Changeset No. Date Contributor Comment
12017-09-19 00:06:07 UTCaharvey Hi, welcome to OSM.
I think it's appropriate to add office=it, see
Also the format for the phone number is described at it needs the +61 country code.
22017-09-19 02:42:54 UTCCloCkWeRX It's better to trace the individual building outline, not the entire block of land.

I'm going to wager that it would be very difficult to or even impossible to confirm this via survey as a web design office, I tend to prefer to leave this kind of detail off the map
12017-09-11 05:32:17 UTCnevw Would you care to elaborate why you deleted the poi with comment "delete useless Poi"
I don't see any sign that you are improving the map with updated or improved mapping for the area.
22017-09-11 06:19:39 UTCCloCkWeRX It seems like this should definitely be reverted; some of those appear to be useful internal POI.
32017-09-13 10:17:48 UTCnevw no response - reverted mass deletion of poi
12017-09-11 04:39:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Landuse=residential is more appropriate, I've fixed this now
12017-09-06 04:49:42 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi, Way 428124147 looks very different to the available imagery from all providers; are you sure its correct? If so, is it from survey or another source?
22017-09-06 13:39:54 UTCerickdeoliveiraleal You can see it in DigitalGlobal/ESRI
32017-09-08 04:02:21 UTCCloCkWeRX No problems; I must have accidentally been looking at digitalglobe premium/mapbox/bing only; though thought I checked the other layers.
12017-09-02 11:37:38 UTCaharvey I don't understand why was added back in, did they temporarily reopen this northbound section, it seems very strange to me that they would.

I deleted the northbound road in 6 months ago but it's been added b...
22017-09-07 05:56:51 UTCCloCkWeRX No probs, it was just a quick survey on my part from a moving taxi; plus referring to LPI imagery after. If you've looked at it more recently happy to roll with that.
32017-09-07 07:00:18 UTCaharvey Thanks for replying. I looked at it both just recently and about a year ago. Things change and imagery get's outdated. I know how easy it is to think it represents reality but it's not always the case.
42017-09-11 03:49:25 UTCaharvey Compare current (was like that at least for the last 6 months) to historic
12017-09-05 03:40:24 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi!
Thanks for contributing. With buildings, we tend to trace the roofline of the building - talks a bit about how to do it.

You've done the land around the house, which isn't necessarily wrong - but you might want to tag these as 'residential landuse...
12017-09-05 03:15:46 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi, welcome to openstreetmap.

Avoid adding information that can't be verified on the ground by survey, such as events ("X happened here", "Bought Y from here").

12017-09-05 03:04:10 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi!
Nice work on tracing the buildings. One thing to keep in mind is we don't tend to put people's names in or other personal data - I'll just edit those out now. Keep it up!
22017-09-05 03:05:08 UTCCloCkWeRX Oops, that might not have even been you adding the names on houses, my bad!
12017-08-23 22:14:26 UTCWarin61 Hi
You have Way 479420783 tagged as industrial power plant yet the imagery shows a parking lot. You have that tagged on Way: 71190511. So what it is? If the parking lot is on top of the power plant then use the layer tag to indicate it?
22017-08-24 05:13:31 UTCCloCkWeRX Maybe its confused with Southbank Zone Substation; which is nearby?
12017-08-21 03:15:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Might be best to tag the overall relation as a cycleway/cycle route; so it shows up on better
12017-08-07 22:45:26 UTCWarin61 Hi,
I think you are mapping the buildings? This is done from the roof outline and they are tagged building= See

The name=* is not used to describe an object - that is a no no. See

22017-08-08 03:55:37 UTCCloCkWeRX I've cleaned up a few of these - thanks for the effort, and welcome to OSM!

You might be interested in using the 'square' tool in ID to make neater outsides, you can access it via right clicking or using 'S' as a shortcut key.

As others have said, if you type 'House' into the search box on th...
12017-08-06 13:15:06 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi! You might be interested in or the JOSM plugins for it to find unmapped roads in this area
12017-08-03 12:44:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Hard to decide if this is a Sidewalk, or a Pedestrian area - its all kind of paved and merged together with the benches ontop of it.
22017-08-05 12:07:08 UTCouchjars Makes sense. I made the Kintore Ave-Pulteney St consistent with the KWS-Kintore Ave section for the time being.
12017-08-02 03:40:36 UTCCloCkWeRX You might be interested in tagging individual turbines (visible on digital globe imagery) - is an example
12017-08-02 03:38:55 UTCCloCkWeRX With this, I traced roughly where the whole business is and moved the address/business name tags to that, left the building attributes on the buildings.
12017-07-24 06:51:11 UTCCloCkWeRX With a lot of these, I marked them as a delivery company office or similar
12017-04-17 06:18:23 UTCWarin61 Errr ...
Removed a node from relation 6987348 - parking .. node is on a street outside the parking area. This now looks reasonable.

Way: 475189238 - parking ... looks bad. Please take a look at it. I have removed some nodes from it .. one of them the same one as the above parking relation.

22017-07-24 04:12:29 UTCCloCkWeRX Fixed
12017-07-20 06:00:04 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap :)

I changed this from a 'path' to a driveway, and added the houses either side.

You might like to add addresses on the individual houses instead of the driveway itself - that will make it show up in navigation apps and similar that use OSM.

12017-07-19 05:40:19 UTCCloCkWeRX The prision is available on digital globe, and appears substantially constructed now
12017-07-13 01:33:13 UTCCloCkWeRX Should probably be building=hospital if its still a hospital, or building = yes if its not anymore
12017-07-12 12:46:56 UTCCloCkWeRX This is actually Beech Avenue according to (that is powered by the same data as is on; which we have explicit permission to use)
22017-07-12 13:05:12 UTCnevw Well spotted.
12017-07-11 06:51:13 UTCnevw The OpenStreetMap is not suitable for adding personal details like "Home in AEU"
22017-07-12 09:00:53 UTCCloCkWeRX I've removed this for now as it seems very unlikely to be an actual confectionery store
32017-07-12 09:36:18 UTCnevw Thanks
Ok DaRa uses that pretty icon for most edits :/
12017-07-10 19:52:13 UTCyurasi Hi DavidJH
Thanks for contributing to OSM. I noticed that you was added highways that not coincide with Bing imagery. Could you share the source you used?
22017-07-10 23:25:35 UTCDavidJH Hi the source is satellite view of google maps.
32017-07-12 08:51:15 UTCCloCkWeRX Unfortunately that's copyrighted / not compatible with the OpenStreetMap licencing.
42017-07-12 08:58:43 UTCCloCkWeRX I've removed the service roads for now; we'll add a user note to recheck this when LPI imagery catches up to whats on the ground.
12017-07-11 09:39:15 UTCaharvey I've changed to use club=sport rather than shop=sport
22017-07-11 09:39:36 UTCaharvey What's ?
32017-07-12 03:14:21 UTCCloCkWeRX I think its better tagged as
42017-07-12 03:14:55 UTCCloCkWeRX SOme detail on it -
52017-07-12 03:44:15 UTCaharvey I'll do a ground survey to confirm its a fitness station. I thought they might be adding some kind of fitness club which is run there.
12017-07-05 09:41:47 UTCCloCkWeRX You might be interested in - you can see a lot of roads in the new residential area
12017-07-04 05:29:56 UTCCloCkWeRX With the Dick Smith shop, shop=vacant might be better tagging
12017-06-27 07:29:47 UTCCloCkWeRX I've fleshed out some of the newly visible roads in the development via digitalglobe imagery, but if you are in the area and can survey the names of some of them, that'd be handy!
12017-06-27 07:13:08 UTCCloCkWeRX I added some of the roads being built visible in Digitalglobe imagery, but its far from well mapped. If you are familar with the area, did you want to have a look and possibly survey the current state?
12017-06-25 11:26:01 UTCCloCkWeRX With the playground on the beach, is that actually a playground? Imagery doesn't show it; and I don't recall seeing anything like that last time I was in that area...
12017-06-25 11:20:26 UTCCloCkWeRX With the buildings, try the 'S' shortcut to 'square' them (or right click, 'square') - can help get the edges.
You can also disconnect houses from each other if they "snap" together accidentally.
12017-06-23 08:07:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Is it better to maybe leave the address tags in place? I tend to use shop=vacant
22017-06-23 13:57:27 UTCQwertii Wasn't any address tags on it so nothing really of value left, I'll update it with whatever pops up there later though
12017-06-23 08:00:08 UTCCloCkWeRX You can see the actual buildings on the digital globe imagery (map layers -> background -> digital globe standard).

