Is this motorcycle training area really a military training area? It seems highly unlikely to me.

Hi all, just to note the edits in this changeset weren't (at least fully) reverted/deleted. Since this was issue was first commented on nearly 2 years ago, I am have removed this "trial route" as part of my public rights of way edits in osm.org/changeset/101923385

Hi, what is way 533372695? (osm.org/way/533372695) After your edit, it is just shown as a line with no tags. Should it be deleted?

Restored (in correct location) in osm.org/changeset/96069831

Hi, I've just checked what happened (https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=87755135) and it shows the position of the church was clearly incorrect based on aerial imagery. But deleting it was an error - it should have been edited/moved to its correct location. I'll add it back, in its correct location, and post here with the changeset link. Apologies.

I know, I was justifying why I mapped the PROW in the first place.
"Could you comment here on what you propose to change before you do so? Or start a discussion on talk-gb." I find this somewhat ironic... but I'm not suggesting changing it.

Hi, I hadn't seen this discussion - feel free to drop me a message about any changes I make (so at least I'm notified). The route is a public right of way and deserves mapping. The decision for designated access tags for individual transport modes was based on: osm.wiki/User:Rjw62/PRoW_Tagging - as gurglypipe mentions designated is a legal definition and which applies to cyclists, regardless of physical accessibility.

I note that the user performed a similar action in osm.org/changeset/66138395
The boundary of HMS Sultan was (accidentally?) edited resulting in it no longer being mapped. I have subsequently fixed it in osm.org/changeset/89521872

I have fixed this issue (remapped the military land use) in osm.org/changeset/89521872

Hi,

It looks like your edits broke the military land use boundary of HMS Sultan. As far as I am aware, HMS Sultan is still a military base (https://www.royalnavy.mod.uk/our-organisation/bases-and-stations/training-establishments/hms-sultan) and should be tagged as such. Please fix this.

Hi, thanks. These public rights of way were imported through the County Council's open access data. If the route isn't passible any more you can report the fault: https://www.lancashire.gov.uk/roads-parking-and-travel/public-rights-of-way/

I agree that Rockall should not be an island. Perhaps islet is better suited than rock however: osm.wiki/Tag:place%3Dislet

Indeed Rockall's wikipedia article (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rockall) describes it as such.

It is - fixed in osm.org/changeset/84477957

Thanks!

Thanks.

Hi,

These edits are not accurate. You have covered a nature reserve as a residential construction site and extended Willow Lane through the reserve - which is not there at all. Please revert these changes.

If you have any questions about the Lancaster area, please feel free to drop me a message.

Cheers.

Bin moved back in osm.org/changeset/70063181

Forgot the source: https://www.lancaster.gov.uk/parks-and-open-spaces/allotments

Hi,

Thanks for taking the time to include the builing block names into OSM. Based on your edits, I made a few changes to these blocks in changsets #68633696 and #68660271.

You had created individual buildings for the blocks which were laid on top of main "Bowland Hall" building. This meant we had multiple buildings located on top of each other. Instead, I created a multipolygon of each individual block and named the multipolygon "Bowland Hall".

Additionally, I added addr:housename tags to the entrance locations you provided so that the names of the blocks would show up on the map.

Cheers.

I've made some changes to these accomodation blocks in edits #68620528, #68620739 and #68621022. I removed the landuse tags and instead split the underlying buildings into seperate buildings. I standardised the size of the buildings and kept with the "building=residentail + residential=university" scheme that is common at Lancaster. I also moved the building names into the address fields as gurglypipe suggested. Cheers.

To reiterate gurglypipe's comments, thanks for mapping these - though I also agree they should be tagged a buildings rather than areas.

However, I don't think apartments is the correct tag. These are shared accomodation blocks - with communial living areas (lounge, kitchen, and bathrooms). Only bedrooms are lockable. Also, it seems the "student_accomodation" scheme is abandoned.

I would suggest you retag as "building=residentail + residential=university". This would also bring these buildings (back) in line with the rest of campus.