As I walked downhill after parking on the bridge, I sought but saw no evidence of them (no signage or anything else marking a stop). Perhaps they're informal or the signage was… missing that day? The Prefontaine stop was quite evident. There did seem to be some minor construction on the north side at the time.

For the bus stops, which attributes needed to be fixed?

Need to verify asphalt/concrete transition position.

Awesome!!

While there might've been a pedestrian crossing previously, there's no longer any physical evidence (e.g. lowered curb, surface elevation, painted marking) of it.

The addresses were sourced from Bing?

way 448424134?

The route marker tagging was a mistake, they're guideposts.

The route marker tagging was a mistake, they're guideposts.

I implore you to look through osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct as this changeset (among others) seems non-conformant at first glance; see particularly its **Problematic usage** section.

While there might not be an explicit prohibition on an ad-hoc addition of an easily computable tag, adding (mechanically or otherwise) trivially computable tags tends to go against OSM philosophy, and there really should be discussion before changing the last modified date of thousands of objects, as they suddenly look like they were recently verified; please see https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrvcVAPdaWI at about 9 minutes in.

Could you please provide a link for where the consensus for this seemingly mechanical edit (which lacks mechanical edit tags and wasn't created with a separate mechanical edit account) was reached?

I've removed addr:state tags during some of my manual editing per past wiki guidance, but if there's consensus for adding the tag then I'll change my behavior.

Given that these are deep inside the state's boundary, is adding the state really desireable?

Changeset description should've been:

A couple of hydrants and a link road and some lighting and poles from survey along Main Street. Other lighting and poles, all trees, and realignments from imagery.

bollards should be away from road.

Corrected in changeset 145346538.

Similarly with 165th just south of Main Street. An old note I had mentioned a stop sign there. Might've been too old.

The stops I placed on 166th at NE 4th are likely inaccurate with outdated imagery. If so then the nodes should perhaps have a note= or other tag to avoid retagging.

from survey, not imagery; trees and other street lamps from imagery.

takeover tag also from survey; probably should split close to intersections.

incomplete