| Changeset | # | ⏱️ Last updated | Contributor | Comment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 175512827 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-12-04 18:55 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 4 days ago | James Derrick ♦82 | Hi CB,I've used ESRI to add the remaining buildings in Chambers Court, but would appreciate you checking the UPRN/numbers (e.g. 13?, 54-58):https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/178532636Thanks and Happy Mapping,James |
| 2 | ~ 1 day ago | confusedbuffalo | Tricky one.I think we can be confident there is no 13, due to the other UPRNs being consecutive from 1 to 15.In the council tax data, 15 and 16 have the same UPRN, so there's some error there.There is only 54, 56 and 58 around here, although there have been known to be houses missin... | |
| 3 | ~ 1 day ago | James Derrick ♦82 | Hi,Ah - that detail helps, thanks.A building once confounded me for a month - eventually spotted it was 4x flats with side entrances. Cadastral data doesn't help with housing associations.I occasionally visit Barry's Bargains on the high street, so might manage a ground survey.... | |
| 171858767 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-09-13 04:43 ~ 5 months ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | no details provided here ♦29 | Site has been totally reconfigured since some very detailed and precise but now out of date mapping some 5 years ago. Needs full site inspection. |
| 2 | ~ 1 month ago | confusedbuffalo | Was this comment meant to go on the note here?I am not in the area to survey this | |
| 3 | ~ 1 month ago | no details provided here ♦29 | Yes it was. I noticed you were active late last year here. I wanted to flag up that the site has been massively reconfigured since a really detailed survey some five years ago. I was only able to spend half an hour or so there today. I wanted to defer to you and any data you'd gathered as you... | |
| 4 | ~ 1 month ago | confusedbuffalo | The check data was based on the government data confirming that it exists rather than a site visit, in this instance | |
| 5 | ~ 1 month ago | no details provided here ♦29 | That's fine. I only managed half an hour there. The comment was just to flag up to anyone else on the patch that it needs more attention than I could give it the other day. There's a few depreciated structures nearby but I couldn't get close. Locked gate and no one to ask. Will try ... | |
| 176424743 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-12-26 08:10 ~ 1 month ago | 1 | ~ 1 month ago | Waldo Lemmer ♦4 | Thanks, apparently I couldn't read when I did these 😅 |
| 175610269 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-12-07 06:07 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | user_5359 ♦20,548 | Hello! Please have a look on https://www.osm.org/way/501155583 (one of fourteen objects). What is the mean the tag ADDR2 = Plawsworth Gate? |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Hi, thanks for pointing that out, I forgot to move that to addr:suburb, now done in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/175709051 | |
| 175266653 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-11-29 08:42 ~ 2 months ago | 1 | ~ 2 months ago | ⇄ john paul jones & gringo ♦23 | @confusedbuffalo May I ask why have you choosen to remove all the (correct) data from The Phoenix Park Academy, their website: https://phoenixparkacademy.co.uk/ This site is now throwing up errors on OSM. |
| 2 | ~ 2 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Hi, I guess you are talking about the building here https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/551933154 ?I removed information from that which was duplicated on the outer way: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1238980439I'm not sure what errors you are talking about, but it is appropriate to only... | |
| 3 | ~ 2 months ago | ⇄ john paul jones & gringo ♦23 | Yes indeed, that is the building. You've removed the uprn (error as no uprn for building), and left the street name and post-code (error as no postal town/city named). Next door at Winteringham school has remained unchanged with information for both grounds and buildings. Consistancy? Is there ... | |
| 4 | ~ 2 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Thank you for pointing out the issue with Oasis Academy Winteringham, which I have now fixed, I must have missed that before.Main feature tags should always go on the outer way, never on both the building/s and the outer way. Having an outer way is better than having just a building.UPRNs ar... | |
| 5 | ~ 2 months ago | ⇄ john paul jones & gringo ♦23 | OK that seems quite clear. I'll try and watch out for that. Thanks for replacing the postal town BTWSorry to bother you with all this | |
| 6 | ~ 2 months ago | confusedbuffalo | No worries, it was probably a mistake of mine to remove then | |
| 174384252 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-11-08 16:26 ~ 3 months ago | 1 | ~ 3 months ago | Udarian ♦656 | thank you for doing this, I was going to run this over Miami Dade County in the near future anyways as I have been wanting something like this for some time now. I have one small nitpick though, next time in the changeset comment can you please put the state or area you ran this over so its easier t... |
| 2 | ~ 3 months ago | confusedbuffalo | HiSure, I should have added the area I was doing it for, I'll make sure I do that in future. | |
| 171329170 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-09-01 18:29 ~ 5 months ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | Weblearning ♦2 | Hi there @confusedbuffalo. I see that you have beenmapping out the boundaries of schools. Been looking at the Google map of Springfield model primary school ( -29.8253679,30.9857276) and Thekwini TVET College (-29.8253679,30.9857276), and I think you have drawn the borders of Springfield model pri... |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | confusedbuffalo | I can't use Google Maps as a source, obviously, but if you have surveyed then feel free to correct it. Some of the locations of schools were not perfect in the source data | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | Weblearning ♦2 | A, thanks very much! | |
