Hello.
You added a couple of features to what appears to be light rail stops. Are they fully enclosed buildings or just roof with open sides?

Also could you please write a bit more descriptive changeset comments? "added additional detail" for every changeset is really vague to understand what you are trying to map. It doesn't have to be super detailed, but it shouldn't be completely useless. osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments 👍
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123450013

I think i see it, it's like benches on 4 sides of it?
If so, you should map the tree and you could map the 4 benches with direction tag for each.

Hello.
It seems like you tagged trees as benches here?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123449946

Hello.
Looking at the satellite imagery it seems like this traffic light applies to both, E7th and Ave C. Could you please elaborate why did you remove this tag?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123449260

way/1077517352 and 1077517353 have "type=multipolygon". Is that a mistake or am I misunderstanding what's going on here?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123446386

Hello.
I understand you tried to delete some of the neighborhoods that you added in a previous edit, but it appears you also deleted other, unrelated ones such as Fords, Colonia, Avenel, Port Reading, etc.
Could you please elaborate why delete those?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123442845

Hopefully washed hands in between?🤪
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123441039

I gave you multiple reasons in this thread, yet you are not accepting them because YOU don't consider them to be good enough. And yet I'm just supposed to accept your reasons as good enough because you said so? That's not going to work.

As documented in osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions name tag should not be used as a description.
This business' name is just "1400 Bar and Grill".
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121254023

Information about "accessible by appointment" goes into the opening_hours field, not description.
That website url is invalid.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/121347417

Why did you mangle phone number here?
phone=*#Usage clearly states that phone numbers should be in ITU-T E.164 format.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/122610277

Nobody is questioning that it WAS there.
The problem is that they do not exist now and therefore do not belong on OSM.
If you want to map non-existing features, go use OFM or if you want to map the past, go use OHM. OSM is for what exist now in the world.

Right...on their business card they would write "https://up-in-smoke-dispensary.business.site/?utm_source=gmb&utm_medium=referral" The whole freaking thing instead of just the domain?! Mind showing proof of that business card?

You are correct. You didn't change the name. I apologize for confusing that.

Yes, any tags you like, however in this case if you are trying to make this feature match others, that means you are coming up with a tagging scheme..and that kind of stuff needs the community consensus like the linked proposal.

This user is not familiar with this area. They are just editing it so that "labels" show up in Upland.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/120987261

Hello.
There are 2 issues with this edit.
First is that "name=*" tag should not be used as a description. This aspect is documented at osm.wiki/Names#Names_are_not_for_descriptions

Second issue is that "amenity=food_sharing" is not an accepted OSM tag yet. According to osm.wiki/Proposed_features/food_sharing this tag is still in a proposal state. As such you shouldn't use it since its syntax might change..
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123417729

Hello.
It appears that every single one of the nodes that you created have incorrect names. They are called "Service Area", not "Rest Area".
Could you please elaborate on why did you name them differently?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123405437

Hello uplander.
As you've been instructed in the past, it is inappropriate to tag the whole building as a business if that business occupies only a part of it.
As such this and your consecutive edits will be reverted.
If you continue to ignore OSM rules your account will be referred to DWG.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/123417473

You are shitnitpicking on what I said. You know perfectly well what I meant when I said tracks. And I said that many times before. Too many of the features you mapped HAVE NO TRACES left in the world world and impossible to confirm. It is 100% imaginary mapping by you.

As everybody can clearly see from the available satellite imagery, a ton of features that you added have no traces whatsoever in the real world, therefore can not be mapped. Give me a screenshot that shows any remaining traces of 432647217.

The fact that some map can not function properly without these non-existing features means there's a problem with THAT map that needs to be fixed. Not add non-existing features back to OSM.