Why did you remove a bunch of trees from campus? I haven't been on campus for a few months, but I really doubt all of those trees have been removed.

It looks like you mapped a number of desire paths as footways. At a minimum, these should be mapped with informal=yes. From personal experience, I can also say that these change fairly frequently, so unless you've checked these paths recently, I wouldn't recommend adding them. Also, why did you remove a number of trees?

The building you added is Thomson Hall, which was demolished last winter, along with the parking lot and nearby paths. I've reverted this changeset in 175280317.

Welcome to OSM, and thanks for contributing to Oxford! The ramp tag is typically used on stairs to indicate whether a ramp is integrated into the stairs, available separately, or not. In this case, it would probably be more appropriate to tag the ramp with "incline" and possibly add ramp=separate to the stairs.

I don't understand, why remove the trees?

Hello, and thank you for your contribution! This mostly looks like good data, but I noticed that unfortunately it seems like you've created new paths by tracing over existing ones, which effectively duplicates them. Please split the paths instead. There should not be two paths, one completely covered by the other. For example, ways 772646018, 772646018, 585278970, and 182453485 are partially or fully covered by duplicative paths.

Hello,

I've repeatedly asked you to notate incline an an unambigous format of either % or °. I think you're marking these in degrees, in which case, could you please go back and update these paths nad your previous ones as such? If you're not sure how I'm happy to do it as well if you can verify that all your measurements are indeed in degrees.

What's wrong with bridge=covered ?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/127017526

Hi, and thanks for contributing to OSM here at Miami!

Unfortunately, you haven't entered the incline properly. It should either be in degrees or percentage, and without an marker here it's ambiguous. (See incline=* for documentation). We've unfortunately got some other paths here with ambiguous incline values that were never cleaned up, which you might have noticed.

Feel free to reach out to me with any questions!

Welcome, and thanks for your edits to Oxford!

When drawing buildings, use the "q" shortcut to square the corners. I've gone ahead and fixed the buildings from this changeset (see changeset/124027032).

Hi,
Did you see my previous comment? Although I appreciate the contributions, it doesn't appear that the concerns I brought up there have been addressed. See changeset/123483685.

Hello,
I'd like to remind you to add a % or ° to your value of incline. Also, since I didn't see any negative values on your inclines, be sure that the incline is in the direction of the way. Both are explained here: incline=*

Brian (ZeLonewolf) is not in charge of any area, indeed, no single person is, but rather the community as a whole works to enforce its standards. In this case, the principle at issue seems to be verifiability (see osm.wiki/Verifiability and osm.wiki/Good_practice#Verifiability), as well as what constitutes a shop. The basic question at issue seems to be: if I went to this location right now, could I walk in to a shop named "BUCXplorers" and buy something?

The linked website (https://www.boreduplander.club/, although I would recommend changing that to the BUCXplorers page specifically if that is the page about this location) doesn't mention a physical location, but that doesn't necessarily mean that one doesn't exist, especially if this is a new shop and they wouldn't have bothered to update their website.

It's also not clear from the website what one would buy here. It looks like it might be a design studio? In that case, `office=graphic_design` might be more appropriate than `shop=yes`.

iD's suggestions are not law and, while generally good, don't necessarily represent a global consensus. I'm still confused about ways 709282297 and 330126860 though, I don't see why they should have been deleted.

Why did you delete ways 709282297 and 330126860? Also, highway=footway + area=yes has some supporters (such as myself) for mapping details of small pedestrian areas (see highway=footway). I'm not necessarily opposed to the use of highway=pedestrian, so I'm not going to revert or ask you to, but I'd advise that you ask in the future, as there's no broad consensus in the US or OSM as a whole on this topic afaik.

What is not:brand:wikidata about?

Correction: the user who let me know about this is ptreidy, not ptriedy

Good catch, I'd forgotten to add those bridges when I did the sidewalks!

Bagel & Deli, along with a bunch of other POIs uptown, was added by myself about 4 months ago. MAPS.ME is likely using outdated data. I recommending checking out Organic Maps, an open source and actively developed fork of MAPS.ME which I use.

Hello omarsouk, and welcome to OSM! To help other mappers understand what you're doing, please use meaningful changeset comments rather than "all". For example, this changeset could have been something like "Added and fixed details on Boulevard Mascouche". See osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments for more information, and happy mapping!