| 172566425 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-09-28 13:13 ~ 4 months ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | SamuraiArmada ♦3 | Thank you for the changes confusedbuffalo! I will implement your advice from now on. |
| 172118295 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-09-18 15:03 ~ 5 months ago | 1 | ~ 4 months ago | JezCrow ♦166 | Something seems to have gone wrong with the operator name on way 148578755 showing as "Areté Learning Trust" instead of "Areté Learning Trust" |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Ah yes thanks for pointing that out. I thought I'd done something about that, it's definitely fixed in processing now and I've fixed all schools in the trust here: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/172345442 | |
| 172121938 by confusedbuffalo @ 2025-09-18 16:19 ~ 5 months ago | 1 | ~ 5 months ago | Dezza ♦24 | Hello! Thanks for updating the details on schools in Lancashire!Did you mean to put the check_date further back than it already was on Ellel St Johns School? https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/454054893 |
| 2 | ~ 4 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Ah no, that check date was based off the update date of the official data. I meant to check if it was changing anything it shouldn't have done, I'll watch out for that in future.I've reverted the check_date to what it was before | |
| 3 | ~ 4 months ago | Dezza ♦24 | Awesome, thank you :) | |
| 144141153 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-17 14:17 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 months ago | Casey_boy ♦86 | Can I check on the status of this footpath? It was originally mapped as a public foothpath but you changed access to private. However, the path is still showing as a public footpath on Staffordshire CC's PRoW map, so it doesn't seem access rights have legally changed. It does seem as thoug... |
| 2 | ~ 7 months ago | confusedbuffalo | Hi, I don't recall the reason for the change of access. It could well have been a temporary closure, so feel free to revert it to being open | |
| 3 | ~ 7 months ago | Casey_boy ♦86 | OK, thanks. Done in: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/168784528 | |
| 113176492 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-30 23:03 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 10 months ago | pittrichimica ♦53 | This charging station is a 4-schuko pole at a guarded public bicycle parking. I can not believe that these 4 schukos have an output of 300kW, which is typical for fast chargers for motor vehicles. I have added a fixme and would advise you to also check your edits not relating to Tesla superchargers,... |
| 117015486 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-02-04 17:22 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | sykul ♦77 | Hi. I know this is an old changset but I've just spotted Lincoln Way has name:etymology:wikidata which refers to Lincoln, Nebraska https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/64982577 Are you sure about this? It seems a lot more likely that this street was either named after the English city of Linco... |
| 2 | ~ 1 year ago | confusedbuffalo | That appears to be an oversight on my part, maybe the interface wasn't clear enough about which Lincoln was being referred to. Maybe best to just remove it | |
| 3 | ~ 1 year ago | sykul ♦77 | Thanks for the reply. No worries. I've removed the tag for now. | |
| 158424720 by confusedbuffalo @ 2024-10-27 18:00 ~ 1 year ago | 1 | ~ 1 year ago | Wekker ♦1 | 687 is now ARUM LILLY GUEST HOUSE |
| 146507935 by confusedbuffalo @ 2024-01-21 11:01 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Should read "Add unit to maxspeed" |
| 146475197 by confusedbuffalo @ 2024-01-20 11:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | rskedgell ♦1,762 | Thanks - I meant to have a look at that last year when I came across it in Capital Ring-related edits. |
| 110932325 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-08 17:50 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | note that official name, not actually used in normal common use goes into official_name, not name tagsee https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/42334894/historySee https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2023-December/030978.html thread |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | See https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145000121 I have already commented, thank you | |
| 142888602 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-10-20 19:21 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | soljiv ♦1 | Has this been prescribed as a bus route only? |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I don't know, why do you think it is? | |
| 144169053 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-18 10:44 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | trigpoint ♦2,595 | Are you sure about this?The original postcode was surveyed using a printed reciept and matches that shown on FHRS and is points right at the garage if you type it into OSM search.NSUL cannot be considered a valid source for armchair edits which break existing survey data.I am reverting t... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I should have put in my changeset comment that I was checking https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/postcode-offsets/ to fix postcodes.This is well within TF9 3.. and the rest of TF9 2JQ is much further down the road, so it was a reasonable change based on that evidence. People and businesses freque... | |
| 123909163 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-21 20:32 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | Seem to have added wrong postcode for NG8 1BW |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | It may have been there originally, but I thought you were using Robert Whittaker's site for checking: https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/pc-stats/NG/NG8/1/ | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Sorry for the delay, there were some seemingly incorrect postcodes added here. I have now fixed them: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/144154120 | |
