piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
Yog Sot (2024-08-15 21:12:42+00:00): ściezka faktycznei nie jest ograniczona zakazami, a czemu zakaz bicyclów? 
nie raz były prośby aby trzymać się rzeczywistości, a nie własnych preferencji.
Aim311_ (2024-08-19 14:29:04+00:00): Nie wiem, o czym piszesz. Podaj link.

Tekst "ta ścieka nie jest ograniczona zakazami w terenie."
dotyczy poprzedniej sytuacji gdzie zostało dodane access=private nie manipuluj.
Aim311_ (2024-08-19 14:49:53+00:00): Jak widać usunąłem w tym miejscu błędy access https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/881749669/history blokujący całkowicie przejscie.
John-O (2024-08-18 11:11:57+00:00): I'm finally getting round to fixing up some more bus route validation errors.

If you are removing the public_transport:stop_position from nodes, then these nodes also need to be removed from the public_transport route relations. They are often included with role:stop.

I don't necessarily agree that the stop_position nodes are unnecessary. and they are part of the PTv2 tagging schema. However I do see the point that in most cases they are next to the platform.
marc__marc (2024-10-07 11:45:24+00:00): Bonjour,
Je te conseille de garder disused:shop=* car cela permet à des outils de détecter les locaux vides et proposer de vérifier ce qui s'y trouve après x temps
Kurosawa06 (2024-10-12 16:02:00+00:00): Bonjour,
Merci pour l'infos.
Après, au 96, il semble y avoir un autre commerce : "Chez Kim".
nevw (2024-06-21 05:41:40+00:00): Hi
I added highway=path + surface=concrete tags to the path so that it will render on the map
nevw (2024-06-21 06:00:10+00:00): The surface may be compacted gravel instead...
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:surface
Can you you fix if necessary thanks.
Also Vic has complex rules meaning pedestrian and cyclists may not both be able to use. I tagged as a path meaning that both can use.
kitsee (2024-06-23 21:17:00+00:00): Hi there and welcome to OSM. Just dropping in to make a small comment, Its best practice to limit your changesets to a local area when possible so in this case you would have one changeset for Thurso and another for Portsmouth. There is nothing wrong with what you've done but this just makes it easer for auditing tools to manage.
happy mapping, 
Kits :)
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152970716
osmuser63783 (2024-10-20 10:27:13+00:00): Hi, thanks for your edits. 

I was at Edinburgh Park yesterday and noticed for the Gordon's Way bus stop there wasn't anything on the ground. There also is no bus route going through it. So I assume it's been removed? I've updated the highway=bus_stop to removed:highway=bus_stop. But please let me know if you know any more about this!

https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5777679044
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/5777679045

I also noticed for Lochside Avenue you used both highway=bus_stop and disused:highway=bus_stop so I've corrected that to use only disused:highway  :-)
kimo (2025-03-30 20:48:45+00:00): Why did you rename the bike path to Airport Road? It is no longer a road and cars and not allowed to drive on it.
Supt_of_Printing (2025-03-30 23:05:52+00:00): I believe it still has that name even though cars cannot still drive on it. This is not unusual. Do you know it the name has been revoked?
NeisBot (2024-06-21 01:20:24+00:00): Hi Receptum, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 94% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 1 highway(s)

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=152971681
citrula (2024-06-21 03:44:03+00:00): Why did you remove the boundary?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152971681
tastrax (2024-06-21 06:40:29+00:00): Hi there and welcome to OSM. Its best practice to edit an existing rather than deleting something and redrawing a path. This maintains the history of edits over time. In this case your edit is also less detailed in some areas than the old path.  I will do an edit to better reflect some of the old path. A good guide for new editors is also the Australian Guidelines at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines

Cheers
BambooNinja (2024-06-21 07:25:37+00:00): Hello Tastrax
Thanks for the tips as I am brand new to this. What I had deleted was very misleading as it was showing and labelled as a continuation of the road, not the narrow weaving foot track that actually exists there.
Will take on board your info.
Cheers
kimo (2024-12-21 03:54:03+00:00): Why was this track changed to a service lane and named boundary road?
Supt_of_Printing (2024-12-22 03:31:58+00:00): Boundary Road was its name before the new alignment of Boundary Road was done and it is more than simply a track but more like a laneway, so I might tag it as an alley.
kimo (2024-12-22 21:35:07+00:00): Having ridden along the track I can say that it does not feel like an alley, laneway, or a service road - it is not providing access to properties. The design of intersections discourages cars from using it. Have you visited this path in person?
NeisBot (2024-06-21 02:56:24+00:00): Hi Receptum, welcome to OSM!

