Hey, I don't think some of these edits you made are correct. For example, you joined an underground pedestrian tunnel (way/112974438) to a surface street (way/17810117). They really shouldn't share any nodes.

Likewise you joined a lot of ways to the overhanging parts of buildings (bank drive-throughs and such). They shouldn't really be joined.

Could you look over the edits you made and check that they all make sense? Or maybe share the validation errors you were trying to correct? Often validation tools will warn you about something that MIGHT be a problem, but really isn't in some cases.

Yeah, tagging can get confusing. The bigger issue here I think the non-intersecting ways, since that can potentially affect routing. (keep right)[http://keepright.ipax.at/report_map.php?zoom=17&lat=42.64872&lon=-83.53082&layers=B0T&ch=0%2C180%2C191%2C195%2C196%2C201%2C202%2C203%2C204%2C205%2C206%2C207%2C208%2C210%2C220%2C231%2C232%2C281%2C282%2C283%2C284%2C291%2C292%2C293%2C311%2C312%2C313&show_ign=1&show_tmpign=0]

FYI: The detail you're adding here is awesome, but I think you're not using highway=crossing the right way. For one thing, there needs to be a node wherever a road and a pedestrian way cross. Secondly, the street crossing tag needs to be put on that intersection node. At least, that's what the wiki seems to indicate: highway=crossing

OpenStreetMap isn't really the place for personal routes like this. Someplace like MapMyWalk would be more appropriate. I deleted this path.

"Do not know flow" is cute, but we probably don't want to go making up names for things. ;-)

FYI if you switch the background imagery in iD to "USGS Topographic Maps," you can often get the names of rivers and lakes from there.

Lastly, I think this particular waterway is more properly categorized as a drain (waterway=drain) and sure enough, that's what the USGS topos name it. (I've already updated the name and tagging, this is just for future reference.)

FYI, I don't know for sure, but judging from the satellite view, this is probably center pivot irrigation (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_pivot_irrigation) not a power line.

Sadly, this changeset is already out of date!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-extra-alarm-fire-in-lincoln-square-20150830-story.html

This changeset seems to have created a lot of points that don't have any tags and don't belong to any ways. See the area of Darrouzett for some examples.

FYI railway=level_crossing (like for this node: node/133967472) is used where a railway crosses a highway, not for one railway crossing another.

In the satellite view there doesn't appear to be a railroad crossing at this intersection.

P.S. I removed the station from the relations, so they should be correct now.

Hi! I was just taking a quick spin through the L relations to check them over, and noticed that the Roosevelt/State station node had been added to the Red Line relations. That's actually not correct: the stop_position nodes should be in the relations, but not the stations themselves. A little confusing, I know. You can find more information in the OSM wiki: osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Public_Transport#Route_direction.2Fvariant

Yeah, that's probably my fault. I moved a couple of them around. I fixed a few that seemed like they needed improvement. I'll make another pass and it should be good.

Hey, I just noticed some of these edits. FYI, it's not a great idea to align a building area with the roof of the building. Unless the imagery is straight on, the roof is offset from the actual footprint of the building.

It's hard sometimes to determine sometimes where the footprint is, but that's what you should be trying to map.

Sometimes it's easiest to map the roof, and then move the outline to line up with the building footprint.

There's some dated but helpful information here: osm.wiki/Roof_modelling

Cool. That seems fine to me.

* The note was #293852

Hey, is there a reason why you classified these roads as tertiary? Most of them dirt roads, on a relatively un-populated island, and it doesn't seem justified that they would be above highway=residential.

Yeah, I don't know Thoreson at all, but if you do, go to town! I updated some parts of Basch today (prompted by your edits) based on some personal experience.

Good question. I'm sure it's partly a judgment call, but I think of a track as something that I probably wouldn't want to drive the average car on. A smooth unpaved road is something different. The wiki has some guidance:

osm.wiki/Highways#Classification
osm.wiki/Track

Hey! Nice work on adding those footpaths. One thought: Thoreson Road looks (to me) like only the southern end of it qualifies as a track. The best thing to do is probably to split the way at the appropriate point and tag the northern half as Unclassified, with an unpaved surface.