| 119777268 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-04-16 09:48 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | The postcode probably should not be on the actual golf course as it applies to the administrative location in Machrihanish village itself (probably the Ugadale Hotel). The actual postcode from UPRN lookups seems to be PA28 6TJ (but this is not the postal address). All a bit of a mess. |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | The addition of the postcode was not me, but I have now fixed it | |
| 144097005 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-16 13:35 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Also fixed some postcodes which crept into this changeset, from NSUL |
| 143956800 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-13 06:18 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | Mateusz Konieczny ♦9,513 | Thanks for review and checking! |
| 143750582 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-07 19:17 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Actually note 3646698 |
| 143643725 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-11-05 10:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Sorry, and remove a duplicate name, they were meant to be separate changesets |
| 140636629 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:45 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Thank you for fixing this. 👍I was looking at changesets in chronological order and didn't see this one before leaving comments on others. --- #REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/140636629 |
| 140635940 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 140635947 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 140635888 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 140635901 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 140635953 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 140635918 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-08-31 13:31 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | MxxCon ♦3,522 | Hello.This edit must be reverted. This IS "Avenue N", as in letter of the alphabet. Street to the north of it is Avenue M, street to the south is Avenue O.Please pay closer attention to your changes. --- #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA Published using OSMCh... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Apologies, I did notice shortly after and reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140636629 | |
| 138845572 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-07-22 09:48 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | JassKurn ♦168 | Hi, The name you've changed to is the OSM official_name=* The School was historically based in Exeter and named "Exeter Royal Academy for Deaf Education". It relocated to Exmouth a few years ago rebranded as "the Deaf Academy", but has retained the old name for official data... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Thanks for fixing this, sorry for changing it by mistake.There is a comment when on a task on MapRoulette about the names, seemingly I didn't check this one carefully enough though.What I will do is adjust the creation of the tasks so that if the name from the DfE matches 'official... | |
| 138427717 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-07-12 15:26 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | mueschel ♦6,918 | Hi,please check the fuel tags you edited here. There are several that are not documented and not used in other places: fuel:D500 = yes fuel:LRP = yes fuel:ULP = yes |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I didn't edit those at all, they had previously been added by someone else | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | mueschel ♦6,918 | Hi,at least LRP and ULP didn't exist before your edits, e.g. here:https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/2309915547/history | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Ah yes, it looks like I also fixed a few things from the validator, in that case capitalised keys | |
| 137681513 by confusedbuffalo @ 2023-06-23 09:57 ~ 2 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | rskedgell ♦1,762 | Thanks for doing this!I don't know if it's in scope for what you're doing, but North London has a lot of source:maxspeed=GB:urban, frequently superseded by a more recent maxspeed=20 mph |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I am first standardising ones where the type and maxspeed match then I may look at ones where they don't, or set up a MapRoulette challenge for example | |
| 124136534 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-27 11:33 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 2 years ago | John Stanworth ♦26 | Hi confusedbuffalo. Running/walking friends have complained that their apps show this footway as open again and their routing software is sending them this way. I understand your reason for remapping it as highway=footway - the relation is still there and the blue route website still shows it going ... |
| 2 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Could you link to the object in question? I edited quite a few things in this changeset | |
| 3 | ~ 2 years ago | John Stanworth ♦26 | Its object 42559274. The footbridge at the southern end of Sheffield railway station. :) | |
| 4 | ~ 2 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Well I'm surprised that routing software would route over something tagged as access=privatePerhaps access=no would be better if it is totally closed to everyone?I terms of mapping what's on the ground, if there is a bridge then it is a highway=footway (even if not usable by anyone).... | |
| 129968666 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-12-11 16:48 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | phodgkin ♦73 | Perhaps this is a StreetComplete oddity, but the added tagging around the Northlands roundabout looks odd e.g. on Park Road North:cycleway:both = separateoneway = yesoneway:bicycle = noThe oneway road now appears to have a contra-flow bicycle lane, which is surely not correct?The origi... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Hmm, yes, I've now cleaned it up a bit, thanks for pointing that out | |
