Please don't change `crossing=traffic_signals` to `crossing=marked`. The latter removes information, and is debated.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83401124

Please don't upload your personal test objects. They affect everyone using this.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83352025

Please don't upload test objects. This is considered vandalism.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83173206

Please don't upload test objects. This is considered vandalism.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83176995

Please don't upload test objects. This is considered vandalism.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83177042

"Roof" (building=roof) means the piece of shelter overhanging, not the roof part of a structure. I changed it to a park for now. https://osmcha.mapbox.com/changesets/83078177
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83067179

Please don't delete `landuse=residential`. It represents a housing estate together with `residential=apartments`. osm.org/changeset/83077048
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83066957

Oh ok
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82904751

Is the name decided yet?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82904751

Added osm.org/changeset/82868382

So don't just delete it.

Are you sure this can't be accessed by applying for a permit?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82863210

Please don't throw away information without replacement. The address and name of previous building is important. The land-use area / land lot is also unchanged. If the building hasn't been demolished, it should remain there and tagged as abandoned or in construction works (demolition). If it has, this should be a brownfield or construction site.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82851209

I don't think this is the best solution as the place should be located on its center, and print maps position labels besides the place to not obstruct the view over it.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82709712

Don't throw away information. Specific tags like `natural=saddle` is preferred over `place=locality` when it is available.

Don't throw away information. Specific tags like `natural=saddle` is preferred over `place=locality` when it is available.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82689443

Before I begin, I should remind you OSM is about current features. If you are interested in history, look at OpenHistoricalMap https://openhistoricalmap.org/. OSM is also about map data, not a collection of maps. In that, copyright is critical, as OSM operates on the most restrictive or open (depending on how you look at it) ODbL license. From what I observe, http://www.hkmaps.hk/mapviewer.html only uses OSM, and its map copyright are unknown as well. You should judge based on a variety of sources, and not rely on other maps. Lest you forget, the first principle of OSM is not to copy directly from other maps.

On places, the convention is to mark the center of the human settlement. On names, primarily `name=` tags the common name used, and there's a variety of name tags.

I asked for your opinion on the center of North Point (not Braemar Hill), and status of Fortress Hill. I don't see you responding to North Point. On Fortress Hill, I also don't see how you have commented on the subject. Can you explain further?

I would also take this chance to clarify what appears to be some misconeptions. "Fortress Hill is no more than a human interpretation of the landscape, there was also a past name "East Hill" which is no longer in use, but there is no such landform for the origin of the neighbourhood," natural feature and place are correlations, not necessary direct causations. They can be mapped separately. "history also told us that the name "Fortress Hill" arose from the construction the MTR Station by the same name, which means it's more of an artificial construct by nature." we can disregard the station to talk about Fortress Hill Road, and the "human interpretation of the landscape" you mentioned. Would these be "artificial"? This doesn't really affect the standing of a toponym as it pertains to a human settlement. OSM is to record usage, not serve as anyone's verdict of what's ought to be.

Ma Tau Chung would be a different matter.

Last but not least, I would remind you there is no "your team", but many different editors in the community. Decisions and guidelines are based on consensus, in line with the global OSM community.

Please don't remove information by changing `crossing=traffic_signals` to `crossing=marked`.

Don't add names such as "Public Bicycle Parking". Use proper tags, or add this to description.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82603652

Please explain why North Point is moved and Fortress Hill downgraded. There is alaos `place=quarter` in between if you disagree that it is a `place=suburb`/
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/82600956