I added the buildings as big 'blobs', you might like to add address points in if you know them
12017-06-21 05:37:18 UTCCloCkWeRX I've updated from newer imagery, if you know the road names/can survey around there that'd be helpful :)
12017-06-18 23:55:49 UTCWarin61 Humm looses a lot because there are no heights . so the tower gains nothing over the rest of the building.
The building:part ... that needs a building=* to sit in .. I have made the outline as a building=church way and then have the tower as a way with building:part=tower ... no multipoygon relati...
22017-06-19 02:56:37 UTCCloCkWeRX Yeah, happy with that, just don't ask me to ride out and survey it again!
12017-06-05 23:29:07 UTCaharvey I wonder if this was entered by the business or by a 3rd party SEO business.

Either way please these on how to tag accepted payments and opening hours:

as the way you've entered them isn't ...
22017-06-06 05:36:42 UTCCloCkWeRX I tweaked the tagging
12017-06-05 12:50:34 UTCCloCkWeRX A strava user says: "L'itinéraire ne passe pas par la route. Il coupe au travers la foret au lieu de suivre la route. Il n'y a pas de sentier de foret à cet endroit. Merci de corriger ce problème. "
22017-06-05 13:00:24 UTCcaptain_slow can you provide a link to this problem on strava or put an osm note to the exact position of the problem? i think the osm note would be better because local mapper could see it (i am not a local mapper). unfortunately it is not very clear from your message where the problem exactly is.
32017-06-05 13:06:26 UTCCloCkWeRX - this section of path between the two roads is where they indicated.
42017-06-05 13:15:07 UTCcaptain_slow thank you for the clarification, i have put a note there because i am not familiar with the situation there.
12017-06-05 09:24:55 UTCnevw These is no reason to delete these private roads which someone else has mapped. The information provided may serve the company staff and visitors quite well. You should instead add the tag access=no or access=private.
22017-06-05 10:33:46 UTCtoxicantidote Noted. The location of these roads was incorrect anyway following a 2015 redevelopment.

I'll try and update these more appropriately.
32017-06-05 12:01:10 UTCCloCkWeRX Have tweaked this a little further, based on DigitalGlobe imagery
12017-06-05 03:53:45 UTCCloCkWeRX Interesting, I can see it on imageery but its not named yet.

Do you know if its stage 2 or stage 3 of the development (
22017-06-06 11:29:54 UTCnrs1958 Not sure of status of development. Just drove that road the other day. I agree it appears the road may not yet be officially named. My guess it will be continuation of Delbridge but will amend if necessary.
12017-05-31 03:59:27 UTCCloCkWeRX Does it need some kind of theme park tagging?
22017-05-31 04:05:22 UTCKNAPPO Ive just added the name "Waterworld" to the building as it seemed the most appropriate place for a name marker.
12017-05-30 06:22:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Is there a retaining wall or similar we should tag with waterway=dam near the spillway?
12017-05-26 02:21:25 UTCCloCkWeRX Howdy, can you add to the note on ? Its a bit hard to tell the current state when looking at LPI imagery
12017-05-24 05:04:30 UTCCloCkWeRX Thoughts on classification of Ringwood Bypass ( ?
12017-05-24 04:56:10 UTCCloCkWeRX Howdy, thoughts on ?
12016-10-23 22:26:17 UTCPizza1016 Oops, got a little too trigger-happy with the upload button. Meant to say in edit summary: "Minor fixes to existing data"
22017-05-24 03:58:16 UTCCloCkWeRX Hey, are you able to weigh in on ?
32017-05-24 04:21:40 UTCPizza1016 Yup that should have been split. Fixed now.
12017-05-24 03:30:12 UTCCloCkWeRX Howdy, thoughts on ?
22017-05-24 03:56:17 UTCTheSwavu Not really. Might want to ask the original mapper:
12017-05-24 02:55:45 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work, I never quite manage to get all of the addresses while travelling along here. Welcome [back to] OSM!
12017-05-18 03:53:15 UTCQwertii *** SPAM *** not displayed - visit
22017-05-18 04:15:05 UTCCloCkWeRX All fixed re attributes.

All good re the duplicates, I added the other one from survey like... 1-2 weeks ago max? I reckon it'll be pretty rare it crops up
12017-05-15 03:17:25 UTCQwertii Where are you sourcing this information from? Two of the tracks you have marked as asphalt look very much like dirt/gravel from satellite images.
22017-05-17 06:23:46 UTCCloCkWeRX The one near heatherbank is definately loose gravel/dirt; from survey. Its easy to accidentally get a bit carried away with street complete and harder to undo mistakes.
12017-05-16 03:15:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work. If you like, I can help flesh out a bit of Wingfield, Dry Creek, Gepps Cross area
12017-05-13 12:02:15 UTCCloCkWeRX There's better imagery available in the Digitalglobe Standard layer
12017-05-09 11:50:28 UTCQwertii Should the website be the site root instead of the individual stores page? When a user clicks to see the website the probably want to see the stores products and similar as they already have the contact info and location from OSM.
22017-05-11 13:59:51 UTCCloCkWeRX I've tended to err for the webpage most directly describing a specific physical location; ie so you can find contact details or hours.
12017-05-08 12:58:25 UTCCloCkWeRX Any chance the rug place is "Hali Rugs" rather than Rugs Hall?
22017-05-09 07:37:20 UTCQwertii Yeah looks like it is, You can see how I got the two mixed up though
12017-04-26 07:37:03 UTCtonyf1 Are you sure there is a shop here? There's nothing in the sat photo.
22017-04-27 00:32:51 UTCCloCkWeRX I think its
32017-04-27 07:13:33 UTCtonyf1 Thanks. Then I suspect the correct placement is 1km south, near viewpoint #2283984229 and "Corner Tasman Highway and Sherbourne Road"
12017-04-26 03:41:42 UTCCloCkWeRX This unfortunately seems very offset from GPS traces (see and imagery (which aligns to the gps traces. Is it worth moving everything in one go?
22017-04-27 23:38:27 UTCkaritotp Hi CloCkWeRX,
That seems to be one of my first editions in OSM, i am wondering if the imagery have been updated for that area or if I used a different source, because I do not understand which was the reason for the offset from the imagery.
Anyway, thank you for notifying me about this. I see that...
12017-04-15 11:41:09 UTCCloCkWeRX might not quite exist, isn't in - have taken it out for now.
12017-04-15 01:12:06 UTCCloCkWeRX Nice work! If there's a particular area you'd like to flesh out a bit, more than happy to help (particularly roads with shops/other POI on them) - have done a bit around Glenside for example.
12017-04-15 01:09:10 UTCCloCkWeRX Adelaide railway station seems to be duplicated in this one.