Thank you for your contributions to the map. I have reviewed your recent edits and noticed that 95% of the changes in this set involve deletions, including:
- 6 highway(s)
- 14 building(s)
- 1 landuse(')

Could you please confirm if these deletions were intentional or if they occurred by mistake?

Looking forward to your response.

#DeletionsCheck
---
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-change-viz?c=152972800
citrula (2024-06-21 03:48:57+00:00): Can you please explain the mass deletions you are making?
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152972800
kmpoppe (2024-06-25 05:26:04+00:00): Hallo Badebubi,

stammt die Note https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/4306804 von dir?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-05-02 10:27:25+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11998212874/history has fixme:type = school that was added in this edit
Would it be amenity=school ( https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:amenity%3Dschool )
Something else?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-18 14:19:44+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11998206372/history has fixme:type = park that was added in this edit
Have you tried to map a park here? If yes, then maybe leisure=park would fit?

See https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:natural%3Dpark
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-18 14:23:25+00:00): and was it simply a duplicate of https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/265429342 ?
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-04-18 16:00:33+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11998206373/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
SeviyMan (2024-06-21 20:17:23+00:00): дубль адреса сделали......
Ирина Созыкина (2024-06-22 04:51:58+00:00): Сорри, проглядела...
Spaghetti Monster🍝 (2024-11-09 04:23:42+00:00): Please don't add duplicate roads
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152975515
mcliquid (2024-06-24 09:42:22+00:00): Hi and thank you for your contribution!

Please note for the future: changesets should be local.

To avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers, it is recommended to:
• combine changes in a small geographical area (within a city, district or province)
• keep changes within the same country
• upload/save changes before moving on to map in a different area

Why? Have a look at the section
"Geographical size of changesets" on this wiki page:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Thanks for considering, have a nice day and happy mapping!
rajdhani (2024-06-25 13:59:49+00:00): Hi mcliquid ,
thank you very much for spotting that issue. Mistakenly I used one changeset for 2 different geographical features. I will be more cautious while performing the edits going further.
joel56dt (2024-06-21 23:30:09+00:00): Since the businesses each have an address, I think it would be best to leave the address attached to each business node. (in addition to the building)

Some people combine the building and business together as a single area, but I think this makes some tags unclear as to if they apply to the business or building. It would resolve the duplicate/redundant address listing, however.

Thoughts?
Fleezing (2024-06-22 06:21:35+00:00): A business only has a given address as long as it's in a particular building. If the business moves or if another company opens up in the same building, the building would need to get those address tags anyway. The Addresses wiki page also states "there should be only one addr:housenumber=* per street and house number (which would typically be placed on the building)." so this seems to be the preferred approach.

I was originally here to fix one duplicated address but updated the rest for consistency since I spotted them.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-21 06:00:30+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera adresy wymagające dodatkowej uwagi. Przygotowałem listę obiektów oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy. Jeśli adres ma nazwę ulicy, upewnij się, że jest ona poprawna. Jeśli nie, usuń addr:street, a nazwę miejscowości przekaż w addr:place.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/934545693

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
NicaTopo (2024-06-21 17:31:25+00:00): Hi,
Your building shapes are far too big. I'm going to delete them all. Please work more carefully.
Thanks
miluethi (2024-06-30 23:40:01+00:00): Your building shapes are far too big. Each single buildings needs a separate shape. All buildings should be squared out. 
I'm going to revert all your edits.
gurglypipe (2024-06-21 08:43:13+00:00): This road is private, not public. Removing access=no without a survey is not helpful. Please don’t change access permissions without doing a survey.
gurglypipe (2024-06-21 08:45:31+00:00): Fixed in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152982224
soliMM (2024-06-21 09:54:44+00:00): Hi gurglypipe,

Thank you for correcting this. I would like to note that I didn't remove access=no tag but rather motorcar=no. The reasoning for that was judging by satellite imagery and base map (OS OpenMap Local (October 2022)), that specific road didn't seem like private road. Also, there are at least three buildings/properties where vehicles are present and that can be seen on aerial imagery, due to that forbidding access for all motorcars seemed inappropriate to me. Now that you have added access=private, that seems more logical.

