Looks like you figured it out, seems good now!

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! Did you mean to downgrade the road classification of CA 41 from primary to tertiary in this changeset? If so, what was your rationale? As one of the few main ways into Yosemite Valley, this road seems important enough to be primary, as it is on either side of the portion you changed.
Best,
Will

Hello,
Thanks for noting this. You are correct that the North Hills East NC relation that I deleted appears to correspond to the official boundary, and that I overlooked it when reviewing this change. I personally think mapping Neighborhood Council boundaries is not worth the effort: they often don't correspond to any real neighborhood (see the list here for plentiful examples: https://empowerla.org/councils/), or, if they do, to any real boundaries between neighborhoods as they're typically perceived on the ground IMO. However, they are government-defined, and so I don't think it's justified to delete them if other mappers deem them important. So I'm willing to revert the deletion of the North East Hills NC relation if you so desire.

In light of this, I re-reviewed the other relations I deleted, and I could not find any others that corresponded to official, on-the-ground boundaries, NC or otherwise. All the others were either MappingLA boundaries, added by user Fluffy89502, or older boundaries that also appeared to be subjective. I don't think OSM is an appropriate place for mapping subjective boundaries, as it makes them appear official when they are not, and subjective boundaries from a copyrighted source are even worse. So I believe LA's neighborhoods are better mapped as nodes at their approximate centers (see, e.g., place=neighbourhood#Node_or_Area?), and I stand by my deletions as warranted. If you can find other examples of official boundaries that I deleted, let me know.

As for your point on the discussion, I did discuss this change with other mappers in the OSMUS Slack before making it, where deletion was the consensus view (https://osmus.slack.com/archives/C2VJAJCS0/p1660065932629299). However, you're right that I could've posted in other channels before proceeding to reach more mappers, so apologies if I caught you off-guard. I'll keep that in mind if I do a change of a similar magnitude in the future.

Best,
Will

Hi OrdinaryJosh,
As you might've seen from the history of these ways, this road has been the subject of some back-and-forth between trunk and motorway. It's been discussed in changeset comments (changeset/117138915) and Slack discussions (https://osmus.slack.com/archives/CCN1KJ76U/p1641935550007600) within the past year. This segment that you changed is highly sub-standard for a freeway, with a speed limit of only 45 mph and tight curves. In addition, there are prominent Begin Freeway (EB, node/9523487420) and End Freeway (WB) signs near the 4th St overpass, and the consensus among local California mappers is to have the beginnings and endings of highway=motorway segments correspond to the locations of these signs (osm.wiki/California/Map_features). In light of these two on-the-ground facts, previous consensus has been to map this segment as highway=trunk + expressway=yes: despite whatever "official" freeway title it may hold, the actual road doesn't really fit the physical definition of highway=motorway. In light of that, I urge you to please consider reverting this change.
Best,
Will

Hi. Please expand any abbreviations in the names of streets (that is, "South Robertson Boulevard" rather than "S Robertson Boulevard"). See osm.wiki/Names#Abbreviation_(don't_do_it).

Best,
Will

Looks like there’s a gate on Santa Maria Avenue and Priscilla, added a couple years ago, tagged as access=private: node/7183621430 and node/7183621455. Appears to be there in (blurry) streetside imagery: https://www.bing.com/maps?cp=15.158793~120.592051&lvl=17&dir=346.002&style=x&v=2&sV=1, as well as Mapillary: https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=1072145197016698&focus=photo&lat=15.158693962462&lng=120.59199693393&z=17&x=0.5115554862896211&y=0.6151427753554801&zoom=0. So it seems reasonable enough to tag the roads behind the gate as private

Hello, welcome to OpenStreetMap. I am the user that edited your business previously. Please note that CATEGORY is not a recognized field (or "tag"), is there some 3rd party service that is prompting you to add it? If so, the service should be corrected. Additionally, the description field is not to be used for advertising messages, see description=*.
Best,
Will

Typo, should be 2009

Hello, it looks like in this changeset you removed barrier=border_control from the California Agricultural Inspection Stations, among other worldwide changes. I think border_control is an appropriate tag for these facilities, as they regulate entry into the state of California, which is quasi-autonomous due to the federal nature of the US. In any case, I do not think this bulk change should have been undertaken without consulting the local community. It's also an example of why it's important to break up large changesets like this, at least by country but preferably by case, so they can be more easily checked by locals in the area.

