Hello Ruixin Feng,
thanks for contributing to OSM and this humanitarian project. You have requested to get a feedback on your changeset.
It seems that you could take more care about squaring the buildings you add. Relatively ease to do in the editors, but makes a big difference in the quality of the map we all together create!
Missing Maps has created a nice video focussing on why it is important to square the buildings and how to do it - here is the link.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
Kind regards
You could also see a visualisation of your edit here - I hope you can easily see what the issue was...
https://osmcha.org/changesets/141688757/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141688757

Hello Evgenii, thanks for contributing to this humanitarian project in Brasil. You have requested to get a feedback on your edits for this changeset.
You have correctly identified building and added these to the database. Apart from this I have detected issues that are often seen with new users - no problem at all. It is common good practise in OSM to map buildings individually normally without shared nodes. Missing Maps has prepared a nice video on this topic - maybe it is helpful for you:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltn1VOiq5_0
Kind regards.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141605466

Hello Lucy,
thanks for contributing on this humanitarian project in Brasil and welcome to OSM.
You have checked while uploading to get a feedback on your edits.
Here is my personal feedback. You spotted the buildings and mapped them as requested in the project's instructions.
One thing you should try to improve for future edits is to square the buildings you add. Here is a link to a youtube video prepared by MissingMaps organization which shows what I mean and how to solve and avoid this issue.
You are very welcome to return contributing to OSM and / or humanitarian projects.
Kind regards.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141787989

Olá fititnt e Everton,
acabei de descobrir a discussão sobre o conjunto de alterações e estava me perguntando se, e se sim, como o histórico do node/5697078796/history poderia ser restaurado.
Restaurei o nó por meio do plug-in undelete do JOSM, movi-o para um dos cantos do edifício e o integrei ao contorno do edifício da prefeitura. Por fim, removi as tags específicas. Infelizmente, não vi nenhuma outra maneira de excluir o nó node/11215654738/ que estava anteriormente nessa posição.
Ao editar, eu me orientei em: osm.wiki/Level0#Undelete_a_node
Caso contrário, o caminho way/1210553264 já foi fornecido com tags adicionais úteis por @Everton. Muito obrigado por isso. Adicionei as tags contact:website, contact:phone e opening_hours.

@fititnt: Você poderia descrever o método usado para detectar POIs excluídos que os usuários excluíram?

Espero que você concorde com as alterações que fiz.

Hello Armando,
thanks for contributing. I just came across over some of the traffic_calming nodes you added in this changeset. Please remember that the must be part of the highway to be considered by navigation software.
Most of the nodes I found were not connected to the highways - fixed some of the issues.

Also please use more self speaking comments enabling others to quickly understand, what the focus of your edit was. In this case, e.g. "added nodes of traffic_calming along highways in Bahia". Here are some aspects why it is important to give good comments: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/134633211

Hello hussein2,
welcome to OSM and thanks for your contribution. You have requested to get a feedback on your edits - here it is:
You mapped six buildings here. It was totally correct to use the generic tag "building=yes".
Unfortunately the shape of the building contures was not very accurate. In general most buildings have a rectangular shape meaning 90° angles in the corners. To achieve 90° angles simply press the "q"-key in the editor when the object is selected. Also try to get the orientation of the building correctly. I have corrected these issues, so just kind notes for future contributions that are always very welcome!.

Here is a visualization of your changeset https://osmcha.org/changesets/142106653/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142106653

Hello Idkwhattoputhere,
thanks for contributing and supporting this project by your mapping.
In this project I came across area of "landuse=forest" here. Even though the chosen tag is correct, it is more likely that it just "natural=wood" - meaning no active utilisation takes place. Anyways I can not recommend to map features like this in projects like this one. The reason is that you are requested to stay with your mapping within the area of the task. Very often it happens that landuses go far beyond the task area. The result of mapping these features is an odd shaped area - and as it is usually not the task to map these features the neighbor contributor does not continue mapping the area. Therefore I cannot recommend mapping these features within these projects.
Anyway, keep on mapping and contributing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142004456

Hello Edwright,
thanks for contributing to the project in Brazil.
You requested to get a fewback on your edit - here you go.
You mapped quite a few objects here and assigned to all of them the building=yes property - some of the "buildings" you added are very tiny and actually not buildings at all, but cars or other objects along the street. It needs some practise and imagination to intepret the aerial imagery - so keep on practising. Also take care that the buildings you add are mapped with a rectangular shape (hit "q"-key in the editor). Here is a visualization of your edit: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141981833/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141981833

Hi Stephanietachon,
as you have requested to get a feedback on your edit, here it is from my side. You assigned a name to a building. For me it looked also odd. I think your actual intention was to state that the building has a recangular shape. In OSM this is done by correcting the geometry of objects, but not with "name=Rectangular Building". I have fixed this now. Anyways, keep on mapping.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142116256

Hello Shishir Teja,
I kindly ask you not to map trees in a closed forest. This tag is meant for isolated and distinguishable trees, e.g. to map trees on a open landscape, e.g. farmland, meadows (see also Wiki here: natural=tree)
In this case and to save your contribution I have included your tree nodes into a new area of "natural=wood" - but it would have been better if you had sticked to the instructions of the project (buildings, highways, waterways).
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141910789

Hello Nadine Devich,
thanks for contributing to this humanitarian project in Brazil.
It seems that you mapped far beyond the task limits and even outside of the project area. When working for these kind of projects it is really important to stay within the assigned area. The main reason is that only the mappings inside the boarders will be checked by more experienced mappers during validation - in this case I came more or less randomly across your edits ...
You added several building contures. Please ensure that you square the buildings you add - simply press "q"-key in the editor when the object is selected.
I am just fixing the issues with the building now.
You are very welcome to continue mapping and contributing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143178348

