I missed that. Corrected now. Thanks.

Is there a reason that a commemorative name should replace the official name? The county GIS remains Chicago Avenue along with the parcel map addresses. The addresses of the businesses continue to be Chicago Avenue which means navigation to them is likely broken.

Certainly how you interpret these could be different. From the wiki:
It is generally not used for through traffic.

Not every roadway within a parking lot is a parking aisle. Examples are...
Road connects a parking lot or parking garage to a through street and serves as the entrance or exit of the lot or garage – use highway=service without service=* instead.
Forms the "trunk" or perimeter of the parking lot, connecting multiple parking aisles – use highway=service without service=* instead. There may be parking spaces on either side, but the roadway's primary purpose is to get drivers to another part of the parking lot.
Roadway does not have any parking bays itself.
Primarily provides space for picking up and dropping off passengers – use highway=service service=driveway instead.

Maybe a better way of saying is that I think people err on the side of calling something a parking aisle just because there is parking next to it. I err on the side of calling it just service road when I can take it to get someplace else.

Yes, as a generality. A service road that provides access to a parking lot or provides access for thru traffic is not a parking aisle. It is possible that a portion of what was changed could have been a parking aisle if broken off.

The following changesets damaged a set of roads between Southfield Road and Greenfield Road after somehow getting connected up with a large soccer field spanning miles. I think it would be best to revert these changesets fully and would propose doing them in JOSM.
121584620
121584223
121583859

The following changesets damaged a set of roads between Southfield Road and Greenfield Road after somehow getting connected up with a large soccer field spanning miles. I think it would be best to revert these changesets fully and would propose doing them in JOSM.
121584620
121584223
121583859

The following changesets damaged a set of roads between Southfield Road and Greenfield Road after somehow getting connected up with a large soccer field spanning miles. I think it would be best to revert these changesets fully and would propose doing them in JOSM.
121584620
121584223
121583859

That looks like a bad type ahead match on what should have been layer=1. It's a bridge. I fixed it.

Thanks for the response. I have removed the proposed road.

East Mountain Road shows up as a proposed road in Flat Rock, Michigan, but all the Tiger data is for Somerset, New Jersey. Is this in the correct spot? Should it be removed?

In terms of tags, I had attempted to be diligent in copying tags from either the parking node or the service road. If I missed some, that was unintentional.

I have not added any parking areas that were not paved and lined accordingly. I have avoided adding any informal parking and am looking at removing one area that looks like it could be that way. There is not an uninterrupted lane edge marker on that one.

The service roads are non-existent in the majority of cases. There is no separation between the road and the parking area. You park there, you do not drive there. You have immediate access to the parking from the main road.

I am not knowledgeable enough about routers and why they cannot route to a parking area attached to the road as that is a common situation. That would mean creating roads where they do not really exist.

I would argue that it is not tagging for the renderer. The convention previously, acknowledging that it contradicts the wiki, was leisure=park. This is what the renderers supported. They do not support what was done. There have been other convention changes in the past around waterways that left the old convention in place until renderers were updated to support the change. Otherwise important features disappear from the map. I don't think effectively deleting state parks from the map is a good thing.

It was tagged as leisure=nature_reserve, not a landuse. The city does not own this. The city does not recognize it as a nature reserve on any map. it is not signed as a nature reserve. The only signage is saying authorized personnel only. Tagging it as a nature_reserve implies something that it isn't.

Unfortunately these changes effectively delete the state parks from OpenStreetMap.org, no name, no boundaries despite the implication of the tag.

Should this be tagged as a nature reserve? The City of Novi does not recognize it as a park or reserve. The land is owned by MDOT. The one entrance to the property is posted as authorized personnel only.

Consider using natural=wood as well as natural for other tags in this area for describing how it looks or what the landcover is. Landuse is for how it is used, in this case "Managed forest or woodland plantation".

Is there a source for the names of these ponds along with the other named features in this area?

That would be correct. Every once in a while that happens about not getting the next update description typed in JOSM.