I noticed you added protected bike lanes. However the main street has bike tagging - since you added the bike lanes, the street tagging now needs to have bicycle access removed. Is this what you want?

Access=no is clearly incorrect as well, these paths you are editing are indeed used for walking from hole to hole as well as for golf carts.

You're making the map solely for your use instead of making the map available for everyone's use and this is problematic.

Yes private driveways should be marked. Anything seen in life or satellite imagery gets drawn.

Agree with above, they should not be deleted, thank you woodpeck for reverting. I am curious as to what your use model that would require these paths be omitted? Perhaps it's best to change your software to simply avoid walking paths that cross over golf courses much like crossing over military bases, private industries, etc. which are likewise marked on the map? Please do let us know and maybe we can think of a solution that would help you.

Was the JoDean's building demolished?

For shops that aren't actively open and selling, they shouldn't be added or at least a construction:amenity should be used. Also if the name of a shop is unknown, it's better to leave them blank. These are both suggestions as they make searching easier.

very well, it shall go poof.

moge subsequently closed in the 10 months you had the note open?

What is the brand of the convenience store, this still hasn't been answered. Also the relation relation for it makes no sense, the transit station relation is for the building and not for station.

Are these already built and on the ground? Please be aware that your edits are visible by everyone in the world!

BTW, if interested or for fun, search for Hygiene, Colorado - that's how I'd expect an unincorporated area gets mapped since there's no real boundary that tells who needs to pay taxes or not. They even have a fire department and a post office...

It was indeed someone else but brought up a very good point. I'm not familiar with California unincorporated areas but things but most of the unincorporated pseudo-cities Colorado don't have administrative boundaries since they were always ad-hoc. It's weird that California Park had a boundary which implies there is some government but if it's arbitrarily added to if some land owner says so, then there's really no boundary...

Cool, just wanted to verify since the anonymous user did bring up a point:
Usually administrative boundaries means there's an administration or some form of low level government, so perhaps this label might not be best, alas, I don't know what's the best way or maybe this is fine, but just wanted to make sure.

Could you respond to note/4320005 - is there a better way to tag this?

node/11967069540 as well, though it does have the south college avenue number correct... not sure where/how the 14a applies... they have their unique address already and the subunits have a 100- number...

About node/11967069541 -- where did this data come from, I think this is obsolete since the rebuilding of this area?

Fair enough, just wanted to make sure someone didn't add a new restaurant but the old one was still there, as much as I dislike two restaurants sharing the same cash register... but they are both the same parent company franchiser...

Are these all really closed? I spot checked
way/185707011 and KFC's website still indicates one here -- and coupled with the shops that share a KFC and a TB (I know of one locally, also a KFC that shares a building/cash register with an A&W) -- just wanted to verify whether things are correct...

I also have my doubts that this is a fence. Fences are usually straight and either follow property lines or natural features and this is neither - however it does track something that's being walked upon so that this is some sort of trail at least for part of the way. Clarification is needed.

Hey, you deleted Fort Collins. Reverting.

osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property