hi madiener, Charles River Reservoir relation is now broken. can you look into correcting? thx.

Hi madiener, looks like some of the points you removed were being used in the Red Wind Bay relation. It's now broken. Can you look into correcting? thx.

Good job! have fun and keep mapping :-)

Zee, this is a production system, please revert your test
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120754816

Zee, this is a production system, please revert your test
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120754718

hi madiener, this change also broke relation/14114335. Did you mean to delete this relation too? Also not sure why all the extra fields are included (like massgis:ARTICLE97). Can you investigate and correct?

kirbert, can you look at jeff davis relation, relation/1073784? it has a duplicate section, way/1058055373 and also Altamaha River way/137851366.

Yes, looks good. Thanks for correcting.

Ram,
can you look at the Bixton Rush Common ward relation (relation/14103909)? It's broken (not a complete ring). Looks like way/1040559077 should be used instead of Brixton Hill (way/4060864).

hi Ellie, check relation/135134,
way/668509175 looks to have been left in the relation, but should be removed. josm's validator found this, maybe it should be included in the due diligence?

hi IK, can you review your change?
Barrio Viejo relation/7058543, and relation/11859917 are now broken.

and since your are cleaning up things on things, check out these overlaps:
way/872829749
way/872829746
way/872829747

way/872829751
way/872829752
way/872829753

hi akuksouski, can you look at the lincoln square relation? looks like an extra section of west 60th is included.

mark, can you check your edit? looks like you deleted a section of birdseye road, and also a census boundary.

jacob, several of these buildings are duplicates. seems like the info should be combined and trimed.

Can you look at the relation again, seems to still have extra members

hi skyb,
can you check village of harrison relatioin, the boundary is broken.
way/292129232 may be the extra section ?

Mr. M, the new farmland relation/13916979 is not closed (but is attached to the Banbury boundary). It may need some adjusting that could use your on the ground knowledge.

corrected.

Ram,
way/232228511
way/1023342244

both seem to both be in Herne Hill relation causing the boundary to not be closed.
I think you can remove the way/232228511 (fence) .

Hi Sam, welcome to OSM. I've replaced the incorrect info you added, and added some real/actual buildings to the area. If you have any q's, just ask. Continue mapping the area.