| 117364089 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-02-13 18:01 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | Postal address of Hollinside Terrace is Lanchester, Durham not Hollinside, Durham (just received a letter) |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Thank you, now fixed: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/129927716 | |
| 123142716 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-03 08:30 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Djminisite ♦40 | I’m confused about these name changes, a lot of the name changes are changing from what is on the ground to names that only exist in NAPTAN, as far as I was aware the correct approach is map what is present on the ground? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Hmm, maybe I could have done official_name=The issue is that often there are loads of bus stops called e.g. "Albion Road" on the ground so how are they to be distinguished? Also I think if the bus has a next stop readout or something then that will usually use the full name, for that exa... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Djminisite ♦40 | You do raise a good point, I walked for about 30 minutes yesterday, and every bus stop had the same name. I think, and I stand to be corrected, the best approach may be putting the NAPTAN name into official_name or alt_name, I think the wiki suggests alt_name would be more appropriate - https://wiki... | |
| 123580820 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-13 20:51 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Mex ♦78 | I drew most of these based on satellite imagery before the cadastral data became available (or at last i became aware of it) to easy align things, feel free to realign, --- Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123580820 |
| 123696580 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-16 17:13 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Dave Venables ♦175 | Derby for DE72 is correct but it should be Ilkeston for DE7 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | Dave Venables ♦175 | The selection on "DE7" has also picked up DE75 Heanor and DE74 Castle Donington, DerbyDE73 Derby was already correct.DE72 Derby is correct and this changeset has improved DE72 a lot.DE75 should be Heanor, "DE7 " Ilkeston and DE74 probably Derby although most existing OSM re... | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I was using this, but misread it I thinkhttps://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/post-towns/DE.htmlI'll fix it now | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | DE75 fixed: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123733008 | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I've done DE74 now too: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123733309As per the post office and that tool I've gone with Derby and used addr:village for Castle Donnington and other villages in the area | |
| 123696702 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-16 17:18 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Dave Venables ♦175 | Post town addr:city for DE7 should be Ilkeston not Derby. All Food Standards entries have an address of Ilkeston e.g. https://ratings.food.gov.uk/business/en-GB/251814/Corner-Cafe-Ilkeston and so does the Post Office in Ilkeston https://www.postoffice.co.uk/branch-finder/4782070/ilkeston(DE... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | DE7 fixed:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123732896https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123732883 | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | DE74: https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123733309Discussion on https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123696580 | |
| 123696586 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-16 17:13 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Dave Venables ♦175 | Derby for DE72 is correct but it should be Ilkeston for DE7 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | DE7 fixed:https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123732896https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/123732883 | |
| 123695465 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-16 16:37 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Should read CO14 |
| 123159436 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-07-03 17:32 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Accidentally included another edit in this, fixing a road to a path |
| 122775001 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-06-23 20:32 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | GinaroZ ♦1,292 | thanks but not quite right :) |
| 110934054 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-08 18:37 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Hannah Piggen ♦9 | The outlines of the schools once mapped by https://www.openstreetmap.org/user/Chobhamonian1 are – from today's point of view – severely wrong. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Feel free to dive in and have a go at correcting them. Or let me know which ones specifically you mean and I'll see if I can have a go | |
| 109478972 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-08-10 18:25 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Peter Newman ♦35 | Did you split some roads in two either side of central reservations in this changeset?It looks like you left the pavement/sidewalk tagging as it was, so it now says both bits of pavement are on one side of the road, rather than there being one on each side. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I don't think so, it looks like I was cleaning up after that was introduced in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/105998331 | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Peter Newman ♦35 | Ah yes, sorry, my mistake. | |