Bit hard to decide if airbnbs are tourist accomodation or not.
12017-04-08 12:35:38 UTCCloCkWeRX Oh, let me see what's on my bike camera from today, rode around a bunch of Glenelg... will upload to mapillary
22017-04-08 13:35:28 UTCQwertii That would be sweet, loads of stores around here that need to be added.
12017-03-19 00:30:55 UTCnevw Welcome to the
You have added a few shop=bookmaker to the map where none exist.
Are you able to correct these edits in the 2 changesets you have uploaded?
22017-04-03 05:05:37 UTCCloCkWeRX These are now removed
12017-04-03 05:04:46 UTCCloCkWeRX Removed these, there's no evidence of any of them from imagery.
12017-04-03 05:03:36 UTCCloCkWeRX Removed this, its not verifiable
12017-04-03 05:03:29 UTCCloCkWeRX Removed this, its not verifiable
12017-04-03 02:37:48 UTCtonyf1 Hi
You continue to add features which do not seem to exist. Maybe you are not aware you are editing a public map? Please reply to this comment as well as one two weeks ago.
22017-04-03 05:02:21 UTCCloCkWeRX I removed this.
12017-03-26 12:14:09 UTCCloCkWeRX I think some of these buildings are double mapped; its a bit hard to tell which is the more accurate changeset
12017-03-26 09:59:42 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah thanks for fixing that up, and welcome to OSM!
12017-03-23 02:47:16 UTCCloCkWeRX What's the source for these, bing doesn't appear to have the buildings.

Unfortunately a lot of these seem duplicated as well; and I can't pick which is the most accurate version
22017-03-23 12:40:56 UTCsrividya_c Hi CloCkWeRX,

Thank you for flagging this changeset.

We have reverted changeset 30347008 which created the duplicates and cleaned up the area.

The main source we used to trace these buildings was Mapbox Imagery. As a local mapper, it would be great if you verify these buildings existence ...
32017-03-25 10:43:19 UTCCloCkWeRX The current mapbox imagery seems to be blank, which is weird. Non free imagery suggests they do exist though.
12017-03-23 22:49:14 UTCWarin61 Why layer=1 for these buildings?

At the moment relationship 6592787 has 3 of these buildings .. all layer=1 ... and they over lap one another ... so in order to 'fix' the problem I'd like to understand the use of the layer tag here.
22017-03-23 23:01:33 UTCLeon K Hi, not sure about the layer tag to be honest, I can't remember a specific reason for it. The reason for the three spearate parts is they are different heights and colours. It's part of the 3d tagging.
The layer isn't associated with that but might be because of the underground car park.
32017-03-25 10:40:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Better to model the different chunks as building:part I reckon; and the building 'footprint' as a building.

A bit hard to get them all in a relation properly with ID; dunno about other editors
42017-03-25 11:01:36 UTCWarin61 Interesting and dynamic architecture is hard to map... particularly from satellite imagery! :) Don't think any of the 2D editors handle it well. Now if we modeled the world in solid modeler? :)))
My thinking at the moment is to map it by the roof over laps .. at least that is visible from the image...
52017-03-25 11:14:12 UTCLeon K I've been there plenty of times, only issue I can see was one overlap, which i've just removed. Hopefully that solves whatever error you're seeing.
62017-03-25 11:16:06 UTCLeon K A single building and building parts might work better, might look into that. 3D tagging isn't so bad, eventually you learn how to see the result from the tags.
72017-03-26 00:41:27 UTCWarin61 Thanks Leon. I'll have a look at it later .. There should be a method of tagging the roof too so that they don't clash.
12017-03-21 06:11:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Its probably better to map the individual cafes/restaurants as points
12017-03-21 05:30:07 UTCCloCkWeRX With I dropped it to landuse=commercial only, so that the individual buildings inside of it wouldn't overlap.
12017-03-21 05:19:57 UTCCloCkWeRX This area might need a bit of cleanup to match the bing imagery available - its close, but not quite right.

You might be interested to find the 'square' tool, or shortcut key = S in ID; which makes it a lot easy to get neat looking buildings.

I've tweaked this a bit to remove overlaps
12017-03-17 02:48:40 UTCCloCkWeRX What's the source of this change, it doesn't match Bing, Mapbox or even some non-free aerial imagery very well
22017-03-17 02:51:52 UTCnibennett The source is the developer of the estates maps, (I'm someone who has bought a block in the estate)
I mapped out the whole estate on the developers maps since none of the other imagery is up to date yet
32017-03-17 03:47:56 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah hah. Probably shouldn't go from the potentially copyrighted developer maps; but since you've got a block there you've probably surveyed it directly :)

Nice work on the detail around freeling and other areas, welcome to OSM!
42017-03-17 04:47:08 UTCnibennett Fair enough. Yeah I've definitely seen it all just used their map of it that they gave us to help do it when I was at the computer.
12017-03-17 03:18:20 UTCCloCkWeRX I swapped some of these to 'farmland' (more for the paddocks and similar), as opposed to farmyard (the bit nearer the houses, usually with a shed or two that is bigger than a typical backyard)
12017-03-17 03:09:46 UTCCloCkWeRX This one is a bit odd, its not really a reservoir like a farm dam so much as an emergency? drainage area... and if the water was that close to the road/houses, would be a bit of a problem. May better as for the main 'drain' part of it (centre/...
12017-03-16 11:10:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice, we did some work to add names, but not so much work to find the ones that were slightly off from info
22017-03-17 04:50:48 UTCcleary Thanks for the feedback.
12017-03-15 23:52:02 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice, hadn't spotted the building mapping in Gawler! Will chip in a few hours to it at some point
12017-03-15 13:22:22 UTCCloCkWeRX This seems to have broken the Largs Bay admin boundary, and turned it into a highway, going to revert in a bit
22017-03-15 23:28:19 UTCCloCkWeRX Alright, that's reverted now - the blue line through the park was actually an administrative boundary, not quite sure why it looked like a road
12017-03-09 04:11:29 UTCMartini097 you've added the tag building=yes to some large areas of land that are also tagged landuse=commercial. the normal convention is to only place the tag building=yes on specific/individual buildings and not large areas. the tagging of landuse=commercial is enough to let people know that there will be b...
22017-03-10 01:11:52 UTCLee Drury Right, so if an area already has building=yes and it is a commercial property I would also tag as landuse=commercial?

And if there is an area that is a known as landuse=commercial but lacks individually tagged buildings, I can designate the whole areas as landuse=commercial?
32017-03-11 08:36:25 UTCCloCkWeRX I've tweaked how is modelled - tracing the individual buildings inside of it.

It can be a little tricky with the ID editor making some assumptions about something being a building, when you are tracing the whole area.
12017-03-09 11:49:39 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work! For the buildings, try the 'S' shortcut key to square them.

