Interstate 310 is not by any means under construction and the tags should be reverted to proposed. A single clearing in the trees that's been there for over a decade does not qualify as active construction.

I think when I wrote this I did research, realized that was the proper name, then forgot I left this comment. Sorry.

1. You only tagged the northern part of DeSoto National Forest
2. This area does not qualify as a leisure=park and is already tagged properly as a protected area.

See this excerpt from the wiki page about leisure=park:
" This tag is intended for (usually urban) parks with managed greenery, located within settlements and nearly always open to general public. Such an area may be known also as metropolitan park, municipal park (North America) or public park, public open space, or municipal gardens (UK)[2]. They are largely a "human-sculpted landscape.""

As such I'm reverting this changeset. If you have any questions, feel free to reply. Please reference the OSM wiki at osm.wiki in the future for proper mapping and tagging guidelines.

Ehhhhh I don't really feel like dying on this hill. It could go either way TBH but I'm personally hesitant to give roads with access control but no shoulders motorway.

Huge disagree. I did multiple skims of the area while there's no at-grade intersections it is not even up to motorway standards. No shoulders, tighter curves, and a 65 mph speed limit.

Careful! Named county roads are not highway=service.

Just noticing this changeset and I want to point out that cycle lanes shouldn't be tagged as their own ways, but instead should be tagged with tags on the roadway they are a part of instead. They should only be tagged separately if they have physical separation from the roadway itself. osm.wiki/Tag:cycleway%3Dlane

If you're interested in that construction project you added, I found the project page for it. They're going to continue it to meet up at that curve in LA 434, then have it continue to I-12. http://wwwapps.dotd.la.gov/administration/public_info/projects/home.aspx?key=88

Correction: Mostly tagged lanes and fixed a road classification in Stone County

Ignore my comment. I misread the OSM change summary. You did this right.

There's a covered road here, but only the section under the building is covered, not the entire way.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/135409429

The more you bicker here the more I question where your data is coming from. A lot of it is correct... but how are you getting this seemingly correct data of far away places? How did you know the substation along MS 588 is the Sand Hill substation? How did you know the long range power lines are operated by Cooperative Energy? If you're using a third party source on the internet to find this data, you need to provide that source and make sure it's compatible with the ODBL.

OpenStreetMap should be treated like a collaborative project, not as your own personal sandbox. It's not really your say to just delete all the valid but imprecise data in an area and assert "I'll replace it when I get to it." No. That's not ok.

Furthermore, you should be keeping the history. osm.wiki/Keep_the_history

This is flat out unacceptable and should be reverted. There are now orphan power nodes all over the place due to this change.

I think your time would be better spent fixing map errors and adding missing data to the map, rather than picking random harmless tags to remove across the entire world and making everyone angry.

A lot of it is TIGER imports. Data from local governments and the census bureau that takes forever to clean up because the US is so massive.

Also this is a pretty big changeset. In the future can you use a more descriptive changeset comment so we know what edits you were trying to make? Thanks.

I tidied up a couple of things and added a few roads.

Used to. How did you know? 😉

Careful, this one didn't get marked as done on maproulette.

Building osm.org/way/1084947034/history isn't even the same shape as the building in its place. Are you checking these before you import them???