And yeah, things are pretty touch-and-go with Metro's service patterns right now, everything will look quite different in a few years. It'll certainly take many eyes to keep these relations hammered out!

A very minor detail that I just edited on the wiki page: the new K Line does not officially have any parenthetical in its name [like (Pink) or (Crenshaw) or something] like all the other lines. You can see the contrast in e.g. Metro's official schedules: https://www.metro.net/riding/schedules/. The parentheticals are relics of Metro's old line name scheme, but they've been slowly transitioning to the letters. My hunch is that once the Regional Connector opens and dramatically alters the service patterns, they'll drop the old parentheticals entirely, so they didn't want to give the new line a name they were going to drop soon.

No problem! Metro's promotional material definitely minimized the fact that only part of the extension was opening. Your fix to the routes (for posterity, changeset/128229922) look good, I also re-added construction: prefixes to the unfinished stops and platforms in changeset/128231672.

Hi stevea,
The portion of the K Line south of Westchester/Veterans is still under construction, it won't open for another year or two. That is why I left the construction tags on this portion when I removed them from the newly opened segment, between Expo and Westchester. See https://kline.metro.net/. Is there another reason you removed the construction tags here? Otherwise I think this change should be reverted.
Best,
Will

Hi, what's your source for adding the (Crenshaw/LAX) parenthetical to the K Line name in this changeset? All of Metro's current documentation that I can see refers to it as just "the K Line", so I think adding (Crenshaw/LAX) is incorrect. See, for example, https://www.metro.net/riding/schedules/, compare how it's written "Metro K Line" versus the other lines, e.g. "Metro E Line (Expo)". My personal hunch is that they'll drop the parentheticals across the system once the Regional Connector opens and re-routes many of the existing named lines, since they're just remnants of the old naming scheme that predate the K line's operation, so with the new line they didn't even want to start.

I've added construction: prefixes to the route relations you added here for the Aviation-Westchester portion of the K line to indicate they're not operational routes. Since they were otherwise tagged the same except for opening_date, most data consumers wouldn't be able to tell the difference between the operating and not-yet-open portions.

I don't see any indication from Metro that this line is called anything but the K line, so I don't think adding (Crenshaw) would be correct. See https://www.metro.net/riding/schedules/, compare how it's written "Metro K Line" versus the other lines, e.g. "Metro E Line (Expo)". My personal hunch is that they'll drop the parentheticals entirely once the Regional Connector opens and re-routes many of the existing named lines, since they're just remnants of the old naming scheme that predate the K line's operation.

Hi, thanks for adding this shop. Rather than just adding shop=yes, it's helpful to add what type of shop it is. In this case, that would be shop=clothing, or possibly shop=wholesale + wholesale=clothing if this shop only sells things wholesale, i.e. not individually to the public. You can find a whole list of OSM shop values here: shop=*?uselang=en#Shop-specific_information. Also, note that opening_hours in OSM have a precise, somewhat esoteric format they should be in, you can see the documentation here: opening%20hours=*?uselang=en. For example, the hours you tagged here should read Mo-Fr 09:00-17:30.
Best,
Will

Hi, I was the one who changed your previous address entry. In OpenStreetMap, only the street name goes in addr:street. Things like a suite number goes in addr:unit. See osm.wiki/w/index.php?title=Key:addr:*&uselang=en#Detailed_subkeys

Does the "Ranch" property really include the adjacent shopping center? Or should its boundaries go around? Not sure if there's a particular history here, but typically such landuses shouldn't overlap

Hi, it looks like in this change you have modified the official city boundaries of the city of Los Angeles, as well as the official unincorporated area of Universal City. Did you mean to do that? It doesn't look like the boundaries have changed, at least according to the city website: https://controllerdata.lacity.org/dataset/City-Boundaries-for-Los-Angeles-County/sttr-9nxz. Note that Universal City (the admin area: relation/10921166) is not exactly coterminous with property owned by Universal Studios (the film studio: way/313036270).