Good changeset, but it would be better if you mapped this field as an area. You don't have to put tags on the address nodes.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118037631

Hi,

Anglebrook Golf Club is already mapped as an area.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118037721

Okay, thanks for responding!

Oh, actually, it looks like you didn't put the full name of the church in. If the name is something like "Saint Patrick's Church", you can include the "Church".
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118037776

Hi,

Welcome to OSM! I've been reviewing changesets in the area, and so far yours have been very good. This one is good too, but I just wanted to let you know that you can tag the building directly instead of adding a point/node inside of it. If the building only serves one purpose (e.g. a church), this is preferred. However, what you did still works well. Thanks!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118037776

Hi,

Specifying a source can help others review your changeset. In this case, I see you deleted and remapped a sand bunker. It appears differently on different satellite imagery. Have you verified it in person?

Also, please avoid deleting and remapping features like this. It helps people understand the history better when you reuse features.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118615023

Also, adding a source would help, especially for your change to remove surface=paved from one road.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118667637

Good changeset, just a couple things:

First of all, please try to break up your changesets into more localized areas. For example, this could have been two changesets, one for each place you added service roads. This helps people who are reviewing changesets.

Also, some satellite imagery still shows the northern place you worked on as being an empty lot. If you ever notice this, you can put a tag on the ways like `source=Bing Aerial` (if you used Bing Aerial as your imagery). This isn't really necessary, just a nice touch if you notice that the feature is very new.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/118891858

Actually, I will be removing the names "Ossining Resivour Fountain" and "Ossining Vet's Park Lake" because they are likely descriptive names. Please see osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117657354

Hi,

It looks like you made a few good contributions here, but you also moved around some address nodes to places where they're probably not. You did this in other changesets too. Why are you doing this?

Also, the names for the places you added don't look quite right. They should be the name that the business displays most prominently. I will leave "Ossining Pizza", "Lipton's Deli" alone, but please double check these names and correct them as necessary. I will fix the typo in "Ossining Resivour Fountain".

Thanks for contributing!
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117657354

Hi,

It looks like you moved an address node from a house to the middle of the woods, and moved the fountain to somewhere it's not. Reverting.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659174

Here, you moved some businesses outside of the building they're in, and added yet another "Fade Faktory" location. Reverting.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659164

Actually, I just noticed that you made the entire place, including the parking lot, a restaurant building. This is not correct. I will remove this way, but leave the node on the building.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660547

You've created a building inside of another building. Please don't do that. Since this is also a duplicate (you created another one of it in your next changeset), I will remove both, and then you can add it back in the correct location.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659206

It looks like you added a duplicate of the same place across the street. That is, unless there are two of these places within such a close distance, but this seems improbable. Please let me know where this place is.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659570

Please specify a source for your additions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659570

Hi,

It looks like another user has corrected this mistake, but you used the wrong tag here. The "recreation ground" tag you used is for open spaces with equipment, not a building.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117659579

Hi,

Welcome to OSM! In the future, please try to use more descriptive changeset comments. For example, "Add Ossining Pizza". Also, please try to include a source in your changeset. If you're a local to the area, you can make the source "local knowledge" to convey that. If you went to the area specifically to collect information to map, you can make your source "survey".

Thanks!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117660547

Hi,

This does not belong in OSM, as it does not really exist in the real world. I see that you added this for a wikipedia article, so if you'd like to copy the map data out into GeoJSON and upload that to Wikipedia, please do so. If I don't hear back for a while, I will likely just delete this relation.

I would say deleting the name for "Overlook Cmns" is probably right, as that's probably just the name of the housing complex, but "Yorkridge Drive" sounds like it should stay.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/117692445