Can you explain why you removed the official name from a footpath and added railway tags?

osm.org/way/60995478/history

Do not partially overlap areas...
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152690162

Again, do not partially overlap areas... This is not the first time I have brought it up...
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152690564

Just use multipolygon relations instead of confusing area art.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153090452

Just use multipolygon relations instead of all these seperate and creative area drawings...
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153178050

Reverted. Access tags should be used instead of deletion.

Read more here:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

osm.org/changeset/153394157

Access tags should be used instead of deletion. All of these roadways are clearly visible on aerial imagery and should be mapped.

Read more here:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152903365

Reverted. Access tags should be used instead of deletion.

Read more here:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

osm.org/changeset/153394128

Good catch. Hard to keep up with people sometimes.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152916680

Reverted. Road/Driveway still exists in aerial imagery.

osm.org/changeset/153394015

Welcome to OSM. Couple comments. Road names shouldn't be abbreviated. Example, it should be "Trail", and not "Trl".

Secondly, "(Private)" shouldn't be in the name. It is an access tag, and the appropriate access=* should be used instead. It doesn't matter if "Private" is in the name, navigation will still take people down those roads if it is not in the access field. Only the official name should be used, and never descriptions.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153177727

Access tags should be used in lieu of deletion. Changeset reverted.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/153313365

Realistically, the only ones that should are the ones within the golf course.

Named lakes generally are tagged as lakes and not water hazards.

For example, Force Lake is a lake, and not just a water hazard.
osm.org/way/93893873

The water treatment plant also should not be tagged as a water hazard.

In many cases, golf mappers remove natural=water to add golf=water_hazard. All bodies of water should be tagged with natural=*.

Also, please use a more detailed changeset comment. What did you change and why? "-" tells me absolutely nothing about what you did.

Review note:

osm.org/note/4296046

Instead of deleting and redrawing it, you should just manipulate the feature that already exists. This would preserve edit history of the feature.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152801709

edit matches aerial imagery. :)
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152805376

Please do not add features that have been built over and no longer exist. One of the fundamental rules of OSM is to only map what is currently on the ground, and not what was once there. For mapping things that once existed, but no longer does, OHM is a great site that is similar to OSM but has additional tools for historical mapping.

https://www.openhistoricalmap.org/

Building still exists and should not be deleted. just the business.

Changeset reverted.

Please use a more descriptive changeset comment. What did you change, and why? "-" tells me nothing.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/152650692