Why did you duplicate the University boundary? There was already a well-established boundary: osm.org/way/967728327. Also, the boundary you drew is very inaccurate and includes lots of properties that are not a part of the university.

*Looks like someone else had dragged a bunch of nodes (fixed now)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109833377

Just a heads up if you are going to be adding some stuff in the area, Mapbox is the clearest imagery in iD and most features in the area have been aligned to the Mapbox datum
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109676269

Surveying the data in these changesets, I found most of it to be outdated/inaccurate. Also, assuming all of these are quarries, they should have been tagged with landuse=quarry.

Is this import documented somewhere?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109653854

Please don't add low-quality data. It makes no sense to have a wooded area overlap with a road, a railroad, a house, a pond etc. You have access to high quality imagery, so ensure that anything drawn uses the same +/- 1 meter accuracy
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109580712

Hi. When removing a demolished building that is still visible in recent imagery, best practice is to mark it with demolished:building=* (where * is the building type). If someone decides they want to map buildings in Johnston and they see one of these buildings isn't there, they might readd it. Adjusting the tags means that the building will not be rendered, but will be shown to someone editing so that they do not readd it. Once the area has been redeveloped or when the building is no longer visible on satellite layers, it is safe to remove.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109363238

If you aren't going to add the name of a road, at least leave a fixme=* tag saying that you weren't sure what the road name is. For the USA, it is usually trivial to reference the county cadastre to figure out the name.

+ the buildings you added were very low quality. You need to trace every contour of the roof line. Not just a rectangle. Buildings use 90 degree angles, you also failed to square the buildings.

Hi, your edits at Coyote Creek GC have a lot of issues. You marked driveways as golf cartpaths, clearly wrong. You also overlapped exclusive landuses. A fairway cannot overlap a putting green or the rough, etc.

should have been marked as a residential road

Please do not add low quality building traces. These buildings are not rectangles, so they should not be drawn as rectangles. You should trace out every contour of the roof. If your primary goal is adding in the street addresses and you don't want to take the time to draw the buildings, you can simply map them as nodes.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108790441

You shouldn't map features which no longer exist

Accepting the default solution that iD provides is a very bad way of fixing warnings. I noticed quite a few bridges in the area that you added where they did not represent the actual span. iD just makes a very short span no matter what. Same thing goes with tunnels.

Why did you add a tag to a line? You should have added it to the relation
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108476264

Hi,

I would recommend switching to using Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta for mapping in CF/Waterloo. It is a bit clearer than Bing, more aligned, and has less vertical skew.

You should also ensure that when you draw a building that you square it. i.e. make all of the corners 90 degrees. It would be pretty abnormal for a carpenter to frame a building with irregular angles. In iD you can do this by right clicking the feature and finding the square tool.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108386720

Do you have a source for this information? County GIS does not show this road as having a name. It is on private property. The adjacent school is not addressed with this road name.

With 2500 edits, I would also assume you are well aware that names should not be abbreviated. "W 2nd St" should be written out in full as "West 2nd Street"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107923219

You can (and should) square buildings. A building in real life probably doesn't have 2 80 degree corners and 2 100 degree corners. Everything is 90 degrees. In the iD editor, if you right click a feature the square tool is one option. If you already have a feature selected, pressing the 'Q' button on your keyboard will also square the building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107786857

Hi. With the small island you added to Totts Lake, you tagged it place=island. Per the wiki definition, islands should be larger than 1 km2.

place=islet is the tag that should be used for small islands (> 1 km2)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/107647968

Shouldn't have used a building passage on osm.org/way/818702337. A way passing under a roof is not a building passage. The roof section of the building should be split and marked with building=roof and layer=1

Hi, I noticed that pretty much all of your changesets have issues. Some big things that stand out to me are capitalization -- you shouldn't capitalize something unless it is actually capitalized. For instance, "MIAMI", should be "Miami". Another issue is abbreviation. You should never abbreviate something. Why would you force the data consumer to make an assumption about what the abbreviation implies. It is best to write out words in full.