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.

On this house, multiple angles are missing: osm.org/way/1039995323

On this house, a side of the house is angled which is not captured in the footprint: osm.org/way/1039995319

On this house, there is a part of the house mapped that isn't even there (and never was): osm.org/way/1039995343

And the list just goes on and on and on. I could nitpick at almost every single house here and find something wrong with it.

Hello abfkts,

It seems you have imported many Microsoft Building Footprints via RapiD. (Essentially an undiscussed import, but that's besides the point.) However, these are notorious for being inaccurate. Oro Valley has some very complicated buildings that can not be captured in exact detail using the footprints. My philosophy is to add valid, detailed data than no data at all and importing these buildings completely defies that. Unless you provide valid reasons as to why I should not revert all of your changesets adding buildings in this area, I will be reverting all of these buildings by 2 day from now. Please leave a comment saying that you have at least seen this message.

Thanks,
BubbaJuice

Hi TCarp,

It seems you have traced already mapped fairways. These will be deleted. Please respond why you did this.

Thanks,
BubbaJuice