description incorrect, intended to say: add vocational school

This is not a dam. Rae's Creek is dammed by a earthen embankment here to form the lake and the canal, which have equal water level.

The embankment is here.
way/952456924

There is a spillway here.
way/545715329

Under typical conditions the water level is regulated by letting water down the canal here.
way/478371980

Has amenity=drinking_water been used to mark a stream here? While I realize that knowledge of streams is useful as a hiking water source, that OSM tag is intended to mark potable water sources, like a drinking fountains.

amenity=drinking_water

See note/4117556

Is there construction here? The article from last month sounds like the proposers are still seeking funding.

Under the good practice of "map what's on the ground" I think a proposal to build something--particularly unfunded--is out of scope for inclusion in OSM.

osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what's_on_the_ground

description should read:
replaced inappropriately marked "rough" over entire course boundary with leisure=golf_course and appropriate tags

Note #4050736 by ChainsawCowboy concerning this edit.

"I used to rent this building so I am positive about the address."

Reversion:
changeset/146522116

Repeat of the intended work:
changeset/146522306

This change set fully reverted since edits in Brownsville were intentional but movement of two nodes near Humble TX was not.

Also should have cited ESRI imagery as source. Former airport indeed appears to be grass.

Description should read "add new neighborhood streets" sourcing in correct.

Thanks for addressing my notes.

Description should have said "add contact info to business and change shop=eyewear to shop=optician

Yes, the number in the postcode field was in fact the correct house number and is now fixed.

Good catch!

Hi Rivermont:
I traced the boundary from a map on the NC wildlife resources commission website listed above. Where it shares boundaries with land cover the land cover was existing.

I'd intended this to be places where a feature logically breaks both use and ownership (e.g. adjacent to road right-of-way), but see now where I've followed a couple undulations in the land use that are not supported by the source for the game lands:

note/3818529

note/3818530

If you think I should make a complete separation of ways, such that there is no joint boundaries of the two multipolygons, I will do that in making these corrections.

Changed. Thanks for catching this one. I specifically searched for many of the Bi-los to change them to current uses, but missed this one.

changeset/138961903

Welcome to OSM. I've marked the anonymous note regarding this issue as complete.

Changeset should have been described as: Add leisure=nature_reserve Buffalo Cove Game Lands

What are you doing here? Cave entrance doesn't seem like an appropriate tag for what your changeset describes as moorings.

Mistaken description carried from last edit. Actual change is removal of a short road that doesn't exist, per cited sources.

removed. changeset/137116897