The abandoned railroad you deleted probably should be restored and gone over, since there's decent lengths along that which the track scar is still visible.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182046787

Updated.

OK, but then someone else will just remap it because they see it on the aerial still.

What's the correct name? Looks like the street name was simply removed, with no new name tag or noname tag.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182004181

Looks like detail-mapped parking was removed in favor of very crudely mapped parking areas that include a lot of not-parking objects, and not all of the detail mapped parking has been removed.

Did you want to remap it like the parking around Crest Foods, or is it OK for me to revert?
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/182004528

This could be just amenity=parking and parking=surface, and just leave off the access and capacity tags.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181737275

I moved that up to the end of the ramp that actually has the freeway junction.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181391133

Usually better to add this kind of thing as a Note instead of a fixme, as Notes tend to get picked up by Osmand and StreetComplete in the field.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/181070521

ref="I 5 EXPR" is wrong, should be "Express".

I believe the wiki to be out of date, as there's been several threads over the years pointing out that consumers already use this information, and some users (especially blind pedestrians) find it useful.

If you're trying to speedymap buildings, please just map them as a node rather than with incorrect 2D geometry.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180934208

This looks like a house. Are you really expecting people to show up to shop unannounced?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180922833

Generally a good idea to include the street names on sidewalks for the same reason we do it on all carriageways of multiple carriageway streets.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180737583

Generally a good idea to include the street names on sidewalks for the same reason we usually include the street names on all the roadways of a multiple-roadway street.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180485396

Hey, wait a minute, this wasn't built in the 1990s on a military base!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/172883738

You seem to have made a complete hash of things by ignoring lane tags.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/177490396

Are these "names" like "Lawrence County High Point" really the names or are these descriptions? If it's the latter, could you please change the name tag to the description tag?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/179651975

This should be noname=yes; refs are not names.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180134049

I would generally include the street names on sidewalks for the same reasons they're included on all carriageways of a road with more than one carriageway.
---
#REVIEWED_GOOD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180145760

A private to private connection should still just be private, not no.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180030852