What sources have you used here, what evidence is there that there is an embankment here. It would be a very unusual thing to find around a stone circle afterall.

Cheers Phil

Hi, why have you added an embankment here?

Have you been here and observed this embankment as there are no embankments shown on the photo on wikipedia?

Also it seems rather strange to add the place name in brackets, we can work that out from the location.

Also not from your edit but the name should be Meini Hirion or tall stones in English.

Hi Brian
Mapping farmland as large multipolygons makes future detail mapping of farmland, such as tagging as arable, pasture or meadow, or adding boundaries much harder for other mappers.

This subject was discussed on talk-gb last December and the consensus was that farmland is better mapped as individual fields. Several mappers having come to that conclusion independently.

The thread is at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2019-December/023889.html

Cheers Phil

For this line https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ttS7a20MR7E and its follow on, are much more recent.

Cheers Phil

Hi, the video you have used for this section is rather old. For example the line still has semaphore signalling. At least on conditional speed limit sign, just south of Wem station, is not shown on this video.

The continuation of the video you were using south of Shrewsbury is much more recent.

Cheers Phil

Hi, this is an interesting source.

I am concerned that wondering if you have recieved permission to use this video?

Cheers Phil

Hi
You seem to have added oneway=yes to ways already tagged as junction=roundabout. I am wondering what fixes you believe are necessary?
The wiki states "oneway=yes is implied and redundant. Though it is not wrong to add it explicitly, it is not needed".

Cheers Phil

Hi
I am a bit confused by this edit. It is normal for roundabouts to be split as part of route relations yet in this edit you have joined the roundabout back into a single way which is no longer correct.
Just wondering what you thought was wrong and needed fixing?

Cheers Phil

Please disregard the above comment, I was looking at a draf policy and made quick assumptions about the URLs.

I was wrong, sorry.

Cheers Phil

Hi
The URL you have previously added seems to contain a lot of random junk, I assume that this is some sort of marketing/tracking activity. If so that is not acceptable use of OSM. For this hotel you only need https://www.hilton.com/en/hotels/bhxsadi-doubletree-stratford-upon-avon/

Also is this account, from the first edit, being used by a single individual. Shared accounts are also not acceptable and all edits in OSM should be attributable to an individual.

Cheers Phil

Sorry, I misread the location on mapillary.

It appears that the vehicle crossing from Highcroft Drive has also gone and has been replaced by a foot/cycle crossing.

https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/6T7MbkdVlJj21ksONK4oiQ

Sorry about that, do you want me to fix this one?

Cheers Phil

Hi, thank you for your edit however please remember that OSM is not simply a map for drivers.
In deleting this link you have also lost routing for pedestrians and cyclists. Mapillary shows, as would be expected when a road route is cut, a cycleway crossing. Please add this and take care not to break routing in future.

Cheers Phil

I will fix that later.

I am sure you have mapped this from your own

knowledge, but please do bear copyright issues in mind in future.

In osm mapper knowledge is the gold standard, there is no need to provide justification for that.

Cheers Phil

Thank you for the reply.

Is there really a building within a building, or is the outer the garden? In which case it should be landuse=residential.

Cheers Phil

Sorry
Foot=yes/bicycle=yes/horse=yes/motor_vehicle=private.

Hi, welcome to Please do not either refer to, or look at planning applications when mapping. We do not have permission to use them and the maps are based on OS, which are copyright.
The access road was correctly mapped as a track, it is unsurfaced. In the UK an unclassified road will be surfaced, plus this is legally a bridleway therefor motor vehicle access is only for access to properties and should be tagged as private.
Cheers Phil

Should the landuse have changed here, also the road does not connect.

Cheers Phil

Bore da, this is a rather unlikely setting for a neolithic stone circle, maybe tag it as an artwork rather than historic?

Diolch Phil

Hi, thank you for the addition, however I am wondering why have you added the Wash Stones as residential road?

Cheers Phil

Why have you added motor_vehicle=no to a footpath, the highway classification indicates it is not for motor vehicles.

Cheers Phil