osm.org/way/1014928106 Is not a train station and this should not be tagged as such.

osm.org/way/340387590 is also not a station of any kind.

Hey Karson,

`water=stream` and `water=river` should not have the name of the stream/river on them.

Thanks.

Road access restrictions based on survey.

Thank you, I really appreciate it. I don't know of any road data that could be used to improve OSM. There is TIGER but most of that data is already in the database.

Hello Emanueli,

These roads are not parking aisles but driveways. See osm.wiki/Tag:service%3Dparking_aisle#Examples Please revert your tag change.

Thank you,
BubbaJuice

Hello sairajdu,

I believe these roads are not oneway roads. Why did you tag them as so?

Hello Bhakta66,

This is not how you add oneway streets. You split the road using 'x' in iD. You then tag that split segment with 'oneway=yes'. This avoids roads that share the same segment, which is never how something should be mapped. Otherwise, thanks for fixing my note.

Regards,
BubbaJuice

Hello 19timber96,

There is no heath in Arizona. Heath is found in costal regions typically, not deserts. Please do not tag it as so. Tagging nature reserves or other polygons with natural tags like you did in osm.org/relation/12893749 is also frowned upon so please do not continue this practice.

Regards,
BubbaJuice

Karson,

You reverted my changeset with no explanation. Why did you revert it? Other mappers have clearly stated undeveloped HOA lands are not to be tagged with leisure=nature_reserve unless they are in-fact so (osm.org/changeset/119868975). The definition of a nature reserve can be found at osm.wiki/Tag:leisure=nature%20reserve. I have basically said this exact same thing in osm.org/changeset/120557252. If you continue this practice I might have to get the DWG involved, which I don't want to do.

Regards,
BubbaJuice

I did not see their preserve layer. I see it now.

In no way does it say that. https://gis.pima.gov/maps/detail.cfm?p=114120800

What is the source this (osm.org/way/1053636223) is from the Nature Conservancy?

Karson,

Please stop tagging these areas with `leisure=nature_reserve` such as you did in osm.org/way/1057364174. As other mappers have already expressed, this is not the proper tagging for these undeveloped HOA areas (osm.org/changeset/119868975). They should only be tagged with `lesiure=nature_reserve` if they are specifically protecting the wildlife, flora, fauna there there. If this is not the case, the area should be left untagged.

Regards,
BubbaJuice

Was this all traced by hand?

I'm retagging the neighborhood right now I would prefer no conflicts.

Hey karsonkevin2,

In what way is osm.org/way/1052733252 a nature reserve?

Thanks,
BubbaJuice

See osm.org/changeset/119646813. Someone asked the same question. (I'm assuming you're using some validator.)

I'm not sure if I do. By "monumentor" I mean the government agency that placed the benchmark there. From what I read on the wiki (I didn't totally understand it as it doesn't actually describe what it is) but it is for a protected feature. These are not really protected. If they're gone, they're gone, unless someone decides to reset it with a new disk (very unlikely). What the tag means is just what government agency had employees go out and set the benchmark.

Hey user_5359,
The meaning of the tag "monumentor" I have started using for benchmarks is which agency monumented the benchmark. In the case of "PUSCH", it was the USGS. The names are completely legitimate. I have visited all of these benchmarks personally and I added them to the database for a rendering proposal, osm.wiki/User:BubbaJuice/Survey_Points_Rendering, where you can find images of each of them, with their stamped names. The coordinates I have are from the NGS database, which is in the public domain as it is a government work.

Also deleting inaccurate building footprints.