the road meet).

Compare;
for pedestrians, on highway=crossing nodes
crossing=traffic_signals

for pedestrians, when mapped seperately
highway=traffic_signals#Traffic_signals_for_pedestrians

for cars, which is always mapped seperately from crossings(!)
highway=traffic_signals#Traffic_signals_for_cars
(there's pedestrian tags on the one in this changeset for example.)

Be sure to zoom in enough to see which one your tagging.

Regards,

Daniel

Are you sure Templedowney Church of Ireland is on Main Street? (preferably the postal address)
Its main entrance seems to be on Church Street, which name also seems to imply this (though this doesn't have to be the case). I do see maybe one narrow entrance on Main Street, but that's all I can say from aerial. The only website with an address is findagrave -it says Church Street-, which we both can't use and isn't a reliable source afaik.

Regardless, I think it's a good idea to add its wikidata;
Q55029615

Let me know.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey Peer van Daalen,

It seems you added place:suburb instead of addr:suburb by accident.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey TXPeig,

"<object x> update <version number>" does not describe the changes you've made in a changeset.

Please use good changeset comments, see the page below;
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

In addition, I would appreciate it if you replied to this changeset comment so I know you've seen it.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey Victor,

I would suggest using
subject:wikidata

wikidata=*#Secondary_Wikidata_links

Is there a reason you used "related" instead?

Regards,

Daniel

Hey egmont,

Your cliffs seem to be pointing upslope.

As you have almost 31k changesets, I'm sure you are aware there are multiple aerial imagery layers available in the editor; see
osm.wiki/Pick_your_mapping_technique#Aerial_Imagery

I would recommend checking other imagery layers to find how to map the cliffs. Bing does not show height differences well.
You can right click a line like a cliff and "reverse" it to make the triangles which stick out on the side of the line to point down the hillside.

We do usually not map herders paths, dry water flow over flat bedrock plateaus, archeological sites or similar. Paths and waterways have to be physically present (at least clearly visible; signed is also helpful) to be mapped. Read the following page on good practice, please.
osm.wiki/Good_practice

The archeological sites you have mapped are mostly holes rather than hills in the landscape and othwerwise are also unverifiable.

If you continue to map like this it may be considered vandalism.

Regards,

Daniel

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I have sent you an extensive welcome message with useful information and links as a private message.

Kind regards,

Daniel

On behalf of the OpenStreetMap community.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I have sent you an extensive welcome message with useful information and links as a private message.

Kind regards,

Daniel

On behalf of the OpenStreetMap community.

Reverted the removal of the building tag in
changeset/116022541

For the building=* tag I'd use =yes, as I don't see a good value for it.

I think social facility covers it better than community centre as it's focused on (health) services rather than activities (see McGrath center).

It's possible to tag amenity=social_facility with social_facility=day_care for the day services.
social_facility=*

The therapy services can be indicated with the healthcare / healthcare:speciality keys
healthcare=*

Could you add the building tag, please? You can always add other tags such as the ones above later if needed.

(I read on their Facebook a specialised pre-school function is also included, but while it overlaps with amenity=kindergarten I think it's better to leave it like this.)

If there are no outdoor areas, the tags are applied to the building.
( amenity=social_facility#How_to_map )

If the amenity shares a boundary with a building, *both* features are mapped on a single area element.
( amenity=* )

This means building=yes should be retained.

An exception would be i.e. amenity=shelter, which does not need e.g. building=roof as it's not much of a building.

Hey Anne,

I see you tagged a number nodes, such as node/9370874597/history
as bumps. However, some of them are quite long for a bump. I would usually tag this as a "table";
traffic_calming=*#By_causing_vertical_deviation
as at this pedestrian crossing;
node/2698214222

Regards,

Daniel

Most if not all conflicts should have been resolved in changeset/115445519
Sorry for any inconvenience.

Hey Nycs Bedonia,

Don't map natural disaster damage, please. We usually map as it was *before* events such as these, especially just after such an event, when aid services could use the data.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey GOwin,

It is possible the following area is a cemetery.
They're usually a short distance away from a residential area and not attached to farmland etc.. Graves(or memorials) may be misinterpreted as small, undefined buildings or (industrial) activities. Actual buildings can also be present.
They're usually scattered, whereas a residential area would be more structured.
way/1001383746
This doesn't always rule out it's a (rural) settlement though.

Regards,

Daniel

Hey arnalielsewhere,

It is possible the following area is a cemetery.
They're usually a short distance away from a residential area and not attached to farmland etc.. Graves(or memorials) may be misinterpreted as small, undefined buildings or (industrial) activities. Actual buildings can also be present.
They're usually scattered, whereas a residential area would be more structured.
way/1012670228
This doesn't always rule out it's a (rural) settlement though.

Regards,

Daniel