Hello, there are no houses on aerial photos here, only a bus stop. Did you mean to put it elsewhere?

https://fotoladu.maaamet.ee/etak.php?B=59.40097383642682&L=24.201704984153682&azimuthmin=157.5&azimuthmax=202.5&div=NW&fotoladu

Hi, good work. But you could also use better aerial photos. Bing's qualty isn't best. You can choose them from the righthand menu. The best ones are Esri and Maa-amet (Estonian land board, available only in Estonia, obviously). Maa-amet's are also more recent and you can see that one of the buildings has changed it's shape recently.

Hi, aerial imagery and Maa-amet seem to suggest it's not a oneway. Are you sure you didn't confuse it with some other road?

Hi, I see you are using Bing Maps Aerial which do not have recent imagery. Please use Maa-amet's aerial photographs. You've actually destroyed my work around GIGANT shop. It would be nice if you rollbacked your changes to the roads.

Estonian name should be the default one. Fixed.

highway=pedestrian areas near tv tower ovelap. I don't think that "indoors" area should be tagged as highway=pedestrian

Hi, good job, but you can also use Maa-amet's imagery (our local land board). It's more recent than Esri and the promenade is complete there. There is also this https://fotoladu.maaamet.ee/?basemap=ofk&zlevel=15,24.76497,59.44790&overlay=tyhi (you can click and see aerial photographs from an angle) I've noticed you've accidentally deleted the stairs near the promenade beginning, I'm adding them back.

Also, shouldn't the way/1044490748 building part's shape follow the promenade? Why does it have building:levels=0 ?

You are using outdated aerial imagery to update recently mapped paths. Also you've removed some ways and made Linnuse tee inaccessible from Narva mnt.

Please be careful! I'm not fixing junctions after you without a reason. It's not other people's job to constantly fix stuff after you, while you enjoy your mapping and ignore all the comments.

Hello, are you sure you have not mistaken?
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=131998146063476&focus=photo&lat=59.423588265918&lng=24.782336962546992&z=17

Hello,
OpenStreetMap data is not for your personal geo markers. Unless it's an official hiking route, it shouldn't be mapped.

Please consult the wiki osm.wiki/Main_Page and getting started guides like this one https://learnosm.org/en/beginner/

way/229667261
It seems you've accidentally moved a road and a building

Looks good

People walking there does not make this a path. This is a railroad and not an abandoned one (though I remember it having a lot more frequent traffic ~20-25 years ago)

https://i2.wp.com/viimsiteataja.ee/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/IMG_1317-copy-scaled.jpg?fit=2560%2C1920&ssl=1

http://milstrand.ee/en/

I think you can connect the path where it ends directly to the railroad to hint that people continue walking on it, but you shouldn't misguide users by drawing paths which don't exist.

Hello, you've added a path next to the railroad, it's even so close that it goes on top of railroad ties. Are you sure it exists? I don't see it on aerials.

Please note that if someone is using a railroad to walk it doesn't make it a path.

Hello,
those roads you've added on T-junctions don't really exist. You shoudn't add a separate highway just because the junction doesn't have perfectly square corners. The convention is to only add a separate way if there is some kind of physical separation or atleast road markings which separate carrigeways.

* to the north of the bridge

I don't think there is a sidewalk to the bridge.

Hello, I think you've made some mistakes.

1)I see you've marked many ways as bicycle=yes. Wiki says bicycle=yes "bicycle=yes is applied where cycling is legal, not obvious from other tags and where it is not explicitly designated for cyclists (that would be bicycle=designated)."
Estonian law https://www.riigiteataja.ee/akt/103012017018?leiaKehtiv says it's illegal to cycle on a footway, unless you are a small child.

bicycle=yes is rarely used in Estonia in cities, since cycleways and combined pedestrian-bicycle paths are tagged with bicycle=designated and actual footways, which are not marked by signs 431, 433, 434, 435 (http://www.liiklustestid.ee/liiklusmargid/kohustusmargid/), are implicitly bicycle=no.

2) way/288898677 This way is definitely not a cycleway, it's a forest path.
This way should be changed to a highway=path for the reasons listed in the first point. Usually forest paths are not tagged with a bicycle=yes or any other bicycle=* tags, since it may require some skill to ride it and only the rider can judge for himself.

Also tag combination like highway=cycleway and bicycle=yes is very unusual. When you edit the map in ID Editor, you'll see that when selecting a cycleway, it already shows bicycle=designated as a default greyed-out value. And it's logical, since cycleways are ways where cycling is designated, there is no need to repeat that. Having a highway=cycleway and bicycle=yes raises some questions why is it a cycleway, but cycling is NOT designated?

I've also noticed that here
changeset/117336964
there is no reason to turn the tunnel into a cycleway (it has stairs, it's not legally a cycleway and it can be dangerous in a narrow tunnel with limited visibility)

Please be careful next time, consult OSM wiki and local law. And it would be nice if you fixed this.

Why did you add a service=driveway to Pilvetee? It's a small street which gives access to other smaller roads. The driveway value is for smaller roads, which are usually not streets and usually connecting to one building. I'm not even sure highway=service should be used.

If you meant to tag a street with a living street sign, then highway=living_street should have been used.

1) operator=Selver
Cadastre map shows that this parking is outside of Selver's territory. Don't add values just by assumption, it's ok to leave fields empty.
2) parking=surface - street_side may fit better parking=street_side
3) Street-side imagery suggests that parking starts earlier than mapped.