Can you please use landuse=meadow instead of landuse=farmland for meadows or pasture? landuse=meadow
For example landuse=meadow you can even see the sheep grazing on aerial imagery...

For your information, these changesets have been raised on the community forums: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/undiscussed-mass-edits-of-sport-rugby-union-and-sport-rugby-league/140303

Where has this mass edit been discussed? sport=rugby_union has over 7,600 uses, are you planning on retagging every single one? Where is the rationale behind this?

Hey, what's the source for the housenumbers you've added here? :)

Will be useful having these tags organised for the inevitable cleanup of nonexistent railway features (such as way/40596345) 👍

I don't think it would be wrong to add that name, as there is no other existing name for this street. For example, the Eastenders set has all the street names and pois mapped (not using standard tags). Presumably the landuse=residential needs to be changed to some kind of commercial/film studio area, as I didn't realise it was a purpose built area when I originally mapped here.

👀

This is not the correct way to use landuse=farmland... maybe something along the lines of boundary=place + place=farm would work better? (as a relation)

I've reverted this changeset alongside thirteen others - they all added Dutch names to footpaths and roads in the UK and Germany.

I've changed these back from farmland to meadow, as I surveyed here just a month before your changes and these were all very clearly meadows, and are visible as meadows on aerial imagery too. Unless you have information about a change of landuse here?

Hi, it would be preferable if buildings were not imported from mapwithai / microsoft buildingfootprints when they still need to be split further - for example semidetached and terraced houses as is the case here. Thanks.

I've restored the tertiary road that appears to have been incorrectly deleted

Hi, thanks for helping to improve building coverage in OSM! As you're making use of rapid's suggested buildings, I wanted to let you know that they are not suitable for import in all situations, for example where there are semidetached or terraced houses. It would be preferable to draw these types of houses manually, so that each property can have one building polygon instead of being merged with adjoining houses. For example, way/1460161479 is a terrace of four houses, way/1460161480 is two semidetached houses and way/1460096302 looks like two detached houses. Overall, everything else looks good as this is an area of mainly detached houses. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask and happy mapping! :)

I've partially reverted this changeset in changeset/176120320 - why did you delete 100 parking spaces from the car park?

Hi, if you have footways overlapping buildings, it would be best to correct the buildings by moving them instead of adding layer=1 / -1. Happy mapping :)

what kind of 'edits'? It would be helpful if you could briefly summarise what you added or edited (or in this case deleted) to make it easier for other editors to understand your changes. Thanks.

Why not keep the way present, tagged disused:highway=cycleway or similar to prevent the cycleway from being re-added by mistake?

In what way would 'Strand Building' not appear in its address? It has no other housename or housenumber tagged, so how would that work? Is it because they are university buildings that something different should happen with these?

This changeset was reverted by changeset/175728513 - please do not delete military base features, they are added from normal aerial imagery and do not contain secret or sensitive information.

This changeset was reverted by changeset/173623367 - please do not delete military base features, they are added from normal aerial imagery and do not contain secret or sensitive information.