Do not partially overlap areas...

Do not "lollipop" features by folding an area back upon itself to simulate a hole in the area. Multipolygon relations should be used instead.

Do not partially overlap areas.

Do not delete features just to readd them with less quality and more errors. Again, you have partially overlapped areas, and this is not allowed on OSM.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150143395

Do not falsely change river areas to a golf water feature. This changeset has been reverted in part or full.

Copied private message received from user=jpotas for public discussion:

"I merged the sand traps that you messaged me about. I don’t really understand why they had to be merged but I did it anyways. For practical use, the way I had them mapped would work for any commercial application.

As far as ading extra splines, I had to drag a spline from a couple features in order for my software to pick the feature up. I can not explain why this happens but in order to get the features to download as accurately as possible I have to do this. I then immediately correct them, within a matter of a minute.

As a side note, when I finish mapping a course, it is extremely accurate and very useful for anybody that needs the information at a later date. This should be much better than not being mapped at all. I do not understand the “practical” reason for the different conforming issues that OSM admins sometimes have with my mapping. Commercial applications will see two sand traps side by side, they don’t need to have them mapped as one large sand trap. Boundries will match. Please explain and include commercial apllications that are affected if you would please, it would help me understand.

Thank you"

As discussed previously, you should not make changes that damages the OSM dataset just for your renderer or application. If your software is unable to read and interpret OSM data that conforms to OSM standards, then that is an issue with whatever software you are using.

OSM has guidelines to ensure software (when properly designed) can read data correctly. Making intentional changes that do not represent reality or mapping with poor quality (partial overlapping, simulated holes, etc.) Is against the OSM guidelines.

You are not the only user of OSM data, and thus the guidelines that are on the Wiki have to be respected.

Do not delete areas with no explanation. Why did you delete all these features?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150004589

As stated previously, do not partially overlap areas.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/150006851

Please use "Q" to square up the buildings and give them 90 degree angles.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149933896

Why did you just delete all these areas?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149933043

Were rails ever installed?

Based on the note on this way;
"railway graded but never operated", it sounds like just dirt was moved but rails were never built... If that's the case, then wouldn't it be planned, and not abandoned?

This is not how you map trees. Do not map them as random triangles tagged as golf=rough. This changeset has been reverted in part or full.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/149869300

This is not how you add trees.

Changeset reverted

golf mapper was reported to DWG. Sock puppet and poor edits.

changeset reverted. user reported to DWG

Changeset reverted

this is not how you add trees.

Changeset reverted

changeset reverted in part or full

changeset reverted

Descriptive names should not be used