Gotcha! My guess by the sound of it could be a sliding gate, although I think the most common tag is just the more general barrier=gate. It sounds like then that gate would be restricting access along a driveway or parking aisle on the 1018 Arnold site, which haven't been added to the map yet, so I can see why a mobile editor like Every Door would instead place the node on the nearest available way, which would be the main road.

I've already been making some parking lot and driveway additions in the area from aerial imagery - how about I remove the gate on Arnold Street, add in some parking aisles and parking lots on the private property, and if you like you can add the gate back in at its exact location on the ground?

Hi, this is a pedestrian-only type of gate that'd usually be found on a footpath between farm fields (barrier=kissing_gate). Having a gate of any kind on a major street like this that would disallow vehicle traffic seems unlikely unless there's been some substantial construction. Are you sure this node shouldn't be on a nearby footpath or somewhere on private property?

I've made comments on a few of your changesets recently so to be clear I'm not singling you out for anything, I've just been doing a lot of mapping around here recently and want to bring up possible fixes when I see something.

Thanks for the response and addressing this!

Hi, according to the City of Greensboro website this park is just closed for construction: https://www.greensboro-nc.gov/Home/Components/FacilityDirectory/FacilityDirectory/425/5540

If that's the case it would be appropriate to retag the way with "landuse=construction", rather than "was:leisure=park". The "was:*=*" key was:=** is intended to mark features that no longer exist. In this case, the park still exists and is temporarily closed for construction.

The construction tags can also be combined with "check_date=*" and "opening_date=*" to the extent that information is available, to help other mappers update the way as construction progresses and eventually restore the "leisure=park" tags as normal once it's fully reopened.

Thanks for the quick response! Looks good to me. That tag will just make it clear to other mappers that it's really demolished while still shown on most aerial imagery. The feature can be removed entirely once most aerial imagery services are up to date to show it gone.

It looks like all the identifying tags for this way way/208115794 were removed as part of this change, like amenity=parking and parking=multi-storey. Was this intentional to reflect a building demolition? If so the way should be tagged with demolished:building=*. Otherwise, the identifying tags should be restored.

Hi, sharing some feedback on these additions. "Commerce City North" as it's described is a named place encompassing a large area with many different land uses. I can see it's defined as a subarea of Commerce City but does not have separate administrative borders of its own. As such it's proper to use a point marker with place=suburb as I've added here: node/13365862822

Landuse=residential should generally be used to show a smaller area of land that is entirely or predominantly used for residences (and currently in use - not only zoned or planned for future development). There's more work to be done correcting the landuse areas labeled "Reunion" - it should be a place=neighbourhood marker.

See changes in changeset/175736566
Refer to landuse=residential
and place=suburb

Thanks for the quick fix!

Hi, it looks like as part of your changeset you moved this node (node/1649972474) ~1500ft from its correct location, distorting the pedestrian path (way/775141614) and area attached to it. I assume this was inadvertent as it can happen when using the mouse to pan around if not careful. It looks like iD editor may have flagged the path as crossing other paths and buildings and you chose the option to tag it as a tunnel rather than revert the move. Please revert this change and review changes before saving in the future.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/174930469

The old MLK Center building way/1446608190 was demolished in 2023. It's since been replaced by a new building - corrected in changeset changeset/174837785

building=ger, that is

Spilled railway=* tag into name=* field, resulting in streets named "Louisa Streetrailway=abandoned". Please review edits before saving. Corrected by changeset #166839998
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/158726188

Yeah, that sounds good! Any gated communities that are residential only and have clear boundaries should be fine to have the name on the way itself.

Definitely there are a lot of places out there that don't observe the wiki as closely; like a lot of things on OSM it's hard to get every community to agree on one way of mapping things. Or, people aren't aware of the wiki, or the features are left over from before those guidelines...

Hi! Looks like we're both working on cleaning up the Midland/Odessa zoning imports. I figured I'd message to make sure we're on the same page. I would agree the neighborhood POIs that are out here seem pretty excessive. Also agree there are a ton of really odd relations that need to go. Although, my practice has been to leave the point markers for neighborhoods as is. Based on the wiki guidance for place=neighbourhood it's generally preferred that way instead of adding the name to residential areas.
The reasoning being that a neighborhood can be made up of many different landuses, and usually has loosely-defined borders. I've got no issue with culling down some of the neighborhood marker points if you've got a good source on the local neighborhoods, but would suggest not replacing them with named residential areas, or even named multipoly relations. Let me know what you think. Mainly looking at these pages:
landuse=residential#Named_residential_areas
place=neighbourhood?uselang=en#Node_or_area?

Yeah, I'm certainly one who gets annoyed seeing a massive bounding box so I hate to do it myself

My pleasure! Was just clicking around some Osmose Lvl1 issues looking for easy fixes.

Yikes, sorry about the size of this bbox. I'm still getting the hang of Osmose editor, clearly.

Hi and welcome to OSM! I noticed that as part of this changeset you added building=school to the three areas tagged as amenity=school. That building=* tag should be used only for features that are themselves a building. When added to the school grounds, that would suggest that the whole property is encased in one large building that overlaps the school buildings already on the map. I've corrected these by removing the building=* tags and wanted you to know for the future. Thanks!

Hi, these buildings and road have been demolished as of July 2024 or earlier and were removed from the map as part of changeset: changeset/154419262

Since aerial imagery has not been updated recently enough to reflect the demolition I've now marked the buildings and road as demolished:*=* to prevent future confusion. These can be removed entirely at a later time when most aerial imagery is updated to reflect current conditions. See changeset/163693122

Hi, as part of this changeset way/195029792 was retagged from landuse=retail to building=yes. It's likely this was accidental, but make sure to check the edits you make and review the warnings shown by iD before saving. Reverted with changeset/163261604