I'm guessing that Ferndale way/196564791/history#map=19/53.13681/-1.19433 was never actually surveyed. I walked past the end yesterday, and it's definitely a residential road. I'll fix it.

What's the source of e.g. the bridge names in this changeset?

Hello - it looks like way/316374979 is a road, but is missing a road classification?

I wouldn't pick the tag based on whether it renders or not - I'd pick the one that best describes it. If something that really should be rendered isn't on the "standard" layer, add an issue over at https://github.com/gravitystorm/openstreetmap-carto/issues .

Hi - just spotted the changeset comment. The normal way of defining access to bits of road is with "access tags" - see osm.wiki/Access for details. If way/296533313 isn't accessible to motor_vehicles then you could add the tag "motor_vehicle" with the value "no". You could also add "emergency=yes" if emergency vehicles are allowed. You may also want to add tags for "foot" and "bicycle". The default on a residential road will be "yes" for all of these unless you specifically add tags to change it.

Hello, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! New people adding stuff that they know about locally is exactly what OSM needs. However, what sort of thing is node/3234781557 "Sandwell Gate"? Whatever it is, that's what it should be tagged as in OpenStreetMap. Maybe have a look at how equivalent similar features are mapped elsewhere (perhaps York's "bars")?

Also, the node has "http://www.britishlistedbuildings.co.uk/en-432931-town-wall-and-sandwell-gate-headland-" as a source. That has a disclaimer at the bottom that suggests that the data isn't licence-compatible with OpenStreetMap. If you actually know that this thing is here without looking at an external website, just use "source=local_knowledge".

Anyway - hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help. If you have any questions please feel free to drop me a mail.

Cheers,
Andy

I think that some of the things added in here are missing building tags - way/317366681#map=19/48.75381/8.00595 is an example?

Are you sure that way/317130424 is now "landuse=commercial"? I haven't seen it from either side on the ground, but from the Bing imagery it looks like a sewage works to me.

Also are the tracks really still in place on the bridge east of Kings Clipstone way/43893968/history#map=17/53.17820/-1.09369 ? I'd be very surprised if they were.

Thanks - hopefully no-one will look at the imagery and add it back in without checking the changeset discussion comments here. Unfortunately people do sometimes do this, so you may want to keep an eye on the area to check.

Oh - and (just in case you're not aware) Google's Street View images aren't compatible with the OSM licence (not that it's relevant here, since you updated based on survey and are just trying to show me what it looks like).

Interesting that iD (the in-browser editor) suggested "dead_pub" - the choices it offers are normally fairly clever (if US-centric). I wouldn't personally change the name to "XXX Pub (Closed)" since the name isn't "XXX Pub (Closed)", though some mappers do do that.

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetmap!

I've just noticed that part of the northern roundabout on the Burnley / Padiham road seems to have got deleted ( way/231267658/history#map=18/53.79069/-2.26608 ). Is that really not there any more or was it an accident? The Bing imagery shows a car on it, but obviously road layouts change, and there are sometimes roundabouts with "one bit missing" like this.

Anyway - hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help. If you have any questions please feel free to drop me a mail.

Cheers,
Andy

Is all of way/316589740 still visible on the ground? I've not noticed it (although looking at the Bing imagery there's a case for it at the southwest end around osm.org/edit?editor=potlatch2#map=19/53.20398/-1.21702 around 30m to the northwest. I'm not convinced there's anything visible at osm.org/edit?editor=potlatch2#map=18/53.20587/-1.21274 though.

What source is there for the operator of way/316939875/history ? I've never seen a sign there. Is it licence-compatible with OSM?

Hi, I notice that you've moved node/1890570102/history away from its surveyed location osm.org/?mlat=53.19132&mlon=-1.04718&zoom=18 and instead lined it up with the misplaced Bing imagery locally. It's easy to see the problem - just hit "GPS Traces" in the top right-hand corner of the Potlatch window. You'll see that there are several GPS traces here, and they're all north of where you've moved the path to. Might I suggest that you align the imagery properly (space+drag) and move the things you've misplaced in this changeset?

Hello and welcome to OpenStreetMap! As you might have noticed from the wiki page for "dead_pub" amenity=dead_pub that tag was something of a stop-gap until a better idea came along. Since it was written tagging as "disused=amenity=pub" has got more traction (compare http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/disused%3Aamenity=pub with http://taginfo.openstreetmap.org.uk/tags/amenity=dead_pub), so I'd probably go for that instead.

Anyway - hope you don't mind me mentioning this - just trying to help. If you have any questions please feel free to drop me a message.

Cheers, Andy

What evidence do you have that the name of way/40961536 is Bevercotes Coal Stockyard? Where is the current signage?

I notice that you've deleted way/178314314/history (with note "No sign of former rail here (the terrain would make it unlikely!)") and redrawn a disused railway line way/316865389 . What evidence do you have that in the month since I was last here a railway has been built and fallen into disuse? Have you ever actually been there and had a look? If not, and if you're just guessing based on aerial imagery (where you get no idea of the vertical component at all) you really shouldn't be editing at all in areas that are (a) open to the public like this public park and (b) have active mappers.

I'd be very surprised if way/316734399 could still be described as "landuse=railway" - any railway there has surely long gone. Have you got any evidence that it hasn't?

I notice that you have again changed a number of roads from unclassified to tertiary without comment. Can you please explain the source and the logic for this change? I'm familiar with the area and have walked from Sedgbrook to Allington a number of times. From the point of view of someone actually walking along the road, it absolutely doesn't look like a tertiary road.