Anyways, in closing, I would recommend a surgical revert here. Leaving the good stuff, like a few alignment fixes you did and layer fixes, but undoing the motorway upgrades and other stuff I mentioned above. Please get back to me on this. I'm more that willing to do the revert process, but I would love a response back first just to know we're on the same page before doing it.

Also, what's up with the downgrading of some of the highways in this changeset (like Arlington Ave from primary to secondary between PA-837 and the Liberty Bridge)? That is a major highway connection there for traffic, and justifies the primary tag between those two roads.

Also, what's up with the traffic lights you added here? changeset/34237498#map=19/40.51800/-80.13079 There have never been lights there (as long as I've been alive). That's all stop sign controlled. I would understand a mistake here if there were shadows from what looked to be lights overtop of the highway, but there isn't such shadows in Bing.

Also, please stop adding the PennDOT quadrant routes into the ref tags ( way/11733339 ). The US community agreed that they shouldn't be in the ref tag and should be added to 'ref:penndot=SR ****' instead. osm.wiki/Pennsylvania/State_Route_Relations#Four_digit_routes They are not signed like the 'keystone' routes which are numbered between 3-999, and thus, don't deserve to be in the ref tag, as that's for 'signed routes'. I did invite you SEVERAL times via PM back in January '15 (all the way till March '15) to join talk-us when we were talking about the quadrant routes so that you could explain why you thought they should be added in the ref tag since I knew you were adding the quadrant routes in the ref tags before then. However, you didn't, even after you said you would (several times).

Seriously, how many times do i have to mention to you that a single interchange on a section of highway doesn't mean that it's a motorway? I mentioned this in changeset/33674410 (where you didn't respond) when you did that along US-220 Alternate near State College a 2nd time after I fixed that area because you broke routing. Now you've done it here along PA-51 ( changeset/34237498#map=15/40.6170/-80.2412 ). Don't you realize you're breaking routing by doing this, especially for Bicycles?? When you falsely upgrade a highway to 'motorway', bicycle routing is broken because it's automatically assumed as 'bicycle=no' on that type of highway. If you look at the cycle map layer, you can clearly see that here on PA-51 (as well as on US-220 Alternate from that other changeset), both of them are major Bike PA routes.

Are you serious? That statement isn't really true. Especially for the bannered US routes here like US-40 Scenic. There are several 'US Highways' that are indeed secondary highways where they are located since they have been superseded by an Interstate and/or a more important state highway that is wider and is a higher quality road that the US Highway is now that is very close by. Plus, mainline US-40 right here is currently on I-68. You also have to factor in routing engine preferences to highway class, and tight curves that may no longer be suitable for big rigs to see if it might be worthy of any upgrade to a higher classification.

When you factor some of the stuff that I mentioned above, US-40 Scenic here should have clearly stayed as secondary IMO. I bet several other mappers would agree with me on this subject.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/33988029. changeset/33988029

Please don't trust Bing & Tiger 100% for adding roads. Here, you added back in West 3rd Street going right in the middle of a brand new baseball stadium that had already been added into OSM. That should have sent up red flags instantly that these roads had a very good chance that they didn't exist anymore. The stadium was built after Bing was last updated in this area. The stadium build between 2013 & 2014, meanwhile Bing Imagery is from early 2011 here in the Charlotte area.

Waited over 8 days for a response back from Matt1993, got nothing here. Meanwhile he's still been editing in OSM during the time between the comments left here, so he's had time to do leave a comment here...... Reverted back to primary in changeset/33947278. changeset/33947278

Just so you know, with lane counts, when you add the :backward & :forward tags, that's based off the direction the way itself is going, not the cardinal directions. For example, way/11691827, when you added the lanes:* tags to it in this changeset, you added them in a way that indicates that going NB on the bridge is 2 lanes, and SB 1 lane instead of the opposite. Since that way is going North to South, it should be lanes:forward=2 & lanes:backward=1. See: lanes=*?uselang=en-US#Lanes_in_different_directions

The ways you added the 'US 22' ref to are NOT part of US-22. This has been reverted.

This is not part of I-70. I-70 is on the 'ramp' to the right.

This is not part of US-22.

This is not part of US-22.

This is not part of US-22.

This is not part of US-22.

This is not part of US-22.

We could ask somebody in the DWG to do the revert, because of being a neutral party.

iD doesn't seem to care about those 'new' tags and doesn't alert a user to them. So, instead of calling it vandalism, maybe go over to the iD GitHub page and report a bug about this? https://github.com/openstreetmap/iD

You ever think that the lane tagging problem could be caused by ID not alerting the user to tags being merged/changed?

When doing a mass delete, can you please add a changeset comment? Helps local mappers know what exactly you're trying to do in the changeset. ;) osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments