Hello, what is the reasoning for removing the place=town tag from West Wendover?

I don't think these roads should be primary, specifically because they see relatively low traffic volumes and serve areas with low, mostly-residential development, especially roads like Reverence and Cliff Shadows which barely just make it to secondary in terms of connectivity and importance in the road network. Secondary is a good classification for roads like these since they serve as a halfway between a tertiary collector road like Grand Canyon or Gowan and a major thoroughfare like Cheyenne or Rampart.

I think the awkwardly short Far Hills Ave exit ramp could stay since it is a drastic realignment from the old ramp. If they weren't completely rebuilding the actual ramp or the temp alignment was much closer to the original, that's a case in which I wouldn't bother having it on the map. The old ramp can be tagged as under-construction with demolished or to-be-demolished segments tagged as such or even deleted.

I would tag the new ramp between Far Hills and Summerlin Pkwy as under-construction until it opens to traffic and delete the construction access road between 215 North and the current exit ramp.

It looks like the way/145182578 is the current open ramp, 1408458573 is the currently closed/under-construction future realignment of the current ramp, and 1475194125 might be construction vehicle access. 1475194126 appears to be a temporarily realignment linking 215 South to Far Hills while the original ramp is being reconstructed.

That is correct. Though not always necessary since they can get in the way of mapping other things in some cases, using proposed features for pre-mapping construction is useful since you or can map everything in one go and then you (or even other editors who now have more context for what's going on because of the pre-construction mapping) can simply re-tag the features to under-construction as real life construction progresses.

For classifying populated places using an on-the-ground basis in the US, the Metropolitan Statistical Areas will be the closest you can get to on the ground as you can see and feel a metro area of a city whereas you cannot visualize the borders and true population within those borders on the ground. In the scope of OSM, city borders, legal status, population figures within the borders, etc. are purely numbers and lines that do not necessarily reflect how large and prominent a city appears to be in reality. Going solely based off objective criteria like population would turn massive unincorporated suburbs into cities and prominent cities with their own prominent metropolitan areas but low city proper populations into towns, which is why we in the US typically go off a case-by-case basis for how we identify what should be tagged as a city.

The second link is a forum discussion, not a guideline. While your first link is an OSM wiki tagging page, it only suggests that a place may be tagged as a city if its metropolitan area exceeds 50k population. Wheeling's metro population is about 140k.

That aside, the other issue with this change is that you seem to be trying to enforce a rough suggestion for international standards (as if it were a policy) in a country that you are not from and likely are not as familiar with in terms of how things are tagged as they are in Italy. The US has a vastly different system for the place classification hierarchy than it does from any other country, which is complicated to the point that it even varies at the state level or even regions within a state, so places cannot be tagged simply based on their populations. The vast majority of places in the US are tagged based on discussion and consensus, documentation, local knowledge and mutual understanding, etc. and criteria that includes population, regional importance, and legal status rather than a single universal criteria like a population threshold.

This is not to say there is anything wrong with editing in another country (even when it touches on place classification) or an actual policy against doing so, but enforcing a rule that doesn't seem to be recognized in that country could be seen as disruptive.

What source are you basing this claim on? Especially because there are no cities in West Virginia exceeding 100k population, yet there are 11 different places tagged as cities in the state, aside from Wheeling.

Hello, why was Wheeling downgraded from a city to a town in this changeset? This is a fairly large and important population center for the region.

Hello, frontage roads should be tagged as regular roads, not motorways. The motorway tag is for freeways only, and the links for the freeway ramps.

Please do not reclassify objects for the sake of rendering, especially for third party services. Tagging this small section of road as a primary road breaks the connectivity of the trunk route. See here: osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Hello, such short isolated segments of road such as the sections of Route 100 that you've retagged as motorways should not be tagged as motorways. Albeit arbitrary, the OSM US community usually agrees that every segment of motorway typically should have at least more than one grade-separated interchange and be multiple miles long. See here: osm.wiki/United_States/2021_Highway_Classification_Guidance#Motorway

I don't believe there's any automation involved, but rather it's that the Lyft editors usually just map without any context other than more up-to-date imagery than what we can access for free (since Lyft can afford to provide such imagery to its own employees). This occasionally results in temporary roads being mapped, roads being given incorrect tags (most commonly residential roads being mapped as service roads), and several distinct streets being mapped as one zig-zagging way rather than multiple separate ways. Their primary focus is to get the data out their as quick as possible. While fast usable data has its pros for OSM-based nav systems like Lyft uses, that leads to questionable quality control unlike a volunteering mapper not tied to strict guidelines or company contracts (like you and I) would be able to provide.

These trunk routes have been around for a while as far as I know and are definitely just leftovers from when all expressways and other "expressway-ish" arterial roads were tagged as trunk roads. Put together, Alvernon Way, Route 210, and Kino Pkwy don't really form a coherent route, especially for non-local long-haul traffic or intracity commuters. They pretty much all serve the same purposes as roads like Broadway, Speedway, or Campbell do, just at different construction standards.

Hello—what is your reasoning for restoring trunk road classification for some of the roads here?

While that is true, I wouldn't overthink the classification of such a short segment of a road that is already tagged as a primary/trunk road for the rest of its route, especially considering it's not really a dead-end stub or anything. Either tagging scheme is fine.

Considering it is still within an active construction site, connected only by other under-construction roadways, and likely does not yet have all its lane markings/other finishing touches, tagging it as an under-construction road makes more sense rather than tagging it as an implied completed road.

I'm not sure why they mapped it, but they likely were unaware that it was a temporary installation part of the F1 track.

Hello. Just to let you know, the ramp you mapped here no longer exists and was demolished a couple years ago. The interchange right here is being reworked.

What makes these changes unsubstantiated? How a road serves in the local road network can be explained by its connectivity with destinations/other roads (its usage as an arterial, collector, etc.) and traffic counts.