Yeah, I wouldn't have done it purposely. It's hard to tell if it is railway or light_rail from aerial mapping across the country.

Whoops. Must have fat-fingered it.

Reverted to readd that node:
osm.org/changeset/147196016

I'm trying to as I have time. Anything in particular?

No problem. Yeah, there are a number that are mapped incorrectly like that, and I have been trying to fix them, but it is hard to keep up sometimes. Once you get done with this one, feel free to make corrections to that one.

Thanks!

What did they do? I am having a hard time sorting out.

Also, they are an organized editor for Amazon, so there is a higher level of quality expected.

Historic/once-existing railways can be mapped on OHM. But they do not belong on OSM if they don't currently exist.

FYI, your changeset was reverted without duscussion by a different user...

osm.org/changeset/145718903

I agree with you. Based on lifecycle tags, they either shouldn't be mapped or should be tagged as razed since abandoned only applies to locations where the rails still exist, and based on multiple roads and the buildings that now exist where these "abandoned" railways exist, I think it is safe to say there is nothing remaining that resembles a railway in some portions.

What is your source? How did you verify they accept crypto payment?

The removal has already been reversed, and thus no further action is needed here:

osm.org/changeset/146693188

In the future, care will be taken to ensure that payment types remain correct (via phone call to business or in-person surveys). I will not touch crypto payment types personally unless it has been verified personally (in person by me), and will comment on relevant changesets according prior to removal.

I have previously encountered seemingly organized mappers updating the "check_date=*" in an automated fashion without verification that it still (or ever) exists. I will comment and report those organized users going forwards without reverting or touching their tags.

When mapping cartpaths over water, they should be a bridge, or the water should be a tunnel...

Welcome to OSM.

When adding buildings or other rectangular/square type features, "Q" can be used to give them right angles and make the map look good.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147156080

Please review:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=Overlapping%20green/fairway/rough%20polygons%20(see%20graphic%20below)
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147100348

When mapping golf course features, do not overlap them partially. The smaller one can be completely in the larger one, or they can not overlap at all. Review here for more info:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=Overlapping%20green/fairway/rough%20polygons%20(see%20graphic%20below)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/147100994

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

I have fixed this one time for you. Please do not continue to submit changesets with these errors.

These houses are mapped as literal trash. They are not even close to square, they also don't even closely resemble the shapes of the houses.

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

I have fixed this one time for you. Please do not continue to submit changesets with these errors.

You made a couple mistakes:

1) Do not partially overlap landcovers.

2) Do not leave slivers of areas to create "holes".

You should review the following webpage:
osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146603640

Before making further edits on OSM, you shoudl review the following:

osm.wiki/Tag:leisure%3Dgolf_course#:~:text=the%20building%20itself.-,Common%20mapping%20pitfalls,-Adding%20name%3D*

You made a couple mistakes which I have kindly resolved here:
1) You didn't add the beiges for the cartpath over the water. you just left it as disconnected.
2) You should not name features like tees or fairways. The name=* tag is not used for these features and should be left blank.
3) You partially overlapped landcovers. Areas should not partially overlap.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/146603969