Hi, welcome to OSM.

Please could you explain what you mean by WCBC Original Map. do you have permission to copy from it?

Also the tags you have used are rather confusing, is it access=permissive or foot=yes. Assuming that this is a PROW then access=permissive would be very wrong.

Cheers Phil

Hi, rather than using the description tag for welsh and inscription for English, it would be better to use inscription:en and inscription:cy.

For an example node/6501076666

Cheers Phil

Hi Paarvan
Welcome to OSM, thank you for your edit however the way you have mapped this is incorrect. We only add a separate way if there is a physical separation. Mapping lanes in this way is confusing to map users and in this case for example somebody joining from way/31834029 cannot enter the turn lane, which obviously they can. The correct way to map situations such as this is to use turn:lanes.

If you need any help fixing this please ask.

Cheers Phil

Thank you

Firstly by adding access=private you are making all map users go around the long way, this includes most importantly pedestrians. Remember to consider other uses as OSM is not just a map for motor vehicles, it was founded by walkers and cyclists.
The most likely access tag here is simply motor_vehicle=destination, other users should not be restricted.
Cheers Phil

Hi
Why would you consider paths with in cemetery to be private? Kind of defeats the object.

Cheers Phil

Most houses don't have names, but if they do it will be on a sign. Otherwise the name/housename field should be left unpopularited.
Normally just the addr:housenumber field is populated with just the number.

Cheers Phil

The names you are adding appear very odd, what sources are you using?

Cheers Phil

Hi Josh
The area looks residential and the building you have drawn matches none of the actual buildings.
Some of your tags appear odd, such as minage=2 and closing at 3am.
Do you have any actual evidence that there really is a bar here?

> How does OSM map adult shops? They
> are often banned from having any window
> decoration/don't have any fascia.
> Are they excluded from OSM?
They are not excluded from OSM because they are easily verifiable. They have signs with a name and the words 'Licensed Adult Shop' displayed on them.
For example https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/dwGq1QN-x5dnx88BA_yCog

Most big towns have one.

> I think it's a beauty shop, by appointment
> only. It probably doesn't have any fascia,
> and I don't think that should exclude it
> from OSM.
My experience of checking such things tells me that it will be just a house that looks like any other house in that street. Other residents would be very cross if it wasn't.

The cornerstone of OSM is objects are verifiable, the gold standard is I went out and saw it with my own eyes. A passing mapper should not need an app/internet/phone to verify an object is what it is mapped as.

Mappers going out exploring is what sets us apart from other maps.

Cheers Phil

It has been suggested that it would be better tagged as craft=beautician.

> This doesn't seem to be domestic,
> everything points to it being commercial.
Aerial imagery and local knowledge indicate it is a residential area. Planning practice does not include business premises in such places, we don't build 'Corner Shops' anymore. People who buy houses in cul-de-sacs do so because they want somewhere quiet, callers to business premises will break that idea and will not be popular.

> We have no information it say it isn't
> signed, and there is a fix me for mappers.
Fix me are not helpful unless the mapper opens the object they never see them, Notes are far more obvious.

We have no information to say that it is anything other than where the business owner lives. The website list the places she travels to.

The note includes "This note includes comments from anonymous users which should be independently verified."

It was only added 5 days ago and you did not give local mappers a chance, especially in the current lockdown.

> I disagree, that not only extend the divide
> in map quality between areas that a few
> heavily active mappers live, and the rest
> of the world.
Leicester has a number of active mappers, myself included.

This is on my list to check at some point in the future, I will buy you a beer at an event if there is a verifiable business there.

> It also create an incredibly poor
> experience for people who think they
> should be listed on osm, so they go to
> onosm.org (an incredibly official looking
> website). Fill out there details, get a
> "Thank you" message, then are never
> added to the map. These note are often in
> OSM for years, often multiple notes in the
> same area as the business owner has
> tried multiple times. That is a bad
> experience, and it is embarrassing.
Onosm.org should point out that OSM is a volunteer led organisation and actioning of notes takes time and effort to go and survey them. Cul-de-sacs doubly so as they are not places one casually drives through.

Cheers Phil

Then they should navigate to the address as they would for any other domestic dwelling.

We should in these cases map what is verifiable and that is likely to be only the housenumbers.

If I am a map user who is looking for the footpath at the end of the road and they expect to pass Cosmetology Hub then they will be disappointed.

Notes like this should not be acted upon until they have been verified.

Cheers Phil

The key to adding things to OSM is that they are verifiable. I seriously doubt that there is a sign that someone passing would see.

Also the area covered indicates that this is a visiting service, if it was a shop why would they care? What have people from Mountsorrel, Groby or Glenfield done not to be welcome.

I see this as a work from home business, which we have never mapped in OSM. Google maps is full of such unverifiable POIs, we should not be copying that, OSM is a map not a business directory.

Cheers Phil

We are aware of the rules followed by highway engineers however OSM is an international project and in the UK we map roads according to osm.wiki/Roads_in_the_United_Kingdom

Hence all A roads with green signs are trunk, other A roads primary and (most) B roads are secondary.

This scheme has worked very well for the 13 or so year OSM has been going.

Please review your changes as they have broken OSM data.

Cheers Phil

Hi, this is a residential area. It seems unlikely that there is a verifiable business here.
If I was a neighbour I would be very cross indeed if my quiet close was full of customers cars.
These businesses tend to be phone/internet and do not belong in OSM.

Cheers Phil

Thank you

Hi Jonathon
The customer comment makes far more sense. "Its completely closed from Thurcaston road side. This corner should be closed" in no way suggests this road is oneway, it suggests that the connection to Thurcaston Road does not exist, for motor vehicles at least, which matches available imagery.

I have removed the oneway and changed the connect to Thurcaston Road to footway as the pavement is clearly not obstructed which is backed up by strava heatmap usage.

HTH Phil

Hi Jonathon, welcome to OSM. This edit just doesn't ring true at all.

It would be kind of odd for this road to be oneway for its entire length because..

1. Imagery shows it as two lane, and typical industrial area construction.

2. It would force traffic onto Thurcaston Lane, which has not been a primary traffic route for decades and would route heavy vehicles down Mowmacre Hill and through a residential area which would be stupid in the extreme. Such planning permission would be unlikely.

Do you have any photographic evidence? Have you been here and surveyed it.

You say 'customer has advised'. This suggests that you user page should say who you are working for.

Please see https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/6/62/Organised_Editing_Guidelines.pdf

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has some errors.

This is clearly a supermarket car park yet you have added what should be tagged as service=parking_aisle as service=driveway. This is very clearly an error that should be obvious from aerial imagery.

Also please improve the map in these cases and add the car park as that is what a map user is likely to want to find.

Cheers Phil

Interesting, to my knowledge the only access to Pool House is from Newtown Linford Lane where there are some quite impressive security gates and intercom.

This gate has to my knowledge not been opened in a very long time and I find it difficult to believe that they would have gone to that expense of extra gates to enter/exit to what would be a dangerous place on the A50.

Do you have GPS traces of this section being used?

Unfortunately I do not have any usable imagery of the gate that I can use to illustrate it.

Cheers Phil