#TIP: we don't use descriptive names in OSM. Unless the camp is named "Camp Pitch near Trapper Creek Trail" can you remove the name?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170503130

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170500319

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170499810

Isn't the QFC accross 228th Ave SW? I've reverted this edit but can restore it if the QFC did moved.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170499546

Wow - a pole in the middle of the driveway. It doesn't sound useable anymore. Would you mind leaving a changeset comment on way/467479637 to explain to the mapper the issue with the driveway?

Since the parking lot and service road still exist then they can be mapped in OSM. The service road was tagged as access=private, which seemed correct from what you describe. I see that someone else restored the service road.

Once the parking lot is closed for rebuilding, then it would be appropriate to remove the service road. For example, I just removed a school building in Mount Vernon. When I drove by yesterday, it was being torn down.

I see that you updated the fence, which is appropriate, and thanks for that.

Is the parking lot gone? The county still shows it as one.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170465349

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good. 576 feet would be really high, but considering that this is in meters, that would be really high!
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170415161

The incline tag is typically looking for either a specific value, like 8% or incline=up/down. However, adding incline to a trail would require spliting the way everytime it goes up or down. See incline=* for more detail.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170255592

On this and the previous edit you added a descriptive name to the service road. Unfortunately we don't use descriptive names. Only add names to features that are signed. Can you review these edits to make sure the names are appropriate? I'll send you more info on OSM in a message. Let me know if you need any help.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170177344

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170170318

Thank you for your edit. I reviewed your work and it looks good.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170169900

If the stop is gone, you can just delete the node. If it has moved, free free to move it, and of course update the name. Let me know if you have any questions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170081557

#TIP: OSM started in England so we use Englands road classifications, including for sidewalks and paths. A footway is more like what we could call a sidewalk while a path is more like what we call a trail. Could you review this edit and confirm that Terrace Trail is a foodway?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170081292

#TIP: Just add the address to the building. A separate address node is redundant.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170044969

#TIP: square buildings by selecting the outline then just type a "q"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170042456

You added a building within a building. While OSM does have the ability to map indoor features it is only used by a few very advanced mappers. I would suggest just adding a node to the feature.

Can you please remove the building tag on the half baked and lil fruity restaurant?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170037236

This app requires that I review everything as good or bad. There is no in between. When I mark it as bad, it may only be that it doesn't fit the OSM tagging scheme. I'll leave a changeset comment with what I found.

These nodes don't make any sense.

Also, please leave a changeset comment
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170020416

You didn't tag the way and it doesn't match imagery. Reverted.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/170019997

#TIP: instead of deleting and re-adding the feature, just move the feature and update tags as needed which save the history of the object.