Excellent, thanks so much! Looks like this may just be misplaced on the map then. Your photo shows what looks like a DOT camera next to a paved road, but the spot you've chosen is next to a railroad and dirt track road. Can you double-check the location?

Sadly, no - can you use a hosting site such as imgur or postimg.cc? Alternatively, you could try and use a street-level imagery site such as Kartaview or Panoramax but they may require a bit mote hassle.

Seems questionable that there is an ALPR here. Do you have a photo or other info on this?

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I've reviewed your changes here. Heads up that in general, changing classification solely to influence specific routing software is frowned upon. But in this case, I agree with your reclassification as tertiary, based on road width and role in the road network. Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I've reviewed your changes. Looks great.

Hi, your edit here might actually not be correct, but I'm not sure. Perhaps user Sytys, the local public transit guru, can chime in here? Yuliya, can you share more about what stuck out to you with the old tags that seemed incorrect?

Hi, the spigot you removed on USU campus does exist. Did you check on site for that one?

Hello - Just letting you know that another contributor has changed the tagging for this camera to a UDOT traffic camera. Perhaps you guys can work together to confirm its actual nature? It's my understanding that Flock ALPRs have a pretty distinct design.

Hi Josh. Thanks, as always, for your contributions in the area! Just making one more appeal for you to please write a changeset comment? Even a few words summarizing what you did is better than nothing.

Pulchritude, were you able to see it in person? That would be great info if so.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! I was surprised to see a speed camera placed in a location like this, so I looked at the Panoramax image you linked. I'm not seeing a camera in that photo. Is this perhaps a test edit for your setup?

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Thanks for your contribution.

Also, please leave a meaningful changeset comment. This helps others review your changes. The commonly cited community guidelines are here: osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments but honestly if you can just put something, anything, that is better than your current pattern. Thanks.

Hi Josh. Any source on your ford addition here? From memory, I'm thinking the bridge actually belongs just north of the trail junction, meaning there is no ford. I've walked this section a few times and don't recall having to wade across the river.

Also, please add a meaningful changeset comment describing your changes. For more information see osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

Hi Ctown1875, the values you've added to the name= tags here seem to be in error. Can you double check and resolve?

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! My understanding of the consensus of the name= tag is that it should contain the full generally used name, whereas the short name belongs in osm.wiki/Tag:short_name=. (which most if not all of these buildings already have.) Therefore I would suggest that adding it to the name is not appropriate in this case. Another good candidate for these abbreviated codes might be osm.wiki/Tag:ref=. Please see name=* . And please let me know your thoughts! As of now I have not touched any of your changes.

Hi Josh - Thanks for your contributions here! Looks great. In the future, can you write a changeset that describes (even very briefly) what you changed?

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Looking at your changes here, it looks partially good but there are also a few issues. The name tag is reserved for the actual name of the feature. Mapping notes and so on should go in note= or osm.wiki/Tag:description=. Also, it looks like you've replaced some private access tags on this way: way/1287823133 - Was that intentional? You may also reference this changeset: changeset/182004558 - Looks like there are others concerned about this area.

Oh, I didn't know about access_aisle! I'll definitely be using that in the future!