Hi,
You seem to have missed the message that I sent a few hours before you made this changeset. Again, you deleted the surface tag from the ways that you edited here. The surface is one of the most important aspects of a road, and it should not be deleted in bulk like this.

Hi,
I'm glad to here that you are working to restore those buildings; that way I won't need to revert your changesets myself. I did see that the buildings weren't of the highest quality. The editor that you are using provides some tools that help you improve buildings. If you click on the + sign between nodes in a building, it will create a new node that you can move to where it's needed. Also, if you have a building selected and press the "q" button, it will make it so the corners are at 90° angles.

Hi,
In this changeset and in 109426429, you deleted a whole bunch of buildings. I'm assuming from your changeset description "we can do better" that you thought that the building outlines weren't good enough. In OpenStreetMap, we try to always improve on other people's work, not just delete everything. Are you currently working on restoring those buildngs? It's been almost a day, and I haven't seen you make any progress. Also, "we can do better" is not a great changeset description. Here are some examples of useful and informative changeset descriptions osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments#Examples

Hi,
Is there a particular reason you have been removing surface=asphalt from asphalt highways? It seems harmful.

Hi,
I reverted this changeset because this service road was moved to be closer to the town line in 2020. The line as I mapped it is just an estimate, but it might appear on the newer imagery that Amazon has.

Hi,
The amenity=bank tag is for full service bank-like businesses with tellers and lending agents. You might be thinking of the amenity=atm tag. Please see osm.wiki/Tag:amenity%3Datm for more information.

Hi,
I reviewed your edit, as you requested. I was able to confirm from other sources that the trail from Guardsman Pass was posted as closed for re-vegetation. However, I was not able to confirm that you can no longer walk around the east side of the lake to continue on to Lackawaxen Lake. I did read that dogs are not allowed within 100 feet of the lake, so maybe you wanted to add the tag "dog=no". I restored the trail around the east side of the lake.

Hi,
Thank you for updating the turn lanes here to reflect the new layout! I reviewed the edit, as you requested, and you did it totally right.

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for your contributions! I reviewed your edit, as you requested. I have a few things to point out. One is that buildings should only rarely be attached to roadways. And another is that we have access newer imagery, including layers that shows the new building. You can see the options by pressing the background settings button on the right hand side of the editor (the one that looks like three pieces of paper). And one last thing, to add a building you can use the Building preset. You can get to it by typing in Building in the search bar that appears after drawing the area.

Thanks again for you contributions in the Amherst/Nashua area, all the POIs you added look good!

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for your contributions! I reviewed the edits that you made today, as you requested. You asked about the trails labeled "Davis Hill". That was the name that the original mapper who added these trails used, and that was 7 years ago, long before these new names were created by the landowner. So thank you for updating the names! You replaced some of the names of trails that strayed off the property with "unnamed", but leaving them blank would be better (I went ahead and fixed that).

You also asked for a review on the changeset where you added the Spring House trail. We actually are allowed to use the Strava Heatmap to map things currently, so I improved the trail using that.

One last thing, on the Lewey's Loop trail, you added the extra " - Foot Traffic Only" bit to the name. That info was already saved by the bicycle=no tag that you added, so I removed it.

Thanks again for your contributions, and let me know if you have any questions!

Hi,
I'm glad to see folks working with UDOT to make OpenStreetMap better. I've seen more than one of you, so I suggest reading up on the Organized Editing Guidelines: https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines.

Regarding the ATSPM tags, I still haven't figured out what they mean. Creating new tags is totally fine, though, as that Wiki page says, they should be documented in the Wiki :)

I'm guessing that the ATSPM tags might have something to do with the signed direction that the state route goes? If so, it is true that there isn't a widely accepted way to tag that yet. However, this summer we (as a United States community) have been discussing a scheme that would handle that, documented (as a draft) here: osm.wiki/User:Minh_Nguyen/Route_directions. If that is the sort of thing that you mean, I can talk to other mappers in Utah and see if there is interest in converting our state routes to this scheme.

The Girl Scout Camp is a great example of a business that should be on the map. They have a website where they advertise and rent out the place (before COVID). It was even properly tagged with access=private, meaning that only the GSU and their invited guests can visit.

