Thank you, @maemolol

School grounds already tagged at way/162044020, and they should be visible in MapsMe (at least they are visible in CoMaps). All information about school should be added there. I'll revert this change and add what makes sense there.

Also, while adding names in multiple languages it is recommended to add local variant (so `name:lv` here) too: osm.wiki/Multilingual_names#Why?

Would it also be reasonable to conclude that node/4979110168 is gone too?

Yes, as far as I understand, on both sides of the bridge cycleways are two ways. It can kinda be seen here: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=56.9641393&lng=24.15153410000005&z=19.9&focus=photo&dateFrom=2024-07-01&pKey=1428088352494114&x=0.8068495725594944&y=0.5765682052345771&zoom=1.2191628911155832
I think it can also be seen on generalplan doc, but I'm not 100% I have a good read/understanding of it.

Hi.
Why have you tagged way/1126690901 as oneway? If it is indeed a oneway road, where would the exit from this complex be?

I think(!) it is permanently open, by the looks of the gate.
But both times I was there were daytime, when `wake` thing was open, so there is a small chance they could be closing it off for nights.

Hi
AFAICT, way/925256483 is not a highway=cycleway
At least when turning from way/796982481 to it, there is a sign 418: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1048637287720873

Yes, it is still blocked: not yet finished construction.

I didn't move it, just left a note for future. Can't check how much it was moved, so will update once it's open and can create a track.

Missing highway=construction was my mistake - added it.

Based on the address changes, I'm thoroughly convinced that actual parking that needed to be updated was this one: way/45068139
I reverted this edit, and applied all the same changes to that parking

Hey, two things:
You forgot to delete planned bus stops near the mazdārziņi (fixed)
Generally, it's advisable not to delete and re-add nodes (or other objects), but to edit existing ones, to preserve history. So here, ideally those planned stops wouldn't be deleted, but converted into non-planned ones. Specifically in this case it's not *that* important, but since you requested review ... =)

Additional thing: ideally, those stops should be included into bus route relations once the changes to route take effect. Current routes are relation/11261550 and relation/11261551 , we'll need to duplicate those and add stops to copies, but it will be clear only after RS adds these stops to routes on their site.

What about this path: way/298255368 ?
Is it closed off too?

Also, you missed this tiny connection path from your edit: way/1177100641

way/1493430543
seems to be partially duplicating way/1493402051 from earlier edit

I don't get what happened with bus stop.
Why did you append "Bus Station" to its name? I'm doubtful sign was changed to append English phrase here.
Meta comments should not be included into names: it's already tagged as bus stop, so adding words into name are not needed (unless it's indeed called that, for example on the sign)

Second, is way/1493184059 really a building=garage? Latest aerial photos (which are outdated) show amenity=parking there. Were garages build there instead? Seems to close to primary school. Also, are they really called otopark?

Fair point. I didn't know how/where to connect east path, and thought that it's probably only intended as a path to this house. But I see how in total it looks strange.
I disconnected it from entrance, and connected to west path directly.

access=no is definitely wrong here, changed to access=private.
Also name in russian seems unlikely. Plus is sounds more like a description. Unless it's commonly referred by locals with this name, name tag should be removed.

Looks good
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/180230965

Two notes about address tags:
1. As far as I understand, introduced addr:* tags will be striped by latvia-bot on next run, since ref:LV:addr=* is not present.
2. Is house number correct? Previously same place had house number 51 (which again was stripped by bot). It seems like 51 was assigned to structure that was where node/9834190253 now, so I wouldn't say that it is an immediately obvious correct number either.

Reverted and retagged as disused at changeset/179954275

It didn't look just like a vacant shop. It seemed to me that the same premises were used for storage or some business without sign: windows are lined with translucent film, entrance looked a bit refreshed, but no sign of construction work, so I wouldn't expect it to open as a new shop or something.
Would this still be correct to use disused:*=* in this case?

You changed area around from construction, but didn't retag building - it was building=construction. I fixed that.
But I'm not sure about road on the south - is it still under construction?