Once again thank you for the heads up, I'll be more careful in the future.

Best regards,
soliMM
gurglypipe (2024-06-21 12:18:05+00:00): Hiya, thanks for your helpful reply. Sorry I was abrupt earlier, I was rushing and I shouldn’t have.

You’re right that it was motorcar=no before. I looked into it a bit more closely and this road is a bit odd. It’s on the Wainwright C2C long-distance footpath, so needs some form of public foot access, but it’s not part of the council’s definitive highways network. So on reflection, motorcar=private seems more appropriate than access=private.

I’ve changed it to that in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152990451

Thanks!
NicaTopo (2024-06-21 17:32:25+00:00): Your building shapes are tooo big. Please match the area imagery and square out all buildings. I'm going to delete most of your shapes.
NicaTopo (2024-06-21 17:29:43+00:00): Hi,
Your building shapes are far bigger than shown on the aerial imagery. I'm going to delete them.
The shapes should be squared out as well. 99% of the buildings are square.
SomeoneElse (2024-06-21 07:24:06+00:00): Hello and welcome to openstreetmap!
Did you know that you could make buildings like https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1294651512 rectangular by pressing q in the editor?
RiMaDu (2024-06-21 08:25:29+00:00): Thank you for the feedback. I appreciate it.
NicaTopo (2024-06-23 16:27:49+00:00): Nikhil,
Please don't add any generic names to buildings.
miluethi (2024-07-05 12:39:31+00:00): Hi NemiConti

You are combining several single buildings and empty yard into one building.
This is not correct. Each single buildings need a single shape and whenever possible the shapes should be squared out. I'm going to revert you additions, sorry.

Thanks for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
NicaTopo (2024-06-22 14:57:40+00:00): Hi,
Your building shapes are often far to big compared to the aerial imagery. Please narrow them down to match exactly 1 building (no yards!). I'm going to delete the biggest buildings. 

Thanks for contributing to OSM Nicaragua.
tastrax (2024-06-21 07:05:10+00:00): Hand of God? "Mapping golf features" would have been a better changeset comment :-)
woodpeck (2024-06-21 07:29:09+00:00): Dear user RiMaDu, please try to make your buildings rectangular (there's a hotkey in the ID editor for that, and the people from whom you received your Mapathon training should have explained that to you). Also, please supply a human readable changeset comment; the OSM community doesn't know what CIBPH is and doesn't care that you are "Team Tricia" - we'd prefer to read something like "traced buildings near PLACENAME" or or so! 

You don't have to make an individual upload for every building, it is totally fine to draw 20 of them and upload in one go.
RiMaDu (2024-06-21 08:26:45+00:00): Thank you for the helpful information. I'll definitely apply what I've learned from you today.
NorthCrab_upload (2024-06-21 06:40:13+00:00): 🗺️ Witaj na OpenStreetMap!

Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy. Adres można oznaczyć na dwa sposoby: na obszarze (dokładniejsze) albo na punkcie. Aktualizując adres, należy się upewnić, czy w okolicy nie pozostały żadne duplikaty.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/10287299304
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1294654279

Dokumentacja adresów (po polsku):
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Pl:Key:addr:*

W razie problemów lub pytań, proszę pisać. Chętnie pomogę.
Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Syl (2024-07-01 10:11:19+00:00): Bonjour, quelle est la situation exacte de la fontaine ? Ajouter un nom descriptif ne change pas son statut dans OSM, pour cela on peut utiliser les préfixes de cycle de vie : https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Pr%C3%A9fixe_cycle_de_vie
UT93 (2024-08-11 15:26:04+00:00): Grüsse
Es erscheint mir persönlich sehr schleierhaft, weswegen du in diesem Änderungssatz, den Wanderweg über den Gochtpass, mit "access=no" also für niemanden zugänglich, attributiert hast, zumal es sich doch um einen öffentlich zugänglichen Wanderweg handelt!
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 16:25:10+00:00): Hallo UT93
Das ist sicher nicht bewusst geschehen. Ich habe die Relation auf der Südseite auch auf die Nordseite genommen. Deshalb, damit er durchgängig ein blauer weg ist. so wie es war war er nur auf der Südseite blau und hat vom Grat weg keine Markierung mahr gehabt. Damit klar ist wieso er auch auf der Nordseite blau ist habe ich die visibility auf sehr schlecht gewechselt. Ich würde sagen ich habe den Access gar nicht geändert, oder sicher nicht bewusst. Ich untersuch das noch genauer
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 16:31:24+00:00): Hallo UT93 
Ich bin unschuldig!!! Sowohl der Teil auf der Südseite, als auch der Teil auf der Nordseite haben den Tag access=no. Es könnte ja sein, dass ich das versehentlich auf der Nordseite wo ich die visibility geändert habe auch verändert habe, aber nicht auf der Südseite wo ich nichts geändert habe.
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 16:39:22+00:00): Du hast Recht access=no ist sicher falsch. Ich korrigiere das. 
Ich habe noch nie ein access tag verändert. In dem Änderungssatz habe ich nur die visibility geändert. Gemäss meinem Kommentar und auch gemäss meinen Erinnerungen. 
Ich bin da wirklich unschuldig. Ich untersuche dann noch benachbarte Wege, wie es da aussieht.

