Bore da.
This edit has gone rather wrong, you have deleted rights of way from Aberdyfi Golf Course.

As can be seen from way/425788505/history and way/425788503/history these are legal rights of way and as I am sure you are aware they cannot be closed without legal process so I am wondering why you have deleted them?

Cheers Phil

In OSM it is good practice to improve existing objects, rather than delete them and start again. Keeping the history in the database is of interest to many.

Cheers Phil

I realise the name is no longer on the map. I am still working on breaking the area into it individual fields and farmland types.
When I have determined the actual boundary and protection status I will add the correct name. The name "Battlefield Heritage Park" is fiction.

Cheers Phil

Hi again, I have been looking at your edits a bit closer and have spotted a very serious error made in this changeset. You have deleted a large section of bridleway way/38571410/history. which has broken the rights of way network. It is clearly visible on imagery so I am intrigued as to why you shortened it.

Also you have disconnected a stile from the boundary and moved the boundary to include the roadside verges. Stiles are after all a means to cross hedge.

Cheers Phil

Cheers Phil

Reverted in changeset/95674415

Reverted in changeset/95674415

Reverted in changeset/95674415

Reverted in changeset/95674415

> There's my rational:
> a) I found strange that the great majority
> of the area, been a park (where people
> walk accordingly to Stava) were classified > as as farmland.
Firstly it is not a park, it is a historical site where a civil war battle may have taken place. You have got the name wrong, according to the signs it is called Battle of Shrewsbury Heritage Site.

Why do you believ that it is unusual to walk in areas of farmland in England and Wales? most of our rights of way network is over farmland.

> b) None of the imagery I used (Bing, Esri,
> Maxar) showed any crop. c) On the other
> hand there's always tractor tracks on the
> fields. That puzzled me.
When you say crops, expecting to see?

I can clearly see that most of the fields are arable and can clearly see that it the fields with tramlines have wheat growing.

> So I found that landuse=meadow was a
> better option. you call it "a mix of arable
> and pasture farmland". Can't that be a
> meadow?
Meadows are very rare and precious, they have a large variety of wild flowers. Most grass farmland has very little biodiversity, it is better described as pasture.

> It's not used to grow any crop and there's
> no bushes growing.
It is very clearly used for growing crops, why would there be bushes? I can clearly see hedges.

> I believe that farmland should be used
> when there's recurrent
> use of the land with crops by means of
> manual labour or machinery.

There is recurrent use of the land to grow crops, see my previous comments

> Besides my opinion, please, tell me if you
> want it back as landuse=farmland.
I will fix it, the area large farmland polygons need to be broken down into individual fields. The site does not include the railway and I will check the correct tagging.

Also way/883130093 is clearly a hedge, not a tree row.

Cheers Phil

Hi, what source are you using for these edits.
The area certainly was not a meadow last time I was there, it is largely a mix of arable and pasture farmland.

Cheers Phil

Why did you change way/331151842 into a water hazard?

Why did you delete parts of Harlech Castle?

Please make your changeset comments meaningful so that they describe what you are trying to fo.

Hi, welcome to OSM, this edit has gone very seriously wrong.

Why have you changed the A493 to a service road, because it was certainly an A road last time I was there.

You have also changed the Cambrian line to a service road which is clearly fiction.

Please remember that OSM is not a toy, this data is used by many users and you are likely to have seriously broken thi
These changes should be reverted urgently.

Why did you make these changes?

Hi, welcome to OSM, this edit has gone very seriously wrong.

Why have you changed the A493 to a service road, because it was certainly an A road last time I was there.

You have also changed the Cambrian line to a stream which is clearly fiction.

Please remember that OSM is not a toy, this data is used by many users and you are likely to have seriously broken thi
These changes should be reverted urgently.

Why did you make these changes?

Hi, just wondering why you created a no right turn on The Magic Roundabout. I can see no signs on mapillary. Did you survey this?

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has gone very wrong.

You have incorrectly changed what are mini-roundabouts into roundabouts

This does seem a very bizarre edit, as it is your only UK or European edit, Just wondering what made you think that the existing mapping was incorrect?

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong.

The already mapped roads to reach this way are private, yet for some reason you have not mapped this as private as one would expect it to be?

Cheers Phil

Hi, I think you have the classification here a little wrong. You have added a service road that is fed only from service=driveway (from a real survey). It should be obvious that any continuation should also be a driveway.

Cheers Phil

Hi, welcome to OSM and thank you for your edit.

From your note you may want to add a width tag, however motor_vehicle=destination is sufficient for access tagging. Access=destination should be removed as it covers all forms of transport and I am sure pedestrians and cyclists are not restricted.

Cheers Phil

You have also broken routing for bicycles with this change.