I’m curious about example 10. First, what imagery is that? It doesn’t look like anything I could find in iD.

Second - how confident are you really that there is a bridge there? There’s at least three ways that a waterway and a road can cross each other: bridge, culvert, ford.

It’s not totally obvious to me from that image that there is a bridge here - could easily be a culvert, as indeed there is a culvert a very short distance northeast. An outside chance of a ford - certainly from the image sources in iD there’s nothing to indicate that that isn’t the case.

IMHO, a “waterway crosses road without bridge tag” problem is not really a problem in itself. It simply indicates there is some missing information, and isn’t worth running the risk of introducing erroneous information with false confidence.

Same reaction here - I’m in Melbourne, Australia. Plenty of stuff deleted around here - but much worse in other parts of the country. Sigh. I think 5 years from now, everyone will be scratching their heads and asking “so, remind me why we did that again?”

I think it’s a reminder that you don’t have to get it perfect first time. There wasn’t much wrong with the original tracing - it was perfectly fine for navigation. If the original tracer decided “this imagery isn’t perfect, I’m not going to use it”, there wouldn’t have been any highway at all.

Imperfect is much better than nothing.

Interesting question. I'd ask on help.openstreetmap.org.