Keep up the mapping!
12017-03-08 08:38:59 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice, I hadn't noticed the house mapping you added - thanks! We've finally fleshed out around here almost completely.
12017-03-02 12:28:29 UTCCloCkWeRX One thing I've been meaning to do more of is indoor mapping - room=shop ( combined with POI tagging kind of thing - shows the results. For places around Rundle Mall, it might be a handy tool

22017-03-03 06:28:39 UTCQwertii Oh cool, I was wondering how multilevel buildings would be mapped.
12017-02-20 02:35:07 UTCCloCkWeRX Is it Strickland or Strickleland? Through work we have some (non free) documentation that suggests its not Strickleland.
12017-02-14 01:51:43 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work. You can use the 'S' shortcut to square buildings, which makes them a bit neater/easier to trace. Keep it up
22017-02-14 03:11:38 UTCPizzicato Wolf Thanks for the tip. I'll amend all of them now.
32017-02-14 03:11:45 UTCQwertii Oh neat, I didn't know there was a shortcut for it. That will make things much faster.
12017-02-12 23:23:39 UTCaharvey This looks like a residential home, is it really a cosmetics shop named "home"?
22017-02-13 03:17:12 UTCCloCkWeRX Could have meant (presumably at the shopping centre up the road); or maybe ... but that's in a different spot.
12017-02-11 03:30:09 UTCTheSwavu I'm going to go out on a limb here but I'm not sure that the carriageways of Port Road cross over. Unless, of course, this is some sort of SA specific traffic calming ;-)
22017-02-12 10:09:06 UTCCloCkWeRX New thing we are trialling here - Car Gladiators. Two drive in, one drives out!

Its weirdly shaped, because they've dug a bit hole where the northmost lane used to be and put the traffic right next to the other lane - previously separated by a wide median.

I've tweaked the two not to intersect...
12017-02-10 06:37:31 UTCCloCkWeRX Good start on the housing in this area. I've used the 'square buildings' tool in ID (shortcut: S) to straighten up a few of these to better match the imagery. Keep it up
12017-02-07 04:35:47 UTCCloCkWeRX Fairly sure the HJ's on Glen Osmond Road is a lot further south east
22017-02-07 10:16:37 UTCboldnesz I'm pretty sure of this one. I had lunch there, it's next to the gas station.

It maybe changed meanwhile or there is another HJ's at the place you're talking about
32017-02-07 23:52:26 UTCCloCkWeRX is the existing petrol station/HJ's combination. puts only one there.
12017-02-07 04:05:58 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work! I've been vaguely meaning to trace more housing/farmland along Flaxley Road - keep it up :)
12017-02-02 12:37:57 UTCCloCkWeRX If you are around there, any chance of grabbing street numbers along Smith Street?
12017-02-01 05:37:52 UTCnevw This edit is incorrect. You have changed place=locality to natural=water for Port Douglas. Do you want me to correct it or are you able to fix it?
22017-02-01 12:59:06 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted this one for the moment
12017-01-25 03:38:27 UTCCloCkWeRX This doesn't match imagery, or a lot of GPS traces from improve-osm - how certain are you of the GPS traces you used?
22017-01-27 03:20:49 UTCChad Wamsley-Taylor you might want to check any "updated" satellite imagery. I personally travel on this road at least once per week. you are looking at old imagery of the old road before construction was completed. Road is still accessible to Mine personal, which could explain updated GPS traces, Public have...
32017-01-27 05:29:55 UTCCloCkWeRX > Road is still accessible to Mine personal
Maybe that bit could be tagged with highway=service access=private or similar?

Are you able to upload your GPS traces into OSM by any chance?

The data in is fairly dense and recent - 2016-8-23 2:55:34, 9+ trips/50 gps points per ti...
42017-01-27 05:34:31 UTCCloCkWeRX Looking at non-free imagery, I can see the new road - I might just re-add the old one with appropriate tagging/notes
52017-01-27 05:37:35 UTCChad Wamsley-Taylor The road has been physically blocked off at the northern end, so only accessible by mine authorized vehicles, GPS tracks could have been a external float carrying mine equipment in from mine site. road is all overgrown. can't upload our GPS tracks unfortunately.
62017-01-27 05:43:10 UTCChad Wamsley-Taylor its also blocked off at the south, at Railway crossing, no Physical connection at either end to Peak Downs Mine Road
12017-01-26 08:37:01 UTCnevw This appears to be a residential area and you have mapped a river, pier, water??
Has this much development occurred recently? This is a public map.
22017-01-26 12:21:52 UTCCloCkWeRX There's no river in Sunbury, I think its safe to say this can be reverted
32017-01-26 12:39:03 UTCnevw Deleted now
12017-01-14 11:52:39 UTCCloCkWeRX I've checked a lot of these against LPI basemap imagery, and most are pretty accurate. A few (Evergreen Drive) aren't in LPI; suggesting maybe the master plan was revised. Are you able to find out if anything has been dropped from the development?
22017-01-15 06:36:10 UTCZhent Not sure. I would recommend on the ground surveys as the best way to keep up from here on out.
12017-01-09 03:52:14 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi - doesn't appear on bing imagery or mapbox imagery, are you sure its right?
12017-01-02 10:39:24 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:49:08 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted, think thats all
12017-01-02 10:40:15 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:48:11 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12017-01-02 10:37:48 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:46:37 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12017-01-02 10:40:52 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:44:34 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12017-01-02 10:41:30 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:43:23 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12017-01-02 10:41:57 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:41:47 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12017-01-02 10:42:37 UTCsb9576 Please remove your graffiti. Any contributions you make to improve the OSM are most welcome, but your graffiti is not an improvement.
22017-01-02 11:40:56 UTCCloCkWeRX Reverted
12016-12-31 02:16:26 UTCkeeponpedalling A deleted section of track named 'Creek Loop' is visible in strava mapping. It is an obsolete section that I deleted some time ago but I can't figure out how to deleted it from strava. If someone can help it would be appreciated.
22017-01-01 10:26:07 UTCCloCkWeRX Strava will (eventually) update, though it may take a number on months
12017-01-01 03:59:26 UTCCloCkWeRX With these, it's probably better to tag them as 'sidewalk'. talks about it a bit in detail
12017-01-01 03:21:07 UTCCloCkWeRX I've tweaked how these are modelled - leisure=pitch and sport=tennis for example are a bit better. Welcome to openstreetmap :)
12016-12-03 23:24:18 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work, I don't get up there to survey often enough
22016-12-04 04:10:43 UTCQwertii Im up in Aldgate most days. If there was a mobile editor that wasn't extremely difficult to use I would have added some more by now.
12016-12-03 23:22:02 UTCCloCkWeRX Nice work! I should probably expand the coverage of Glenelg down south till it meets up with your work
12016-11-19 09:45:17 UTCCloCkWeRX I don't see much GPS activity for ; do you know if its accurate? Do you have any more information on the construction?
12016-11-17 14:36:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Its a bit hard to make sense of - improve-osm suggests one set of GPS traces, strava heatmap another; neither are quite how its traced at the moment.

22016-11-19 00:32:32 UTClcmortensen The road here was realigned in 2015 with the replacement of the Dashwood Pass rail overbridge (see The current route is a best guess awaiting an accurate GPS trace.
12016-11-14 11:07:16 UTCCloCkWeRX I updated a few roads like which seemed to have completed construction - do you know if the speed limit of 15km/h is still valid? Did you want to trace the other nearby areas just to the north as well?
12016-11-11 02:39:28 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if the road works have started or similar? There's no GPS traces via yet, so I'm assuming its very early days
12016-11-11 02:37:37 UTCCloCkWeRX shows a bit of a different story with - are you able to take a look with your knowledge of things on the ground and decide if that bridleway is right; or the gps trace a bit over fro...
12016-11-10 04:01:45 UTCCloCkWeRX Hey, just wanted to say nice work with the house mapping around here!

