If every data element (way, node, relation) was individually reviewed, then it is not a mechanical edit, but based on what Casper has said, that is not what happened here (for example, there was no mention of loading all elements about to be changed into something like the todo list and looking at each one individually).

I would prefer to just review those in my metro area or county.

> Then how would you prefer to review my 3200 changes
If you don't have enough respect for our community to follow our norms and invest the time, effort, and skill (or recruit others with the necessary time and skill to help you) to do things inline with community expectations and rules, then I would prefer that you do not make this type of change at all. The fact that there are a few "color" vs "colour" tags is not a life and death situation for OpenStreetMap, and data consumers can easily translate if it is important to them.

BTW, regardless of what you call it, this does fall under the Automated Edits Code of Conduct[0], which states the code covers the "use of find-and-replace functionality using a standard editor such as JOSM "

[0]osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

Thanks, I understand things happen.

Please limit the geographic extent of your changesets to a more reasonable size
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108536838

Pretty arrogant for you to post yet another changeset with a huge geographic extent after you have been informed via changeset comments on one of your other changesets that this is not appropriate. Also, this appears to be a mechanical edit, which is also not appropriate.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108548780

Nice job! Thanks for the edits!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108551391

Can you share your workflow with us?

Thanks again for the edits, and your reply.

I have never used Streetcomplete, but I raised this on the mailing list, and here is what was reported as a way to avoid this problem:

"Uploading solved quests manually before solving a geographically distant
quest, it's a pretty prominent button in the upper right of the main
screen. "

Another changeset with a large geographic extent. You really should group all of the Boulder edits together one changeset, and group all of the Egan edits in a separate changeset, and then have a third one for those in the middle of Iowa.

Hello again,

This change set also spans a large geographic area, it really should be two separate changesets.

Mike

Thanks for the edits. In the future, please limit the geographic extent of your changesets to a smaller area, for example, a couple of neighbourhoods. This changeset has edits in Egan MN; Boulder, CO; and somewhere in the middle of Iowa. It really should be three separate changesets.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108503646

Thanks for the edits, but please, limit the geographic extent of your changesets! Many of us try to monitor our local area for changes, and these large changesets show as being in our area, regardless if there were actually any changes in that area.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108496890

Thanks for the edits on this task! The fire is long out - thankfully, but I am sure there will be other disasters, so this still helps.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108342480

Thanks for the edits Beth!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108388275

Please!, find a way to group these changes by geographic area, and keep the bboxes a reasonable size.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108430155

Ok, I will try to fix the boundary. There is some data from the USGS with park boundaries that we are allowed to use... I just have to find it...

The problem with trying to map Oak Flat Campground from overhead imagery is that the tree canopy is too dense in most cases to actually see the roads. Strava and OSM GPX traces are only things we have (the park map cannot be counted on to be spatially accurate, its creator may have taken artistic license to make the map more readable/useful for general park visitors )

Hi! Welcome to OpenStreetMap, it is great to have you as part of our community!

A couple of things. You need to cite your source. I know there is a new trail there (I live a few miles away), but you should let us all know how you know the trail goes exactly there, perhaps a GPS track from when you hiked it? If you do have a GPS track, perhaps you could also upload it. You mentioned Bing Imagery, but that trail does not show up in Bing as it is too new.

A trail already exists for part of the way where you drew the new trail, no need to draw it a second time. I see it is tagged as construction. You can just change that tagging, and snap your trail to it where they join.

Let me know if you have any questions. Again, I am local so I know a little bit about the area.

Mike
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108389530

Hello again,

Sorry to keep bothering you, but I just noticed this.

What was your source for saying the following were fords?
osm.org/node/8933673417
osm.org/node/8933673418

https://www.parks.ca.gov/pages/422/files/richardson_grove.pdf
Shows them as bridges.

If one is not sure, it is better to leave the error (crossing waterway / highway) for someone else to research and fix.

By the way, I am not sure of the scope of your effort, but Richardson Grove State Park actually has two boundaries in OSM. The tagging should be merged and one deleted (probably the smaller one as I suspect the park has been expanded over the years, but double check your sources).

Also, on this specific changeset, the southern most road of this camp ground is probably actually a little to the north based on the Strava Global Heatmap.

Finally, I did realign some of the trails to the Strava Global Heatmap - just FYI. I am not trying to step on anyone's toes, I was just in the area (virtually), and couldn't help myself. :-)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108331556