Hi johnny67sixseven,
Edits to OpenStreetMap should match what is on the ground - it's not a place for vandalism or false data. I've reverted all of your prior changes. Please make sure all of your edits are accurate before continuing. Thanks!

There is no regional style Jass, look at Heavitree, West Clyst, Cranbrook, or Taunton for counter examples! It's discouraging for you to be changing prior mapping - unless done alongside a clear improvement. That's the issue I have, and the reason I ask you not to continue.

Please do contribute fixes and improvements, including those to my edits, or of the edits from others!

Please *do not* continue to convert between accepted practices to match your own preferences, as it is discouraging to other users. At the very least, please communicate your intentions on the community forum before doing so. Thank you!

Both styles have their place, I agree. The issue is making ~10,000 changes in an automated/mechanical edit, something the wiki advises against. I see these as imposing a personal style, and not objectively improving the map.

Regarding locality, we could both choose different areas and come up with different results. In politics, this is known as gerrymandering. It is worth noting that when looking at the UK as a whole, ~84% of address tags are on ways. This is an indicator of community preference.

I hope you'll agree these changes are both undiscussed (please provide context if I've missed any) and automated (ie, made using scripts or similar), and for those reasons, are best reverted to their former state.

Your prior work in this area has not gone unappreciated, and I hope you continue to contribute to OSM! :)

not sure on your definition of 'local style', but I think I would prefer to see this reverted. See the wiki:

osm.wiki/Mapping_addresses_as_separate_nodes_or_by_adding_to_building_polygons

Amended in changeset/158089680. Thanks!

I doubt there's a cliff here. This changeset may need to be reverted.

'Grangetown' is more commonly one word now, I'd like to see this name change reverted

good bot

'Deli & Stpre' Jass? :)

Hi, yes I agree with your reasoning. Amended in changeset/126937990. Thanks!

Hi Adrian, thanks for contributing to OSM! I have two suggestions for this changeset:
1. There isn’t a need to add a ‘name’ tag to these properties, since you’ve already correctly added the housenumber & street information under the appropriate tags! We try to avoid duplication where possible.
2. Having a look at other addresses in Long Ashton, it seems ‘addr:city’ should be ‘Bristol’, and ‘Long Ashton’ tagged with ‘addr:suburb’.
Thanks again :)

Hi wilda69, was this changeset an accidental upload of your internal notes? I can see most of it has now been deleted, but the 4 nodes that remain don't look useful without additional details. Please could you clarify or delete them? Thanks :)

Interesting, thanks Stephen. I noticed the street sign at the junction for the first time today. Thanks for your insight and contribution, I'll mark the note as resolved.

Hi Stephen, where is your source for this please?

An anonymous mapper mentioned this in an OSM note, I’m curious to know why as I can’t see it indicated anywhere on the street.
note/2893566

Congrats on your first changeset! All the building outlines look fine to me. I've removed the amenity=dentist & healthcare=dentist from the building area as there is a node representing these tags already. Sometimes the building itself has the amenity tags, sometimes mappers create an extra node with them instead. To have both would be duplicating data! Thanks and happy mapping. :)

No issues here - nice to see more details added to buildings!

Hi just to let you know, I’ve removed 2 of the Greggs nodes added in this changeset as it looks like they are already present on the map.
It might be worth updating your map data if it is outdated.

This looks like a bad automated edit - the URL before this change was correct.

All looks fine to me, welcome to osm. :)