piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
DD1GJ (2020-12-21 12:56:59+00:00): Bayern (80 cm) ist das amtliche Luftbild der Landesvermessung, für das wir eine OSM-Nutzungserlaubnis haben. Es ist in den JOSM-Hintergründen ganz unten zu finden und sollte als Referenz genommen werden. Auf das GPS eines Smartphones würde ich mich nicht ausschließlich verlassen.
ziwendel (2020-12-21 17:59:11+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis. Habe zusätzlich den BayernAtlas Luftbild als Referenz genommen und habe nun den Bildversatz korrigiert. Jetzt sollte es passen. 
Habe wieder etwas dazugelernt!
FvGordon (2020-12-21 21:50:09+00:00): Danke, jetzt sieht es mit den Positionen der Gebäude gut aus. Einige kleinere Korrekturen habe ich noch gemacht: Turning_circle -> turning_loop, wenn die Mittelinsel nicht überfahrbar ist (wenn da z.B. ein Baum steht), Wege auf dem Parkplatz Aurachhöhe.
4004 (2021-01-04 01:26:59+00:00): в многоквартирных домах стоит еще отмечать номера подьездов, они рисуются с больших масштабов
VitoScaletta (2021-01-04 14:00:30+00:00): Я так понял, это ref флаг? Вопрос, как отмечать частников где 2 хозяина?)) Делаю пока всё также как в подъездах и типа просто квартиры 1 и 2.
4004 (2021-01-04 19:07:38+00:00): да, ref.
два хозяина, один вход и разные помещения - можно притянуть и сделать как в подьездах 1;2.
частные дома, где вы вешали входы на углы дома - там реально двери в углах?
VitoScaletta (2021-01-04 22:31:35+00:00): Нет, это как пример, ну или факт того что там 2 хозяина. На тех вариантах карт не было вообще понятно что там 2 хозяина. Проставлять входы и вырисовывать здания - то ещё занятие, особенно как люди любят всякое перестраивать...
4004 (2021-01-05 13:38:00+00:00): но входы реально на углах здания? меня это смутило.
количество хозяев может быть хоть 20, если вход один, то соответсвенно точка входа будет одна, а на ней уже можно отметить если в доме раздельные квартиры
VitoScaletta (2021-01-05 14:05:36+00:00): Чаще всего на углах. Входа одного нет ни в одном здании (там где они есть - я помечал соответственно). Просто в самом OSM здание частников идёт квадратное а по факту оно очень угловатое и чтоб нормально отметить выход - надо вырисовывать кучу всего. Не вижу смысла тратить время на перерисовку зданий, поэтому ставлю просто по углам.
4004 (2021-01-05 15:20:17+00:00): понятно, логично. рисовать детально частные дома по спутнику разрешением 3 метра нет смысла
Cascafico (2020-12-15 08:38:16+00:00): In questo modo sono mappate due scuole: ho spostato i tag dal nodo al poligono
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/95834806
tastrax (2020-12-20 23:40:38+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added according to the following format +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
Negreheb (2020-12-15 11:04:42+00:00): Hier hast du ebenfalls wieder das Gebäude https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/136921731 und den Punkt https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5583225913 um dann selbst etwas darauf zu zeichnen? Nicht nur einmal, sondern mehrfach. Was ist dafür die Begründung - nur weil es die Version 1 ist und deswegen die History ignoriert werden kann?
user_7581226 (2020-12-20 09:21:18+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, 
ich orientiere meine Mitwirkung an OpenStreetMap nach den OSM Wiki Empfehlungen.
Negreheb (2020-12-20 09:23:50+00:00): Wo ist die Empfehlung, dass man Gebäude löschen und neu einzeichnen soll?
user_7581226 (2020-12-20 10:14:07+00:00): As well as I can do
datendelphin (2020-12-22 16:42:57+00:00): Hallo Stans. 