Hello Kern88!, thanks for contributing to OSM and the humanitarian project in Brazil. You requested to get a feedback - so here it is.
You have requested to get a feedback on your mapping - here it is:
You mapped building contures here. Almost all of them were mapped with right angles, very good.
One thing you should avoid is to assign specific tags like "building=house". Hopefully I am right (else please feel free to reply): as I think you are not a local mapper who knows the locality very well, it is recommended to use the generic tag "building=yes" instead. This leaves the decision about the actual building-type to the local community.
Keep on mapping and supporting OSM.
You can get a visualization of your changeset here:
https://osmcha.org/changesets/141890451/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141890451

Hello Angelina Reish,
thanks for contributing to OSM and the humanitarian project in Brasil.
You have requested to get a feedback on your mapping - here it is:
You mapped building contures here and assigned the tag "building=house". If you are a local mapped perfect - if not it is recommended to use the generic tag "building=yes" instead. This leaves the decision about the actual building-type to the local community.
Another thing you might try to improve is to square the buildings you add. In the editor just press "q"-key when the object is selected.
I know this was your only edit so far - though I hope that you you return one day contributing again.
Here you can see a visualization of your changeset https://osmcha.org/changesets/142106437/
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142106437

Hello dumbinom,
thanks for contributing and supporting this project by your mapping.
You mapped and area of "natural=grassland here. Even though the chosen tag could be correct, I can not recommend to map features like this in projects like this one. The reason is that you are requested to stay with your mapping within the area of the task. In case of landuses that go beyond the task area the result of mapping these is that an odd shaped area results - and as it is usually not the task to map these features the neighbor contributor does not continue mapping the area. Therefore I cannot recommend mapping these features within these projects.
I am doing currently a kind of 3rd pass validation for the project - I have decided to remove the area as there is not certainty about the actual type of landuse (could e.g. also be a meadow).
Anyways, keep on mapping.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142004945

Hello Sperberber,
thanks for contributing and supporting this project by your mapping.
You mapped and area of "natural=grassland here. Even though the chosen tag could be correct, I can not recommend to map features like this in projects like this one. The reason is that you are requested to stay with your mapping within the area of the task. In case of landuses that go beyond the task area the result of mapping these is that an odd shaped area results - and as it is usually not the task to map these features the neighbor contributor does not continue mapping the area. Therefore I cannot recommend mapping these features within these projects.
As there have been already complaints of the local Brazilian community about the mapping quality of this project (I am doing currently a kind of 3rd pass validation) I have decided to remove the area as there is not certainty about the actual type of landuse (could e.g. also be a meadow). Thanks for your understanding.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/143104402

Hello mayais11,
thanks for contributing and supporting this project by your mapping.
Here you mapped and area of "natural=wood" here. Even though the chosen tag is totally correct, I can not recommend to map features like this in projects like this one. The reason is that you are requested to stay with your mapping within the area of the task. In case of landuses that go beyond the task area the result of mapping these is that an odd shaped area results - and as it is usually not the task to map these features the neighbor contributor does not continue mapping the area. Therefore I cannot recommend mapping these features within these projects.
Anyway, keep on mapping and contributing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142109139

Hello RockhopperMapper, you asked to get a review on your edits in this changeset.
What I liked was that you sucessfully squared buildings mapped by other mappers - always good to do so. What I do not recommend is to map landuses in this kind of projects. The main reason is that you are requested to stay with your mapping within the area of the task. In case of landuses that go beyond the task area the result of mapping these is that an odd shaped area results - and as it is usually not the task to map these features the neighbor contributor does not continue mapping the area. Therefore I cannot recommend mapping these features within these projects.
Anyways keep on mapping!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142139783

Hello Shishir Teja,
working on this humanitarian project in Brasil which focussed on the mapping of highways, buildings and waterways, you added nodes of natural=tree here. This tag is meant to mark positions of individual trees, but at this position is an area (=closed way) that might be tagged as natural=wood. If trees form a line in parallel to a road you might also use "natural=tree_row", but natural=tree is not the right tag here.
FYI: I have removed most of the nodes and have included some of the nodes in two new tree_rows.
In general for projects with explicit instructions like this one I would ask you to stick to the instructions and avoid to add other features. The task is to check task's for the requested features. If nothing all requested features are mapped then just check "mapped".
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141911280

Hello Hannahtheegg,
thanks for contributing to this humanitarian OSM project in Brasil. You added an area of landuse=farmland here (way/1212503074). Although on the task's imagery from BING it looks like you are right in fact it is false as visible on other imagery (ESRI). It is a residential area and buildings have been built here in the meanwhile. I have removed this area therefore. As mapping landuses was not the focus of this project I kindly ask you to stick to what is written in the instructions.
Anyways, keep on mapping!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/142036929

Olá Daniel, muito obrigado por sua ajuda com este projeto. Você pediu um feedback sobre sua contribuição. Certifique-se de que os edifícios que você desenhou sejam retangulares. Para fazer isso, basta pressionar o botão q no editor quando o objeto estiver selecionado. Outro ponto: você selecionou "building=house" como o tipo de edifício. Essa é uma tag específica. Não tenho certeza se você tem conhecimento local. Você pode enviar um breve feedback. Se estiver contribuindo remotamente, é melhor usar apenas a tag "building=yes" e deixar a especificação mais detalhada para os mapeadores locais mais tarde.
Você pode ver uma visualização de sua contribuição aqui: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141891096
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/141891096