Perhaps I should have broken this into two changesets, but in addition to my summary, I also retagged the path in the area of the military base, from track+visibility=no to a path. As it's primary use seems to be hiking, and it seems unlikely that this would be used for motor vehicles.

I've added these buildings from the City of Vancouver data, that is compatible with the OSM licence as per the Wiki and the mailing list.

Thank you. I could have been more polite with my comment. I'll try to be so in the future.

This edit added a duplicate relation for Haida Gwaii. I've deleted the duplicate, but saved the multilingual tags, but copy and pasting them onto the original relation. Thanks for those tags. I hope it doesn't feel like I'm stepping on your toes.

Here's a link to the changeset: changeset/52499451

This edit brakes a bike route relation (at Main and Keefer). It is the second bike route relation I've come across that's been broken by a telenav editor. Please be more careful, and note the warnings that JOSM provides when editing relations.

I've fixed it, but please try not to make these amateurish mistakes.

This edit changes the address of a building I visited from 12 E 10th, to 2617 Ontario Street. (The building at the SW corner of 10th and Victoria, way/331422481). I added the this changeset: changeset/45201188. As I noted in the changeset tag, the source was a survey.

What is the source of your info mappered1? Please do add a source tag to the changeset. If you would like me to explain how to do it with iD, I'd be only too happy to.

Hi mappered1, thanks for the addition of addresses. I did notice that there are 3 buildings with the same address (1733 E33rd). I'm putting a note (here: note/1143839) about this ostensible error.

I'd also like to point out that iD (the OSM editor you are using) now has the ability to add source info. If you click on the "add field" dropdown and "sources", you can input any other source. This is nice because it lets other people know where you got the info. For example if you are out walking around you could add "survey" as a source.

What's up with this? Has construction completed on the new school building?

Hi mappered1, I'm curious, what's the source for these edits adding address you are doing?

Ok, thanks for the info. The road's history lists the creation with this changeset, and not subsequent versions, so if you're not sure about the name tag, I'll remove it.

What's with the `highway=unclassified` with the `name=s` tag that was added with this changeset, just north of Hikkim? This is a very unusual name. It seems like it could easily be a typo. The changeset also lacks a source tag, so we can't tell what the name would be based on.

FYI, this edit added many power=tower nodes with identical locations, pairs with one connected to the powerline, and one not. I've fixed it with this edit: changeset/50956271

Thanks for fixing this Checkpoint, I've added a note (note/1094106) questioning if there is really a checkpoint here, and was wondering if you knew one way or the other. The reason for my doubt, is that I was not stopped here while cycling past last summer, nor did I notice any chekpoint. And I was looking out for things that would be worth adding to the map.

Thanks for your contribution Ana! It's good to have someone in Ladakh adding details.

You have made an error that is common to new editors, of using the name tag as a way to provide general information. It should be used exclusively for names. Names like "Fresh Naan 7rs!!" should not be used, unless in the unlikely event that is the bakery's real name.

I have deleted some name tags that clearly contain descriptions.

There's also a few objects that include Gompa in the name. This is the Ladakhi and Tibetan name for monastery, but the context makes me think that you are referring to something else. Am I correct? What are you referring to?

I failed to update the source tag, yet again. This did use Bing, but also used Mapbox for sections.

I don't normally make major adjustments like this one based purely on imagery. In this case the discrepancy between the imagery and what we had mapped was huge. Slightly further south, in Udaipur, the imagery aligned perfectly with the public GPS track we had, and our mapped road was off. In this area we don't have GPS tracks at present, but I suspect that the imagery is pretty good.

Oops, this edit used Bing, not Mapbox, imagery.

The way representing the canal I extended is in the opposite direction of the one it meets. As an irrigation canal this would have a direction of flow, so it makes sense that the way should match it, but I don't know which is the correct direction.

The "residential areas" that are added with this edit contain a great deal of farmland and wooded areas. I can only view it as inaccurate enough that the traces should just be deleted. But perhaps I'm missing something?

Also I am confused by the "#Pakistan" in the edit summary, it seems to be a political statement, regarding the long controversial Indian administration of this area.

I'm adding a `religion=jewish` tag to this, as the Chabad institutions are Jewish. I do not know if this is a synagogue or not, but as some renderings may assume based on the current tags, but I will assume that the place_of_warship tag was accurate.

If the original uploaded could provide more info we might be able to tag it better.