The Bonanza Flat Conservation Area is under fee ownership of Park City, so the ownership=private tag wouldn't be correct here. The easement does allow Park City to regulate access to the public land, and any place that has been signposted as closed should be tagged with access=private or access=no depending on if city employees/contractors use those areas. However, it is a matter of accuracy and safety that any trail that someone can see on the ground belongs in OpenStreetMap with the proper tags. If people are using trails that have been closed, I recommend that the City put signs up on the ground saying those trails are closed.

Adding accuracy to names and regulations is much appreciated as oftentimes those get overlooked and have likely changed since the area became public land. There's a lot to do to improve the map in this area. Clumsy deletion of popular trails and access roads doesn't help.

Hi,
I see that you have joined OpenStreetMap today and spent the morning going on a deletion spree, including deleting places I have been myself. You also claim to be representing "landowners" from all across the Park City and Brighton area, which seems dubious. In OpenStreetMap, we map things that exist, including things on private property. I'm going to be reviewing each of your changes this morning and reverting the deletions that map valid ways. You might be interested in the ownership=private tag to describe ways that are on private land.

Fixed in 108777770

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for your contributions.
I've been following your changesets in Tooele, and I have a question and comments. First the question, what do these tags in the atspm namespace mean? I couldn't find them in the Wiki. Next the comments.

First, the Wiki page for connectivity relations (osm.wiki/Relation:connectivity#How_and_when_to_use_connectivity_relations) says that they should be used for more complex intersections, so I don't think they should be used for these simple intersections. At the very least, I've never seen them used before like this. They're really not necessary unless there's many intersections in quick succession.

Second, you've been adding a lot of duplicate stop light nodes. Please see osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dtraffic_signals#How_to_map for some instructions on how to map them, but, as it says, ideally each stop light would be mapped exactly once. In a simple 4-way intersection, that can be the intersection node. Where some of the streets are split, stop light nodes can go on the stopping lines with the proper direction tag (forward/backward).

Third, you've been splitting ways at the stopping lines, and I can't figure out why. It'd be one thing if the tags were the same on each side of that split, but you've been setting them to different values, which isn't good intersection modeling. OSM tries to use a 1D data model in a 3D world, and there are some compromises we have to make because of it.

Fourth, turn lanes should only be tagged where there is a turn lane. You've been tagging them hundreds of feet in either direction. I think that you've gotten better at not doing that over time though.

Fifth, you've been using some older imagery. As I'm sure you know, this road has seen a lot of construction in the last few years, and lanes and layouts have changed. It's worth checking newer layers like Esri World Imagery or Maxar Premium to make sure the most up-to-date information possible is being saved.

Sorry if this feels like a lot. You have been doing quite a bit here, and I wanted to catch it so that your future edits can be the best they can be :)

As the Wiki says, they should be tagged according to what sort of building it is. The building tag reflects the original use, so purpose-built hotels should be tagged with building=hotel. Hotels that are repurposed from other things (like a church or a house), would have a building tag like building=church or building=detached. If you don't know the history of the building, then building=yes is totally fine.

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thank you for your contributions! I see that you've been adding a lot of ATV trails east of Monroe. That's all well and good, but you've been using tags like "grade" and "grades", when I think you've been meaning to use "tracktype". Please see osm.wiki/Key:tracktype for more information. In the editor that you're using, there's a drop-down box in the left sidebar that helps you select the track type. I already went through and cleaned up the ones you've created so far. Thanks again for helping improve the map near Monroe, and happy mapping!

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thank you for your contributions. I see that your operating procedure was finally changed so that multi-building businesses are finally modeled better, and I'm glad for that. I see that you are setting the building tag to "*" now. I'm guessing that someone gave you advice to tag buildings with building=*, and you took it literally. In technical spaces, the "*" character often means wildcard. What they meant was to use building=hotel, building=motel, building=commercial, or building=yes, depending on what is correct for that individual building. If you don't know or can't figure out what would be best, then building=yes is the most generic option.

Hi,
What is your source for this change? I went all around the nearby trails and up to the top of the hill, but I couldn't find any sign or map calling it this name that you changed it to.

Hi,
A business offering rental cabins is tagged with tourism=chalet, not tourism=hotel. Please see osm.wiki/Tag:tourism=chalet for more information.