OK, got it. Ya, I had asked ivanbranco in a different changeset about this too. Not a huge deal - I too don't see the point in these 'sites' but was just curious - thanks.

Hello Supaplex,
I noticed that you created a relation with only one thing in it. Generally relations with only one member are not necessary. Is there a reason to have relation 14902864? It is a relation with only one member and it is a part of another relation. It seems that the way could just be a member of the top relation and remove 14902864?

Hello, mcliquid,
I was just wondering why you changed this to a 'site'? The wiki says that sites must also have a tag to indicate what type of site. This used to be a locality... is that still appropriate. Thanks - just curious.

Hello gnlpfth,
I was wondering if you could explain why you changed this to a 'site'? From what I read on the wiki (osm.wiki/Relation:site) this should also have some kind of tag describing what type of site it is? I just don't understand why these would be grouped this way in the first place so I was curious.

Hi Necessarycoot72, I just renamed the way that goes over the bridge back to Vermont Route 102 since the bridge area exists with the same name. As I understand it, the way that goes over the bridge should have the name of the road and the bridge area should have the name of the bridge. If you disagree then let me know and I will change it back (or you can revert it, but I'd like to know in case this is a rule that I'm not reading right)

Cool - just wanted to make sure that your initial effort was addressed. If it was a mistake then concider the matter closed. Thanks again.

Hello Winschu, can you comment on why you tagged w844825405 as a river?

... FM 78 designation since the ref tag already has this value. I hope this is acceptable and helpful.

Balam11 - it looks like you are changing the 'name' tag for Seguin road to FM 78. It seems that the road is marked as FM 78 on the street signs and this is why the 'ref' tag is set to 'FM 78', but many of the businesses have an address of Seguin road on this street so I think it might be possible that the road's name is actually Seguin Rd. Generally - in either case, we don't put the street number (like FM 78) in the name field. It should be just left blank if the road has a number, but no name. Also, I noticed that you neglected to rename all the segments of that street. Was this intentional?

I also see that you did not rename all the segments of the highway. Many bridges on the freeway still have the old name. (Just an FYI)

Hello Aighes, Is there a reason why you deleted the roundabout here? I see that you recreated the roundabout in a later changeset, but I'm wondering what made you delete this in the first place. I believe that the connectivity check from Map Roulette was not indicating an issue with the roundabout, just connectivity between two roads.

Hey Guy! just wondering why you renamed these freeways to Martin Luther King Freeway and dropped the "Junior". I see here that the freeway was named after King Junior.
https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1989-09-06-me-1563-story.html

Levina Chan, Can you explain what you are attempting to map here? These shapes don't seem to represent anything visible in the satellite imagery.

Hello DThos and thanks for mapping! Your edits to golf courses look great. One thing that the OSM community would appreciate however is if you can avoid making mass deletions only to replace the features with new ones. When features are deleted and replaced we lose the history of the feature and it can make it difficult to track changes. Instead of deleting and replacing would it be possible to just edit the already existing features?

Weird - I wonder what happened. If I may suggest, if you are an iD editor you may want to try the rapid editor - it has a few bug fixes that the iD editor doesnt and also includes building data sets from ESRI as suggested features.

It looks like you changed an administrative boundary to a highway in this changeset. The Clear Creek township boundary was affected by this change. I'm not sure how you might have managed to do that but I will reverted that part of your change so the admin boundary isn't a road.

osm.org/way/1101756572#map=17/23.56458/116.37411 seems like it duplicates a road. Can you please resolve this issue? (Delete the new road and make necessary changes to the old road).

example: osm.org/way/1079410266

Curious: When you add an abandoned rail that crosses a road do you think it is correct to add a railway=level_crossing?
The way that I was reading things it seems that abandoned rails don't need level crossings because the rails are no longer there?

Thanks for adding building, but can you please tag these with 'Building=yes"
In iD you can click on the feature type and search for building.

感謝您添加建築物，但您能否將這些標記為“Building=yes”
在 iD 中，您可以單擊特徵類型並蒐索建築物。