We use mapbox streets at work as a property industry company - is what it looks like in our system.

The stuff on the left, blurred, are recent sales along Danks street, which includes things like Lan...
12016-11-08 12:37:50 UTCCloCkWeRX Keep it up with the building mapping :)
12016-11-05 10:56:48 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you happen to know the surface of ? From a strava user note: there is a route but it is not a official road more like a farm track and unsuitable for road bikes
22016-11-05 11:13:08 UTCbigalxyz123 Hi - I had a look on Google Street View at both ends of the route. It's a narrow farm road but has a good surface. I've added it as a service road, but with the original footpath way still there in the same place. I'm never quite sure - with public footpaths that are also roads - what the best way t...
32016-11-07 08:03:21 UTCCloCkWeRX Track can be a good compromise in that case.
12016-11-07 03:20:14 UTCCloCkWeRX shows a bit better layout of some of the roads which you might be interested in
12016-11-05 13:24:20 UTCCloCkWeRX I think this might have misaligned
12016-11-05 10:32:46 UTCCloCkWeRX Is this cycleway better modelled as part of the footpath, with bicycle=yes?
12016-11-04 01:00:41 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if the bridge (see is actually there still?
22016-11-04 03:46:09 UTCaharvey The bride is there but it's a pipeline not a footbridge. I've fixed this up via

Not sure why it was marked as a path in
12016-10-29 12:02:43 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if is a private road at all?

A strava user reports: "Camino privado cerrado"
22016-10-31 15:15:58 UTCBaconcrisp I'm not sure.
12016-10-29 10:48:39 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah, thanks for adding Herron Todd White :) We're more of a valuation company though!
12016-10-27 04:56:37 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi, you might know if is resolvable or accurate
22016-10-27 14:57:35 UTCFledge Sorry, I just used OS OpenData Locator. They could be wrong, of course.
12016-10-27 04:45:19 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if the intersection at is accurate? Imagery suggests something different to what is mapped.

Strava users report: "it will always send me up this road against traffic. I must deviate around it one block and then cut over.", which I ...
22016-10-27 13:36:15 UTCfayor A quanto mi risulta l'incrocio è mappato correttamente. L'immagine si riferisce a un periodo precedente.
12016-10-27 04:42:49 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you happen to know what the condition of is on the ground?

Strava users report a problem, and the heatmap suggests the imagery is out of date ... but you've mapped accurately to aerial imagery.
22016-10-27 11:08:18 UTCoglord Yes the heatmap is correct. The cycle path has been realigned as per the Apple Maps aerial imagery.
12016-10-19 05:28:01 UTCnevw You are meant to enter the tags name=* in English in this country.
If you want to add name=* in Chinese use name:zh=* instead.
22016-10-19 23:28:12 UTCCloCkWeRX Lets revert the renames and move it to the right tags, I think!
32016-10-19 23:33:20 UTCnevw Agreed.
42016-10-19 23:49:54 UTCCloCkWeRX All sorted out; some merged with the better features, some removed.

12016-10-16 03:06:21 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi! I notice you've added a lot of notes for the bikeway; probably something more suited to a bike routing engine - are they in there for a specific purpose?
22016-10-16 04:37:09 UTCsamsavvas Hi, I'm afraid that this was an unsuccessful (or at least an uncompleted) experiment on my part to see if OSM could be used to develop a guide to the Outer Harbour Greenway. I'm very happy to remove these notes but I can't figure out how - any guidance would be appreciated. I have no real idea what ...
32016-10-16 21:14:01 UTCCloCkWeRX No probs, I can clean these up. A good end user routing engine would be something like Strava's route builder - lets you generate a course with elevation, based on popularity. Others: RideWithGPS, mapmyride, runkeeper, etc, though they dont use open data under the hood.

42016-10-16 22:26:15 UTCsamsavvas Thanks a lot for these suggestions - I’ll follow them up and get back to this project. The PortBUG (of which I’m secretary) has had a long interest in providing maps and directions to using this Greenway for naive or younger users, principally because the Gov’t seems reluctant to d...
12016-10-15 13:36:12 UTCtrigpoint Are you absolutely certain about this?
Have you been there and checked? Did this Strava user send you a photo?

Firstly a missing unclassified road in the Midlands has alarm bells ringing, there is as much chance of finding Elvis selling fruit and veg on Leicester Market.
So did you check the av...
22016-10-16 15:11:08 UTCRichard Geograph photos:
32016-10-16 16:28:12 UTCtrigpoint I have changed this to a track
42016-10-16 21:07:12 UTCCloCkWeRX Thanks, that seems a more appropriate modelling
12016-10-15 10:45:29 UTCCloCkWeRX Strava user report - "Geen doorgaande weg (ook voor fietsers)" for - but I'm not really sure if that means access private or something else. Do you happen to know?
22016-10-15 14:54:06 UTCSander H No idea, I only cleaned up an old tag on this road that originated from the AND import in 2006 while performing the BAG import cleanup steps in this area. Maybe it's better to add a note so that local mappers can check.
12016-10-13 14:48:15 UTCCloCkWeRX Is this complete? Strava GPS traces suggest it is.
There are also Strava user error reports:
Temos um circuito muito bom neste local e não podemos marcar como rota. Aguardo ajuda.
22016-10-13 21:05:38 UTCRonnie Nys The Google satellite images are very recent (2016) and show that these new roads are already in use. When zooming in on the following link you can see the details.,-38.3050097,1191m/data=!3m1!1e3?hl=nl

32016-10-14 01:11:14 UTCCloCkWeRX Thanks, I've updated it based on the GPS traces
12016-10-13 14:56:01 UTCCloCkWeRX Strava user error report: "I'm trying to take the Main Road onto 460, but it keeps backtracking and taking an imaginary street through the woods. " with - I think mapbox imagery might be viewable to double check some of these paths
12016-10-13 13:42:14 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi,
There's strava user error reports like:
"Won't allow route through a paved bike path. Shows as a dashed line path on map but it is an established paved bike path. "


"There is a sidewalk here, but no vehicle access. Should be able to route. "

Are the fences (htt...
12016-10-13 13:23:13 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi, I've got an old (2 years ago) report from strava errors: "Although there is currently construction on the longfellow bridge, it is open to bicycle traffic in both directions. I can't get the my route to go over the bridge though."

Do you know if that's the case currently?
12016-10-10 13:08:28 UTCnevw You have mapped a Post Office here with the name HOME.
Is there really a Post Office here called HOME?
Is it instead your home?
Please review this object and tag correctly thanks.
22016-10-10 14:11:28 UTCCloCkWeRX Looking at Australia post, there's several offices on Sydney Rd; and the already mapped post office on Grantham Street.
12016-10-10 05:08:41 UTCCloCkWeRX Hi - - you added what looks to be a phone number for this restaurant, is that the case?
12016-10-08 05:33:57 UTCCloCkWeRX suggests that these roads need to be realigned to GPS traces
12016-09-23 05:37:36 UTCCloCkWeRX and similar don't appear to be visible on imagery
22016-10-07 07:46:33 UTCwerner2101 Do you think it's usefull to discuss a 6 year old changeset? If fixed an import error long time ago.
32016-10-07 08:29:45 UTCCloCkWeRX Given that imagery which is seemingly more recent doesn't appear to show the buildings... its worth spot checking and removing obviously wrong data probably.

