Looks all good to me. Thanks!

I would just add that you don't need to add the trail names, because they are already included on the hiking trail relations. e.g. relation/11269400

this path overlaps a driveway
way/1066054150

This path does not exist as well
way/1066098189

This path does not exist
way/1066099001

Here again, here you backtraced so there are two lines per one crosswalk. Please see my first comment.

this path (way/1066114558) overlaps a bit with Johnson St and you added an extension towards Robbins Ave that is not existing.

This path doesn't really exist because it is just a thicker part of a sidewalk

Hi and welcome to OSM!
Thanks for contributing, I just wanted to point out a few things that I noticed in your edits:
1) Some of your paths are not on satellite imagery, which suggest that they don't exist. In those cases please don't add "fake" data even though a connection would make sense there. In parking lots, one can draw ways tagged with service=highway that allow car navigation.
2) Several of the paths (eg. the one in this changeset) you drew intersecting themselves or back-tracing the same sidewalk twice. We always draw line/way only once and it should lead along the center line of the sidewalk/road. Try to look around first how others have done it in the past. A good example for sidewalks and crosswalks is New Haven.
Cheers

Hi and thanks for contributing to OSM!

I just saw that you created a "site" relation from an existing building. What are you trying to achieve?

Hi, thanks for contributing. I noticed though that you created a bunch of overlapping polygons. You can get more info on mapping golf courses here: leisure=golf_course#Common_mapping_pitfalls
Mashin

Hello, please don't delete existing paths. Private trail access can be signified with access=private tag.

Please refer to osm.wiki/United_States/Trail_Access_Project for mode details.

Perfect! I've seen you progress report. You're doing an awesome job!

Hi Kevin, I saw that you removed admin tags from some of the boundary ways. Are we now keeping them only on relations? If yes, I would then go and remove them in CT as well.

I agree, it was really a bad idea to dump all that data into OSM unannounced. Though IMO if they have permission from the data owner at hand it seems like a less stress on the database to fix the overlaps and tags than to import-delete-reimport million nodes.

@woodpeck Please don't. Let's wait until a response. If the license is compatible, then geodz can have a chance to fix the data and tags (and create an import wiki page).

This changeset should be reverted. It created duplicate lakes in Canada.

Thanks!

Hi, you just removed tag that marked this area as a golf course. Please be more careful next time.

Hi and thanks for contributing!
I suggest using a different aerial imagery - "Esri World Imagery (Clarity) Beta". This will allow you to see through tree canopies and reveal that there is no lake or forest in those places that you marked.
Let me know is you need any help.
Cheers