so, just to clarify the bikes share lanes with cars, aka cycleway=shared_lane would be applicable, is that correct?
for context the relevant wiki page would be cycleway=shared_lane.

as with changeset/171522294 in this changeset you added something tagged as a footway but based on the imagery it looks like a bike lane, so is way/1427629238 a bike lane or are pedestrians also allowed to walk on it.

my bad, forgot to fix the addr:street_address when I copied the address data over from ATP, I will be more careful next time.

next time please provide more address tags, especially the associated street of the address, and when you add a name to an address please add some tag describing what it is like office=*, amenity=* or any other such tags.

happy mapping,
Udar.

please stop adding objects that are just one address tag and a name without any other tags to specify what it is.

based on the imagery way/1427418996 looks more like a bike lane then a footway, is for pedestrians and bicyclists or just bikes?

the location seems incorrect as I don't see any evidence of a camp ground at this location

why did you delete the map (node/6956220575 ), what is you source for it no longer existing.

I doubt that this business takes up this whole building.

both these toilets seem to be duplicates

why did you add this as a circle when it obviously is not on the imagery. This also messed up the g4eoemtry of the existing building and added a unnecessary area=yes.

I am assuming that this means that the "Orchid House" hotel has closed, is that true?

thank you, based on the imagery provided the work looks relatively good.

I live near this area, and it is in my commute, this building does not exist, neither does the park.

this changeset removed the obviously incorrect building=yes that was added to the business in changeset/171333082. I also left questions on a previous changeset of the users (171005707). I just fixed the obviously incorrect aspects of the business as I do not have the time to check if they exist but do not want bad data in OSM in this region so I fix what I can.

then building=yes is incorrect.

so does this mean that this business takes up the whole building.

from what I remember, in this area there are no bike lanes. you can use the sidewalk or the M-path so bicycle=use_sidepath would be the correct tag to use. Also if you look at recent aerial and street side imagery non of them show painted markings on US 1 that indicate that you can ride your bike on the main road.

this was previously placed in a building and now is not, and I doubt that a bar (which is what this is tagged as) would not be in a building. I am also pretty sure that the buildings in this area are residential from Bing streetside, there are some retail/commercial looking buildings in the area but this object would need to be moved to be in those.
So the question becomes, is this bar real and if it is were is it actually located.

happy mapping,
Udar

To be honest here, I was hoping that you could send a screenshot of the aerial imagery you used as you have in the passed so that I can check for my self. Sorry for the imposition.

Happy mapping,
Udar