Für die Ludothek gibt es den Wert toy_library: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dtoy_library 

Grüsse 
Michael
Stans (2020-12-22 17:39:34+00:00): Hoi Michael
Vielen Dank für den Hinweis. Das osm-wiki gab mir keine Antwort auf Ludothek. :)
Frohe Festtage.
Hubert
Cascafico (2021-08-02 09:13:34+00:00): Hello Seichter,
cannot see where way 884925376 flows in Imja Khola river. Maybe stream doesn't exist?
seichter (2021-08-02 12:30:41+00:00): Stream can be better seen in actual Bing image. Maybe it was even more obvious in earlier imagery.

But it is of course to some extent a "matter of taste" whether to map such small intermittent waterways - although they may be a great obstacle during monsoon.
noliver (2020-12-31 23:25:13+00:00): Hey, thanks for the good work adding the relations for the Towns.  Just a note--when there's a Village/City entirely contained within the town, like the village of Nelson here, the Village needs to be role "inner" in the Town relation.  That makes it like the inside of a donut, so that the Village is not considered part of the Town.  It's an easy thing to overlook, but there's a subtle difference.

Thanks for your work getting the relations entered!
OrDal (2020-12-16 17:27:07+00:00): Hi,

"Bed Falouh" is the official name (by PA), not "Beit Falouh" (it's "بد فلوح" in arabic and "בד פלוח" in hebrew).
Also, it's officialy part of Jannatah so it will be better to find other tag than place=village (maybe place=neighborhood)
NFZANMNIM (2020-12-16 18:49:39+00:00): Agreed with the name. Also with the "tag" criticism. I think "suburb/borough" would be applicable, as it's a "borough" of Jannatah" village.

I have a general question,  what is the best way to map, situations such as this? Having the same issue with the villages East of Efrat settlement too. Situations where there's several villages and builtup areas, but there's one main village, and the rest are subordinate. We can't really draw official boundaries, in a normal way (PA defined, which I think more-or-less match Mandate era boundaries), as they just cross Area B.C lines. 

see page 5 of this document
http://vprofile.arij.org/bethlehem/ar/pdfs/VP/wadi%20Rahhal_vp_ar.pdf
OrDal (2020-12-16 19:11:36+00:00): place=borough sounds good.

There's actually a map of local municipal boundaries in http://geomolg.ps, but they "divided" the territory of the Israeli settlements among the arab settlements. I plan to import this map to OSM but limited to A + B areas (and of course with admin_level=8/9 tags). This will not be the most accurate but will give a partial answer to the problem you have mentioned.
I'm also importing the boudaries of Israeli Local Authorities, this days.
NFZANMNIM (2020-12-16 19:31:00+00:00): That is going to end up looking pretty messy lol.

especially the area i mentioned, Wadi Rahhal. Most of the main village is in Area C, but on the Palestinian side of the "military road" (future path of extension of separation wall apparently?).
OrDal (2020-12-16 19:46:30+00:00): True, messy like the rest of this area...
This wont be perfect. but will make sense in most of the cases.
About the "military road" it was planned as part of the seperation wall, used today as security road of Efrat (it's prevents entry without security check). The rest of the seperation wall will be never build probably as both Israeli and Arab residents of Gush Etzion / West Bethlehem oppose construction.
NFZANMNIM (2020-12-16 19:55:34+00:00): now, there's gonna be another question that needs answering, if we are to map village boundaries. That's the matter of "Palestinian governorates". If we are to map village, town, city boundaries as per PA maps, then don't we need to show the governorates (in Areas A and B too at least) too? AND, if we do, where in the "admin_level" hierarchy would they make the most sense? 

something to, maybe discuss in the near future.
OrDal (2020-12-16 20:17:46+00:00): The admin level for the Palestinian Governorates suppose to be 5.
I dont think we must show the governorates, mainly because it will make the map look too messy. but, maybe i'll fix the governorates boundaries to match both Israeli and Palestinian maps, and then make it visible.
As we have discussed before, I'm not sure that the boundaries mapping in this area is good idea due to the political uncertainty.
Yet, I think that adding layer admin_level=8/9 is in higher priority, as the admin_level=5 depends on it.
NFZANMNIM (2020-12-16 20:41:38+00:00): I'm happy with that, admin level 5 makes most sense. Palestinian governorates are (in terms of size and population, and importance of capital city), on the same level as 48-Israel's subdistricts (נפות)

