Hello, why was the node for Goodsprings merged with the boundary? This completely removes the label from appearing on the map.

Hello, what was the reasoning for deleting and re-mapping place nodes, such as the Goodsprings node (node/12983464131)? Every object in OSM has edit history stored in it. Adding '/history' to the end of a way, node, or relation ID will show every edit that anyone has ever made to it, and a lot of these history is important, specifically for major objects like place nodes, so that old versions can be compared and edits, including those that reflect real world updates, can be better tracked. Generally, it is best practice to try to keep as much as you can. There will be many instances you need to simply delete and object and re-map it, but if something can be moved or have its tags changed, especially if it's a significant object like a place node, it's best to not delete it.

Thank you, I appreciate your response!

Hello, I'll admit that the highway classification page for Virginia is dated in that it implies the CBBT should be a motorway, but I would say it would make more sense not to tag it as one not just because of the undivided sections or RIROs, but rather because on either end of it, it's not a motorway, effectively making this just a long mostly-uninterrupted section of the Route 13 trunk expressway.

I upgraded it to secondary since it is definitely a wider, busier, and certainly a higher-priority route—granted it carries a bus route, has more access to amenities like schools, a park, and a church, and intersects two primary roads plus another secondary route in the southern end.

Now, that I think about it, I'm more on the fence. Comparing it to obviously more important secondary roads in the valley or Desert Inn or Pecos it's probably a tertiary road, but for the area it's located in, it's definitely an important road. However, it might not be too different from your run-of-the-mill grid tertiary collector road which will normally link to school and parks and at some point connect to other major secondary/primary roads in most cases, and Tree Line Drive may just be an high-traffic anomaly/exception. I'm not too sure, but I think that the way it is now probably makes sense.

For clarification, a freeway connection isn't required for a road to be primary—just criteria to consider—especially because Sahara Ave directly connects to many other important roadways along its route. D.I. Road and 5th Street for example pass right over I 15 with no direct interchange.

I'd have to ask again on in the server if third-party signage is enough verification for a trail name. I don't see why it wouldn't count, in this case, if they are more permanent installations rather chalk writing on rocks or the like.

If you were to use an image hosting site like https://imgbb.com/ you should be able to upload example images and link them here. You are also welcome to contribute to the discussion in the OSM US Slack server where you would be able to upload images directly rather than linking them through an image hosting site.

Hello, while on paper it makes to have a primary route connect to I 15 from the junction south of Moapa Valley, the Valley of Fire Highway is also a park road with an entry fee used only by parkgoers for most of it route, and is not used by through traffic heading between the town and the Interstate. Route 169 is the only major road in an out of Moapa Valley and this leads to another rather uncommon primary spur instance here.

Trail names generally do have to come from a government entity such as a park service, be it a city park service or the NPS. i.e. the ones who would put the trails on official maps and signpost/mark them. If we let any one individual or group informally invent the names for objects, then we blur the lines between fantasy mapping/vandalism and the on-the-ground rule and create loopholes for people to call anything what they chose to. The "widely recognized and used locally" rule (which is already subjective and contentious amongst mappers enough) would apply better if these weren't informal unsigned pathways on open public BLM lands, created, used by, and referred to by an already niche subset of individuals like local hobbyist groups such as a mountain bikers and hikers. The other issue with this logic is that, since no one entity controls the trails themselves because they are within BLM lands, any other group could theoretically come in and rename them under the basis "this is what we call them" just as well.

I hate to be the outsider to come in and mess with something you yourself are familiar with, but nobody owns anything they map or has personal control over it, especially if it's something based off a personal knowledge or a conflict of interest with a project rather than something that can be proven by anybody else with permanent signs, park maps, GIS programs, etc. You also cannot report people for simply following OSM rules that they are accustomed to following because you disagree with them.

I created a thread in the tagging channel of the OSM US Slack server (https://openstreetmap.us/get-involved/slack/) regarding these trail names, asking whether the names should be removed or moved to a different name-related key as they are unofficial. While there doesn't seem to be a single clear answer, I'm more inclined to believe that from the responses from other editors, moving the names to a key like 'mtb:name', 'loc_name', 'nickname', 'alt_name', or removing the names wholly is more applicable than leaving them under the standard 'name' key.

Please do not map features that do not exist like you have done with supposed airport expansions in Nevada and Arizona. I have reverted these edits.

Hello, Northshore Road should not be a primary road. Some years ago, I upgraded it to primary for the sake of connectivity, but more recently downgraded it back to secondary as it does not serve as a primary road in the scheme of travel. It is a major roadway in a sense, being the main highway in and out of the Lake Mead NRA, but its traffic counts are extremely low for most of the road, no populated places are directly linked aside from the sporadic mobile home parks along the shoreline, and with the roads being tolled (or requiring a National Park pass), there is likely little to no traffic here using these roads as through roads for travelling between, say, Moapa Valley and Boulder City, but rather sees its usage from visitors and residents.

Hello, unless these names are official and signed (by the BLM or another overarching government entity or landowner), it is more likely than not that these names should be removed or at least moved to another tag. If these are names used exclusively by the mountain bikers of these trails, the tag 'mtb:name=*' could be used instead of the regular 'name=*' tag, which implies a more formal on-the-ground case.

