That would be great. I'm happy to makes some notes on the wiki in case other folks stumble upon it and have questions. Sites updating can be super annoying for stuff like this. It seems like the state of the art is to use the WayBackMachine (https://web.archive.org/) to get a more permanent snapshot of anything interesting (the license in this case). But perhaps that's lost to time now.

Does Missouri open record law actually have the proper license for this import? The linked site in the source tag doesn't have an obvious "this is public domain" license. I also don't see anything in the import Catalog for St Louis.(osm.wiki/Import/Catalogue). Unfortunately, just because a GIS department lets users access their data, it doesn't mean the data is suitably licensed to be compatible with the OSM license (this is the case in my home state of Washington). Any chance you can provide some more insight?

Hello! I am working on adding address information into the Indianapolis area and noticed this set of buildings (and area) you editing early in your mapping career. They're a bit of a mess would you mind taking a second look?

Here's my first evening of work: changeset/129987947

Definitely. The first place I checked was RapiD as this is a pretty common thing. Like I said, no worries at all just wanted to give ya a heads up. I'm actually using the MapWithAI plugin to get the address data into JOSM and should have all this patch up in a couple of weeks. Definitely let me know if you see anything amiss!

Hello! I am doing an import of address data for Indianapolis and noticed that this changeset has several features that I think are incorrectly addressed. In particular, I think the buildings near Medina Drive (bottom middle of the box) appear in the imagery to be duplexes and will need both address nodes. It's a bit tricky as the main clue is the double set of driveways. Anyhow, I'll clean it up as I go through but figured I'd let you know in case you see other instances of it in the future.

Any time. Happy to help.

My goodness you are absolutely right. I will be more careful in the future.

Alright, that should look better and keep some other folks from tripping into it with that MR task. Let me know if something else is amiss. Thanks for letting me know.

You got it.
https://maproulette.org/browse/challenges/28573

Ah, missed that as the QuickFix UI in Map roulette only shows the one area. I'll patch this one up and try to be a bit more aware. Did you catch this with tooling or just clicking through random edits?

Perfect thank you. Just didn't want anyone driving into the woods!

The way added in this change (870317033) does exist. There is a dead end at the end of 159th Ave and the spur off of 159th Court is a shared driveway. They don't connect at all.

Reasonable. I have left a map Note where I think the trail head is in case someone wanders through there and can take a look.

It would be interesting to know if/when the trail nearby gets a name update.

Thanks for updating this. A few of us in the US OSM slack are trying to get through all the renames. You're welcome to join us of course! https://slack.openstreetmap.us/

Thanks! Will probably try to sweep through all the public east side schools over the next while. I wasn't sure about using the pedestrian area in the front of the school.. Anyhow, let me know if you have any suggestions!

Ah yes. I'll fix it up now. Simple oversight on my part. I appreciate you pointing it out!

Ah. Thanks for pointing that out. Certainly not ideal. Really clutters up OSMCha etc. booooo. I appreciate you letting me know.

Just a heads up: It's preferable to have changes submitted for each region separately as it makes reviewing easier. :-)