Copyright and Google's terms don't let us take data from any of their products, which includes Google Street View.

Why did you change bulding=bulding to building=bulding?

Hi,

you've used Google as a source. Copyright and Google's terms don't let us take their data or use their products. (osm.org/copyright) Did you use Google as a source for any other changes?

Also, can you please use a more descriptive changeset comment than "Validation" so people can easily see what you're doing?

Hey,

I wanted to let you know that the tag to indicate a place accepts bitcoin is "payment:bitcoin", and if it's a bitcoin ATM, you should add an amenity=atm tag

It should mean that anyone using a router or geocoder using OpenStreetMap as a data source will be able to get there. Of course, it will take time for devices and apps to update their data.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. I slightly changed the tagging of the POI to indicate it's a funeral directors, as well as mapped it out as a building, and added detail to the nearby Walmart

Hello,

It's claimed that this data is node to node identical to Tracksource, a copyrighted source.

What was the source of this changeset?

It looks like you've changed the link roads connecting to the motorway to secondary links. Normally these would be highway=motorway_link. You can read more at osm.wiki/Highway_link

this seems to have made some problems around relation/812190#map=18/34.25831/136.58273 where the admin geoms are separate from the coastline. It's also fairly absurd to represent the admin boundary as thousands of little islands

As the import did none of the required consultation with the imports@ mailing list or the local lists, I'm going ahead and reverting it.

Rub21, would it be better to revert this changeset?

Please use a meaningful changeset comment, not one like "#map-feedback #851" which doesn't allow someone to figure out what you were intending and why. osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments has more information about writing good changeset comments.

Could you direct me to the imports list consultation about this import? I'm worried that I can't find it and the imports guidelines haven't been followed

Hello,

It's good to see the buildings filling out in Edmonton. I was wondering what you were using as a source. JOSM lets you fill in a source automatically based on the imagery you have open

Hello,

Imports in OSM need to follow the import guidelines (osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines) which include consulting with the imports@ mailing list before importing, as well as other requirements. Can you please make sure the requirements are met before importing, and contact the list about these imports?

way/244211443 looks similarly odd - you've tagged it as a residential road joining two trunk roads.

Why did you add highway=residential to way/306099045?

Given the high level of errors, would it be easier to just revert this changeset?

Do you know if you'll be fixing this import? e.g. merging the residential at osm.org/#map=18/36.721324/-119.693138 into something like way/321089844

Both claimed or both controlled?

If you think it's a different landuse type and want it restored as that, you should indicate the type. It's fairly clearly not landuse for significant parts of it, and I can't see any type that most of it is.