How do you figure? They look like townhomes to me, based on the shared walls, lack of corridors, and linear layout.

The letters should probably be ref=*, not name=*. People would be unlikely to call one of the buildings "O", but might call it "Building O" much like the nearby road could be called County Road 699 but is tagged ref=CR 699.

I agree that way/1243330356 and way/1243330357 are semi-detached

Pay attention to the data you're "fixing". It was vandalism and got reverted.

"AVenue" extant for 22 months. Oops.

Enjoy your spikes. Not sure why you needed your lawyers to look at me and disagree or what the "better way" you wanted me to help was.

More SEO spam. Business does not have a public office and cannot be added. I deleted it as well.

Nope, SEO spam. There is no office here and you will not get a reply. I have deleted.

It's very hard to prove a negative. Perhaps you should provide your source and explain why it's trustworthy instead of the other way around. I cannot find a street in the assessor's dataset with this name. Keep in mind that this is a square, and the addresses are based on that rather than on a street.

Deletions should be reverted

Please do not tag access unless explicitly signed, and do not tag access=yes unless it is on public property (rather than private open to public). For example, it is unlikely that way/1243035131 has a sign forbidding horses. If it is just written into law in general, the tag should not be used. Also, it is implied that pedestrians and bicyclists can use a cycleway and motor vehicles can't.

Assuming HOA means homeowners' association, the park should not have a name and "HOA" should be spelled out.

I thought the data was already on the buildings. Fixed and removed more businesses that have also closed

Assessor says 2041

Can't you just split it?

Please don't add names like "Highway Fifty Nine" that duplicate ref tags like on way/19944737 unless there is also a directional or something to distinguish it.

Why do you need to fully revert edits that don't properly split sidewalks? Can't you just leave them be, or split them if you need to? I get that you can add extra info when they are split along roadways but it's not really "wrong" to have them as loops. highway=* ways have never been interpreted as representing something discrete. They still are useful data. Reverting the whole changeset comes off as a threat, to me at least.

With that said, it would be good to hear from Akshat.

Spam will not be tolerated, especially as you have damaged correct existing data in the process.

Check way/1158920232, address number seems to be of incorrect parity and out of order

When looking at the website the listed address corresponds to node/3325932341. It already seems to have a different occupant though. https://newcastletraining.com