Frage: Hast Du ein Tool, das genauer anzeigen kann wer welches Tag wann geändert hat. Gerüchte sagen die Datenbank hat die Info. Ich bin ausgeschossen mein tool kann nur das was ich rausgefunden habe. Für den Fall reicht es aber.
LG Thomas
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 16:58:01+00:00): Hallo UT93
Ist geändert. Alle schwierigen Übergänge über die Churfirsten haben das tag access=no gesetzt gehabt. Das habe ich jetzt korrigiert. Das hat wahrscheinlich alles die gleiche Person gemacht. die sac_scale=.. war auf jeden Fall perfekt. Genau meine Einschaätzung. Es sind aber noch jede andere tags wie horse=no gesetzt gewesen. Defintiv die gleiche Person. Die anderen Wege in der nähe sind OK. Deshalb habe ich dieses tag gar nicht gekannt musste zuerst googeln. Das macht nur in Städten Sinn.
PS ich treibe mich da oben öfter rum Den Schnürliweg habe ich vor  2 Wochen wie jedes Jahr gemacht. Der unterstehende Link zeigt Bilder vom Schnürliweg. Das ist eine wilde Sache.
https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&sca_esv=26989143cc4811e0&sca_upv=1&q=Schn%C3%BCrliweg&udm=2&fbs=AEQNm0DRuw6278ZiF-YWKBciBpQo8lDPoEXn8_TIu8bGxnk80Q-CuJN15PxGkrj18nriB25kVSGjtGtP-eU97BrwQVY5B-Lhtzuv_lSySm3en-0IX7dzOukXwacT4hcvpSDfI7NhXQ3UygGThyYiHKMbqxBg3awDdSje5-GjFgbB0s3qJuwBe8-ud_SW7p40eekGhBrAiyV_&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiJmrT1s-2HAxXs_7sIHbefLTYQtKgLegQIEBAB&biw=1192&bih=573

LG Thomas
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 19:35:49+00:00): Hallo UT93
Ich weiss wie es passieren kann. Der Editor ID-Editor heisst er glaube ich stellt da 5 Möglichkeiten wer sich auf dem Weg bewegen darf zur Verfügung. Der oberste Punkt "alle=yes sieht aus wie wenn dann alle pferde usw. erlaubt sind. Ich habe da rumgespielt um rauszufinden, was dann bei den Eigenschaften  eingesetzt wird. Der Editor macht es falsch. Wenn man alle=no (access=no) setzt werden da Fussgänger immer noch als erlaubt angezeigt.
Ziemlich verwirrend.
Thomaso58 (2024-08-11 19:52:26+00:00): Ich bins schon gewesen. Es ist so wie oben beschrieben habe passiert. Ich weiss jetzt auch, wie ich die Historie eines Wegstückes rausfinden kann.
LG Thomas
UT93 (2024-08-12 15:26:12+00:00): Gut, schön zu sehen, dass du "deine Schuld" erkannt hast, passiert ist dir das in genau diesem Änderungssatz, auf der Nord-, wie auch der Südseite vom Gochtpass.
literan (2024-06-23 12:46:12+00:00): кривой формат адрески. Надо ставить пробел перед буквами "к", "с", "вл"

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%90%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%B0#%D0%9D%D1%83%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%86%D0%B8%D1%8F_%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2
Taya_S (2024-06-21 09:12:27+00:00): Ik heb deze changeset teruggedraaid. De busway die je hebt toegevoegd staat al op de kaart Zie way https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/6667434

