Google Maps is not a valid source. Their map data has incompatible licensing and is illegal to use in this manner. I assume you cited the source for the street name? I verified the name with TIGER so it is okay.

When you add name=* tags in OpenStreetMap, you should never abbreviate the name. If you write something as ABC St, how is someone supposed to know that St = Street? There might be some cases where St is abbreviated for something else (Saint) or where St isn't short for anything. In general, don't abbreviate and leave it up to the renderer to decide whether or not to abbreviate.

Why did you change this pond from water=pond and convert it into golf=water_hazard? Both tags can coexist. Also, there is no golf course here, so the golf=water_hazard_tag is inappropriate.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/115182620

This is a bad edit. You deleted substantial amounts of data and edit history just to redraw it in lower quality with incorrect tags.

You should always modify what is already drawn. If you delete and redraw you lose the history. You marked the cart paths as roads. You marked the parking lot as a building. You set fairways and greens to overlap. This is impossible, you should use relations to ensure there is no overlap.

I am reverting your edit and will be reviewing your other recent edits.

Did they actually change the name of the Recreation Building? I see https://www.facilities.uiowa.edu/building/0304 refers to it by the name you used. Other campus resources still list it as the Recreation Building.

Having trained in the building for 5 years, it was always referred to as either "The Rec" or "The Recreation Building". Emails I receive which mention the building still refer to it as the The Recreation Building.

Yes, the building does have an indoor track as well as locker rooms for track/xc. The building also has the locker rooms for baseball/softball. And a weight room that is used by other teams. And an athletic training room. And an equipment room.

Also don't use Bing imagery in this area. It isn't the highest quality, it isn't most recent, and it is misaligned by around 5 metres. If you are mapping in the Quad Cities, you should use Mapbox Satellite. If you are mapping outside the Mapbox coverage in the Quad Cities, you should probably use either Esri Clarity or NAIP

It appears you never read my changset comment from a month ago. All 4 golf courses you have mapped, you have used incorrect tagging, which will cause significant uncaught issues for some end users.

To reiterate some of the issues with your changes:
* You tagged every single feature with leisure=golf_course. Only the overall course gets this tag, you should remove it from everything else. (This is the most egregious mistake)
* Golf features don't need a name=* tag. Ex. #13 fairway does not need a name.

Please revisit the courses you have mapped and make these corrections.

Please ensure buildings are squared like they are in real life. In iD, you can select a feature and then press 'q'.

Also make sure to use more meaningful description comments. I have no idea what those hashtags are supposed to mean. It would be better to say something like "added house"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/113062995

Looks good to me

Forgot to add as source
*USACE Navigation Charts
*Esri World Imagery
*Bing Imagery
*Iowa 1950's

Hi,

highway=living_street is basically nonexistant in the US. It is reserved for very low-speed streets where priority is given to pedestrians. Based off of 25 mph & 2 lanes, I feel confident this is actually highway=residential.

Also, ensure that names are written in full and not abbreviated. So "St." should be written as "Street".

Finally, I noticed you added a few roads in Polk City over the last few weeks. I checked the Polk County GIS portal, and none of the areas seem to have been platted. Are these roads actually constructed already, or are they merely in a preparation or proposal state? If the latter, then they should not be tagged highway=residential.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/111391271

Marking the building with layer=1 implies that it is floating above the ground.

Why did you add a node with name="Rest area" inside of an existing rest area. If the rest stop is already represented by an area, then adding a node is redundant. Also calling it name="Rest area" is a descriptive name, like naming a park, name="Park"; not correct.

If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. The QC is my home turf for mapping.

Hello j-clark3, welcome to OpenStreetMap. While you have successfully added features to Byron Hills GC, you have made some significant mistakes with your tagging.

* You tagged every single feature with leisure=golf_course. Only the overall course gets this tag, you should remove it from everything else.
* Features don't need a name=* tag. Ex. #13 fairway does not need a name.
* Each golf=hole does not need a name=*. You did a good job adding the ref=* tag. This stores the # of the hole.

Why did you downgrade a bunch of bike paths from highway=cycleway to highway=footway?

It is very clear that osm.org/way/979190256 is not a bridge. Just a culvert. If using iD, Esri Clarity is usually the best imagery for rural US.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/110668603

demolished:building=* doesn't really refer to how long ago the building was demolished. Features that may be visible in some aerial imagery, but not in other layers should use this tag to prevent people from unknowingly readding the data. For example, someone using Mapbox or Esri Clarity might see the buildings, assume that they are there in real life, and then retrace them. If they are marked with demolished:building=*, then someone armchair mapping would realize that they have been demolished and should not be readded.

What is the point of incorrectly marking roads as proposed? This road has been in this location for nearly 100 years, nothing about it is proposed. Proposed also implies that the road does not physically exist, only in the mind of a development company.

Corrected boundary to:
osm.org/relation/13111548

It is worth noting that just because a campus map shows a property, does not mean it is a part of the college. Some universities may show independently owned housing or frats on their campus maps, but because they are not owned by the college, they should not be included in the boundary.