OK, it looks like you restored essentially the same paths that I had drawn in changeset/131867158, am I interpreting that right?

Yes, as a local to the area I can confirm that this golf course was recently remodeled. I traced off of the Bing imagery, which when I drew these paths, and still from what I can see, is the current alignment. I know this because I noticed when Bing imagery updated from the under construction course to the current paths.

Hi,
Is there a reason you deleted all the golf cart paths I added at Hillcrest Country Club? It doesn't really impact much but they did take some time to trace properly.
Thanks,
Will

Hi,
I was wondering what criteria you use to upgrade roads from residential to tertiary. Some of the roads you've upgraded here don't seem very "important" to me from a network perspective. As in, they just have normal residences and don't actually do any "collecting" as described in highway=tertiary.
Best,
Will

Looking through https://osmhv.openstreetmap.de/changeset.jsp?id=131618695, which is the best way I could figure out how to look at this, a few things stood out:
-Was this an error? Probably should stay pupuseria, maybe +salvadoran/ian/ean node/3939355534
-As with @oba_510, I question automatically changing korean_barbecue to korean;barbecue without retaining the original tag, as Korean BBQ implies a very specific type of restaurant with certain features, distinct from normal Korean or normal barbecue restaurants. This seems like data loss to me.
-It's unclear to me why "cuisine=tacos" is the standard form you've settled on, when all the other food item-style tags are singular, like sandwich or bagel.

I don't mean to be piling on, but while most of these changes seem to be welcome and obvious syntax and spelling corrections, some of them appear to me to go beyond that to defining a standard tagging where none exists, and I'm not sure whether they were really documented as such.

In general, for bulk edits like this, it'd be nice if you documented all the changes you were making, as such large edits are very hard to check via most quality assurance tools. I saw your diary post, but it didn't list any of the examples that have proven worth discussing here, for example.

On a different matter, it looks like you've, in an automated fashion, standardized all variants of Salvadoran, Salvadorian, and Salvadorean to "cuisine=salvadoran". What was your rationale? I looked into this tagging a little while ago and found that there wasn't much consensus, and all three spellings are listed as variants in most dictionaries.

I personally think it's more important that the cuisine titles all look the same, so that future mappers will use standard forms and not have to learn that California is the singular exception in the world.

I disagree with this assessment: even if it's sometimes called "California cuisine", phrasing the tag as a noun and not an adjective goes against OSM practice for other cuisines from certain localities, e.g. cuisine=chinese, mexican, french, southern vs. china, mexico, france, south.

Hey, thanks for pointing this out. Totally an error on my part, must've somehow autofilled it wrong in JOSM. Was meant to be "from=South Bay Transit Center". It's been corrected.

Hi, welcome to OSM. Please note that the description=* tag is not for subjective evaluations or advertising, and photo is not for logos, which is why I removed them earlier. See description=* for more information.
Best,
Will

Whoops, very odd typo here, should be "still need to add stops to relations"

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.