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/152983241
NicaTopo (2024-06-22 15:33:01+00:00): Hi,
Your buildings a by far to big compared to the aerial imagery. They are also not squared out and you entered odd triangled shaped buildings. 
I'm going to delete them all. Please be more careful entering data. 
Thank you.
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-11-26 13:43:06+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11998353323/history has width = 0 that was added in this edit
how something exist and have width=0?
Branko Kokanovic (2025-03-14 19:51:38+00:00): Not sure how many times we already said to #adt - stop adding street names and address names in Serbia. Signals you have are not good. You are adding wrong street names and you are adding them in wrong script (latin instead of cyrillic). So - please stop
WanakaLake (2025-03-14 22:12:45+00:00): Hi Branko Kokanovic, thank you for the message. Our team is no longer adding street names are per the previous guidance from the community. This addition was 9 months ago, before the guidance was given. Please note you should not see any additions from the past few months, and continuing going forward. Thank you!
Branko Kokanovic (2025-03-15 07:16:35+00:00): Got it, thanks!
Mateusz Konieczny (2025-08-28 12:48:34+00:00): Hello! https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11998343119/history has amenity = fixme that was added in this edit
What kind of object is here? Is it a shop? What kind of a shop? (see https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:shop )
Leo Slager (2024-06-21 22:38:31+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Leo Slager (2024-06-21 22:47:25+00:00): Dag Dieter,
Alle begin is moeilijk en hier zijn veel beginners fouten gemaakt.
De fietsdoorsteekjes zijn vasygeplakt aan de wegen. Er kan dus ook geen route over gepland worden.
De Maaslandsingel stond al op de kaart. Er liggen nu dus twee wegen op elkaar gekleefd. Dat is natuurlijk niet de bedoeling.
Geldt het éénrichtingsverkeer niet voor fietsers dan ook bijtaggen: 
oneway:bicycle=no.

Ik pas het even aan.
Leo Slager (2024-06-21 23:06:21+00:00): Ik bedoel:
De fietsdoorsteekjes zijn niet vastgeplakt aan de wegen.
Dieter1973 (2024-06-22 05:47:04+00:00): Dag Leo. Dank voor de input en de doorgevoerde correcties. Ik zal er in de toekomst rekening mee houden. Ik snap alleen je opmerking niet aangaande “de fiets doorsteek is vastgeplakt aan de wegen er kan dan ook geen route over gepland worden”. Mijn logica zegt dat als het vastgeplakt is (wat in de praktijk ook zo is) kan er juist wel een route aan geplakt worden. Maar dat zal kaart-technisch anders zijn wellicht. Nogmaals dank.
Mvg Dieter
Leo Slager (2024-06-22 10:45:16+00:00): Je hebt gelijk. Een type foutje van mijn zijde. Zoals ik hierboven ook al schreef:

Ik bedoel:
De fietsdoorsteekjes zijn niet vastgeplakt aan de wegen.
Leo Slager (2024-06-21 23:27:53+00:00): Welkom bij OpenStreetMap. Ik heb een uitgebreid welkomstbericht met wat handige tips en links gestuurd als privebericht.
MVG,
Leo
Namens de OSM Community
Frans S (2024-07-07 10:24:28+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------
A: Inaccurate mapping

B: Overlapping buildings

C: Collecting adjacent buildings and mapped is as 1 building

D: Connecting Nodes to other features

E:Buildings not squared


Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152979244
Frans S (2024-07-07 10:10:15+00:00): We welcome you as a new mapper.
Thanks for your contribution to this project.
This changeset is reviewed by a Global Validator to check that the tasks have been mapped in accordance with the quality standards of HOTOSM. 
We cannot expect from a new mapper that he/she delivers high-quality mappings from the start, so we offer some guidance.
Please pay attention to the next summarized issues. (see attached document with examples for more info)
-------------------------------------------------------------

A: Inaccurate mapping

B: Overlapping buildings

D: Connecting Nodes to other features

E:Buildings not squared

H: Included a yard of clearing,

Explanation can be found in this document what  might be helpful to strengthen your mapping skills
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Swwz-ZwM3_YOstqstsmCg1-lNAPbnMLpi1Al-h-2UOQ/edit


Best regards and keep mapping!
Frans S
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152979313