And, my personal belief has for a while been, that Areas A, B, C, should be a level lower, ie Admin 6.
OrDal (2020-12-16 20:54:14+00:00): Yep, I recently discussed with other users in Israel and the territories, about the level of ABC.
I supported level 6 for ABC (while relations of Judea and Samaria and West Bank are level 4, and fixed to only areas A+B [WB] / area C [J&S])
But it was decided that ABC would be level 4 (while admin_level tag would be removed from J&S and WB relations). This decision has not yet been fully implemented actually.
NFZANMNIM (2020-12-16 21:12:12+00:00): that is a strange decision, might i say....

Both WB, and J&S are useful as admin tags. They are both used, when it comes to searching place name and addresses. One applying to Israeli Settlements, and the other to Palestinian localities.

No one really gives their address in terms of areas ABC

I like your original proposal much more.
!bm (2020-12-15 14:39:06+00:00): Hallo Laubisba,

wenn das Gebäude bzw die Einrichtung keinen Namen trägt, ist es richtig diesen (wie hier geschehen) zu entfernen – insbesondere, wenn es sich um einen rein beschreibenden Namen handelt. Um Wiedereinträge/Verwirrung zu vermeiden, lässt sich auch noch noname=yes hinzufügen. Deine Frage (bzw der im Cs-Comment sichtbare Teil) lässt sich also klar mit "nein" beantworten – siehe https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Good_practice#Verwende_das_Name-Tag_nicht.2C_um_Dinge_zu_beschreiben

Der zweite Teil, eingeleitet mit "Wenn z.B. mein Sportv" wurde ebenda abgeschnitten. Falls noch Klärungsbedarf besteht, gerne nachfragen.

--besteGrüße!bm
Laubisba (2020-12-15 14:46:16+00:00): Danke schön für die Klärung und den Link, !bm.
tastrax (2020-12-16 09:03:12+00:00): Hi folks FYI - Phone numbers in Australia should be added according to the following format +61 x xxxx xxxx, (+61 xxx xxx xxx for mobiles) or use the phone:AU key if a 1300 or 1800 number as per the wiki guidelines https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines - I have just updated a recent addition that you made to OSM – Cheers
ScottWalkerAU (2020-12-15 02:12:17+00:00): Shouldn't multiple sources be delimited with semi-colons instead of plus signs? re: changeset source
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/95836677
Warin61 (2020-12-15 06:55:04+00:00): It is free form text. So no real rules, you can use whatever you like. As long ass the meaning is clear.
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-20 23:09:43+00:00): Hi Speiros,

A few things here:

- It seems these are buildings (albeit rather misshapen) rather than the wider landuse area around them
- They are missing a primary tag that describes what these features are
- The description tag is not intended for user reviews and subjective evaluation about the POI itself. See https://osm.wiki/Key:description#No_advertising
- The name=* of the place should be the name only, not a description of it, which belongs in description=*. See https://osm.wiki/Names#Names_with_generic_terms

I did my best to fix things up as best I was able in changeset 186085387. Feel free to follow up with additional tagging as appropriate.

https://osm.org/changeset/186085387

Thanks, and happy mapping!
catgirlseraid (2026-07-22 23:52:16+00:00): Hidden some rude comments, CAM-Gerlach keep up the good mapping work!
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-23 17:01:34+00:00): Thanks! I've had to politely ignore a fair few nasty messages like these ones in my current cleanup work, but they are more than made up for by the kind words and understanding of mappers like those in changeset 186119408 and changeset 185051169 in just the past couple days 😊

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/186119408

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/185051169
CAM-Gerlach_Repair (2026-07-20 23:10:02+00:00): Hi Speiros,

A few things here:

- It seems these are buildings (albeit rather misshapen) rather than the wider landuse area around them
- They are missing a primary tag that describes what these features are
- The description tag is not intended for user reviews and subjective evaluation about the POI itself. See https://osm.wiki/Key:description#No_advertising

