No worries, glad to hear! Was going a bit insane trying to find out what was wrong.

Thanks for the addition to the map!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175282166

Verified this as a good change but note that the tag "name=*" is generally for the signed or established name for a feature, not the general name for it. Unless the area is literally called "site" this name tag should be removed.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175275157

TY for adding the paths! Noticed they're not connected to each other and they don't seem to connect to any of the other paths. Is that intentional?

It leaves way/1454696669 entirely disconnected.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175283413

Edits look good! Thank you for adding this information! And welcome to OSM!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175113708

Looks good! Just for future reference if you visit a site to confirm info you can list that as "survey" in the sources section for the changeset which is more standardized on OSM even though people will 100% know what "site visit" means. You also don't need to list the sources in the comment if they're listed in the sources tag for the changeset.

Thank you for improving the map! And welcome to OSM! :D
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175117521

Looks mostly good! Thank you for mapping some addresses in the new development!

Only thing I noticed was construction=footway being changed to construction=detatched which isn't a documented tag for a highway=construction way. What was the goal there?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175119944

Looks good aside from this building: way/1256346261
It seems to have gotten smaller and less accurate to the full shape of the building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175239873

Oh also when mapping buildings in iD editor, you can use the "q" key to square them up.

Thank you for helping to improve the map! I'm assuming this is part of a new development hence it not being visible on the satellite imagery?

If possible do you think you'd be able to take some Mapillary and/or Karta View street level imagery around the neibourhood? This helps other mappers verify your changes in the area and we can help map roads and all the other buildings as well.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175245229

Cool cool, I've deleted the old area at the moment as now that there's a POI it should mean you're searchable on all the OSM based map applications. You can always upgrade to an area again in the future.

From here I'd recommend adding more tag info to the point you've dropped. Access information is particularly important to add to the map but here are some suggestions for tags you could add:

addr:country=GB, addr:housenumber=*, fee=no, contact:phone=*, contact:email=*, wheelchair=*, amenity=toilets, toilets:wheelchair=*, shop=gift, internet_access=wlan, description=*, ref:wikidata=*

I might also suggest collecting street level imagery through Mapillary or Karta View of the surrounding area as then other mappers will be able to map the location more accurately and support you with mapping.

Best of luck!

Looks like there is still a tree node there so I suspect you just ended up deleting a duplicate node on further inspection. Whatever the case the map is currently correct so no more action needed.

TYSM for your reply and for improving the map!

Ty for the assistance Cebderby! Looks all good now!

And thank you for the detailed response Mrs Jacqueline Lamberty! Thank you for helping to improve the map!

Cool cool thanks for the clarification! And thank you for improving the map!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175195362

Loving the detailed improvements to platforms! TYSM for adding this data to the map!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175197033

Nice, I've copied over all the old tags from the previous recycling center as I assume it's going to recycle roughly the same stuff and deleted the old one.

The reason you couldn't delete it is because it had a wikidata tag, If you need to delete something like that in future delete the wikidata tag first and then you'll be able to delete the way just fine.

Thank you for taking the time to reply on this and keeping the map up to date!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175199802

Noticed this changeset deletes a random tree a ways north of the building, is this intentional?

Other than that looks all good, nice building refinement!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175238429

Great work on the mapping! I noticed the addition of name=James house on the building and another name tag on the service road leading to it.

Just a note on tagging convention: The name tag should only be used for a feature's publicly known, established, or signed name. Private residence names are generally not added unless the house is a local landmark or has a sign posted for its name (like "The Old Mill House").

BCNorwich has already gone in and tweaked the geometry so no need to worry about that but for future building mapping you can use the "q" hotkey to square the corners on any buildings.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175078432

Thank you for adding to the map, though it's usually not advisable to disclose your home address via changeset on OSM.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175077889

Seems like it might be a shop=pet rather than a supermarket but otherwise great!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/175174714