'I have reverted this changeset for the following reason:
fantasy edits'

osm.org/changeset/143595089

'I have reverted this changeset for the following reason:
fantasy edits'

osm.org/changeset/143595089

'I have reverted this changeset for the following reason:
fantasy edits'

osm.org/changeset/143595089

'I have reverted this changeset for the following reason:
fantasy edits'

osm.org/changeset/143595089

'I have reverted this changeset for the following reason:
fantasy edits'

osm.org/changeset/143595089

In this car case, a huge piece of the loop was missing, so even a trivial check would have caught it.

The algorithm for boundary validity is not hard. I do it in Streetferret. You just gather up all the member ways and make sure each endpoint has a matching endpoint on the same or another way. Then you check that all the inner loops are outside an outer loop. In any case, there is definitely a QA site with boundary validity.

On the satellite view it looked expressway-like to me, but if you have a better local understanding feel free to adjust it.

This boundary is broken (osm.org/relation/119236)

This was the last edit to touch it. I'm sure this bot edit wasn't the one that broke the boundary, but now it's hard to tell what the culprit was. It would be ideal if a bot edit working on boundaries might also check to see if the boundary is valid.

This boundary is broken: osm.org/relation/37376

Should be a primary expressway instead.

landuse=forest and natural=wood means the same thing, trees.

While some mappers have tried to use =forest to mean managed forest, many others use it as a synonym. I personally think it's a waste of time to draw a distinction. I think natural=wood where trees are present is a perfectly acceptable way to map wooded areas.

Hi, had to revert this change to highway classifications. The current documentation is at:

osm.wiki/Rhode_Island/Highway_classification

which is the Rhode Island specific implementation of

osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance

Everything is subject to debate of course, but the Mt Hope Bridge upgrade and the motorway_link change near Sprague Street are not right. Motorways have pretty specific definitions, and _link roads need to connect to roads of their parent types.

I surveyed this area on September 10th. Here's my GPS trace:
https://www.strava.com/activities/9821831153

Additional discussion on osm.org/changeset/141402069

Aside from above, the reason that I marked this area as access=no, is because it is currently scheduled for demolition, and it is surrounded by a tall chain link construction fence. I trust that this explanation is sufficient and that I don't need to run out and gather more photographic evidence as I did on the other changesets on the island that I reverted. I would appreciate in the future, if you would have a discussion when reverting recent edits if you are not personally putting your eyeballs on the thing you are changing. I live in this area and my edits are based on personally visiting these locations on the ground.

Also, Bing Maps Aerial is the wrong imagery layer for this area. You should be using the March 2023 Rhode Island aerial imagery, which is the most up today.

Please explain how you came to determine that this road is accessible. I personally surveyed it.

Please explain this edit and how you came to assess that this street is accessible.

This road has a sign at the end that reads:

HARBOR VIEW DRIVE
PRIVATE
DO NOT ENTER

Therefore I am restoring the private access tagging and mapping the gate and inscription.