I did my best to fix things up as best I was able in changeset 186085387. Feel free to follow up with additional tagging as appropriate.

https://osm.org/changeset/186085387

Thanks, and happy mapping!
Carnildo (2020-12-14 23:18:52+00:00): Is the address really disused?
Kristjan ESPERANTO (2020-12-15 00:23:57+00:00): Okay, you are right. That was too much. I removed the "disused" from the address tags. Thanks :-)
mosstreet (2020-12-15 17:03:17+00:00): Вы закрыли проезд с Подлипаева на Сусанина, это действительно так? Или вы перепутали прямо от право?
mosstreet (2020-12-15 17:05:43+00:00): вдобавок там лишний светофор
mosstreet (2020-12-15 17:12:02+00:00): да кого я спрашиваю, это же проходимцы с другого континента
Pakuhi_Ahi (2020-12-15 23:01:12+00:00): Здравствуйте mosstreet, спасибо за сообщение. Я исправил участников ограничения no_right_turn на пересечении улиц Подлипаева и Советская (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95894123) на основе знаков на снимках с уровня земли (https://www.mapillary.com/map/im/GFYtfFMwTQezV8m5Nt9qd6).
mosstreet (2020-12-16 09:00:39+00:00): Ок, вы сделали этот момент, на который я указал, но почему не убрали светофор?
Pakuhi_Ahi (2020-12-17 01:00:31+00:00): Здравствуйте mosstreet. Светофор, похоже, остался от редактирования  (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/94789866)  которое сделал New-Yurok (https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/New-Yurok). Этот сигнал светофора не имеет отношения к проблеме, которую я рассматривал, поэтому я не редактировал его. Возможно, вы можете связаться по этому поводу с New-Yurok. Спасибо, что указали на отсутствующий элемент ограничения поворота no_right_turn, который я недавно исправил.
maraf24 (2020-12-29 14:19:09+00:00): Constrado pozmieniał mnóstwo dróg, w tym te tutaj:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/96564853
Forum:  https://forum.openstreetmap.org/viewtopic.php?pid=813181#p813181
alesarrett (2020-12-29 07:08:53+00:00): Ciao, vedo che hai fatto un lavoro dettagliatissimo di suddivisione del landuse. Per curiosità, ti chiedo come mai ci sono così tante aree a landuse=residential contigue. Credo che sarebbe più corretto (e semplificherebbe e alleggerirebbe la mappa) averne una unica, laddove aree con uno stesso landuse sono contigue. Oppure ti sei basato su informazioni catastali o simili?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/95837446
tolioalessandro (2020-12-29 08:38:36+00:00): Buongiorno,
ho provato a seguire i dati catastali ma alcune proprietà risultavano eccessivamente frazionate. Per cui ho preferito seguire le immagini aeree nelle aree del mio quartiere, dove so come sono divise le proprietà. Invece nelle aree più lontane ho lasciato le aree che erano state importate in OSM da altri prima di me, semplicemente modificandone la destinazione d'uso.
limes11 (2020-12-15 18:35:41+00:00): Hi,

sicher landuse=village_green? Passt das zu 

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:landuse=village%20green?uselang=de

?

Gruss, Limes
aleph_null (2020-12-15 19:56:01+00:00): Hi Limes, danke für den Hinweis! Eine Sitzwiese ist das sicherlich nicht... Die beiden Flächen mit den vielen Sitzmöglichkeiten waren vorher als jeweils eine große village_green Fläche getagget und ich habe das dann einfach ohne weiteres Nachprüfen von dem Tag für die einzelnen Teile übernommen.

Was würdest du denn als Tag vorschlagen? Das sind sehr niedrige Büsche (falls du noch nicht selbst auf dem Campus warst, hier kann man die ganz gut sehen: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YwtAcD1e3QI).

barrier=hedge?
und/oder
landuse=grass?
limes11 (2020-12-15 20:07:17+00:00): Ah, ich wusste nicht, dass das vorher schon so erfasst war. Der village_green tag wird leider vielerorts falsch benutzt. 

