Hi, I'm not sure that the boundary tagging is correct for this - admin_level=8 is for small cities and towns, not just for grouping of similar features. It is rendering very strangely on some maps now because of this. Are you sure these climbing areas need to be grouped at all, as long as they are individually tagged correctly? If they do need to be grouped, then they shouldn't be grouped with a boundary that isn't real.

True, the reservation areas, while not subject to the criminal laws of Oklahoma, are still "in" Oklahoma from a boundaries perspective, which is similar to the other major reservations. The legal details are somewhat beyond me (and probably most people other than legal specialists), but the short answer to "Is an Indian Reservation a State?" is "no". BTW, thanks for making the update, the court ruling is a big deal, and map visibility is an important way for people to understand the implications to them.

If you were just there and the house is still present, then you are probably right that it isn't part of the park (yet).

Thanks for updating the Forks Park boundaries. However, didn't they buy that little "notch" that is along Big Thompson Canyon and make it part of the park?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/87161555

Hi, did you have a chance to review my comment? If I don't hear from you, I will have to revert the change as a mass modification without consulting the community. Thanks - phidauex
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86794921

Hi, thanks for mapping. I noticed you added a building, but you drew the building over the entire parcel, rather than just the structure. Can you modify it so the building=residential way is just over the house itself? Thanks
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86849614

Welcome to OSM, and thanks for your contributions! One tip to make your building additions more professional is to use the "Q" shortcut in the iD editor to square the corners of the building, it makes it faster to draw, and gives a better end result. Happy mapping!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86854366

Hi, and welcome to OSM! You've made a large modification to CO parks by removing the recreation_ground tag - this was established by consensus between a number of local mappers a while back to address some gaps in the protect_class tagging and ensure the intent of "open space" type recreation areas. Please revert your edits and discuss with the community, either in changeset comments, the mailing list, or the OSM-US Slack channel before making mass edits like this. Let me know if you have any questions.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86794921

Hi, I noticed you've been updating a lot of road classifications around Denver - I don't have any specific objections, but I'm curious what guidance or sources you are using for the changes. Are you local to Denver area?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86632106

Hi, thanks for adding Boulder Junction. Since it is so mixed use (whole sections are commercial or light industrial only), it would probably be better tagged as "place = neighbourhood" (note the UK spelling), with individual landuses for the areas. Happy mapping!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86615959

It is in the Good Practice section: osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_map_temporary_events_and_temporary_features

The main issue is that, while the OSM front page updates quite quickly, most major data consumers of OSM maps update on a weekly or even monthly basis, so if something is sufficiently temporary that having it show up on a map 3 months from now wouldn't make much sense, then it probably doesn't make a good addition to the OSM database itself.

Note that my objection is purely of a practical nature, I completely support the actions of the protestors and would be right there with you if I wasn't home with a 2 week old baby. :)

"Abandoned" to me implies that no one holds a lease to the property, not just that someone isn't currently using it. I wouldn't say someone on vacation has abandoned their home, for instance.

I'm supportive of the intent to map the "live" situation of the protests, but keeping in mind that map source updates run on a schedule of months, rather than minutes, it is worth asking ourselves if this sort of change is going to actually be useful.

It isn't super well supported, but if you are interested in adding it, this is the conditional syntax for bicycle access on a highway: bicycle:conditional=no @ (Apr-15-Oct 15)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86294894

Hi, I am reverting this change, you seem to know why. There is a park just a few doors down from your house, no need to change the apartment to a park just to play your game.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86310252

Hi, thanks for your contribution to the map! I had a few tips for you - the first is that your roads don't connect to the other nearby roads. Please connect them where the actual road connects. If there is a barrier there, then select the node where the barrier is and tag it as a "gate" or other barrier type. Second, I noticed you deleted the old road and redrew it. In OSM, the "history" of an object is important for auditing the map quality, it is usually better to modify the old object, rather than delete and re-draw. Thanks, phidauex.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/85951440

Another option for dealing with trails that are being revegetated would be to use the lifecycle prefix, "demolished:highway=path", which will stop it from rendering on the map, but will still show up in the map editor so that another mapper doesn't inadvertently add it again.

This doesn't work well for trails that are "real", and people just aren't supposed to be there, but is a good solution for trails that the park is actively removing and revegetating.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/86017235

As a CO resident I would agree that most of these would qualify as residential. Roads should be tagged based primarily on their use, and how they are used by the community, and less on their physical characteristics. This is why you have highways in Western Africa tagged as a "primary" highway when they would barely qualify as a "track" in some communities - but since they are used as a primary highway by the community, that is how they are tagged. Surface and smoothness tags can expand on the physical nature of the highway.

If you haven't been to CO, you might be surprised at how rural it can be - nothing in Europe really compares.

It could be an existing issue, but I haven't seen this particular problem in the TIGER set before. Whatever is going on is easier to see here: https://osmcha.org/changesets/83440452/

What it looks like is that perhaps the lines have been "closed" into areas so there is a long straight section? I haven't rolled the history back any further.

Hi, I'm not sure what you are doing here, but it is creating a lot of very long straight sections and overlapping highways. Can you take a look and fix whatever has gone wrong here?

Right from the horse's mouth! Thanks for the contributions. One tip is that this is a good time to use the "old_name" or "alt_name" tag for the original name. That will allow it to show in searches if some businesses are still using the old name on their materials (it will probably take a while for it to fade out), and also informs other mappers if they come through and aren't aware of the change (who might then incorrectly change it back to W 50th).