Hello, Route 50 through Warrensburg should not be tagged as a motorway. This segment is very short and isn't entirely a freeway. highway=trunk and expressway=yes would be the best tag for this segment.

Lake Las Vegas Pkwy is the main road into the community, and as a secondary road, it would be the last major road that Lake Mead Pkwy intersects before it reaches the gate into the Lake Mead NRA. An argument for it to be extended to the gate could be made, like how the US Routes do before entering Yellowstone, but I figure it would make more sense for it to terminate at the last major populated place and the intersection where most traffic would be splitting off.

I had the main roads through the Lake Mead Rec Area upgraded to primary in the past but downgraded them to secondary a couple years ago since they're realistically only used by traffic local to the park rather than by through traffic.

On a more unrelated note regarding the Lake Mead Boulevard section you upgraded to primary, I think it could make sense to leave a primary spur from Nellis Blvd to Hollywood Blvd, since it's the main E-W route through Sunrise Manor and has a much higher AADT than the rest of the secondary roads in the area and supports more commercial development as well. Though, I could see a possible primary connection along Hollywood between Lake Mead and Boulder Highway in the future once the new bridge over the wash opens up and thus creates a new eastern bypass for the valley.

I would say that this is one of the rare exceptions in which a primary route can terminate with no other connections to a primary road or another highway of a higher classification, due to geographical restrictions. Traffic traveling between Reno/Sparks and Spanish Spanish Springs is funneled into Pyramid Way, which is a very crucial high-traffic commuter route, especially south of La Posada Drive. The only other major highway linking to Spanish Springs would be going 447 to 446 via Wadsworth and Nixon, but these are primarily used by traffic heading to the nearby smaller communities or local rural sprawl.

The other examples of primary spurs like these would be Lake Mead Parkway between Henderson and Lake Las Vegas—aside from the lower-traffic local roads like Galleria, the other way to reach the area would be taking Lake Mead Boulevard or Northshore Road, which are only accessible to Lake Mead NRA traffic—Route 169 to Moapa Valley (for the same reasons as Lake Mead Parkway), and Route 227 between Elko and Spring Creek, as there's no other paved highway between the two.

Hello, when adding road names, please be sure to use the road name's full suffix (e.g. 'Boulevard' instead of 'BLVD') per OSM's standardization guidelines. Thanks!

I think it should be fine to use a bi-directional roadway (i.e. the undivided sections of roads) as a way in a boundary relation, but in a case where the roadway splits into two one-way lines (i.e. divided by a median), I'd roughly trace a new boundary in the middle—not the median exactly, but just between the two ways—and avoid snapping that boundary to any intersecting roads or median breaks. I would also avoid snapping any landuse or natural feature multipolygons to these roads because it's convoluted enough having a way serve as both a routable highway and a boundary of an entity, not accounting for any transit or a road route relations the way is a member of.

Hello—it looks like a few things were broken or made more complicated in the changeset:

- The sand polygon surrounding northwestern Vegas (relation/19087109) appears to have been broken, as it no longer renders. This could be an issue as simple as an 'inner' member added to the relation as 'outer' or vice versa, or perhaps two disconnected ways.

- I've noticed that you have snapped a bunch of boundaries and multipolygons to Moccasin Road (way/14311102), and this is problematic for a couple reasons. Generally, you should avoid snapping things to roads that don't physically intersect with the roads (same goes for footpaths and waterways), especially large relations multipolygons and administrative boundaries, because you want to make an edit to such a way, you also have to edit all the relations attached to it and risk breaking them in the process. I've seen cases where a straight road serving as a boundary between two entities is added two each respective relation, but once a city boundary, a Native American reservation, and two or three natural area multipolygons are linked two a single unrelated routable way like Moccasin Road, it makes editing things more difficult and makes the objects more fragile, such as if an editor adjusted, split, or retraced the road in such a way that neglects the relations attached to it. Furthermore, it creates a massive bounding box (those red/blue squares that appear in the changeset history that show where edits were made), thus making it more difficult to see what simple edit was made because so many other things were also accidentally editied.

- Additionally, Moccasin Road here is not a straight line, whereas the Paiute reservation and the Las Vegas boundaries are relatively straight. In reality, the boundaries don't arbitrarily wiggle across the desert along an informal track road, but follow markers and fences on the ground that follow the same section line that Moccasin is located along.

While it is fully grade-separated, it's very short, and technically not part of the real motorway here, which would be the Airport Connector—this part of Paradise Road branches off the terminus of the Airport Connector at the series of terminal access flyovers before the tunnel. Another reason for this being primary over motorway would be it's narrow arterial road-like concrete median and low speed (35 mph), making it feel like a regular road when you drive along it instead of like a freeway as does the Connector. Part of the Airport Connector does have a low speed limit, but it retains a freeway-like structure and the speed limit increases once it exits the tunnel, whereas Paradise Road is just an arterial road that passes through an interchange partially, connecting to the other freeway at its end. Granted that it's a halfway combination between arterial road and freeway, I supplemented that with the expressway tag.

Back then I used to tag these short controlled-access spurs of highways that branch of other freeways as motorways, since that's what I had been used to seeing them tagged as, and under the basis it's connected to another freeway at its end, but since then I've actually been undoing those edits of mine as well as others I've come across. I've just now tagged this one as secondary with expressway=yes.