| 118965674 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-26 23:42 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | 0235 ♦41 | Thanks for this, I never realised that there was a difference between "Building=terrace" vs "building=house + house=terrace".Its very confusing, as pretty much every other building in OSM is exactly what it says, without some overcomplicated tagging acrobatics. e.g. a semi de... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | The difference is really between "terrace" and "terraced".Until recently, there hadn't been anything specific to distinguish individual terraced houses, but then the house= subspace started being used. You could just map them as a house and be done with it, or add house=te... | |
| 120639352 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-05-06 16:55 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Comment should read "Add data to schools in the UK using Get Information About Schools open data" |
| 119942235 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-04-20 08:54 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | lakedistrict ♦320 | Thanks :) |
| 113077088 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-28 10:55 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | lakedistrict ♦320 | Would this info be better on the relation (https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/5982501), as it applies to the school as a whole (both the senior and prep school campuses) rather than just the senior school site? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Yes, good point. I've put appropriate information on all three objects now | |
| 110222964 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-08-25 10:45 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | What about name-only houses? How else can that be indicated through tagging if the name tag is stripped to leave only addr:housename, presumably nohousenumber=yes? Otherwise it leaves things ambiguous as to whether the addr:housenumber has yet to be mapped.Removing name tag is still an issue for... |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I'm not sure I understand what sort of situation you are referring to.In my mind if a house has addr:housename but not addr:housenumber then nohousenumber=yes is impliedI don't think that having a duplicate name changes that at all | |
| 3 | ~ 3 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | For such cases and systems unaware of nohousenumber tag itself, e.g. ABetterRoutePlanner, then the absence of name results in addresses without name or number. Also for cases where both number and addressing name exist, the name tag can help explicitly define the common case instead of leaving it to... | |
| 4 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | It sounds like you're saying that ABetterRoutePlanner is unaware of addr:housename, this sounds like a bug there and shouldn't be dealt with by duplicated tagging in OSM data.I disagree with your point about name there, as it is still duplicating data.I'm happy to disagree tho... | |
| 5 | ~ 3 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | addr: prefix is related to the postal address service addressing scheme. The name tag is the commonly known identifier for an object. In the case of a named-only house either addr:housename and name should exist and be the same without nohousenumber=yes to indicate the fact, or if the latter is pres... | |
| 6 | ~ 3 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | Also houses displaying only name or number, but having both in the addressing system, still benefit from having a name key to express their preferred identifier per installed signage. | |
| 119613762 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-04-12 09:57 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | ndm ♦889 | You've added an addr:street which doesn't have a named way - that really doesn't seem correct. |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | It probably needs a path adding in front of the houses, but it's not visible from aerial due to the trees | |
| 119034058 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-28 18:13 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Somehow moved some objects, reverted in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/119034173 |
| 119032748 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-28 17:42 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Comment should read "Change building=terrace with singular housenumber to building=house with house=terraced" |
| 118563662 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-16 18:45 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | RedAuburn ♦227 | wow that was fast, thanks 👍 |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | No worries, I was browsing recent notes | |
| 118564433 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-16 19:10 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | Pablo Rodriguez ♦5 | Thanks. One question, what NSUL stands for? Is there where you got the post code? |
| 2 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | See details herehttps://www.ons.gov.uk/methodology/geography/geographicalproducts/nationalstatisticsaddressproductsSomeone made a layer for JOSM, which is what I mostly use, I can probably find the info if you're interested | |
| 118214208 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-03-07 21:53 ~ 3 years ago | 1 | ~ 3 years ago | confusedbuffalo | The plugin let me down and didn't ping the right changeset.Notes that are sent here were mostly resolved in https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/118214154 |
| 116741271 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-29 12:02 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Paul Berry ♦136 | Hi,Thanks for fixing the otherwise invisible non-breaking spaces in the postcodes I recently added. I know now to check for these characters and I've sanitised my upcoming changes accordingly.Regards,_Paul_ |
| 115917402 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 17:06 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | JayTurnr ♦157 | addr:county is an undocumented tag |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | JayTurnr ♦157 | Do you mean addr:province? | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Surely the fix would be to document addr:county in English (it's already documented in Polish and Japanese) as it is widely used, both within the UK and other countries.I have therefore done so: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Key:addr:countyFeel free to add detail to the page. | |
