"that shows the beginning of the bridge" : NO it's the beginning of the Deck (tablier ou Travée in French). A bridge is made of a Deck and a Abutment (culée ou butée in French). So previous geometry of the bridge was correct (for the part on Havenlaan) (minor extend of outline near Willebroeck can be made as my survey and knowledge of the construction history) so exactly the opposite of what you made @Jhowie_Nitnek.

You can find a publication of one the major "bureau de technique spéciale" in Belgium exactly saying what i say here : https://www.facebook.com/bureaugreisch/photos/a.327246661330950/791256421596636/?type=3

Also you use "Reverted " in your changeset comment but it's not a reverting you do (OSM wiki say reverted to a previous state or roll back ) You simply make a new change on nodes and you modified more than the previous changeset : https://osmcha.org/changesets/134704662/

So saying that this changeset is a mistake and should be reversed with proprer plugin.

Hello,

This changeset attract my attention because seamark with vhf 20 accross the canal in Brussels usualy take place near lock or movable bridge and that's not the case here.

So i made a survey this morning ; see pictures here : osm.org/note/3635087 and i don't find any seamark on the bridge or surroundings. So where do you :

- See a seamark (or have a document mention it)
- Take the seamark:name ? Is it guessed ?

review_requested : inadvertently ticked

Hello,

Please respect work done here.

133112338 : I have create a MP to fix a water inside a water.

133112737 is only adding different zone after 2 ground survey and a note sitll open. Your changeset comment is irrelevant and don't explain why you did that ...

Also by this changeset you add a error by deleting the MP and set it on a way ...

"Reverting" something wihout explaining why is realy childish even more when previous changeset was done to fix error you made.

Hello,

There is some problem in your changeset :

- https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/246311636 you move the outline of the building.
- osm.org/way/993055808 : you add generator to all the building, that is not the case , area =yes on building make also warning in validator, and even it's not necessery in other case : osm.org/way/1151355748 you can remove it to fix the typo. (set area is not a error but as your way are closed you don't realy need it).

osm.org/way/263981303/history also it's not all the building with generator, and as you can see it's on a construction zone, a part of the building doesn't exist anymore.

Can you fix the issues please ?

Hope that can help.
Have a good day.

Hello,

Why do you have removed network and operator info ? https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/2571061754

Also please : osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Bonjour,

Ils n'occupent pas tout le building n'est-ce pas ? Pouvez-vous corriger le tir svp ?

par ailleurs : osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Hello,

Please read : osm.wiki/WikiProject_Belgium/Conventions/Railways

That clearly stipulate that railway tracks don't have a name.

Hello,

Your edit remove a small part of "Rue de Kleinbettingen". https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/167273741

Can you fix this ?

Hello,

My concern was to correct the retaining_wall set on V1. (as it's planter) As a another mapper change "garden" to "village green" in v2 , i didn't change it. But you are right shrubbery is more appropriate.

Changed in : osm.org/changeset/132705166

Have a good day.

Hello,
You can use this tag instead : osm.wiki/Key:ref:vatin

Hello,

This changeset seam to be (for fuel) more notes than real fuel station, can you please check the POI you create and fix this ?

Best regards,

Hello,

Can you please check changeset history before making armchair mapping : osm.org/changeset/131637654

Your change has bee reverted.

On what source you affirm this building will be demolished ?

FYI :
https://www.arau.org/content/uploads/2019/02/Analyse-KBC-av.-du-Port-12-14.pdf

https://molenbeekadm.irisnet.be/fr/fichiers/urbanisme/avis-commission-de-concertation/07-07.2020/24-pu-37-338-av-du-port-12-14.pdf

Hello, it's based on a ground survey and it's indicated here : osm.org/note/3521390#map=18/50.86154/4.34941 and on my changeset desciption (link to the permit). That was notified to you on this changeset comment also : 131341836.
If they demolished this part will be a legality problem and also a practical problem : the general direction of "enseignement" use the 16 (and a lot of vzw) and have a long term contrat of leasing until 2036).

On what source you affirm this building will be demolished ?

Ok thanks ; let's be simple and keep the landuse like this (will be still a industrial in the futur).

Fix also the MP on the landuse : osm.org/changeset/131767008

@Jhowie_Nitnek : on what source or document you have use to make the outline of the Brouwerij ? Asking because the part near Breeveld (a91g parcel) is now a brownfield with rest of previous building and the old building was never connected to the existing one (fence are still in the same place) ; as industrial efficiencies it's a little strange not connecting together.

Hello,

You indicate Bing as source, but this source clearly show a two way street. Recent street level imagery and Urbis show also a two way. https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1624203131249426

Do you have more accurate up to date ground information ?
Otherwise : Can you kindly reverse this edit ?

Please : read the history of the road and use up to date source imagery. This small part is especialy 2 way in order to permit some entrance on the gouvernement parking building. Have to reverse your edit.