The map is only supposed to have one feature per item, however you have added 2 duplicate hotels and removed a useful point. Please keep the features as points like it was before, or make it an area or multipolygon, instead of multiple buildings. Additionally, please don't make individual changesets for single movements. Your last 3 changesets are all in the same area and could be made 1.

The map is only supposed to have one feature per item, however you have added 2 duplicate hotels. Please keep the hotel as a point like it was before, or make it an area or multipolygon, instead of multiple buildings.

The map is only supposed to have one feature per item, however you have added 6 duplicate hotels. Please keep the hotel as a point like it was before, or make it an area or multipolygon, instead of multiple buildings.

If you can, please try to adjust the existing building instead of deleting it and creating a new one. It looks like it hasn't lost much this time, but in general it's good practice to keep the attributes and history of any existing objects.

If you can, please try to adjust the existing building instead of deleting it and creating a new one. It looks like it hasn't lost much this time, but in general it's good practice to keep the attributes and history of any existing objects.

I know that the location of that address is correct. What I mean is, is there really a Togo's at that address? The person who filled out the form could have missed a digit in the house number, or put their home address by accident.

The changeset information gave me every reason to suspect it to be vandalism. It covers a large area, the description is a single word, the description does not describe what was removed or why, there is no "source" changeset tag to indicate that aerial imagery was the reason for removal, and your profile didn't have any additional information (except for a number of other similar-looking changesets, some with similar complaints). Additionally, broad removals are suspicious and hard to review in the first place. I will admit to also using short changeset descriptions sometimes, but more information is always better, and helps both the community and the project.

This looks like a house. Is it really the right address?

Removal of what? And why? Did you check that each thing is no longer visible in imagery?

Alright, sounds good. Thanks for contributing as well!

Yes, I helped build that MapRoulette project. In the directions, it says "Check that the address is to a business/office open to clients and not the business owner's house. Skip tasks in private residential areas." But if you think the person here wouldn't mind clients coming to the door (excepting pandemic restrictions), then it's fine.

This (along with the numerous other preschools that you've mapped) seems to just be somebody's house, and I don't see any signs in Streetside advertising that it is a preschool. Are you sure this (as well as the others) isn't an invasion of this homeowner's privacy?

I've reverted this and your 11 other changes under this MapRoulette challenge ( osm.org/changeset/97572110 ). Please read the task instructions before making changes.

This reverts changesets 97551909 97552220 97552821 97553116 97553242 97553490 97554249 97554456 97555647 97555913 97556693 97558201

This is wrong. The task is to add a business here. The building is already drawn. Also don't name it after yourself.

This is wrong. The task is to add a business here, not just a commercial area. Also don't name OSM objects after yourself.

This is wrong. The task is to add a business here, not just a commercial area. Also don't name OSM objects after yourself.

This is wrong. The task is to add a business here, not just a commercial area. Also don't name OSM objects after yourself.

This is wrong. The task is to add a business here. The building is already drawn. Also don't name it after yourself.

I would think that "noexit=yes" at the end of the road and the path would be enough to discourage editors from connecting it