Regarding way/956419285... It seems to duplicate node/4969327454 as the "scenic overlook". It should not have addr tags on it since it doesn't have a street address. I suggest removing the element entirely.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106682165

But does it have a name? Maybe it's "Pearl's Seaside Market and Cafe"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106653912

Thanks for adding these buildings. When there is an address node that clearly represents the building you add, please consider merging the address node with the building.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106613697

What's an NL script?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106481841

I see you've already fixed this. Please disregard.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106353300

Regarding way/954387336, natural=grassland doesn't seem appropriate for a college lawn. consider landuse=grass instead.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106353300

This change seems entirely wrong. You delete all of the woods you just added, and you turn all the 'wetland' into 'building', which it certainly isn't. Would you please fix this and ask if you have questions.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106299619

Since you haven't responded, I've fixed this.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105718638

Since you haven't responded, I've fixed this.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105703390

I'm surprised you haven't responded to this comment or fixed there error. Do you need help?

... so what is "The Territory of Thales"? I'm removing it because it seems very made up. Send me a reference and I'll put it back.

Reminder that "Brickyard Ln" should be "Brickyard Lane" (expanded street type). Some of the description you added could be more useful to your customers if they were tags, for example 'wifi=free'.

Also, same issue about duplicated elements. Merge them where possible.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106120325

Also, same issue about duplicated elements. Merge them where possible.
---
#REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106120325

The data source you are using doesn't appear to offer a license compatible with OSM. See "Proprietary Rights" at http://www.interment.net/statement.htm
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106120325

(fixed in change 106257293)
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106120023

Thanks for mapping this. If you're going to do more like this, please be careful about duplicating elements and merge them where possible. In this case, Dunn was already mapped as a node: node/358219263.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/106120023

Did the partial address data come from the data source? For example, way/952160319 is missing a house number which seems problematic. Be careful when merging elements, you've ended up with an invalid building tag on way/952160324.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105998700

Name is not the place to put a description like "Private land not part if the Sawyer Mountain Highlands". Consider using something machine readable like access=private. Also, this element has not bee set as an inner polygon to anything. I'm making an edit to clean this up.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105923267

Name is not the place to put a description like "Private land not part if the Sawyer Mountain Highlands". Consider using something machine readable like access=private. Also, this element has not bee set as an inner polygon to anything. I'm making an edit to clean this up.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/105923267