| 5 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | addr:province or addr:state. Either way addr:county is undocumented and not the 'norm' | |
| 6 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Well, not undocumented any more.Depends what you mean by 'norm', even before I made any changes, county was used more than either province or state in the UK (according to taginfo).And we don't have either states or provinces in the UK anyway, obviously. | |
| 115916546 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:40 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115916573 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:41 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115916768 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:47 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115916822 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:50 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115916985 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:54 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115917094 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:56 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115917162 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 16:58 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 115917250 by confusedbuffalo @ 2022-01-08 17:01 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | papaj ♦39 | Cant find any documented use of addr:county. Should probably be reverted back to addr:state. |
| 112920874 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-24 20:29 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | ramthelinefeed ♦74 | Everything has an address, my friend ;) The addresses for all Lambeth's parks are given on the Lambeth Council website |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Some people would think that as you can't send post to parks they aren't 'addressable', but whatever, feel free to amend. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | ramthelinefeed ♦74 | Well yes, you can't post letters there. But all land is owned and has an address on the Land Registry (well, unless it's very special and secret ;) | |
| 112912708 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-24 16:18 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Robert Whittaker ♦301 | Could you have another look at https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/401032045 ? The postcode isn't right for this location. (See https://osm.mathmos.net/addresses/pc-stats/B/B36/0/#0DD )From a bit of searching online I think Summerfield Education Centre may not be occupying new buildings on th... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Ah yes, I was just going off the edubase ref.Looks like https://www.get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/Establishments/Establishment/Details/133531and https://www.get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/Establishments/Establishment/Details/134534are both at that new site.Ofsted report hist... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I think I'll revert these changes and leave some notes then. | |
| 113164551 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-30 15:05 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | Don't addr:postcode and addr:street belong on the building as part of deliverable address? They're already there, but are now duplicated. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Ah yes, I forgot you didn't like that. I'll remove it here, but I still think that one would generally consider a school to have an address and that therefore there should be address tags on the school object. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Actually, having said that, I didn't add any address tags here, and they've been there for over two years | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | Original building postcode added by me in June 2011. No surprise to see Robert Whittaker adding them to the closed way in May 2019. I just don't believe Royal Mail would ever be all that happy about their postcodes ending up on things other than deliverable units (typically buildings). | |
| 113056304 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-27 21:17 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | RaccoonFederation ♦97 | Thanks for resolving so many of my Notes :) |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | You're welcome. There are still some to fix though which I couldn't easily do remotely | |
| 112277292 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-10-08 18:19 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | EdLoach ♦172 | But you left the state as Florida? I'll remove it... (PS - this is meant to be a jokey comment - thanks for fixing the postcode) |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I was clearly on a one track mind of postcodes, thanks for spotting and fixing | |
| 111839132 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-28 22:01 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Wynndale ♦58 | Where do the postcodes come from? |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Using a custom layer in JOSM created by Rob Nickerson:https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2021-September/027693.htmlWhich uses this data:https://geoportal.statistics.gov.uk/datasets/4ee7422138104d568538137dc2d4f1e1/aboutwhich can be used under the OGL (i.e. is compatible with... | |
