I've removed aquaculture and set as parking per <1yr old imagery. If you feel that's not right please just post back.

Are you sure https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/648328250 is aquaculture, that seems quite unlikely.

Another mapper has corrected this by changing it to proposed and unjoining the nodes shared with surface features.

Hi, could you please provide some more context for these changes? Are you carefully reviewing each change, or is this a bunch of mass-manual changes based on the iD validator?

There are a number of changes here which don't look right so trying to understand how the changes were made.

1. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/3338957765 I don't know about this one specifically, but Nando's is a chicken joint, so did you verify it's pizza here, or was this an armchair edit?
2. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/4776056221 the name here contained the branch, this information should be retained either in the name tag or moved into the branch tag. Personally I think the prior name was fine, but if it's signposted or known differently then at the very least it should be moved to branch.
3. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/node/5740037527 this is a traffic signals crossing last I saw, why was it changed to marked?
4. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/108737537 leisure=swimming_pool doesn't need to be an indoor excavated lined pool. according to the wiki it's simply "a place built for swimming as a recreational activity or sport" so if it's a special purpose built facility for swimming, then that's okay even if outdoor.
4. https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/23717445 What's swimming_pool=swimming mean?

someone else mapped this too in the same way as you changeset/90481024

my comment still stands that for sewer vent masts, you can see a bunch I've mapped at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/XMk. I used: man_made=mast + substance=sewage + tower:type=ventilation

are these distinguishable by an observer, or do we need to wait for people to get caught to know where they are? How can you tell them apart from regular traffic cameras?

for sewer vent masts, you can see a bunch I've mapped at https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/XMk.

I used:

man_made=mast
substance=sewage
tower:type=ventilation

hi, just the same comment as before if you could try to avoid sharing nodes/snapping with overground features unless the underground rail is connected to it in same way, you can see at https://osmcha.org/changesets/90496885 where you placed the shared nodes.

Has construction actually stared or is it just planned? Per osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix "proposed" may be better until construction starts.

This can be tagged with both `proposed=railway` and `proposed:railway=subway` see proposed=*

hi there, when mapping things like tunnels if you could try to avoid having these share nodes with above ground features unless they should be linked, eg. you can see at https://osmcha.org/changesets/90531971 that you're change as a number of shared nodes now. So eg if someone dragged a building above ground that would cause the underground rail to move because the nodes are snapped. If using the JOSM editor you can hold Ctrl while placing nodes to avoid snapping, there may be a way to do similar in iD, I'm not sure.

ping @Maradona11 not sure if you're interested in these changes, you can inspect in osmcha, eg https://osmcha.org/changesets/90403765 plus another change today at https://osmcha.org/changesets/90411239

note=* is for other mappers, description=* is for end users of the map, What you've placed in note seems better fit for map users to be aware of hence better to use description.
Is "Campground Clearing" really the name, or is it just a description? osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things

FYI I just created the proposal to try and formalise the existing tag for a rock overhang shelter see osm.wiki/Proposed_features/Tag:shelter_type%3Drock_shelter

also if you're tagging different parts of the buildings with different hights, but still part of the same building, then for the smaller inside parts it's standard to use building:part=*, eg. building:part=yes and then leave the building tag for the outside way which is for the footprint.

Okay please don't tag them as highway=steps then if they are not steps there. You can just save your edits locally until you are ready to commit the change, or if you still want to upload it then leave the ways untagged and maybe add a note= tag so explain that you're still working on it.

hi what do you mean by temporary markings? Do you intend to delete them later? Are these existing on the ground, are they on the ground level?

actually looks like this was a duplicate of what was added in changeset/90249432 so I deleted the duplicate to keep just one instead of overlapping ways.

I updated trail_visibility from 0 to "no", "no" is a much more common and accepted way to say it's pathless https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/trail_visibility#values

Thank you.

sure I see now this predated your changes. Thanks. I'll add a note here for someone to check it.

I see now this was an existing turn restriction, because you deleted the existing one relation/11155539/history and added it as a new one relation/11566490/history. It's good practice to retain the history of objects osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history which I know that's not always possible and I'm being pedantic here, but it would have helped me understand the change better if retained the history.
I think leaving the restriction in place is fair enough without local knowledge either way, so I've drop a note here for someone local to review it note/2331888.