Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks good to me. Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I did my best to look over your changes. Looks good generally, nice job! The only suggestion I have is to submit your changes before moving on to another area. That makes it much easier for others to review your changes. More info: osm.wiki/Bounding_box#Bounding_Box_Size
Thanks for your contributions!

Great addition. Thanks!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Generally, everything looks great! The only major issue is that Google Maps can't be used as a source for any info going into OSM. I see that you also added local knowledge as a source - that's excellent. I think in this case there's no need to revert anything since it seems like you've reviewed this in person, but in the future you'll def want to avoid copying data from google maps.

A couple other improvements here are to adjust the farmland area nearby to reflect the new residential area, and to add an outline shape to the apartments. I went ahead and did those.

Let me know if you have any questions. And thanks for your contribution!!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great to me, except that since the road still exists in real life, it should have some highway=* tag. I think highway=service makes sense here. And access=private like you've done is great!

I went ahead and added that. Let me know if you have any questions! Thanks for your contributions.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Looks great, no complaints from me! Thanks for your contributions!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here, and in some of your other changesets. Things look great overall, but looking at this one it seems like some of these "sidewalks" are actually just highway shoulder. Rapid can make it really easy to just blindly add stuff without verifying, but we should be double-checking each change.
Let me know if you disagree or have any questions. Thanks for your contributions!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Looks great! Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Looks great! I see that you tagged this outer area as a giant building, but it looks like you fixed it already.

Thanks for your contributions!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over this changeset. Everything looks great! I was about to suggest that you connect driveways to the street, but looks like you already realized and fixed that. Thanks for your contributions!

(See my comment on your other changeset first.)
So OSM has a principle called "Any Tags You Like" [0] that basically says you can make up new tags to describe verifiable features. However, it's generally recommended to instead create a tag proposal or use existing, already-in-use tags instead.

So, if another mapper could come along and see some kind of net features here, then great! In that case I'd recommend finding or creating more descriptive tags to describe these physical features.
But if someone couldn't (theoretically) verify the nets in-person then arguably this data doesn't belong in OSM. [1]

Also, I acknowledge that OpenStreetMap is a community, so people are going to disagree, so while my comments might reflect the general consensus, other contributors might disagree with me. :)
Let me know if you have any questions, thanks again!

[0] osm.wiki/Any_tags_you_like
[1] osm.wiki/Verifiability

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. This changeset looks great to me! I also had a glance at your other changeset, where you added some birding type features. Unfortunately, without descriptive tags other than name=*, most data consumers (like the map renderer) won't do anything with those features. I'll add some more info that gets a little more in the weeds on that changeset.
Anyway, again, welcome - and thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything seems great to me - Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great to me! Here are a couple tips.
- You can select a feature like a building and press "Q" to square up the corners. (With a complex shape like this hotel, you might need to square it up, adjust a bit, then square again.) Squaring corners isn't necessary, but it just makes things look a little nicer.
- AFAIK it's fine to have address tags on an entrance node, but I'd consider it best to move those tags to the hotel feature itself.

Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks great to me. Thanks for your contributions!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks great to me! Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes. Everything looks great! Thanks for your contributions.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Thanks for updating these, this is really valuable info for routing and addresses! One minor problem is that names shouldn't be abbreviated. That's because it's easy for software to shorten names where appropriate, but can be harder to "expand" them. (More info: osm.wiki/Abbreviations)

I went ahead and fixed that so no need to do anything. Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Things look good overall, but there was a problem with a couple of your tags. Specifically, description= is for a concise description of a feature, not marketing ad space. (Looks like another mapper has already fixed things up!)
Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Things mostly look good to me! One problem, though, is with the addresses on those buildings. You've added the name=* tag, whereas the address belong in addr:*=* tags. (You can use the form in the online iD editor to add the right tags.) Name is for the "common name" of a feature. Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!