| 111610532 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-23 17:50 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | GinaroZ ♦1,292 | I'm wondering whether religion=none is the appropriate value for non-denominational schools, since technically they aren't non-religious... |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | The possible values in the data for "Denomination" are:Non-denominational : 2090Roman Catholic : 360Inter-denominational: 7Episcopalian: 3Jewish: 1All schools have a denomination recorded.In Scotland it seems that schools have to provide Religious Observance: https://www.gov.... | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | GinaroZ ♦1,292 | Suppose my thinking is whether religion=* needs to be tagged at all on non-dom. schools. Since they are sort of in between a school which is actually non-religious and one which is religious (eg RC). Assuming that religion=none/no means no religion?Have all the religious schools been tagged yet? | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | In general I think it's best to tag something even if that tagging is tagging an absence.I have not tagged all religious schools yet, so I assume they are not all done | |
| 111062137 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-11 13:23 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | ndm ♦889 | You are changing items that are carefully surveyed - the road signs in Bristol have postcodes on them - that’s what the postal code on the road is signifying - it should be what is signed, I.e. BS9. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Ok, that seems to me like a partial postcode though and therefore much less useful than a full postcode | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | ndm ♦889 | Roads (ways) don't really have full postcodes - buildings on opposite sides can often have different full postcodes.I'll revert. | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | Worth noting that in some places road signs will have a full postcode (providing the road is short enough to only have one). Quite common in Nottinghamshire, and perhaps elsewhere. | |
| 5 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | And that's why I thought it would be reasonable here as that's sometimes the case near me too and all houses on both sides have the same postcode here.As an aside, I've used postal_code:left and :right where postcodes are different on each side> Roads (ways) don't really... | |
| 6 | ~ 4 years ago | ndm ♦889 | If you edit roads in the City and County of Bristol and change postal_code then you need to move the signed value to an appropriate tag (signed:postal_code). Or just use addr:postcode if you really want to have the whole postcode somehow associated with the road. Otherwise there will be a loss of su... | |
| 110717225 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-04 13:41 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | DaveF ♦1,608 | OSM's not a dump for external databases. The edubase refers back to data that's more accurately maintained than schools in OSM. |
| 110687994 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-03 16:58 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | gurglypipe ♦1,000 | Heya, seems a bit odd that the name now includes ‘Penrith’. I can’t check locally but it seems pretty unlikely that’s going to be on the signage at the school. Where did the name data come from? Ta |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Originally from https://get-information-schools.service.gov.uk/Establishments/Establishment/Details/136732 (available under OGL)Then confirmed by the branding on the websiteFrom the gov website you can see under links that the previous establishment didn't have Penrith in the name. | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | gurglypipe ♦1,000 | That seems pretty convincing! I should have checked the school’s website, sorry. Thanks for your work on schools recently :) | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | No worriesI've set up a Map Roulette challenge to make adding detail to schools easier (which is what I used here)Check it out if you're interested:https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/21922 | |
| 110677341 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-09-03 12:44 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | Please avoid adding addr:postcode to the school area when there's a building=school present with it already. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | The postcode had actually previously been added by someone else here.I agree that it seems like duplication having tags on the building as well as the site outline, but I'm not convinced that it's wrong for the school's postcode to be added to the school outline | |
| 3 | ~ 4 years ago | Pink Duck ♦166 | There's another tag postal_code that could be used, but addr:postcode is building-specific per UK Royal Mail deliverable addressing. | |
| 4 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Hmm, I feel that postal_code is only for highways so I wouldn't like adding that.Feel free to remove addr:postcode here | |
| 109342078 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-08-08 11:40 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | mueschel ♦6,918 | Hi,please watch out for the spelling of keys, it's "parentstreet", not "parent_street". I think I fixed them all. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Thanks | |
| 109321030 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-08-07 18:12 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | BCNorwich ♦5,097 | Hi, In the absence of a capacity tag on a single parking space it is implied that the capacity is 1. Therefore it's not necessary to tag each single parking space with capacity=1.Regards Bernard. |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Sure, I think it's best to be explicit though | |
| 100584263 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-03-07 17:22 ~ 4 years ago | 1 | ~ 4 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Thanks for fixing these! |
| 2 | ~ 4 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Just happened to spot them and couldn't leave something that broken! | |
| 98808887 by confusedbuffalo @ 2021-02-06 11:25 ~ 5 years ago | 1 | ~ 5 years ago | BCNorwich ♦5,097 | Hi, I just wanted to let you know that some sections of the A1 are now duplicated. Way: 904401852 is on top of Way: 39007749, Way: 904401872 is on top of Way: 39007749, Way: 904321783 is on top of Way: 449251807, Way: 904401872 is on top of Way: 39007749, Way: 904401873 is on top of Way:... |
