Hm, I'm sympathetic to your arguments here, but I'm still not convinced tagging these polygons natural=sand is any better a temporary solution than leaving them as natural=desert, since that sort of encapsulates the uncertainty about the real landcover that you describe. Would you mind if I brought this up on the OSMUS Slack so other folks in the US community can take a look?

Hello!
Thanks for adding additional tagging to the map around here. One question: it looks like in this and some other of your recent edits, you've changed a number of ways from a 'sidewalk' (highway=footway + footway=sidewalk) to a 'bicycle path' (highway=cycleway + foot=designated + bicycle=designated). What was your reasoning for this, and how did you choose which to upgrade? They mostly look like pretty typical sidewalks to me, without any specific bike infrastructure I'd expect on a cycleway.
Best,
Will

I would also say that Valencia is better classified as tertiary than secondary, and would appreciate it if the changeset comments were more descriptive

Hi, welcome to OSM! I've noticed you've changed the highway classifications of a number of roads all around Northern California. If you don't mind me asking, what's your rationale for these changes? In this particular example, I've driven much of CA 1 in this area, and it's not a big thoroughfare connecting major population centers, but rather a one lane road connecting to small, rural towns and recreational areas. So I think primary is a good fit for it.

In addition, which roads to classify as trunk in California were recently hashed out by the mapping community and documented at osm.wiki/California/2022_Highway_Classification_Guidelines, and these segments aren't on it. If you think they meet the definition of trunk, it'd be nice if you discussed it on the talk page there.

Best,
Will

Hello,
Why was the building tag removed from this way? It appears to be a building.

Best,
Will

Hi,
Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Unfortunately, your data was not entered in the correct format. In OpenStreetMap we use "tags" in standard ways to denote different objects: osm.wiki/Tags, and things like "Category" are not standard. Can I ask, how did you come to use these tags?
Best,
Will

Hello,
It looks like this feature you've added might already exist: way/243583735. Did you mean to add another one?

Hi, thanks for looking to add to the map. Unfortunately, Google maps is not allowed as a source on OpenStreetMap: osm.wiki/Google. If you'd like to add an image of this park, the best way might be to take one yourself and upload it to Wikimedia Commons: wikimedia_commons=*.
Let me know if you have any questions!
Best,
Will

Hi again, I'm going to go ahead and revert this. Please respond to changeset comments in the future, especially if it's related to an organized editing campaign.
Best,
Will

Hey Joseph,
It looks like in this change you changed a lot of the giant natural=desert polygons around the Mojave to natural=sand. Can you say a little on why you think natural=sand is a good tag for these areas? I think that natural=desert certainly isn't well defined, but natural=sand doesn't seem like it's always right for these areas either to me. A lot of these "deserts" are covered in scrub or other plants. In fact, the Mojave Desert polygon you retagged overlaps with a tagged natural=scrub area: way/934058828), but you can certainly see it if you zoom in to e.g. the Lanfair Valley (way/165774302). I find that retagging these vast, often vegetated landscapes as sand weakens the tag meaning and obscures the actually sandy areas, like Kelso Dunes (way/61011696). IMO, some of these might best be tagged as some kind of place=*, or maybe natural=valley.
Best,
Will

Thanks!

Hi, it looks like you're using outdated imagery, as this area is currently under construction. In fact, you've re-added these highways directly on top of some demolished:highway=service ways: way/773910913. It might be useful to check for these sorts of things before adding new ways.
Best,
Will

Hi, this looks like an error, as this appears to be a building from satellite and streetside imagery

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! It looks like you've added names to the ramps in the 405/10 junction. Typically, freeway ramps aren't named for their destinations; instead, you can tag that with "destination:ref=I 10 West", for example. You can read more about it on the wiki: highway=motorway_junction#Destination_of_the_exit.
Happy mapping!
Will

Ha, all I saw is that the Murrieta label had disappeared from the map, which looks fixed now. These sorts of boundaries are certainly messy, so I don't think I see a specific improvement I'd make. Good work, and thanks for fixing!

Hello,
Please note that the description tag is not to be used for subjective/advertising copy: description=*#No_advertising. I will remove it shortly. Also, please note that opening_hours in OpenStreetMap follows strict syntax rules, as was corrected previously.

Hey stevea,
In this changeset, it looks like you changed the city label for Murrieta to "Mahogany Hills", instead of adding the existing Mahogany Hills suburb node (node/2990321549) to the relation. Was this an accident, or is there some other reason?
Best,
Will

Hello,
What in your view makes this not an alley? It looks like a normal alley to me.
Best,
Will

Hi, for what reason have you removed the service=alley tag from this way? It sure seems like a typical alley to me.

Typo! This change upgraded CA 74, not CA 79