Hi,
I think the road is not a residential road, but a service road (highway=service).

Hmmm, this still doesn't seem very good. 'The Port of Hull' is a better name, but it's not a locality IMHO - it's a port. Adding stuff in an arbitrary place with a dubious tag so it appears on your own render is not a great way of editing. Maybe there's a seamark tag for a port that might be better.

This seems an odd edit. Why have you added Hull Port as a locality in the middle of a named dock? AFAIK 'Hull Port' does not exist. What are you trying to do with this edit?

Thanks for the detail. I would not add footway=sideway to ordinary footways. Sidewalk implies they are beside a road, but these are not.

HTH

The park you added was already mapped, in more detail so I removed this park

That make a huge difference. :-)

I should have added that websites are also copyright and cannot be used unless the data is explicitly released in a compatible form. (everything is copyright automatically, so unless there is a licence to allow you to use that info it is not suitable for use in OSM).

Thanks for the info.

We MUST NOT, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES use any information from Google in OSM, EVER!!!!

I hope this is clear. You cannot copy google maps, Google Streetview, Google Earth or any other Google source. It is expressly forbidden in their terms or use. OSM is based on being able to use our data for any purpose by anyone, but if it becomes contaminated by third party licences that all breaks down.

The name you have use may be right, but you must see it with your own eyes, on the ground, not from any other source unless we have explicit, written permission or a suitable licence. OS Opendata is released under OGL which is acceptable and the aerial imagery in the iD editor is used with permission.

I will revert your edit - we have to. If you see the name in person then feel free to use that.

Please, please, never refer to Google data again for use in OSM.

This is an interesting change. Where have you seen property addresses that point to this change? What does the road sign on the end of the street say?

Welcome to OSM
Your cycleways are welcome detail. Creating any road or path needs to join up to the existing network. Does the cycleway cross the road where it ends? If so I would join it to the road there. The one that crosses the roads at the south of the roundabout is an example.

Welcome to OSM

Buildings are very welcome detail, but I think these are semi-detached, ie they are each two houses. This becomes important when addresses are added, which is the best case.

If you need help or hints, feel free to ask.

Chris

Please change the changeset comments. These changes have nothing to do with pond and pond.

Welcome to OSM

Are these really ponds? The one in the industrial area around Salt End looks like a building with a blue roof on the imagery. The one in the allotments just looks like part of an allotment to me.

Do you have better info than the imagery or was this a starting experiment that got saved?

Welcome to OSM
I wonder why you think there are parks in such strange places. Could it be that you thunk it will attract Pokemon?

If you want to add real stuff in the right place correctly described you will be very welcome, but junk will just get removed

We place points of interest in it's real place. If you use the aerial imagery you can see that the existing chemist is in the right place because it over the building on the corner. The buildings are set back from the roads.

The name is not Boots the Chemist. The shop is called Boots. Some have a sign saying 'Your local Boots pharmacy', where the Boots part is the company logo. We try to use the names as they really appear and not combine a description (chemist) into the sign.

I will sort this out.

Hi, Welcome to OSM

The building was already named as RockCity. Your tags are useful and improve the info, but by adding them to a separate node (point) you have now created two RockCity descriptions. I would have added the extra info to the building rather than create a new node, but I guess that MapsWithMe maybe can't do that.

Why have you added a second chemist which not where the buildings are?

Could you please use more descriptive changeset comments. 'Improvements' really is too brief.

The fact you don't think the edit was important enough to discuss just shows how opinions differ. Mechanical edits upset mappers. Mappers are our most precious resource. See the rules here: osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

You can start discussions on IRC or mailing lists. More info here: osm.wiki/Contact_channels

You MUST stop making these mechanical edits. These MUST be discussed before you make them. Revert this now