Ref osm.org/note/4493019

By changing the building outlines to building parts, there is no longer any building outline. As such no building will be displayed by (most) rendering applications.

Please resolve this as appropriate and comment on this changeset when you are done.
( note to other mappers: see
osm.org/user/googlenaut/blocks as to why user is being actively recommended to comment here.)

If you need any help, contact the local community at
https://openstreetmap.community/?map=-33.86434,151.20266&zoom=7.98

Hey crazed-mapper,

In reference to
osm.org/note/4518062

For private ways, you should use
access=private
The tag access=no is intended for areas prohibited to the general public, such as construction areas.
osm.wiki/Tag:access%3Dno

Your changes visualised
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=58306975

Resolved in
osm.org/changeset/165212968

Hey MapCam,

Be careful when mapping objects obscured on aerial imagery.
Where available, you can use streetlevel imagery, though be aware it may be outdated.
('Edit' => right sidebar => Data Layers => i.e. Bing Streetside); solely for your information, proprietary (copyright) sources such as Google Maps etc. can not be used for this.
osm.wiki/Import/ODbL_Compatibility

It is best not to map these if not sufficiently visible.
osm.wiki/Verifiability

Instead, add a 'fixme' tag to request other mappers to survey the location.
osm.wiki/Key:fixme

If you need any help, feel free to contact the local community at
https://openstreetmap.community/?map=-33.87118,151.20198&zoom=8.36

Removed the unverifiable footway segment in
osm.org/changeset/165210839

Ref osm.org/note/4518858

'Standing stone put there with a crane' does not magically create (religious) anything for OpenStreetMap.
Religious landuse is reserved for points of interest (POI) providing i.e. religious services, offices(and if included with these, shops) to their users.
Places of worship are reserved for those which are/were used for religious practices by their users.
Neither, nor as such most objects, are intended for those used solely by a private individual, or inaccesible property without such proper reason to map them.
See also
osm.wiki/Private_objects
(and links on each page)

The enclosed wooded area seems okay. It can at least kind of be seen to exist from sources contributors are allowed to use from the editor application (see 'Edit'); solely for your information, proprietary (copyright) sources such as Google Maps etc. can not be used for this.
The name should be the signed name, not description, see
osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions
(you already used description, which is good.);
though, some of the below recommendations apply here as well
osm.wiki/Tag:man_made%3Dnesting_site#Recommendations_and_Guidelines_of_Usage

Your changes visualised
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=48590715

I have removed the unverifiable standing stone and religious landuse. Resolved in
osm.org/changeset/165210187

Hey green_leek,

Objects which represent a single group should be mapped as a single object if sufficiently close together.
See this page for more information
osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

(Some objects like charging points can be mapped individually, but usually have their own tag)

If there is a small gap, you can add a note tag saying there is one, but this is just so that other mappers do not add duplicates from aerial imagery.

Mentioned in notes
osm.org/note/4476345

Your changes visualized
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=155872976

Resolved in
osm.org/changeset/165208248

These are foundations of demolished buildings, not ones for new to be constructed buildings.
Resolved in
osm.org/changeset/165144571
Marked them as demolished and the area as brownfield.

What is the source for your changes?

See osm.wiki/Verifiability

There seems to be no physical signage for such a route at this location
https://api.panoramax.xyz/#pic=cb6b6972-9f29-4845-8b4a-2a242102a435&focus=pic

only for the cycleway itself, which is already mapped as a way. See
osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element

What is the source for your changes?

See osm.wiki/Verifiability#Planned_features

article used for previous changeset only, not for this one.

Thanks. Yes, that makes sense.

Hey PluMGMK,

Are you sure it is this pole?

It looks like you meant this one.
osm.org/node/12459264558

Regards,

Daniel

osm.org/way/842361171
Is it explicitly signed as "Bell Tower"? It seems like descriptive name. It is already correctly tagged as
tower:type=bell_tower
I would suggest removing name tag.

Are these low walls or full-height walls (up to ceiling)?
For full-height wall there is indoor=wall.
osm.wiki/Tag:indoor=wall
(ignore image on the right, this is wood frame inside certain walls)

changeset comment should be
"changed playground seesaw node to line".

Hey Brian,

Some objects seem to be duplicated.

Ex.
osm.org/relation/13285410/history
looks like a duplicate of
osm.org/relation/13281077/history
(taken from edit view at this point);
osm.org/node/9137759200

Regards,

Daniel

Added in
osm.org/changeset/160413994

Added in
osm.org/changeset/160413994

Added in
osm.org/changeset/160413994

Added KK024-01300(1,2) in
osm.org/changeset/160284245

Hey Learscail,

I would not recommend adding historical objects during your first edits, but you are welcome to do so.

Unfortunately, we can not use the SMR as sole source for adding objects. The SMR and layers available on the Historic Environment Viewer (HEV) are a proprietary/copyright source and OpenStreetMap does not have permission to use them.

In order to add these objects, you will need another source to verify they exist.

We have permission to use the following layers

- Layers available in OSM editors such as the one you are using.
(which I commented on earlier)

- NLS historic maps
https://maps.nls.uk/os/#ireland

- Esri World Imagery Wayback
(of which most current and oldest are available in the editor)
https://livingatlas.arcgis.com/wayback/#active=60013&mapCenter=-7.16811%2C52.61855%2C15

You can go outdoors and survey one to see if it is physically present, but most won't be visible (have been plough-levelled).
You can then add a source "survey" when saving your changes.

If you know or someone else knows about their existence you can add them with source "local knowledge of (myself, resident, employee, etc)" on saving your changes.

If there is a centuries old map/book in the library ('out of copyright') you can add the source as
"Book X, chapter Y, author Z"
(though this is preferably left to advanced contributors)

If you can't verify them in one of these ways, they are unverifiable and can't be added to OpenStreetMap.

---

osm.org/way/538299207
KK024-011 is larger than mapped but the outermost ditch is only partially visible on aerial imagery.
It might not be quite circular.

For the enclosures in the meadows
KK024-159 might be visible on regular Esri but is deemed uncertain in SMR.
KK024-013001 is faintly visible.
KK024-013002 is clearly visible.
The enclosures in the meadows seem to be visible on regular Esri,

---

This changeset has been reverted in
osm.org/changeset/160248638

Regards,

Daniel