No response. I recommend reverting all their edits as vandalism.

What source(s) did you use for this info?

A large portion of the things mapped in this changeset have absolutely no tags. There are a ton of blank/untagged ways.

You also duplicated the business that was already mapped here.

As mentioned in a different changeset (changeset/153988379), if you are organizing on behalf of a business you are expected to follow some guidelines. Please review the attached:

https://osmfoundation.org/wiki/Organised_Editing_Guidelines

What brand ATM? Weird you wouldn't even add the ATM.

What source did you use for this business?

I asked similar on a different changeset and seeing they haven't responded, I suspect the data may be of questionable quality.

Their edits are all "Added business", but all scattered about. No sources are provided and they have not responded to changeset comment(s) requesting the source.

Refer to DWG and let them decide if a revert is warranted?

Hello. What is your source of info for this business and the others you added?

When adding buildings in OSM, please try to somewhat follow the outline of the building.

When adding buildings, please use "Q" to square them.

What exactly are you adjusting?

Changeset has been reverted in part or full. Features that are "private" should still be mapped. Access tags should be used to depict it is private. You can read why deletion isn't the answer here:

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

changeset/154544704

Welcome to OSM! Please use "Q" to square the buildings.

You can enable notes from the right sidebar and close your notes as you address them.

Already is published. You should be able to query/search for it now. It shows up at least when I look at the map.

Any changes made to OSM are immediate, though it might take a bit for any renderings to update, and even longer for third-party services that rely on this data to update.

edit looks good
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154309999

you have requested a review of this changeset. I have found the changeset to be satisfactory.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154208195

you requested review of your changeset. This changeset is a good correction of a previous one with errors.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154208241

you requested a review. good changeset
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154201124

you requested a review. good changeset
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154201124

You requested a review. Please do not abbreviate names. I am assuming "St." is "Saint" and not "Street"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/154201265