Ich wuerde das als barrier=hedge erfassen, da es den hier beschriebenen Zierhecken aehnelt:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/DE:Tag:barrier%3Dhedge

Das kann man auch mit area=yes benutzen. (Also ich haette das einfach eindimensional als Linie eingetragen, aber so liebevoll, wie hier alles erfasst ist, ist die Flaechenerfassung natuerlich auch moeglich.)
aleph_null (2020-12-15 20:32:31+00:00): Mach ich so, und danke nochmal!
Leo Slager (2020-12-16 23:32:07+00:00): Dorpsstraat 30,
self-intersecting way gerepareerd.
smootheFiets (2020-12-17 00:05:05+00:00): Bedankt! Ik zag het net, maar je was me voor :)
Leo Slager (2020-12-17 10:52:31+00:00): Ik zie dat de laatste tijd vaker en bij meerdere baggeraars. Heb je enig idee van de oorzaak ?
smootheFiets (2020-12-17 13:32:59+00:00): Volgens mij kan dit gebeuren als er een nieuw gebouw geïmporteerd wordt / een bestaand pand van vorm verandert, en dat pand aan een ander pand aansluit. Dan moeten wij de gedeelde node's handmatig "ontdubbelen": 'merge', sneltoets M. Gewoon gesproken geen probleem, maar als een pand twee of meer node's dicht bij elkaar heeft en ik heb niet ver genoeg ingezoomd, dan kan het misgaan en de verkeerde node's worden met elkaar gemerged. Ik vermoed dat dit hier gebeurd is. Zou best kunnen dat andere bageraars dat ook eens overkomt.

Wel raar dat JOSM validator dat niet oppakt. Misschien een feature request waard...
aharvey (2020-12-22 04:22:49+00:00): hi, not sure if it was mentioned in a private message or not but, ways are placed based on the physical seperation not where lane markings go. Turn lanes can be mapped via turn lane tags. This change was reverting in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95940898 based on that justification.
GoodClover (2021-01-03 13:52:55+00:00): Please can you try to make your changes in smaller areas in the future? (upload more frequently)
As you have created a large changeset for appears to be houses in different areas.
WoodWoseWulf (2020-12-15 00:31:28+00:00): Hi Dtang,

I'm not sure if you saw my comment on your previous changeset where you added two similar but different shaped parks over these houses, you can find it here:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95783836

Please note that houses and private residential yards are not considered parks on Open Street Map and will be removed.

Please feel free to reach out if you have any questions.
user_5359 (2020-12-15 05:23:22+00:00): Hello! You added a bigger number of unknown tags in this change set. 
OBJECTID=1
OSMID=190739524
SHAPE_Leng=0.0691917866144
osmSupport=no
osmchanges=88785291
osmtimesta=2020-07-31
osmuid=1840640
osmuser=jpgon
osmversion=8
osmvisible=true
Please explain the source of this information and the meaning of the keys.
Marcelo Edy Peinado (2020-12-15 11:10:58+00:00): Esri Imagery and survey in field
Marcelo Edy Peinado (2020-12-15 11:23:18+00:00): I mistake these tags. Where can I remove them?
user_5359 (2020-12-15 11:37:34+00:00): I can dellte them for you.
user_5359 (2020-12-15 20:11:45+00:00): I did the deletion, but now 284 ways only have the comment fixme="empty ways after delete non standard keys (see https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/95839223)"
Marcelo Edy Peinado (2020-12-17 12:16:11+00:00): I'm using "track" for the highway tags! It's correct?
Marcelo Edy Peinado (2020-12-17 12:17:27+00:00): To adjust features I'm using the command "Add nodes at intersections". It's correct?
user_5359 (2020-12-17 20:16:17+00:00): Question about the highway value track: Unfortunately, I cannot say definitively (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtrack) Another key tracktype belongs to this tag and describes the state (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:tracktype, see especially the pictures).

Question about JOSM operation: This only cleans up one error. Sometimes two points lie directly on top of each other. Visually, the paths look connected, but from the routing point of view, these are not connected paths. I recommend to activate all error messages of JOSM.

Regards.  Georg V.
Marcelo Edy Peinado (2020-12-17 21:18:29+00:00): Thanks Georg!

