Is this based on a visit to the location?

I found this discussion about reverting this changeset when I found this node (node/6468319591), which is incorrectly tagged (puts a description in the name value, tags it a tourist attraction, rather than a bar), poorly located (about 100m away from where it should be, on the wrong side of the road), and duplicates a preexisting node that properly locates and tags the bar in question.

While this is a small part of this changeset, if indicative, it supports reverting this changeset.

This edit adds a building called "Kadakh Renewable Energy Development Agancy" is this a typo for "Ladakh"?

Thanks for the link to the wiki page, it's interesting reading. This changeset in particular, was that based on info in the pdf you link to?

Regarding the names of Wildlife Sanctuaries, In this case I do think that following the guidelines recommended on the wiki is wise: osm.wiki/Names#Notes

I don't mean to suggest that the wiki is an authority that must be followed, just that in the case of abbreviating names it makes a good point. I'd like to follow it, and I don't see a reason to abbreviate Indian wildlife sanctuaries.

This edit makes significant changes to the outline Dachigam National Park, and a minor change to Overa Aru wildlife sanctuary. These boundaries are not visible in satellite imagery. What is the source of this edit?

I know this was quite some time ago, but I'm wondering why you added and then removed the `leisure=park` tag to this area.

I have fixed the addressing error on this building too: way/163539163/history

And another one: way/331422538/history

And this one too: way/331422517/history

It is probably worth pointing out that I posted a question on help.osm.org about this: https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/65629/should-riverbanks-be-tagged-as-naturalcoastline

Alright. Thanks. I started to do that, but was finding it more of a headache to figure out how it had been tagged than I expected. Then I procrastinated.

Yeah, you make valid point.

Huh. To me that feels like mapping one thing twice. Tasting rooms and breweries are not the same thing, but they are still part of the same establishment.

But I respect your judgement, if you'd rather tag the outline as the brewery and add a node for the tasting room, I'll let them be.

That's the one. I was being a bit silly prong that in the edit summery, especially because I don't expect people to read those edit summaries. At least not often.

Also I was kind ignoring the point of the article, by only tracing the curb around a traffic island, which seems pretty irrelevant for the potential uses the blog post was advocating.

Thanks for your message.

I'd forgotten about these turn restrictions. The restrictions had been put in place before I made this edit, but seem to have been some sort of trial of additional traffic calming/diversion on the Lakewood bike route. There had been plastic bollards and signage about turn restrictions. The bollards are definitely gone, and I think the signage is gone too.

While there continues to be lots of other measures in place, this one seems to have been removed.

I've deleted the turn restrictions, and will inspect the intersection next time I am passing by, to see if any restrictions remain.

This one too: way/109684770

Another address error I've fixed on this building: way/102521333

I forgot to update the source field, it should be "survey".

This building (way/160290132) also contained an error, should have been 3 addresses, not one. I've fixed it.

This edit contains at least one error, this (way/309854489) building contained one address, when in fact it has 3 separate addresses. I've fixed it by moving the addresses to nodes.