I don't know about Reese Technology Center or the farm in Spain, but Mountain View Cemetery was tagged as "boundary=administrative" because the cemetery is a disconnected part of Davenport.

Was removing "surface=asphalt" from the south end of Iron Court intentional?

As far as I know, the U-District bridge was designed, advertised, and intended as a pedestrian bridge. Yes, bicycles are permitted, but that doesn't make it a cycleway.

#please-edit-in-smaller-pieces-or-use-a-meaningful-changeset-commment #or-both :)

Is this actually in use for commercial purposes? I'm not seeing anything that looks like commercial buildings, or even commercial construction, in last week's Sentinel imagery.

On the subject of software not displaying things properly, I'm currently 0 for 9 on web browsers showing this changeset discussion as intended (Seamonkey on Gentoo Linux comes close, but the flag more closely resembles that of the Netherlands than the intended rainbow flag). Email clients are currently 0 for 4 at displaying comment notifications, with Gmail on Firefox/MacOS coming closest ([white flag] [rainbow between two clouds] = primary). That's a lot of software we'd need to fix before this could even be considered for use.

Even Unicode-aware programs can fail to handle emoji correctly, since they're combining characters outside the Basic Multilingual Plane. JOSM on Linux shows the tag as a black-and-white scribble, while viewing a dump of the changeset in a text editor shows the scribble plus a black-and-white flag.

For that matter, programs that handle emoji correctly can have problems. I came across this changeset while trying to figure out why a bunch of stuff had been tagged as "[flag of the Netherlands]=primary". I'm now reasonably sure it's supposed to be "[rainbow flag]=primary", but when the flag was shrunk for display, the color bands got merged to produce red-white-blue.

Do people call it this, rather than something like the "West Richland Post Office" or the "Van Giesen Post Office"? Is the name actually on the building somewhere?

If neither of these is true, it should probably go in the "official_name" field rather than the "name" field.

As far as I know, this ramp meter is still merely proposed.

Standard practice is to only add a name to the school building if it's different from what's on the school grounds.

I don't think "level crossing" is the correct tag for a railroad that runs down the middle of the street the way the WIM Industrial Spur does in Palouse.

All but the oldest imagery shows this as being used for RV storage. When it comes to mapping land use, "who owns it" doesn't matter as much as "what it's used for".

When you're building landuse multipolygons, please don't include city-limit lines as part of those multipolygons. It makes it very difficult to adjust things if the usage changes, or if a mistake was made.

This was still closed last Sunday when I drove by. Has that changed?

#WatchYourNodeDrags

Seriously. In addition to whatever you were doing in Africa, you moved an administrative boundary in Ireland and dragged an intersection in San Francisco to a point several blocks away.

You did a couple of what are called "node drags" here: you accidentally pulled an intersection across the map, leaving a tangle of roads behind. I've fixed them, but it's something to watch out for in the future.

The general principle of OpenStreetMap is that we map what is there, not what used to be there, what is going to be there, or what someone wishes was there. If the jetty is there but the railroad used to build it isn't, we map the jetty but not the railroad.

The main exception to this is if something has left obvious traces. For example, in one of the areas I hike, there's a strip of decaying asphalt and two bridge abutments. Since it's still obvious where a road used to run, I've mapped it as an abandoned road and a demolished bridge.

When you're adding a grid of ways (such as the parking aisles you added to the La Grande Wallmart), make sure there's an intersection (a grey dot) at each point where they cross. Computers are, as I noted, rather literal-minded, and they'll have you driving around in spirals trying to get out of the parking lot otherwise.

When you need to change the attributes of part of a road, don't draw another road over the original like you've done here. Computers are rather literal-minded, and they'll treat it as a bridge, or an embankment, or whatever, stacked on top of another road.

The correct way to do this is to split the road into two or three pieces, and then make the changes to the appropriate part:
1) Click on the road to highlight it.
2) If there isn't already a node (a white circle) in the correct place, click on a nearby white triangle and drag it to create one.
3) Right-click on the node and select "split" (the scissors icon) to split the road in two at that point.
4) Repeat if needed to get a third piece.
5) Click on the part of the road you want to change and change it.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap! I've got some questions about the changes you've made, as well as some tips for better editing.

1. Are you sure the stream you added as "Sanderson Creek" is called that? The USGS topo map has it as "Mill Creek".

2. Is thre a reason why you re-tagged a stretch of demolished railway through Post Falls from "razed" to "abandoned"? "Abandoned" should only be used when there's still evidence of the track, such as the gravel railbed.

3. There's an easy way to make square-cornered buildings: once you've drawn and tagged the building, highlight it and hit the "s" key or right-click and select "square" from the menu. This even works (usually) for 45-degree angles.

4. "Ruins" is only intended for things of historic interest. For things that have simply been demolished or fallen out of use, the "lifecycle prefix" tagging system is prefered: osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix

5. Have you considered editing in smaller pieces at a time? Editing in large chunks like this makes your edits show up in the history for most of Washington and Oregon, and makes it hard to ask you about just one aspect of your work at a time.