There is a better imagery for this purpose. In iD go to background settings (or press B) and select "Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta". Just keep in mind that these images are few years outdated.

Just to bring to attention, there is a scheme from mapping marked hiking tails as relations: osm.wiki/United_States/Long_distance_trails

Hi David, is that "bushwhack" an exiting trail? Because if it isn't blazed or otherwise marked and no path is visible, we don't want to mislead people into are where they would get lost.

The correct tagging is:
atv=no
trail_visibility=intermediate

Path was added correctly.
Hiking trails are a bit more advanced. We make them by adding the paths to a relation (see osm.wiki/United_States/Long_distance_trails)
I created a hiking relation here: relation/11039101
If you know you can fill in other info about the blaze appearance for the blue/white trail: relation/11039100

All good.
Just one thing, you didn't have to bind 3 line segments into multipolygon. You can just merge them into one that will create closed way/area.

Thanks for the info. I've updated the building footprint and details.
btw. Just recently we started with New Haven/CT meetups until the epidemic started.
osm.wiki/New_Haven
Discussions are held on Slack : osmus.slack.com

You've added level and roof information for Helene Grant School building. This building sees to be rebuilt (see Mapbox Satellite, Esri imagery). Are those tags for the new or old building?

Hi, great work mapping those golf courses. Just one improvement: We place tag 'golf_course' only on the boundary of the whole course and not on the individual elements.

leisure=golf_course

Hi, great work mapping those golf courses. Just one improvement: We place tag 'golf_course' only on the boundary of the whole course and not on the individual elements. See Thumble Brook Country Club just a bit to the west from this location.

leisure=golf_course

Generally, can you explain your motivation behind all your changesets, where you deleted driveways and other service reads?

As a beginner I recommend browsing through wiki.osm before deleting any structures, as you might not know the purpuse of those objects.

Yes particularly the earlier edits appear correct, but I don't think anybody has time to untangle the bad from good. I wrote to DWG, let's wait about their decision.

I think there is not much to discuss here, all changesets at least until #80982684 have to be reverted and user reported to DWG for blocking for vandalism.

10+ hours of work and "Job appeared as rushed and without much care taken". Ouch.

Je to naozaj parkovisko, alebo parkovanie na ulici? parking:lane=*

Hi, I don't think that this is correct. From the areal imagery, it is obvious that the bridge is much longer.

1) You added information about a company onto a line which represents Honeyspot Road. Businesses have to be represented either by a single node (at exact position = building) or in case a whole building belongs to the company, the tags are placed on building polygon itself.

2) You forgot to include tag that would identify what kind of business it is. In case of Kitchen Brains something like 'shop=electronics' would be appropriate.

You can find all the information how to correctly edit OSM in wiki: wiki.openstreetmap.org or iD editor tutorial.
If not sure, you can ask any questions on help page: https://help.openstreetmap.org/ or in the Slack channel: osmus.slack.com

Edits with exactly the same mistake as yours appear in OSM about every 30 min and fixing them takes OSM community a lot of effort. Please, it would help if you could spread these information among your colleagues so their edits also follow OSM guidelines.

Hi, I reverted your edit.
Please stop damaging map data with your SEO edits.

Hi and welcome to OSM!
Unfortunately I had to revert your edit because it didn't meet the OSM criteria.

1) No source for the data was specified
2) The node was placed on a lawn not at an object where the business resides.
3) The type of business was improperly tagged (no tag at all).
4) The neighboring object looks like a residential building. It is hard to verify that such company resides there.
5) You included unwanted SEO tagging.

From my point of view, since the two buildings are physically attached without any air gap, we should have them attached here as well, because we are mapping the reality.

What I agree is controversial is the Quadrangle multipolygon and its validity.
The Quadrangle (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memorial_Quadrangle) is the whole structure including all the courts and so 1) I could draw a new area around everything and name it Memorial Quadrangle or 2) create multipolygon relation and unite all the areas under one name. (Only the 'outer' role make sense, because 'inner' would exclude them.)

Maybe I'll try to ask at OSM forum if anybody has a suggestion how to handle such cases.