Perusing other changesets by this mapper, they look like they've added a number of other buildings that appear to exist from aerial imagery, but based on one somewhat rude interaction resulting from slightly out of date imagery in changeset/140611357, you've reverted all of their edits? Is there more to this? Otherwise this revert does not seem justified. Happy to discuss this in an alternate forum if that's better.

For instance, this revert has deleted existing crosswalks (way/1198901851), removed new buildings (way/1198917796), and restored demolished ones (way/427818140), problems which, frankly given the number of local mappers, may never be fixed.

If you don't mind me asking, why was this reverted? Other than being huge, from a quick perusal, the original changeset looks like it mostly made worthwhile changes, and I think this revert has significantly lowered the map quality in the areas it touched.
Best,
Will

Hi,
Thanks for clarifying, by source I guess you mean as a second check? Because otherwise using as a source sounds quite like copying.

In any case, in the future it might be better to refer to this source as Esri itself, maybe using this link directly to their map: https://www.arcgis.com/home/webmap/viewer.html. Citing the website you sent makes it look like you were using data from a public domain database, which I found misleading.
Happy mapping,
Will

Hi,
I've noticed that in this and other recent changesets, you've been adding "hiking=yes" to a number of trails. Can you clarify what you mean by this tag? It isn't documented anywhere on the wiki far as I can tell, and more importantly, I'm not really sure what it's supposed to imply about, e.g. the service road you've added it to here. In fact, on some ways you removed established access tags like "foot=yes" in favor of it, which I reverted when I saw it.

Best,
Will

Hi,
Welcome to OSM! If you don't mind me asking, what were you trying to do here? Your edit appears to have removed names from a few roads, and even turned one of them into a power line. I'm going to go ahead and switch them back, but if you have any questions, feel free to reach out! This beginner's guide might also help: osm.wiki/Beginners%27_guide.

Happy mapping!
Will

Hi,
Out of curiosity, what "local mapping guidelines" are you referring to here that led you to tag this route as trunk? Are they documented anywhere?

For context, consensus has emerged across the US to tag trunk routes by their importance to the road network rather than by physical characteristics, see osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance. As part of this, I and other mappers developed California state guidelines to adhere to this concept. You can read them here: osm.wiki/California/2022_Highway_Classification_Guidelines. In particular, we documented this particular route as being best-tagged as highway=primary + expressway=yes, to reflect the fact that it does not connect major population centers, but is still built to near-freeway standards that allow for high speeds.

Happy to discuss these guidelines and the thought process behind them, and whether any modifications to various documented practices are necessary.

Best,
Will

Hi Olga,
Thanks for replying. Unfortunately, this response raises even more questions from me regarding your methods. The North American Roads database you linked to appears to contain only major roads. They appear on my system as blue lines, and if I click them, data such as object IDs and speed limits appear. "Santa Monica Place" does not appear to be in the database. Instead, I see Santa Monica Place as a label in the underlying base map, which appears to be from Esri. I think copying from this map would be prohibited in OSM, since I think it is copyrighted.

Moreover, even if it were allowed, I see no evidence from this map that the pathways themselves are named. The label appears to be labeling a location, not a road. Note how the label isn't inside the roadway, like it is for nearby Broadway or the 3rd Street Promenade.

Is there any other indication that makes you believe this path through the shopping center is named? If the roads database really was your only source for this edit, I believe you've misinterpreted it and that this should be reverted.

Best,
Will

Hi,
Regarding the Leeward intersection, note that it's preferred to map two-way stops like this on a node off the main road. There's an example on the wiki: highway=stop#Tagging_minor_road_stops. Also, direction here refers to the road's defined "direction", so should be "forward" or "backward", not the cardinal direction. Hope this helps!

Best,
Will

Hi,
Welcome to OSM! Thanks for trying to fix these lanes up. How to tag lanes correctly can be pretty tricky for newcomers. A couple of notes for you:
-The "forward" and "backward" values are always defined relative to the road's "direction". This direction is arbitrary, but in this particular case Slauson is defined as forward going eastward. It looks like your tagging switches back and forth.
-You always want to define a total lanes=* value, where the value is the sum of the lanes:forward and lanes:backward values
-While technically correct, you don't really need to define turn:lanes if the lanes are all going forward and there are no turn markings.
Hope that helps! If you need more information, the wiki has some helpful examples of lanes tagging: lanes=*.

Out of curiosity, what system are you working on where the bug was reported?

Best,
Will

Hello, please note that Windsor Square is already mapped as a node: node/7304762329, which is more typical for neighborhoods in the area. Also, by deleting landuse=residential from the polygon, you have removed information about the landuse from the map. In my opinion this should be reverted. What is your source for these edits?
Best,
Will

Hi, Santa Monica Place is the name of this mall complex. I don't think it's really the name of the pedestrian walkway through the mall. What is your source for this change?
Best,
Will

This fell off my radar, but it looks like you went ahead and put Metro back in the names yourself. Thanks for doing that!

Will

I attempted a distinction between grass allowed to grow without any apparent maintenance (natural=grassland), grass that appeared to be regularly cut but not for recreational use (landuse=meadow), and lawns intended for recreation (landuse=grass). But it's possible there's a better way of tagging this. It's also possible that some areas switch between these categories over time (recent survey seemed to match Bing imagery). But hey, they all render the same in Carto anyways ;)

Note: boundaries between adjacent scrub polygons were arbitrary

Hi,
In the future, it would be nice if you could use descriptive changeset comments, so that other mappers could see at a glance what you're changing. Maybe something like "Traced house in Brentwood" for example?
Best,
Will

Hello, and welcome to OSM! Note that Griffith Observatory has already been mapped, you can find it here: way/422130705. In light of that, I'm going to delete the duplicate point you added.
Let me know if you have any questions!
Best,
Will

Hi,
It looks like you've been doing some needed standardization on the various aspects of the Metro Rail system, thanks for that. A minor question: on this and other changesets it looks like you removed "Metro" from the route relation names, did you have a specific rationale for that? I've been working on the bus routes in the area, and I typically name them with the operator first (so like "Metro 33 Westbound"), so it might be a bit more consistent for the rail/BRT lines to keep it too. It seems like the wiki is ambiguous, and usage in other US cities can go either way. And of course, the route relation names don't matter that much anyways: honestly, I probably prefer "Metro" just because it means they all sort together alphabetically in JOSM ;). That is to say, it's not a hill I want to die on or anything, but just wondering if there was a good reason either way.

Best,
Will

I went ahead and changed these back to sidewalks in changeset/139230161

Hi, I added this building based on survey, it's definitely a multi-story parking garage. You can see this from streetlevel imagery