I'm curious why you deleted these fields. And also their names Canary, joubert, and Fletcher. Are these their actual name or the owners name? If they are the owners name, we don't add personal information unless it is a posted sign.

Please let me know.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160456573

#TIP: OSM does not use descriptive names such as name=Woods"

Is North Woods what the large area of woods are actually named?

Can you review this edit.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160455485

Since you didn't fix it, I have changed it to a service road that it appears to be. Let me know if you have any questions.

Please don't vandalize OSM. Your edit has been removed.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160408106

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160407705

The way added seems more like a highway=track. Unclassified basically is a rural residential street. Can you review this edit?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160419822

You might want to use a more recent imagery like the Bing imagery. It's a high quality and years more recent than the esri clarity.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160413988

$TIP: save and upload your edits before moving on to a more distant location.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160379109

You added a couple of fords on the South Fork Fortune Creek but the stream was shown to go through a colvert. If the culvert is there, then the ford should be remove, else the culvert should be removed. Since you are familiar with this area, can you review your edit?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160379109

Ideally this construction landuse should be changed to leisure=playgound instead of deleting the polygon area.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160325803

classifying the canal road as a primary seems like a stretch. At best it is highway=service. The county doesn't even have it on it's basemaps. See https://matterhornwab.co.pierce.wa.us/publicgis/

Can you please correct?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160318802

Looks like duplicate buildings from the small area I looked at.

#TIP: street names are spelled out in OSM because software has a hard time unabbrevating.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160266829

There are two existing roudabouts to the east and west of your addition. Is that what you are talking about?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160260675

There are two existing roudabouts to the east and west of your addition. Is that what you are talking about?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160260675

This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

Please do not vandalize OSM by adding features that do not exist on the ground. I'm reverting this edit.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160266779

removed beach tag

There is a business Alices's Floral Designs there which does seem to imply the building may have been named Alice. I'm going to ask a friend that frequents the area if he knows or can find out.

Did you not understand my changeset comment about not adding parcel polygons as houses? Let me know how I can help.

This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

These look more like parcels that houses and we don't add parcel areas in OSM because they are not verifiable by an onsite visit. When adding houses, the outline should follow the roof line.

I'll send you more info on OSM in a message.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/160110951