Hi, these are not properly tagged.
The relation should get:
type=boundary
boundary=protected_area
leisure=nature reserve

The member ways should get no tag.

As it is now you've introduced a bunch of duplicates which are showing up in this boundary QA tool:

https://zelonewolf.github.io/wikidata-qa/Rhode_Island_flagged.html

horse=destination, really? 😃
Putting all those access tags on driveways is not typical unless there's a special access situation.

Resolved in changeset/146344539
Thanks for catching this!

Ugh, I was afraid I missed one 😬 Feel free to revert and do-over if you can get to it before late this evening.

I agree, and based on this discussion, I am restoring natural=cape tagging.

This changed Kaena Point from a cape to a locality, which is wrong.

Cliff, you know the answer and now you're just unnecessarily busting my balls here with rule lawyering. This edit updates the tagging on TIGER-imported CDPs identifed by TIGER tagging that indicates that it's a CDP.

For example:
relation/237313

Tagged
tiger:NAMELSAD=Lakeview CDP

I scanned through enough of these with lookups to satisfy myself that these are all categorically CDPs. I felt this was a fairly obvious tagging cleanup and consistent with our norms. I do a lot of boundary work, it's fairly tedious and it involves a lot of lookups and corner cases. I didn't feel it needed a discussion as these cases were clear-cut.

Now, if you feel that this edit was wrong and I've overstepped our norms for these kinds of edits, feel free to revert it and start a discussion about whether these features should be tagged as CDPs and I'll focus my ongoing boundary efforts to other areas.

I stand by this edit as correct. boundary=census is a well-established tag for CDPs in the United States. That has been discussed ad nauseum.

If it's wrong, feel free to revert.

Reverted; this is a normal mapping practice. Please discuss in the United States section of the community forum before further removing pedestrian areas. https://community.openstreetmap.org/

changeset/145448850

Reverted; this is a normal mapping practice. Please discuss in the United States section of the community forum before further removing pedestrian areas. https://community.openstreetmap.org/

changeset/145448850

Reverted; this is a normal mapping practice. Please discuss in the United States section of the community forum before further removing pedestrian areas. https://community.openstreetmap.org/

changeset/145448850

Please undo this edit, this is normal mapping practice.

Thanks for adding this, these polygons will be really helpful for skiing applications.

Hello,

Your recent edits along Route 66 are being discussed on the OSM Community Forum:

https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/kevinajames95-currently-mangling-route-66

Please review that thread before editing further.

If you look carefully, you'll notice that between 29 and 30 Cliff Avenue, the road crosses into private property. North of that location it's outside the property boundaries.

The road is within the parcel boundaries of private property.

Slack discussion also at https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CCJ2P6KCH/p1701209510983289

This is private property as listed in the city of Newport GIS. It is posted "NO TRESPASSING".
Please do not change this road back. I am not familiar with "Axios GIS" but if it's an OdBL-compatible data source, please document it here:
osm.wiki/Rhode_Island

Link below to City of Newport's official GIS site:
https://newportri.mapgeo.io/datasets/property?abuttersDistance=200&latlng=41.479467%2C-71.298528&previewId=5907&zoom=18

I reverted this change because these streets are posted as private access roads. Please do not change them back without community discussion. Ref/ DWG ticket #2023112810000241

changeset/144581288

I reverted this change because these streets are posted as private access roads. Please do not change them back without community discussion. Ref/ DWG ticket #2023112810000241

changeset/144581288