Hi Kevin, I see you are adding names like "Macroom Road" to some routes.
This is not good practice. It makes no sense when you are in Macroom and the Macroom Road takes you to Bandon for example.
Where it is official it can be added as the proper name, but in other cases, at most it should use the loc_name tag (local name), and it shouldn't extend very far from the town/village it goes from.

I understand you now.

I have also just noticed that abandoned:railway requires the following:
railway=abandoned

I guess that would be the feature we were missing.
I think I read somewhere that it is against guidelines but extremely common to map former railway features in OSM. People may get upset if you remove them.

I'll add the tag above and we should be pretty good then

By distinct vs null node, do you mean having an icon and description in the editor?
I don't think that makes any difference, it's just a feature of the editor.

Looks like historic:railway=station has about 5k uses so there should be no harm keeping it.

abandoned:railway=*

abandoned:railway=station seems to be the only documented one so I would just use that.
I think historic would be more used for a station that was famous or very important in some way

Hi,
Regarding the tagging of Farrangalway and Kinsale Railway Stations.
As they are not active stations I think the following tags should be removed:
public_transport=station
railway=station
train=yes

It's not a castle. I'm pretty sure it's the new convent (old one is a few hundred metres to south east) but I haven't been able to verify

Looks like an odd place for a charge point?

So you are putting access:permissive as standard?
Are there reasons to prefer that over access:customers?

It seems you changed the Lidl car park from access:customers to access:permissive. Is that something specific to this location?

Hi Kev,
I see you have tagged a park and wildlife park here.
Are these open to the public?
If so do they have a name?
There are also several nodes here tagged as natural=wood.
Those are for tagging a forests and should not be used in this situation.

Feel free to ask if you have any questions.

Mark

Accidentally requested review on this one

Are you sure about the following two areas being quarry?
The Maxar imagery (2018) seems to show green fields.

way/762212534

way/762212527

No worries. Good to know someone is questioning things

I haven't been out there but from looking at the ESRI imagery I am confident there is a tunnel there.

I think farmers can get grants for them as herding cows around public roads is difficult for all involved.

I can call to verify it at some point if you wish?

Will do. I wanted to try it out but couldn't see any difference. Does the feature work in Ireland?

That's brilliant, thanks

No problem. I use the iD editor and couldn't see who made the mistake and was worried there might be more like it. I'm not sure if that would normally be followed up on