| 2 | ~ 5 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Thanks for pointing that out, not sure how it could have happened as I thought I always split the ways when editing.I believe I've fixed it all in changeset #98924390 | |
| 40679064 by confusedbuffalo @ 2016-07-12 12:02 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 6 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | Does the Alpha House Dental Clinic really exist on Alpha Road in Cambridge? |
| 65094785 by confusedbuffalo @ 2018-12-02 13:02 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | I think this has been pointed out before: Freefone & local call numbers: 0385, 0845 are not reachable through international dialing. Therefore adding the international prefix is actually wrong: there are no such numbers. This is a typical problem when contributors make large scale search & r... |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I hadn't thought I'd added +44 to any 08 numbers, can you show me where I did? | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | On post boxes | |
| 50970392 by confusedbuffalo @ 2017-08-09 11:33 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | You've changed the 0844 number for NUFC here - is that valid? Can you actually dial 0844 numbers internationally? |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Possibly not, I hadn't realised that at the time though | |
| 65081223 by confusedbuffalo @ 2018-12-01 20:12 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | ontheotherhand ♦2 | Changing the phone number of the local doctor from local to international format is ludicrous to say the least. If it stops or merely slows down a local being able to phone a doctor at time of stress and anxiety it might have serious consequences - I hope it does not cost folk. |
| 2 | ~ 7 years ago | SK53 ♦868 | On the other hand it provides a more consistent format of machine readable text to be readily handled. Most OSM users will be using the data in some way mediated by apps & not as stored natively in the database. On my phone numbers entered in international format always work; in national format ... | |
| 3 | ~ 7 years ago | GinaroZ ♦1,292 | If someone is using the OSM website to look up their doctor's number then having it in the correct international format will create a "tel:" link and allow them to call the number directly without copying and pasting. | |
| 64788149 by confusedbuffalo @ 2018-11-22 16:36 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | confusedbuffalo | source is actually Bing, forgot to change the tag from a previous edit |
| 64787960 by confusedbuffalo @ 2018-11-22 16:29 ~ 7 years ago | 1 | ~ 7 years ago | confusedbuffalo | source is actually Bing, forgot to change the tag from a previous edit |
| 51697271 by confusedbuffalo @ 2017-09-03 16:49 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | chillly ♦819 | This looks like an undiscussed mass edit. |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I can see why you say that, but I felt that this was acceptable. Firstly, it's only changing the tags, not keys.Secondly, I feel that it is important to have phone numbers callable internationally, particularly with the increasing use of OSM data in smartphone apps. When travelling, I expect ... | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | For clarity re "When travelling, I expect to be able to tap on a phone number and for it to work, without me having to enter the country code at that time", you can. If you're roaming on another country's network you can just dial local numbers with no country code, just as if y... | |
| 4 | ~ 8 years ago | chillly ♦819 | Your premise explaining why the international code is wrong. You can dial any number in the UK using only the area code (known as the STD code in the UK) and the local number. If you visit the UK with a roaming phone you still do not need the international code (+44). You only need that if you are c... | |
| 5 | ~ 8 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I hadn't realised that about dialling numbers | |
| 49782617 by confusedbuffalo @ 2017-06-23 22:27 ~ 8 years ago | 1 | ~ 8 years ago | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Hi, this change to Leazes Bowl appears to have replaced the roundabout we can see on the aerial imagery view with a new junction. The tag junction=roundabout is still in existence on some of the ways, but it no longer looks like a roundabout. Should these tags be removed?Cheers,Mike |
| 2 | ~ 8 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I was unsure whether to leave them or not. The sign for the junction as you go west on the A690 towards it still shows it as a roundabout (it seems to be the same sign that was there before the junction update), and it does behave somewhat like a roundabout with traffic lights | |
| 3 | ~ 8 years ago | Mike Baggaley ♦630 | Thanks, I have had a look at the plans, and I it looks like it is still a roundabout, however, I have removed the roundabout tag from the western second loop so that there is now just a single loop tagged as a roundabout, and rounded the corners slightly. | |
| 40612417 by confusedbuffalo @ 2016-07-09 13:41 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | SomeoneElse ♦13,682 | Hi,I'm guessing that http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/430051718 , and the other houses in the terrace, should be "building=house" not "building=H"?Cheers,Andy |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | confusedbuffalo | Oops, yes it should have been, good spot.I've now corrected it (http://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/41018159) | |
| 40686542 by confusedbuffalo @ 2016-07-12 15:15 ~ 9 years ago | 1 | ~ 9 years ago | smaprs ♦380 | Are you sure that things like landuse=gr actually mean grass? Couldn't it mean landuse=greenfield, greenhouse_horticulture, or other mistyping?(incidentally saw http://www.openstreetmap.org/way/337204098/history) |
| 2 | ~ 9 years ago | confusedbuffalo | I looked at satellite imagery for each change that I made, making sure that it was actually grass there. There were a couple of odd tags I'd found where I couldn't be sure what it was meant to be, so I left it as it was.Maybe I should have made that clear in my changeset comment, sorry. |