Hello - I'm a bit confused about this edit. My existing buildings here were accurate to the shape of the building and the cadastral map. The newly drawn buildings are less accurate (you can compare with a less-frequently-updated tiling service like some of the layers on https://graphhopper.com/maps/) and do not line up with the cadastral map - it looks like the rooves have been traced rather than the bases of the buldings. Was there an error that caused my submission to need to be redrawn?

*Oops, 'The Cake Box'

(and fixed building levels that were marked underground)

Hello - thanks for your edit. I can see you've added businesses in several countries across Europe. In future, please try to limit your changesets to small geographical areas to avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers. Thanks!

Guidance here: osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

💚

I'm not sure what editor you're using, but I'd *really* encourage you to adopt three changes to your editing:

1. *Please* check your edits before submitting. The amount you're contributing is great and it's nice to see another local editor, but accuracy is really important. osm.wiki/Accuracy

2. Do try to align your building footprints to the base of the building. It's worth using the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels layer to align the satellite imagery.
https://osmuk.org/cadastral-parcels/

3. Consider squaring your buildings' corners - this will bring curved edges into line and give near-right-angles proper right angles.
https://learnosm.org/en/hot-tips/tracing-rectangular-buildings/

Thank you!

Hello - quick issue here, seven buildings on Princes Rd have been given the house number "1", and many of them are marked as being several lasyers below ground level.

Hello - thanks for your edit. I can see you've added businesses in Portugal, Belgium and Thailand. In future, please try to limit your changesets to small geographical areas to avoid conflicts and as a courtesy to reviewers. Thanks!

Guidance here: osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Hello - it's hard to explain without visuals, but take 6 The Uplands as an example:
way/1381713422

Two of the nodes in the perimeter way have addr:housenumber and addr:street properties:
node/12792117571
node/12792117576

I guess this is because you've copied and edited the way from another on Silchester Road. The address properties on the nodes should be removed, since you've already got address properties on the way as a whole.

Please don't use the "name" key for building descriptions such as way/1381525736 "Three rear flats - Residential" or 1381665071 "Rear flats". Thanks.

name=*

Hello! Please note that the "name" feature should be used only for the primary name of a building and not a description, such as "Block fo Flats" [sic] in way/1382013516 or "Antique Shop" in way/1382013510, both on the west half of Norman Road. Thanks.

Way number 1381957720 seems to have postcodes as addr:housenumber here. Could you please check?

Another note - at least 14 of these buildings have an address node as part of the area way (outline) listing them as number 36 - could you please check?

This looks to also be true of changeset/165518584.

changeset/165518584

At least 45 of these buildings have an address node as part of the area way (outline) listing them as number 36 - could you please check?

Hello - there are four houses called "Tapshaw" in this edit. I'm guessing that's an error?

Is this an accurate change - is access not permitted or possible for any vehicles on the stretch of road south-west of Tilekiln Lane, or is it rather that traffic is restricted? Note that the lane was already tagged for private vehicle use and unclassified.

Hello - I've reverted this change on three grounds:

Firstly, that the comment describes a height restriction that does not appear in the changeset.

Secondly, that the change involves a change to the road width (+0.1m) and road type (under construction -> living street), but Maplehurst Road is not a living street per the OSM Wiki definition, even if residents would like it that way. The existing state of the map already covers the closure for non-residents while the Junction Road changes are occurring.

Thirdly, that the change includes a change of speed to 20mph that is not cited and I can find no evidence of. If I'm incorrect about this, I apologise, but the new limit should be on the entire road rather than the north end, and ideally the change tags should give some evidence of this.

Thanks.

Hello - I've reverted this change on two grounds - firstly, that the map should represent what's on the ground, not a future state, and this still is a closed road at the moment. Please see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

Secondly, because the "name" tag should not be used for non-name values. Please see osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_use_name_tag_to_describe_things

(I also note the typo in "Uknown".)

(This is a reversion of change 163947223.)