Another thing that I needed to change was the tag "track" to "unclassified" because the most useful of these features will be in purposes to routing (OSRM) and navigation (OSMAND).

Best regards,

Marcelo
ScottWalkerAU (2020-12-15 02:17:23+00:00): Bridge looks good - should the middle also be marked as a bridge or at least layer 1? (same for the ends)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/95839399
Soopl (2020-12-20 16:36:42+00:00): 45.81933, 3.48028  
Pour le nom du hameau, il n'y a pas d'accent sur le a.
Barrat  tout simplement.
Olyon (2020-12-20 17:36:54+00:00): Il y a un accent dans la base adresse nationale https://adresse.data.gouv.fr/base-adresse-nationale/63276_h9qoi4 et comme dans osm on trouve souvent des oublis d'accent alors que dans la base adresse nationale il y a beaucoup d'oublis d'accent mais je ne pense pas qu'il y a beaucoup d'accent en trop, j'ai cru bien faire.
Désolé
bxl-forever (2021-04-11 11:55:35+00:00): Hello,
Why did you create so many orphan footway crossings?  All those dead-end ways trigger validation issues.  I have already spent many hours trying to fix this and connect them to existing footways but it’s a huge time-waster.  Any reason for that?
km2bp (2021-04-11 12:27:53+00:00): There is so much to do that one person cannot do it.  I didn't have time to draw everything.  I was just drawing along my own GPS trace
olehz (2021-06-15 18:19:18+00:00): офигенное выравнивание. взять сместить с треков. заебали вы ребятки со своим выравниванием
Dimacn (2020-12-15 07:11:40+00:00): Уточню: класс дорог unclassified и residential абсолютно одинаков в населённом пункте.
gscholz (2021-01-23 08:53:09+00:00): Hi Orózco,
your recents changesets have added several errors to the OSM database regarding wrongly named relation roles (inner/outer):

http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-74.81644&lat=10.89929&zoom=14

Please read the documentation to understand what this is about:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Relation:multipolygon

Can you please fix your errors?
Kind regards
Guido
gscholz (2021-03-07 14:08:56+00:00): Hi Orózco, 
these errors still exits, can you please start to fix this?
Guido
Orozcu (2021-03-08 13:33:46+00:00): Si, ya estoy empezando a solucionarlo.
ndm (2020-12-16 17:48:38+00:00): I've reverted this - you need to adjust Bing imagery offset - given large amount of buildings already drawn.
ssnjan (2020-12-17 12:03:31+00:00): Hi Ndm, 
As per your suggestion I have redrawn the service road based on Esri Clarity beta in which the roads and the buildings are aligned. Please find the changeset (96003796) for your reference. Thanks for your feedback. Always happy to learn from the community.
Regards,
ssnjan
erickdeoliveiraleal (2020-12-15 14:23:25+00:00): Hello I will revert this edition. You deleted many roads I traced without ask me. Look to Strava layer or Sentinel imagery to confirm this: https://apps.sentinel-hub.com/sentinel-playground/?source=S2&lat=-4.331528097711674&lng=-40.70289945680997&zoom=16&preset=1-NATURAL-COLOR&layers=B01,B02,B03&maxcc=20&gain=1.0&gamma=1.0&time=2020-06-01%7C2020-12-15&atmFilter=&showDates=false
(inactive) WarpathPeacock (2020-12-15 15:40:27+00:00): Hello erickdeoliveiraleal, I sincerely apologize. This was my mistake and I am at fault for not being more cautious. I appreciate that you reverted this incorrect edit. Thank you for bringing Strava and Sentinel imagery to my attention.
(inactive) WarpathPeacock (2020-12-15 15:53:09+00:00): I wish you a happy holiday season. Again thank you for reverting the edit.
ndm (2020-12-16 17:52:59+00:00): Redrawn to map roundabout correctly.
daitv (2020-12-17 12:57:33+00:00): Hi Ndm, 
Thanks for looking into my edits. I have added the service road and gate based on bing aerial imagery. Thanks for improving my edits. 
Regards.
daitv