Madina Halal Meats was already mapped at osm.org/node/6315306130
Please consider merging the two features rather than creating duplicates
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161040922

This is at the wrong spot. Woolworths was already mapped at osm.org/node/5157906821

Kia ora Cristian, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your edits. I have reviewed this changeset and noticed the following two issues: I can see that you added a new area for Whakanewha Regional Park, but this location was already mapped appropriately at osm.org/relation/13757909 The other issue was your edits to the Waiheke Musson survey location. I can see that you wanted to add detail to the airstrip terminal, which is good, but the survey mark feature should not have been edited to make this change. I have reverted those two changes, and added Waiheke Wings as its own new point of interest. Cheers
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/159026856

Hi jmg-nz, welcome to OSM and thank you for your updates to the map! The highway features you updated from construction to residential are still showing as access=no, this tag can either be deleted entirely, or updated to a more suitable value. Cheers
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157931496

Hi adssadsad, thanks for adding the new road. Does it need to be made access=private?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157414216

Hi degreesbelowzero, welcome to OpenStreetMap, thank you for your contribution, you have filled out the values well and left a useful changeset comment. As you mention in your changeset comment, this is a temporary feature only occasionally erected. It is best-practice not to map temporary features - see this wiki page: osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features

Cheers
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157320511

Hi leotherocketman, Thanks for the addition. Does the path connect to anywhere at the south end - perhaps into the carpark? Currently it's a dead end. If it does lead into the carpark, try to snap the southern end to the footway around the carpark. Cheers
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157290337

Hi Mincemeat, welcome to OSM and thanks for your edits. This update is great. One minor thing is that you could have updated the existing node for PK Furniture, rather than deleting and adding a whole new one. This helps maintain the history of the feature, giving a richer history in the OSM data. Cheers keep it up.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/157106405

Hi EstatesBlair, welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your additions. Your edits looks good. Maybe you would benefit from switching to using the more recent Bing aerial imagery (use the Background Settings button). There is an issue with your building:levels tag, which is stating that these new buildings are 1,234 storeys high! I imagine you meant to say they're 4 storeys, so I have updated the tag's value. Cheers
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156845576

Thanks :)
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156680808

Hi adssadsad, thanks for adding detail to OSM. Please can you use more meaningful changeset comments when you publish your changeset, as it helps other contributors who are reviewing your changes. See the OSM wiki page here: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156669584

Hi mapnerd, thanks for adding detail to OSM.
Please can you use more meaningful changeset comments when you publish your changest, as it helps other contributors who are reviewing your changes. See the OSM wiki page here: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/156556417

I have simplified the highways around the Pit Stop
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154799341

Hi mapnerd, similar issue in this changeset to what was brought up by ❤️‍🔥 for changeset 154877622. The service ways through the carpark at Moselle Rd/Waipareira Ave did not need to be split into separate ways for each direction. This should only be done when there is a clear physical distinction and distance between each direction, for example dual carriageways.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154799341

Hi adssadsad, welcome to OSM and thank you for your edits. I have reviewed this changeset and it adds good detail to existing features. Please can you use more meaningful changeset comments summarising what changes were made. This helps the review process and helps to communicate your intentions. Thanks, keep it up
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154872779

Hi mapnerd, welcome to OSM and thank you for your edits. I have reviewed this changeset. Mostly it contains good edits which add nice detail to the map. It would be useful to have a more informative changeset comment describing what was changed. There are two issues I have noticed in this changeset. The first issue is that you accidentally dragged a node on the way 605391262. This has extended a service way several a long distance across the neighbourhood. I will fix this issue now. The second issue is with Way 59580371 - this was correctly tagged as an unnamed footway, but you have changed it to a service way (alley), and given it a name tag. It may be colloquially called an alleyway, but in this case the name should only really be for signposted names. It is not a service way/alley, I recommend reading the OSM wiki page for the feature for clarification on this point: osm.wiki/Tag:service%3Dalley Other than those two issues, the changeset is all good, thanks and keep it up

Kia ora Sam thanks for fixing the addresses. You can inspect the history of the address nodes to see the source used is was LINZ (Land Information New Zealand). That is likely what is also used by Google Maps. I can see that the LINZ dataset is different to what is in the Auckland Council address dataset (AC is more similar to your correction). Unclear to me why they differ, because my understanding is that LINZ gets its address data from the councils.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154501273

Hi chatnz, this inconsistency is due to OSM contributors mapping in different styles. Both approaches are valid. Welcome to OSM, you'll be seeing a lot of similar inconsistencies :)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154327976

❤️‍🔥 I can see this changeset was marked Resolved but the ways I have checked which were changed in this changest are still showing as highway=residential
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154249401

The changesets from HeyHiHello123 that I have reviewed in Auckland are making many such changes which are out of step with the standard mapping practice in Auckland, effectively promoting private driveways to public named residential roads. I would like to see those changes reverted entirely, but unfortunately there are other changes in the changesets which are completely fine.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154249401