I've picked this up from reviewing GPS errors via Feel free to track down the original import changeset and raise it there...
12016-10-02 16:57:52 UTCCloCkWeRX Strava users report: "Should be able to cross from south to north here" re - but imagery is inconclusive. Do you know if this is a wall for certain, or could it be a tunnel?
22016-10-03 21:12:15 UTCmrcookie I was there 2 times. The first time there was no MA-3440 and the Cami was uninterrupted. The second time the MA-3440 was REALLY new and interrupted the Cami, and no way to cross. A car had to go backwards up the hill to Llubí, because there even was no way to turn the car and te navi didn't k...
12016-09-27 05:15:38 UTCCloCkWeRX looks complete according to bing imagery, is that the case?
22016-09-27 08:26:22 UTCSomeoneElse One of the Edinburgh locals will have more info, but the current road state looks like it mirrors the work being done to support the (as yet unopened) new bridge, and the imagery looks like the old road state before any of the work started.
12016-09-27 04:39:02 UTCCloCkWeRX These are close, but don't align to strava gps traces ( vs for example)
12016-09-24 09:39:26 UTCCloCkWeRX There's no imagery for that seems to match up with the road
12016-09-23 05:01:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Theres no GPS traces or imagery matching Cawburn Road, do you have any photos or similar?
22016-09-23 14:18:07 UTCtms13 Yes, I have the photos, but I don't generally publish my survey photos or GPS tracks. Is there something in particular that you want a picture of?
12016-09-21 19:16:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know when this bike path will open?
22016-09-21 20:31:44 UTCBoxBike no, they are still working.
12016-09-12 05:12:34 UTCCloCkWeRX Bing suggests is finished, as well as strava user reports:

"There's a trail here, but I can't route there
Created 2016-08-29 (13 days ago)

Existe un puente en este lugar para cruzar la ría pero no la reconoce el constructor de rutas. Me ma...
22016-09-12 07:30:25 UTCEdgarDS Teoricamente, esta prohibida la circulacion por el puente por la situacion del mismo, pero ni se han empezado las obras, ni es muy dificil colarse para transitar por el.
12016-08-09 04:24:36 UTCCloCkWeRX This duplicates existing data
12016-08-05 02:50:23 UTCCloCkWeRX Strava users report way 345760205 is just farmland now, imagery tends to concur. Can you resurvey and perhaps add notes to it to reflect whats on the ground?
22016-08-05 15:38:02 UTCtrigpoint Historic OS 1-25k mapping shows a PROW on this line, unless it has been legally extinguished it should not be removed.
There is a legal right to walk a PROW irrespective of condition.
12016-07-27 13:19:27 UTCCloCkWeRX This seems to add a few 'almost junction' errors in according to keepright - - and it's a little off from the bing/mapbox imagery. I don't suppose you could grab photos of it via mapillary next time you are in the area?
22016-07-27 13:35:47 UTCB 67 Hi, I've never been here. Had never heard of keepright or mapillary until now either. So much to learn. I'm sure the paths are are a little off as I only based them on photos elsewhere. Feel free to make corrections. Or I'll try to do so myself when I can.
12016-06-27 04:42:53 UTCCloCkWeRX What's the source for - there's no mapbox/bing imagery for it afaict
12016-03-29 12:39:36 UTCinas I notice this changeset changed Crookwell from a GNB town to a GNB locality. This isn't the case - Crookwell is still a GNB town. There is also a locality Crookwell. Was this a scripted change?
22016-03-29 22:05:41 UTCTheSwavu No this was a manual edit. I did a comparison between all of the place nodes in NSW tagged with ref:nswgnb and checked to make sure that their place:nswgnb were still correct. These are all the places that needed their place:nswgnb changed to "LOCALITY".

In the case of Crookwell the pla...
32016-03-29 22:21:00 UTCinas I'm really sceptical that GNB are changing towns to localities in their database - especially for places like Crookwell. Perhaps we need to understand the changes actually being made to reflect these in OSM.
42016-06-21 14:28:44 UTCCloCkWeRX is still marked as a village, but it doesn't really look too inhabited - is it better tagged as place=locality?
52016-06-22 00:38:52 UTCTheSwavu I didn't change the place tags on any of these only the place:nswgnb:

Personally if a place doesn't make it onto the list of UCLs:

I'd t...
62016-06-22 00:48:22 UTCCloCkWeRX Yup, that prompted it
72016-06-22 04:48:28 UTCTheSwavu Good-O. I won't bother then.
12016-06-14 04:31:23 UTCCloCkWeRX - do you know if this is still under construction? Imagery is inconclusive
22016-06-20 09:03:37 UTChulius Well, these are actually abandoned works on this road. As you can see, it's an alternative way a few meters southern completely functional so I'm afraid it never going to be concluded. What do you think it's the better option to tag this situation?
32016-06-20 09:14:08 UTCCloCkWeRX I think if its physically ok to drive on and connects to places, marking it as a highway service/residential/etc is OK.

I just rechecked bing/mapbox imagery and it looks as though road is physically there...
12016-06-18 08:05:06 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if the proposed roads have been built? Satellite imagery is inconclusive
12016-06-14 10:56:34 UTCHugo André Sousa Yes. It still's under construction.
Part of it is constructed, the other is not.
The road is blocked.
22016-06-14 23:05:46 UTCCloCkWeRX Yeah - I split the bits that were physically finished and visible in imagery off from the stuff that wasn't, changeset comment was perhaps a bit broad
12016-06-14 01:42:18 UTCCloCkWeRX - is this still under construction?
22016-06-14 06:40:11 UTCzvenzzon Mapped this during travel, cannot resurvey. I have looked at Bing, Mapquest Mapbox and the Spain-specific image layers available in JOSM. Cannot however see any plan of the new Road or confirmation that is has been finished. However, I would be surprised if this is not finished at this point. If i r...
32016-06-14 06:46:21 UTCCloCkWeRX Much appreciated :)
12016-06-14 04:30:11 UTCCloCkWeRX do you know if this is completed? Imagery is inconclusive
12016-06-14 04:29:06 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if is still under construction? Imagery is inconclusive
22017-02-23 21:58:41 UTCJulian Lozano As far as I saw 2 months ago, that was still under construction.
12016-06-14 04:25:23 UTCCloCkWeRX - is this still being built? Imagery shows cars parked where the road would go
12016-06-14 04:22:22 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if is finished? Imagery is inconclusive
12016-06-14 04:21:04 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if this is still under construction? Imagery is inconclusive
12016-06-14 04:15:33 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction?
12016-06-14 04:14:05 UTCCloCkWeRX - is this built now? Imagery shows unpaved roads
12016-06-14 04:12:51 UTCCloCkWeRX - small parts of this are built, do you know if the connecting parts are under construction?
22016-06-14 14:36:32 UTCgpesquero Hello CloCkWeRX... I haven't been in this place for years, so I don't know about it.
I've checked aerial imagery (Bing & PNOA dated 2013) and it looks like they're doing some works, but nothing worth editting for the moment....
12016-06-14 04:11:14 UTCCloCkWeRX - do you know if surrounding construction work has taken place?
12016-06-14 04:08:58 UTCCloCkWeRX Is being built? Imagery doesn't show anything
12016-06-14 04:07:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still being built? Imagery isn't very conclusive
12016-06-14 04:03:39 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction?
12016-06-14 04:01:15 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still being built at all? Imagery suggests nothing is there
12016-06-14 03:59:38 UTCCloCkWeRX Is being built? Imagery suggests no
12016-06-14 03:58:30 UTCCloCkWeRX - is this finished construction?
12016-06-14 03:56:14 UTCCloCkWeRX - is this being built any further? Imagery suggests no
12016-06-14 03:55:18 UTCCloCkWeRX Is finished to your knowledge?
12016-06-14 03:52:27 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction? Imagery doesn't show it finished, but it was under construction approx 3 years ago so may be finished
12016-06-14 03:51:12 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction? The imagery shows some improvements around it that may be worth updating
12016-06-14 03:49:50 UTCCloCkWeRX Is this being built, or just proposed ( ? We should update the name or the tagging to clear it up
12016-06-14 03:46:25 UTCCloCkWeRX Is being built? Imagery doesn't show any indication of it
12016-06-14 03:44:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Is under construction? Imagery doesn't suggest it is
22016-06-14 09:33:20 UTCpedrojuan01 Take a look to the lastest "orto" image at:
12016-06-12 05:26:49 UTCCloCkWeRX Are The Clifford Apartments still under construction?
22016-06-12 07:40:34 UTCTheSwavu No. Currently for sale on AllHomes.
32016-06-12 07:44:40 UTCCloCkWeRX Thanks for updating that. I was trawling through all contruction=* via osm turbo, looking for stuff over a few years old. To find these new developments, are you just working from survey/local knowledge or subscribing to something like planningalerts?
42016-06-12 09:40:27 UTCTheSwavu I'm not putting new developments in.

