Please don't delete something that still exists.

It can be changed to `tactile_paving=yes` . This is acceptable detailing. Only the `=footway` is wrong. And this is `=pedestrian` (+ `sidewalk=no`) , not `=service`. (`service=emergency_access` should only be used for roads entirely dedicated to contingency use without dominant pedestrians use, while this is more for walking along the building)

Please don't change towers on podiums from `building=` to `building:part=` . This is not the common practice locally, and is debatable as to their definition.

`*:housenumber=` is used for the street number, not building number. They are all 7 as the estate here.
Secondarily, `addr:*=` is for some form of address. These block numbers are not used, when they have names.

If the eatery occupies the entire area, and the area has no other identity or info of its own, having `amenity=` on the area is correct. Especially as they should be `indoor=area` which should have another feature or feature-attribute tag to describe it, not `=room`.

The deletion is for this project only. It is only deferred, not cancelled.

1. There is still a left turn from Ma Sik Rd though?
2. Please keep the road section which will be reinstated after completion.

Please don't use `=*_link` when they connect to different classes of roads. Eg Oi King St is not `=primary`.

!. While separate `addr:housenumber=` points is more detailed, you can still keep the main address used on the area. This aligns with the common practice in HK.
2. Please don't delete `shop=` / `amenity=` points as they still represent a shop space. Moreover, some have an address, especially they can have individual numbers in a range of address. You can remove the feature tags (by changing to a plain "point"), or modify them to be `was:shop=` / `was:amenity=` etc.

0. Please split your uploads.
1. Please don't directly add not yet opened features. Don't add `railway=` to `roller_coaster=track` .
2,3. The roofs are not yet removed.

This shouldn't be done for data topology reasons. Eg you would not move them from `building=` to `type=building` either.

1. The issue of `=motorway_junction` on restricted lane change braided ramps is quite uncertain. I discussed with Apple or some company once before. It is desirable not to duplicate it, while in this case North Point on-slip needs to be considered too. Now I imagine some form of `destination:*=` on the point of diverging may help. But you have already added `junction:ref=` (regardless of whether this is the best solution), so the `=motorway_junction` isn't absolutely necessary.
2. Although I don't agree with it fully, you are supposed keep the separate `highway=speed_camera` next to the road. The `type=enforcement` is sufficient to show what road section is being monitored.

Please don't modify the entire building. That's what you have edited here. Create a new point inside.

The other one looks correct (I'm not using Telegram)

This is actually for the larger `boundary=administrative` it is naming. There is another item for this location.

Please at least add `bicycle=yes` back to them. And I find `*cn_=yes` more proper and informative.

You haven't fixed it. At most, there is a `route=hiking` . No `route=mtb` .

Your other edits osm.org/changeset/141012355 and osm.org/changeset/141012355 hasn't been adding them to it.

You could coordinate on Discord to let everyone to see, not that it is crowded. Or use the wiki page. osm.wiki/Hong_Kong/Transport/Routes#專營巴士_Franchised_buses

Eg osm.org/changeset/140987678
And `route=bicycle` removed on `highway=` without belonging such a `type=route`. This can be valid if the class of `*cn=yes` wasn't determined yet, https://osmcha.org/changesets/140798528
Fundamentally `*cn=yes` is acceptable. `ref=` and `network=` aren't removed from roads with `route=road` created.