text: Also, unlike you, I have zero problem with it being a park or not being park. I don't ultimately care either way what it is. Outside of that it should be tagged probably and that what is on the ground fits how we map things. That's it. So go prove that it's a park so we can map it accurately instead of endlessly arguing about it. If you do, I'll 100% resolve this note and go along my marry way. 
  
  (Although with the caveat that it still wouldn't qualify as "managed greenery" under the OSM definition of a park and thus wouldn't qualify as a park. Which, if you have a problem with your free to build consensus on, write the mailing list about, etc etc. 