The source cited "Bing aerial imagery" does not support all of the changes being made in the changeset, for example, there is no way to tell for sure from "Bing aerial imagery" that way/781963882 is surface=wood. It could be composite decking for example.

The sources cited do not support all of the changes made, for example one can not deduce from "Bing aerial imagery;Esri World Imagery;Mapbox Satellite" that maxspeed=20 for way/164014396

This is another changeset that where the source cited "Bing aerial imagery" does not support all of the changes made, such as bicycle=yes
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109329363

This is another changeset where the cited sources (Bing aerial imagery;Esri World Imagery) do not support all of the changes made, for example maxspeed=*
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109331300

Hello again!,
Generally if a road has houses along it, it probably should be highway=residential, or a higher classification. way/970770248
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109228741

Hi, Thanks for the edits! Good to see Mapbox working on mapping the protected areas in the US!

What evidence is there that way/970657598 is a bridge? You cite "Bing aerial" as a source, but when I looked at that location in Bing I didn't see a bridge. Note you shouldn't just add a bridge, ford or culvert to make an error go away. If you don't know, you don't know - just leave the error for a local mapper to research.

This also applies to: way/970657602
way/970657600
way/970657603
way/970657605
way/970657607
way/970657608

Source cited does not support changes made
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109174009

Sources cited do not support changes made - no way to tell from Bing Imagery that a sidewalk is bicylce=designated
Also, changeset comment doesn't match changes made, this isn't part of Colorado State University
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109175968

source cited does not support changes made
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109176285

Hi, thanks for the edits! Great to see participating from Amazon Logistics.
One thing that would be helpful is if you could keep the bounding boxes of your changesets to a reasonable size. This one extends across much of the US (west-east). Also, if you could cite your source, this would help. I suspect it is "driver report" - which is great, but document it in the changeset.
Mike
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109144640

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! It is great to have you as part of our community.

Thanks for the edits. Many of in the community like to see changesets with a smaller geographic extent, such as the size of a few neighborhoods or a small town. It facilitates easier review. This changeset's bounding box spans much of both North and South America. Other than that, the edits I checked looked good. Look forward to seeing more from you.
Mike
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109117191

Hi, Thanks for the edits. maxspeed=* is important information. However, it would really help if you could restrict the geographic extent of your changesets to something reasonable. This changeset stretches across about half of the US (west-east). This would make review much easier.
Mike

Good catch on the "Skate Park"! Unfortunately there is a lot names in OSM that are really just descriptions or labels people would like to see.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109053355

Hi, thanks for the edits, I think you are working from outdated imagery. This is now a pedestrian plaza (as is currently displayed in OSM). The Maxar Premium Imagery shows the plaza.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108999982

Hi, Thanks for the edits. In the future, please keep the geographic extent of your changesets to a reasonable size, such as the size of a small city. This changeset spans much of the continental US.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/109022686

node/1416217509
Is NOT a "trailhead", it is a rock climbing route, which the other tags clearly indicate. It looks like you are just putting "tape over the oil light" here, in other words, you are just making changes to make errors in some tool go away, regardless if those changes reflect reality.

I highly doubt that this trail:
way/840670704
Has a compacted surface in the OSM sense: "A mixture of larger (e.g., gravel) and smaller (e.g., sand) parts, compacted (e.g., with a roller)" - The park service is not dragging a road compacter/roller into the back country to "compact" these trails.

What evidence is there that:
node/5399586648

Is a "trailhead"?

Hi Axel,
Thanks for your nice reply and willingness to try to keep the bounding boxes of your changesets smaller.

As someone with an interest in computer science, you probably realize there should be a technical solution to this, both on the creation side, as well as on the review side (a tool to only show changesets that really have a change in one's area of interest), but I don't think we are there yet.

Yes, things can get overlooked. I look back on some of the things I mapped ten years ago and can't believe I did what I did.

Mike

Hi Axel, Thanks for the edits! Many of us in the community like to see changesets with smaller geographic extents. It makes it easier to review.

Also, this edit may fall under osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct

I did notice in a least one case, there was an address, and an outline of a building, but no building: way/874944082

As aside, i read some of your observations about the differences between the US and Germany, which I found very interesting. I have visited Germany, and my ancestors came from there. I see you are in St. Paul, I grew up just west of Minneapolis.

Mike T (osm: tekim)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/108777070