I just checked the local real estate website to see if they had been finished ie: are there now properties for sale.
12016-06-12 05:36:03 UTCCloCkWeRX Is this finished construction? ? Still tagged as construction / can't tell from bing
22016-06-12 07:27:22 UTCTheSwavu Yes.
32016-06-12 07:38:24 UTCCloCkWeRX Thanks!
12016-06-12 06:25:04 UTCCloCkWeRX doesn't seem to exist, can you confirm?
12016-06-12 06:06:56 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction?
22016-06-12 06:22:05 UTCaaronsta Contruction is still in progress for landscaping. All traffic movements are now open. It was completed in late March 2016 when this changeset went live.
12016-06-12 05:28:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Is this area still under construction ( specifically)
22016-06-12 07:32:35 UTCTheSwavu Not for quite a few years now.

Still needs to be better aligned using NSW LPI imagery.
12016-06-12 05:23:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Is still under construction? Bing suggests no
22016-06-12 07:50:58 UTCTheSwavu It has been finished:

but it's been a while since I've been on the Barton so I don't know what was built.
32016-06-13 13:06:57 UTCmrpulley The construction=minor tag was added 3 years ago. I don't recall any work when I went through a year ago., so it should be safe to delete this tag.
12016-06-12 04:54:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Was ever built?
12016-06-12 04:44:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Do you know if has finished construction?
22016-06-12 06:31:21 UTCAlexOnTheBus No - at this time there is no track installed there. When the Middleborough Road grade separation was built the space was left for a third track to be built to handle peak-period express trains through Laburnum - what could be called "active provision". For rendering purposes I would have ...
12016-06-12 04:41:30 UTCCloCkWeRX - is construction finished on this? It shows at least a footpath on bing imagery
22016-06-15 03:16:08 UTCBeager This small section of path (the way you've referred to) was gravel when last visited it.
I've ridden past it since, but wasn't looking if it's still gravel or not.

The path of Gardiner's Creek: Warrigal Rd - Burwood Hwy is complete and has been for a while.
12016-06-12 04:30:52 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah neat, she (Sarnya) used to be my landlord.
12016-06-12 04:26:09 UTCCloCkWeRX - that should probably be completed by now, safe to mark it as no longer under construction?
12016-06-12 03:47:42 UTCCloCkWeRX There's a few weird polylines; like which were added here. It looks like some kind of import, but lacks correct tags / some of the buildings are way off from imagery. Can you take a look at this and clean it up?
12016-06-04 16:37:18 UTCCloCkWeRX So with tracing places like this; you don't need to add both an area and an individual node with the same information - the area tracing will set the right name and other details.

You might be interested in tracing the car parking and building itself separately - right now this is tagged as one b...
22016-06-04 21:56:48 UTCInputMan I see. I was concerned over the parking as some of the parking came from a parking place (like an automated "parking" spider, or something), which may indicate on the map that the parking was for the general public. I wasn't sure about that, so I removed it from some of the buildings, as...
12016-05-29 12:28:16 UTCCloCkWeRX I'm guessing from strava user reports this (w247960495) is now built?
12016-03-30 10:17:38 UTCCloCkWeRX Nice work! I spent a bit of time with a list of Canberra schools (via the JOSM opendata plugin and; adding buildings, tennis courts, etc and a lot more detail.

I wonder if there's a similar list for SA schools we could use to find other likely sporting grounds
22016-03-30 21:17:14 UTCWarin61 I'm using overpass turbo with the wizard entry sport=football for the football... I think I have most of those done for OZ.. there are a great many in Europe though if you want to reduce their numbers.

