Hi, you entered a firestation in Mountmellick ( osm.org/node/1130217277/history ), but from the aerial imagery it looks like there's nothing there. And someone has just drawn a playground around it (which matches the aerials). Is that right? Is this a firestation or is that gone now?

Hi! You added a long terrace on the sea front in this changeset. However you made a mistake with splitting it up. You shouldn't put the untagged ways in the middle. It's better to make lots of buildings, which are glued together.

JOSM's terracer plugin can make this easy.

Hi! You asked for a review, and similar to that last changeset ( osm.org/changeset/54609113 ), you've got the mapping for the tree a little wrong.

Hi, Welcome to OSM! You asked for a review, so here it is.

You've added on object in this change ( osm.org/node/5282837222 ), and er, that's not quite right. In OSM we use the "name" tag for, well, the name of things. And we need some extra tags to explain *what* the thing is.

If you want to map a tree in OSM (there are ~10 million mapped already!), you should use the natural=tree tag. It's best to use the presets option in iD, that'll tell you the right one. If you type in 'tree' to that, it'll select the correct values.

So if you change that point to be like that, then this is good.

It is written on the "note" of the node! 😉😉

You asked for a review, so here it is. Nothing wrong with this. The GNS data is a bit hairy, it's good to clean it up as you go along.

I think most geocoding software won't actually use those tags to figure out the county, so it was unlikely to have broken anything. 🤷

Still, good to have it fixed. 👍

The original value from 7 years ago was "280m", and 280 feet is 85 metres. 🤷

It looks like that value of 280m was added in 2010 by pf_irl ( osm.org/changeset/5155134 ), I've left a comment on that changeset.

Hi, you added a point for "highest point in tory island" (this point: osm.org/node/804468936 ), and it has lately been changed in this changeset ( osm.org/changeset/54468124#map=16/55.2632/-8.1925 ), saying that the elevation value was probably wrong.

Hi! Welcome to OSM. You asked for a review of this change, so here it is.

I'm afraid you've made a bit of a mistake with this building ( osm.org/way/545257648 ) by putting it on top of what's marked as a road in OSM ( osm.org/way/70755936 ) from looking at the aerial imagery, that road it wrong so I'll have to remove that. Don't be afraid to remove things like that which are wrong!

You also added a little "landuse=residential" here ( osm.org/way/545257647 ), it looks like a building to me. You only use landuse for things like housing estates, not individual buildings.

I might take a look later, see if I can clean it up a little

Hi! Welcome to OSM! You asked for a review of this edit, so here it is.

You're right, this *is* 2 "paths" on the top and the bottom. (I was there recently).

You've added `footway=sidewalk` to the path, and I don't think that's right, since it's not a path beside a road you can drive on. I'd suggest `highway=pedestrian`, since it's quite wide. (A good rule of thumb for OSM: It's a `highway=pedestrian` if you physically could drive a car on it, but you're legally not allowed. Or alternatively, could 4 people walk abreast on it. In this case, yes)

I dunno how to properly tag that the area is all walkable..

Hi! Welcome to OSM! You asked for a review, so here it is.

This looks good. You've added some details to the new coastal trail (like width/lit/etc). You've connected the path to the road, which is important for topology/routing.

You have the path going slightly into the sea at the coastline corner in the middle. I've nudged the coastline a bit so your path stays on solid ground. :)

Keep mapping, and have fun. :)

Hi! Welcome to OSM! You asked for a review, so here it is. This looks like a fine edit. Adding some footways, and you've correctly ensured they are connected to the roads (which is important for routing).

The building you added looks fine. If you know more details of the building (like what sort of buidling it is, or it's name) that's always good to add. You can press S to make the building be more right angled, which is more accurate for how buildings actually are.

Welcome to OSM! This looks like a nice edit, making the map better. :)

Hi! Welcome to OSM. In this changeset, you said you added an irish name", but I can't see any Irish name on this road ( osm.org/way/61942637 )

Does it make sense to add a name tag to a stretch of coastline? Do you mean to add the name of the island? There already is the name on the townland ( osm.org/relation/6836983 ) so i don't think you need another name here?

You asked for a review, so here it is.

Firstly you changed the lane to `building=residental`, which is wrong. All the buildings are mapped, so it would be better to delete the way itself.

Hi! Welcome to OSM! You asked for a review, so here it is.

This is perfectly fine. Nothing wrong here. 👍

In OSM we can add more detail than just the building. In this changeset ( osm.org/changeset/54231514 ) I have added an `amenity=fuel` object inside this, this tells people that this is actually a filling station. This can allow people to find it. 🙂

You asked for a review, so here it is.

I was in the area recently and went through this junction. It has been changed from a roundabout to a regular intersection, so this looks good