Calm down Adamant1. I'm only doing what the Wiki says. If you actually clicked and read the links I sent above, you should have seen the part where it says "he tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so GNIS-tagged features should be corrected for position and especially name, keeping the gnis:feature_id=* tag intact. These corrections can be submitted to the USGS directly, and will also be shared back from OSM, making GNIS possibly the only database in the US to share work from OSM.[1] Because of this two-way connection, it is very important that GNIS features only be deleted or renamed if the feature no longer exists or the name is definitely wrong." or "The Feature ID uniquely identifies a feature in the GNIS database and is thus the most important thing to tag when relating an OSM feature to a GNIS feature." I don't know why you sound aggressive and condescending on this entire journey, even in our DMs. I've provided my reasons to keep GNIS, but you haven't demonstrated a good reason to delete gnis:feature_id. Deleting the other GNIS tags, I'm fine with (like gnis:state_id).

Now, I had no idea that QIDs contains GNIS data. I didn't bother to add QIDs for Happy Rock Park because no Wikipedia page exist for this park hence I assumed no existence of QIDs for this park.

I didn't take it up to the mailing list because of better methods of communication (like Slack or Discord).

I get OSM is "edit anywhere", but PLEASE edit in your own local area (or state) or areas you traveled. If I asked why you did the edit you did, don't be toxic about it. It's normal that I ask.

Anywhere on the wiki or someplace that discuss about removal of GNIS? I'm only seeing wiki pages that says to keep them.

Well, here's the wiki page about GNIS osm.wiki/USGS_GNIS and osm.wiki/United_States/Data

"The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is the authoritative database on place names. The tags may possibly be imprecise in position, so GNIS-tagged features should be corrected for position and especially name, keeping the gnis:feature_id=* tag intact." (from the 2nd link)

Only delete the GNIS tag/place IF AND ONLY IF the place no longer exist (or alternatively add "historical" to the name).

"The Feature ID uniquely identifies a feature in the GNIS database and is thus the most important thing to tag when relating an OSM feature to a GNIS feature. The tag gnis:feature_id is by far the most commonly used for this purpose." (from the 1st link)

Volunteer responding - GNIS tags MUST be preserved!

Volunteer responding - Pleasant Valley Road Athletic Complex should be a park because KCMO Parks and Rec own this land. It's also labeled as a park in the Parcel Viewer.

Volunteer responding - On-off ramps on the I-44 and MO-13 interchange should NOT be a primary_link. It should be a motorway_link.

OSM Volunteer responding - After further review of the area, labeling the "Tucker Leadership Lab" as a park is NOT appropriate. Looking through their website further, it cost money to use the facility and must be reserved before use. This area is on private property or a property the city does not own, so it is not an open public green space (aka students and faculty space only). Clay County's Parcel Viewer also suggest this is private. I recommend this to be tagged as "leisure = sports_centre" and "sport = climbing_adventure". The characteristics are very similar to Mizzou's outdoor leadership and team building playground as seen here way/584399742#map=19/38.92591/-92.34211 .

OSM Volunteer Here - Please do not change the legal street name of the segment NE 96th St. "Midwest Institute for Addiction Kansas City" is not an appropriate street name. Please read and follow the OSM Wiki for editing. I am going to change this street back to "Northeast 96th Street"

Volunteer responding - do you have evidence to suggest that "Tucker Leadership Lab" exist as a park? It is not listed as a "park" on the William Jewell website.

What is your source for the streetname? A recent survey shows that this street is NE 89th St.

There are no signs or sources indicating that US 169 is "Arrowhead Trafficway". What's the source?

I'm saying that the way I edited the intersection 8 months ago was fine. You didn't need to extend the ways or add extra nodes. I don't know how constructive you want me to be.

My method was fine. You should not have touched this intersection.

West Frontage Road is a tertiary road, not secondary. MoDOT marked this rod as a Collector and not a Minor Arterial.

You be careful of what you say. I checked the edit history and evidently you have been connecting neighborhoods to roads. I deleted some of them.
Somewhat related: I can't believe you screwed up the geometry I had for the ramps for the US 60/65 interchange. I have to go back, delete the ramps, and redraw them.

Never ever ever connect areas to roads. It's very frustrating when I have to update road geometry and do TIGER cleanup. Thanks.

This kind of conduct is not allowed on OpenStreetMap. You have been reported.

The road link between Manchester Trafficway and East 23rd Trafficway IS NOT ONE WAY. It is a two way link. Also, the channeling right turns that connect to the motorway_link should be classified as motorway_link, not trunk_link.

Anywhere that promotes more people to participate in the discussion and convenient would work.

Top of page says "Part of WikiProject United States" (most likely part of OSM US) if you can't read. What you edited does not represent the OSM community; that only represents three out of million editors. Discussion with other US mappers is the only way to resolve this. I also forgot to mention, why do you believe what you posted on the wiki?