way/1436820739 should have been squared when manually reviewing each imported building.

way/1461690291 is wildly innaccurate, this should have been caught by manually reviewing each imported outline.

way/1427706309 is not a sufficiently correct outline to be imported, please correct the curved edges.

way/1500742011 is another wildly incorrect outline that should be squared, then the curve at the Northeast corner should have been mapped.

Additionally most of these buildings should have square corners, which you have neglected to correct. Use the square tool (right click -> square, or the Q key) when importing ML outlines that are incorrectly warped.

Hi
Please make sure to review every single building you're importing and correct any innaccuracies. Buildings like way/1500744495 are not acceptable to be imported and must be adjusted manually.

JOSM had a network blip during this upload, hopefully nothing went wrong

Welcome to OSM!
To clarify, is Ethier just the owner of this property or is the peak here known widely by this name?

For the future, please make sure each of the tags you add make sense -- most of the keys used here shouldn't have been filled in with anything. I've gone ahead and removed all of the bad tags, and given this point a osm.wiki/Top-level_tag in changeset/181560653

Thanks!

of course there's plenty more cleanup to do around here and elsewhere that they've touched

most of this mess is from @vanburin "fixing" iD validator warnings with no review whatsoever... I really wish people would care about more than just their golf courses/railways/whatever :/ (or at least don't touch things they don't care about...)

reverted changeset/175011172 to preserve history

John Erb Park* whoops!

Hi apgosm, thanks for your contributions! Please resolve warnings iD gives you before uploading. Footways leading to building entrances should be connected to the building outline with a node tagged with entrance=*

Please also consider removing the preamble in every changeset comment, instead you can use a changeset tag or a shorter indication that you're mapping for Uber.

Thanks!

That makes sense, I agree that the unique curbs/tactile paving justify separate ways here. Thanks!

This is quite late but I'm curious if it's preferred to map these crossings with a single way tagged with `segregated=yes`, given that there's no physical separation

I've mapped similar crossings (i.e. way/1372493450) with `path=crossing` + `crossing:markings=dots;ladder`, my main hesitation is including multiple marking values since this doesn't differentiate between the cycle and pedestrian ways, nor is it clear that the markings are unique (as opposed to combined as the wiki suggests for multiple semicolon-delimited values) for each mode of transport

...at Bruce Power, large bbox is from editing Lake Huron!

Hi, splitting this roundabout broke PTv2 relations for route 78 -- I've fixed them up here: changeset/174491103

Please make sure routes are intact after editing them! Thanks

...at Bruce NGS

Hi! It looks like you accidentally tagged this as `highway=junction=roundabout`, I've corrected this in changeset/166671349

resolves note/4018276