Do not add parking lots as a building. This is incorrect and has been fixed.

Only things that actually exist should be mapped. So things with a presence. I highly doubt there is a railway (abandoned or not) going through the person's bedroom at 3315 Gregory Street.

See more here:
osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

This would definitely be good stuff to add to OpenHistoricalMaps where it can live on forever. Features that no longer exist but once did and have been overbuilt belong on OHM:
osm.wiki/Nonexistent_features#:~:text=Please%20feel%20free,right%20time%20period.

OpenHistoricalMap (OHM) also allows you designate start and end dates for features. I highly recommend focusing time and energy getting old railways added there so you don't have to worry about them being deleted over time:
https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/

This shouldn't have been created since it is clearly done "just for the renderer". I believe this has been mentioned before...

osm.org/way/1176294681

Why did you do the landcover as seperate segments, such as:
osm.org/way/1176266838

Multi-polygon relations should be used or large areas should just be used rather than weird pieces like this. It has been addressed and cleaned up.

Do not make tempoary changes to the map purely for whatever you are doing with the export. Instead, the data should be exported and manipulated in a sandbox, such that it does not affect the OSM database.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138249142

Make sure you square your buildings. "q" can be pressed to make the buildings square and have 90 degree corners.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/137968279

What's the dealio with not adding cartpaths as bridges over the water/streams?

I'll update that.

First, welcome to OSM!

Second, this should be a service tag and shouldn't have a name. The name is descriptive and can be put in the description/note field.

I have gone ahead and updated/resolved this for you.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138065752

When creating features, do not "lollipop" the areas. Use multi-relation polygons instead to punch a hole in the area if it is necessary.

reverted.

I have reviewed this changeset.

It shouldn't be a water hazard. I removed that tag from this and the reservoir. This is actually a bit of a messy multi-relation polygon but I cleaned it up a bit.

Why did you get rid of the golf cartpath bridge that is still clearly mapped?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138167297

Why did you get rid of the parking lot ways and other features that were already mapped correctly?

Don't delete things that are already correctly mapped. This changeset has been reverted in part or full.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/138167720

Despite no changeset comment, can you elaborate on what you did or why? You added tag-less features, such as this:
osm.org/way/684840860

What is it? Why was it added and why were no tags added?

The paths have once again been removed and left as tag-less lines. The errors are through the roof based on the link you provided:
https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/hdyc-osmi-issues?uid=416346

There are no paths through the pedestrian areas to provide navigation.

They are all tagless again. It's an absolute mess.

I'm not sure if "Update" is better or worse than "(No comment)"

Please use more descriptive changeset comments. What did you change and why? There have been other users who have commented on your changesets and have requested the same thing.

For more info on how to write changeset comments:
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments#:~:text=A%20good%20changeset%20comment%20should,have%20edited%20on%20the%20map.

Please use better changeset comments. What did you change, and why?