I'm also targeting leisure=pitch without sport=* again using overpass turbo with the wizard e...
12016-03-30 02:27:26 UTCCloCkWeRX Why is Grand Tunnel du Chambon marked as access=no ?
12016-03-19 12:22:53 UTCCloCkWeRX Rosedale drive doesn't match imagery etc at all - does it exist?
12016-03-14 14:55:20 UTCCloCkWeRX Please stop mapping like this, what you are contributing is not as per the HOT task or the actual content on the ground. Please ask your instructor or mapping party organiser to stop the activity and discuss with the HOT-OSM mailing list.
22016-03-17 11:01:46 UTCgeo_prof okay we stop with exercises
12016-03-14 14:52:49 UTCCloCkWeRX Don't map like this; it's wrong and will need to be reverted. Can you tell your instructor or mapping party host that this is inappropriate and to stop the activity.
22016-03-17 12:29:24 UTCgeo_prof ok! understood will refer you but how many trees ... :-)
12016-03-14 14:47:43 UTCCloCkWeRX Don't map like this; the task doesn't require forests
12016-03-14 14:42:44 UTCCloCkWeRX Why are you mapping like this, it has no relationship to the imagery or HOT task
12016-03-14 14:40:27 UTCCloCkWeRX Why are you mapping forest? This little or nothing to do with the imagery or task
12016-02-18 05:25:31 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah the building for the Reepham already seems tagged as a pub etc
12016-02-18 02:32:13 UTCCloCkWeRX causes a lot of errors in keepright - is this better modelled as highway=proposed or not even as a highway at all (just part of a relation)?
22016-02-19 00:53:32 UTCfbello This unbuilt part of the route (using tag=dummy) is important to periodically check the relations of national routes for inconsistencies. highway=proposed may be rendered in some maps, which is not the intent. The errors in keepright can probably be avoided by adding a layer tag with an unused layer...
32016-02-19 00:59:48 UTCfbello added layer=-5 instead
12016-02-01 02:54:35 UTCCloCkWeRX This causes a lot of errors in keepright, and the main highway should probably be highway=proposed, not highway=planned. Specifically
22016-02-04 02:43:18 UTCnaoliv I have fixed the proposed highway.
12016-01-30 11:25:08 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah neat. If you are keen, there's a few others via that we know of - there's a generated .osm file with the details
12016-01-24 23:28:24 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice!
12016-01-20 12:10:54 UTCCloCkWeRX What's "Household Code" ?
12016-01-18 10:39:02 UTCCloCkWeRX What's the error osmose is coming up with? The wiki suggests that combination of tags (direction=clockwise, highway=mini_roundabout), and in Australia that's consistent with the traffic flow...
22016-01-18 16:42:33 UTCvenerdi Osmose signals the tag as unrequired because, by law, in the country the roundabouts are clockwise. A similar rule is applied by Osmose to the tag junction=roundabout that does not need any tag oneway=yes because the junction classified rondabout have the oneway by default.
32016-01-18 23:33:44 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah hah! Thanks
12016-01-14 14:03:06 UTCSomeoneElse *** SPAM *** not displayed - visit
22016-01-16 08:22:43 UTCCloCkWeRX *** SPAM *** not displayed - visit
32016-01-16 13:46:42 UTCSomeoneElse *** SPAM *** not displayed - visit
42016-01-16 14:52:11 UTCCloCkWeRX *** SPAM *** not displayed - visit
12016-01-13 02:48:01 UTCCloCkWeRX Do the various offramps intersect with the Cross city tunnel? It's also at layer -2 and showing up in missing-junctions checks on keepright
22016-01-13 07:53:31 UTCLeon K The tunnel doesn't intersect with the surface roads except where the ramps surface and are already marked.
It does pass directly below the surface roads though. I'd class the junction errors as false positives.
As for the layer, yes the tunnel is below the surface so -2 seems appropriate.
12016-01-08 02:44:44 UTCCloCkWeRX Ditto
12016-01-08 02:43:45 UTCCloCkWeRX There's a couple of routing errors with this one; like - could you take a bit of a look?
12015-04-07 16:00:19 UTCCloCkWeRX There's no evidence of much of this in mapbox or bing imagery, nor is there anything in Property Location Browser. What's the source of these roads?
22015-12-28 14:00:18 UTCCloCkWeRX I'm removing these.
12015-12-28 11:25:02 UTCCloCkWeRX This intersects a lot of buildings; also sourced from digitalglobe - which is more accurate? The existing building data, or road?
12015-10-25 08:37:02 UTCGerdP please review:
highway=bump on node 2309010300
which is not connected to a highway.
What is meant?
22015-11-19 10:22:14 UTCGerdP Ive removed that node now.
32015-11-22 04:01:40 UTCCloCkWeRX That was a speed bump; should have been traffic_calming=bump
42015-11-22 07:51:02 UTCGerdP thanks for the feedback.
Do you remember the road ?
The bump was mapped close to the middle of the roundabout, in that case I see no need to map a bump.
Bing seems to show another obstacle
~20m north of the node, maybe this was meant?
12015-10-03 08:57:17 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah neat, someone else in the area who knows the details/can survey :)
12015-09-15 03:08:41 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice, thanks. Keepright either didn't tell me about it or I missed it :S
22015-09-20 05:13:43 UTCnikhilprabhakar :)
12015-09-07 07:12:39 UTCCloCkWeRX Oops, accidentally tagged a road name as the petrol station there. I like to tag these with a landuse=commercial, name=Shell Inglewood, brand=Shell combo which works well for larger petrol stations. Either way, keep on adding :)
22015-09-08 22:04:47 UTCsliceo ok thankyou, are there any projects going on at the moment that I can help out with.
32015-09-09 03:56:50 UTCCloCkWeRX I have been doing a bit of work with missing road names -

Its not the most thrilling of jobs but it does help with routing.
12015-09-02 06:24:33 UTCCloCkWeRX - afaik, we've never managed to successfully get explicit permission. Fantastic if you've got it, but you'll want to be mindful of
22015-09-03 06:45:29 UTCTheSwavu Hmm, that's an interesting point. I had used the data on the basis of this:

which is the closest thing I could find to formal permission to use any data.vic stuff. But I suppose you could interpret this to only cover th...
32015-09-04 09:07:24 UTCTheSwavu I emailed data.vic yesterday asking them to confirm or deny any permission we may have. I'll post any response I get to list-au and revert this changeset (and the other) or update the contributors page depending.
12015-09-02 06:13:57 UTCCloCkWeRX Be careful with a few of these, was done a while ago - swapping to relations makes it harder to refresh from the source data. gives a good view of what's present.
22015-09-03 11:02:48 UTCTheSwavu May I suggest that if you have a cunning plan that you should let other mappers know. Perhaps by tagging with a note to that effect or mentioning it in the changeset comment. Relying on our ability to read your mind is not going to work.
12015-08-17 03:37:37 UTCCloCkWeRX This doesn't seem right at all: apartments and roads named all of the same thing?

If its a vanity suburb or similar community, it's better to draw a landuse=residential around it and name those.
12015-06-10 10:37:41 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work on the buildings!
22015-06-10 11:00:06 UTChryciuk Thanks.
12015-05-28 14:10:01 UTCCloCkWeRX What are these amenities? They are showing up as wrongly tagged -
12015-05-11 22:00:43 UTCCloCkWeRX This has caused a lot of conflicts with existing buildings traced via Bing imagery
12015-04-17 19:24:30 UTCCloCkWeRX You might be interested in seeing the impact of your work with addresses - ; click the 'no address' tickbox.
12015-04-13 14:33:35 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice :) Good to see the building mapping is being fleshed out
12015-03-30 22:17:24 UTCCloCkWeRX All of the dams here should be landuse = reservoir
12015-03-26 10:21:15 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah thanks re these, I'm doing a lot for and planning to come back and do a pass of 'way ends near other road', but all help is appreciated :)
12015-02-22 00:27:18 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice work on the buildings etc! I've mapped heavily from Port Adelaide in to Brompton, maybe between us we can knock off parts of Hindmarsh, Welland, etc.
12015-01-28 14:35:53 UTCCloCkWeRX Nice work on the buildings! Let me know if you want a hand tracing a few in the area
12015-01-17 14:37:44 UTCCloCkWeRX For the new buildings here, what's your source? I can't see much on bing, mapbox or
12015-01-13 06:14:18 UTCCloCkWeRX Ah nice :) I tried cleaning the buildings up a bit, and I never have enough energy after riding through here to remember the details of what I saw well!
12014-12-27 16:50:21 UTCCloCkWeRX
12014-12-27 16:49:08 UTCCloCkWeRX These are better traced as polygons - they are coming up as errors on
12014-12-23 23:18:45 UTCCloCkWeRX This doesn't match up with satellite imagery for the area at all.
12014-11-05 10:17:51 UTCCloCkWeRX Neat, moar buildings!

How far are you keen to trace? I'd be happy to help do rural housing or detail on a place like Lyndoch, making it easy for you to add in shops/landmarks/etc.
22014-11-05 10:44:32 UTCJosh_G That'd be great - just trying to get as many of the rural landmarks/buildings traced as possible in the area. Hike all around here so its all useful data.
CloCkWeRX has contributed to 229 changeset discussions(s) with a total of 395 comment(s)