While there might've been a pedestrian crossing previously, there's no longer any physical evidence (e.g. lowered curb, surface elevation, painted marking) of it.

The addresses were sourced from Bing?

way/448424134?

The route marker tagging was a mistake, they're guideposts.

The route marker tagging was a mistake, they're guideposts.

I implore you to look through osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct as this changeset (among others) seems non-conformant at first glance; see particularly its **Problematic usage** section.

While there might not be an explicit prohibition on an ad-hoc addition of an easily computable tag, adding (mechanically or otherwise) trivially computable tags tends to go against OSM philosophy, and there really should be discussion before changing the last modified date of thousands of objects, as they suddenly look like they were recently verified; please see https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrvcVAPdaWI at about 9 minutes in.

Could you please provide a link for where the consensus for this seemingly mechanical edit (which lacks mechanical edit tags and wasn't created with a separate mechanical edit account) was reached?

I've removed addr:state tags during some of my manual editing per past wiki guidance, but if there's consensus for adding the tag then I'll change my behavior.

Given that these are deep inside the state's boundary, is adding the state really desireable?

Changeset description should've been:

A couple of hydrants and a link road and some lighting and poles from survey along Main Street. Other lighting and poles, all trees, and realignments from imagery.

bollards should be away from road.

Corrected in changeset/145346538.

Similarly with 165th just south of Main Street. An old note I had mentioned a stop sign there. Might've been too old.

The stops I placed on 166th at NE 4th are likely inaccurate with outdated imagery. If so then the nodes should perhaps have a note= or other tag to avoid retagging.

from survey, not imagery; trees and other street lamps from imagery.

takeover tag also from survey; probably should split close to intersections.

incomplete

changeset/140623612

@goldfndr/traces/9716161

I've since confirmed trace and this map update were good.

The change of the yield location is confusing. With node/1713572090 tagged as give_way instead of node/2532291172, it looks like drivers yield only after they've already driven partway into Southcenter Parkway instead of at the triangles painted on the link road prior to the intersection.

Got a bit carried away here. Trees from imagery, most objects from previous notes.