These are undiscussed and unapproved mass changes. Please revert back to previous state.

Hi, cities are not defined by population. These cities are defined by CT and are subsidiary to towns. That is why there are two admin levels: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_towns_in_Connecticut

Also some CDP are still active villages or boroughs. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Old_Mystic,_Connecticut
I don't understand why you go ahead and edit something without discussing it first. Btw are you at least from CT?

In iD, you can add new tags either thorough "Add field" or scroll down and expand "Tags" section.

I see. In more complicated situations, more nuancing and personal judgement might be required.
If it was the former official name. Then osm.wiki/Tag:old_name=... can be used.
Do people still refer to it in that way? Ten perhaps osm.wiki/Tag:alt_name=...
If it was not the name but more like name of operator, then perhaps osm.wiki/Tag:disused:operator=... But OSM does not really store historical data, so this is more controversial and the use is more for closed down buildings that no one has turned into new business yet.

All good. Keep on going!

Is the "Riversdale Farms building 1" an official name of that building or just its description? If the latter then the name tag should not be used. One could mark it as operator = "Riversdale Farms". (if there are more buildings then ref = 1 can be added).
Otherwise good job!

This is just a problem with AllTrails not using OSM data properly for rendering. Maybe a bit of poking would get them going on this.

There is a better imagery for this purpose. In iD go to background settings (or press B) and select "Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta". Just keep in mind that these images are few years outdated.

Just to bring to attention, there is a scheme from mapping marked hiking tails as relations: osm.wiki/United_States/Long_distance_trails

Hi David, is that "bushwhack" an exiting trail? Because if it isn't blazed or otherwise marked and no path is visible, we don't want to mislead people into are where they would get lost.

The correct tagging is:
atv=no
trail_visibility=intermediate

Path was added correctly.
Hiking trails are a bit more advanced. We make them by adding the paths to a relation (see osm.wiki/United_States/Long_distance_trails)
I created a hiking relation here: relation/11039101
If you know you can fill in other info about the blaze appearance for the blue/white trail: relation/11039100

All good.
Just one thing, you didn't have to bind 3 line segments into multipolygon. You can just merge them into one that will create closed way/area.

Thanks for the info. I've updated the building footprint and details.
btw. Just recently we started with New Haven/CT meetups until the epidemic started.
osm.wiki/New_Haven
Discussions are held on Slack : osmus.slack.com

You've added level and roof information for Helene Grant School building. This building sees to be rebuilt (see Mapbox Satellite, Esri imagery). Are those tags for the new or old building?

Hi, great work mapping those golf courses. Just one improvement: We place tag 'golf_course' only on the boundary of the whole course and not on the individual elements.

leisure=golf_course

Hi, great work mapping those golf courses. Just one improvement: We place tag 'golf_course' only on the boundary of the whole course and not on the individual elements. See Thumble Brook Country Club just a bit to the west from this location.

leisure=golf_course

Generally, can you explain your motivation behind all your changesets, where you deleted driveways and other service reads?

As a beginner I recommend browsing through wiki.osm before deleting any structures, as you might not know the purpuse of those objects.

Yes particularly the earlier edits appear correct, but I don't think anybody has time to untangle the bad from good. I wrote to DWG, let's wait about their decision.

I think there is not much to discuss here, all changesets at least until #80982684 have to be reverted and user reported to DWG for blocking for vandalism.

10+ hours of work and "Job appeared as rushed and without much care taken". Ouch.