commented by freebeer (2018-09-06 08:19:01+00:00): thanks.
the problem is that these bug-reports (Notes) are a very inefficient way to get things done.  i believe i have seen statistics that at best, one out of ten active mappers even bother to act on notes.
also, of those who do, ii am sure you have learned far more about how to map stands and other sports facilities than the typical note-solver.  here in texas there are far too many unresolved notes for years, while in some places of california there is an active community of mappers who also act on notes.
.
also notes are best to point out errors that can be verified and fixed, rather than general things missing, particularly where there is an overall lack of detail on the map as here, unlike london, or other places where someone has done 3-d mapping of a stadium, and where an active community can verify something is missing.
therefore, here, i would advise you to go ahead and map - you've been asked to pause your edits, but as here you are participating in public feedback, i am sure those who asked you to do so will be happy for you to go ahead and edit here.
.
i expect this comment to be seen by at most half a dozen mappers, unless attention is drawn to it, in which case maybe a hundred mappers tops might see how you are being guided here and can also give better feedback than i can offer.
.
Here you will be adding something missing - not much that can go horribly wrong with that.  if you get the tagging wrong, that can be fixed - i do not know how to tag these things properly so i cannot be of any help.
.
from looking at the aerial imageries, it seems reasonably straightforward - bing is not good here and many metres off, while here the Mapbox aerial imageries align well to the drawn outline and offer enough detail to improve upon it., even without bothering to check the alignment.
.
with some 30'000 bug-reports across the us alone needing attention, the advice you receive to open a new one does not work well here, as opposed to germany with a far more active community and where those bug reports - if any like this need to be opened, i do not recall seeing any in the last half year - usually get attention, so take that advice from a german mapper as not universally applicable.
.
osm is a do-ocracy; that is, things work best if you take the initiative.  but start small.  adding these mmissing items is something i can't see as anything but harmless, and i do not see any obvious problems to be aware of like outdated imagery (that which i recommend is probably a year to two out-of-date, but i see no way other than the elusive local mapper to see this after-the-fact.
.
note that in the past, the texas orthophoto imagery was generally the best, but it does not appear for me and there may be licensing issues that it should not have been used.  as such, osm may lag behind commercial products by some years so if you see a source disagreeing with the legal resources available to osm, bring that up in a discussion somewhere.
.
if you are still editing with the iD editor, you may be forced into lower precision than josm is capable of offering, but i do not believe it to be a show-stopper here.  i know it has some disagreeable behaviours, joining things that should remain independent, that catch a lot of beginners unaware, but do be aware josm has a steep learning curve (which i have not attempted to climb, seeing little future beyond potlatch in my minimal editing efforts these days.
.
also, if you are not doing so, ask for a review of any edits you make you wish feedback about, by whatever checkbox iD refers to the review_requested=yes.  due to the overwhelming volume of changesets daily and the minimal number of people actually reviewing, there is no guarantee of feedback.