Can you explain what are you doing?

R33 already exists in osm.org/relation/6928194 which should be modified. You duplicated the two.

`via=` is not for roads. It's not for all places it pass through either. It should be for places advertised only.

Please don't remove the address. It's still useful.

Please don't change `building:part=` for a single structure with different blocks.

Ok it seems that proposal is a mistake...

It's duplicating and quite a overkill to add each section as an `attraction=water_slide`. It should be tagged on the enclosing for the entire facility. Think it should use `water_slide=`, similar to `roller_coaster=track` inside an `attraction=roller_coaster`.

Please stop impersonating others and copying others changeset comments while doing the opposite.

It's added on osm.org/way/1033838693 --- The convention in HK is to put on `landuse=residential`. I only put the `addr:housename=` on the `building=` again for good measures.

See osm.org/way/163970357

In this case, they need to be encouraged to route along the actual crosswalk, not roadway. It's not really a "sidewalk".
Conceptually, I imagine they should be detoured and penalized when considering the topology only.

Please don't add descriptor labels in `name=`. That's for proper names only. Use `description:en=`.

Please don't add descriptor labels to `name=`. That's for proper names only. OSM is not a printed map. Use `description:en=` + `description:zh=`.

Ok I will take a look. We can certain discuss what should be `indoor=` and `tunnel=building_passage`, but I wanted to be consistent with `highway=service`. (since you didn't change that), and there is no `level=` yet.

The area is also a sawtooth shape, which is pending to be added. It will be easier to draw this as a `=platform`, rather than `barrier=`, or `area:highway=footway` and `area:highway=service`.

For other countries, eg in Berlin, there are even `highway=bus_stop` (no `=platform`) on a `highway=platform` + `public_transport=platform` (where the `platform` goes) . It's not a settled topic, including `=bus_stop` vs `=stop_positions` That's why there are discussions.

I review every changeset, and apply the same standards to myself. I don't delete anyone else's work lightly. I always try to improve on them. One reason being, there is one user here who keeps deleting everything to redraw them, often at a lower quality and missing tags; which others have complained before to no avail, and nothing can be done because technically it's not "wrong". It's not good practice.

You removed the area with reason being it looks bad. That's why I remind you osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_map_for_the_renderer By the same token, don't delete objects you don't understand either. osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don't_remove_tags_that_you_don't_understand

"people adding relations to them arbitrarily" is because there weren't any `=bus_stop` points until you added them now, thank you. " had become an eyesore after new buildings are built over it." is a renderer issue.

`=platform_edge` would represent the entire usable length, similar to `bus_bay=` on the road where they exists. (There are not even standards for bus stops per se) You considered boarding, but not disembarking. Other countries would use multiple doors, and even articulated buses.
You can look at HZMB to why `highway=platform` and `=platform_edge` may be needed. They are separated into platforms A alphabets onwards, then each position gets A1 numbers onwards. Each route can board at any slots on their area. Is it totally accurate to claim there are that many bus stops, for reasons of many stopping positions alone? As for door position, what about accessing the luggage bay? There will also be discrepancies in the stopping position every time. That's why both door position and `=platform_edge` is useful. Of course, here it is indeed one bus stop for every position.
Other countries use `highway=platform` on roadside stops as well. Which I don't agree with entirely, but it does show the variations.

1. They are not mutually exclusive. As I said, you can use `area:highway=` for the exact walkable areas. You should not delete something simply because it is inaccurate. The platform represents the entire area. There are many `=multipolygon` that can removed by this suggestion of yours simply because they need to have more `inner` added.
2. Again, this is a matter of iterative refinement. As I remembered, there were no individual `highway=bus_stop` + `public_transport=platform` added at first. Therefore I used the `highway=platform` first. You are definitely welcomed to add individual points to replace the `highway=platform` as members. `=platform_edge` only augments them.

For comparison, a railway platform would be occupied by other structures as well. However, the meaning of `railway=platform` is the entire area for it, including everything on it. Walkable areas should use `area:highway=footway`.

You are not allowed to directly copy from Wikia and Wikipedia. Please at least use KMB's official website only. (Although there are still grey areas with database rights, so you should rely on it alone)