also set building types to dorms and added www. to store url

Correction: the source was a survey, not imagery

Correction: the source was a survey, not imagery

Correction: the source was a survey, not imagery

oh yeah, the url didn't start with https:// but it still worked fine when I pasted it into my browser so I updated the URL. I think whenever possible we should try to fix things like this rather than just removing the information.

why did you remove the website?

Hi, the reason you got the bot message above is because while moving around the map you accidentally dragged part of a sidewalk far from where it was supposed to be. I've fixed it so you can ignore the message from the bot.

Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM!
The outline of the building should show where the base of the building is. This is more difficult when the aerial imagery shows the imagery at an angle, because you'll end up with a much larger footprint than the building actually covers. For that reason I am going to revert this changeset and some other ones you have made recently.
For mapping things on campus I would recommend Esri World Imagery, it has a top down view of all of the buildings which makes tracing them a lot easier, but the buildings are all mapped pretty well already.

Yeah you are right that the grayed values are usually the implied defaults so it is strange that they are all set to yes. I asked some people who are more experienced than I am. One said they usually don't set the access tag unless it is signed but said that access=destination is most correct (except for the section connecting the sidewalk to the road, if there is a sidewalk, because pedestrians can use that to get to the road). The other said "Driveways can be assumed to be access=private (+access:delivery=yes), but it doesn't hurt to tag that access explicitly."

So I would probably leave the access tag blank and assume that whoever is using the data knows how driveways should be used, but using access=private or access=destination isn't wrong either.

according to the wiki, access=yes means "The public has an official, legally-enshrined right of access; i.e., it's a right of way." which I don't think is true here.
I think it would be better to just remove the access tags altogether if none of them are marked as no trespassing.

access=*

Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM. I've removed the unmarked crossings because those should only be used when crossing a regular road. When crossing a driveway for someone's house the sidewalk should continue.

Having the footpath connected to the road there was technically correct, because someone walking on the footpath would be able to start walking on the road once the footpath ended.
You are right though that there isn't actually a path connecting them, so for more detailed mapping you can use the tags highway=footway and footway=link to connect the path and road, which is what I have just done. You can read more about that tag here: osm.wiki/Tag%3Afootway%3Dlink

Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM!
Just so you know, the name tag should only be used if something officially has a name. So frequently the name tag can be left blank. I've removed the name from the drop off road because I am guessing that is not the official name.

If the playground, field, and track do not have official names, those name tags can also be removed.

Here is an excerpt from the wiki which explains more:
"Do not construct names for features by combining the name of an enclosing feature with a description. For example, an unnamed fountain in XYZ Park should not be tagged with name=XYZ Park Fountain. Internal features to a named area should only be tagged with a name when they have a commonly-used local name, or some other indication (such as signage) of the feature's name." (osm.wiki/Editing_Standards_and_Conventions)

Hi, you added the same road three different times in these three changesets:
179564248
179564249
179564251
I have deleted two copies of the road so it is fixed now but please be careful.

Hi, thanks for contributing to OSM. For future reference, when adding a marked crossing, there also needs to be a marked crossing node that connects to the road that the crosswalk is crossing.
To add this, click on the crossing that you just added, and there will be a yellow box on the left side of the screen saying what the issue is, you just need to click "connect using a crossing"

Hi, just so you know we aren't allowed to use Google Maps or Google Streetview as a source because of copyright reasons, so don't put any google links in your changeset comments

Got it, thanks!

That makes sense. I initially hesitated with 'village' because I don’t see it as a distinct settlement. I’m still figuring out when to use the various place values.
I see you changed it to a neighborhood already, thanks!

I am curious why you classified the paths in the Salem Common as tracks. I haven't been there but in the imagery they look like regular paths

Hi, I am curious how you decided to classify places, because I don't think some of these places fit the definition of a village. Amherst Center for example doesn't fit the wiki definition of a village in my opinion: node/13388820240