Hi, I'm not sure if you're familiar with this area, but I don't think landuse=commercial is a good fit for this area, which is mostly covered by a hospital, a cemetery, and government buildings, none of which are related to commerce. What was your rationale for making this change?

Cleanup completed in changeset/124167667

OK, maybe they didn't load correctly, or possibly you had a layer switched off. Could you see any existing features while you were drawing? It looks like in your subsequent edits you attached paths to existing features, so perhaps you figured it out.
I'll try to delete the duplicates (like the extra Hilgard and Le Conte Avenues and the second botanical garden) later on tonight.

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! It looks like in this changeset you re-drew a number of features on top of previously existing features in the database, like roads, buildings, and the botanical garden. Places like Parking Structure 2, Hilgard Ave, etc. are already mapped. Did you mean to duplicate these features, or just to modify them? Maybe they were somehow not visible to you in the editor?
Best,
Will

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! Are you using some sort of third-party tool to add your business information, or are you doing it yourself? I ask because you've added your shop's info in a non-standard way: for instance, in OSM we don't say a point is in a "Category=Jewelry Store", but instead use key-value pairs that express the type and sub-type the point belongs to. In this case, shop=jewelry. If you did it yourself directly from openstreetmap.org, no worries, I'll fix it up myself. But if you are using a separate tool, that would be good to know so it can potentially be fixed. Thanks!
Will

Hi Eddie,
It looks like you were correctly trying to delete these demolished buildings. As MxxCon pointed out, there are some other tags associated with the old buildings that can be safely removed, like their heights and names. In cases where the building has been knocked down, it's actually usually better just to delete the old buildings entirely and draw new versions of whatever has replaced them, like the parking lot here, since the lot doesn't really have the same geometry as the old building footprints anyway.
Best,
Will

I would also appreciate a changeset comment that describes the actual change you made. Maybe something like "modified intersection in Malibu" would be more informative than "local features" (plus something about whatever you did in Croatia here...)

It looks like in this edit you separated the lanes of an intersection on Malibu Canyon Road in Los Angeles. Separate ways should only be drawn if there are physical barriers between them. Are these lanes actually physically separated, by at least bollards if not full curbs? If not, you might be able to better map the intersection using lanes:* and turn:lanes:* tagging rather than drawing ways representing the literal paths a car could take.

Hello. I've noticed an apparently organized group from tomtom making edits like this. Can I ask what purpose these edits have? They're pretty minor, but you appear to have the goal of rounding off road corners. However, I don't really think this edit adds useful data, as the road here doesn't really curve like that. The sharp corners here are just an artifact of how dual carriageways are mapped in OSM. Do these changes improve your routing software somehow? And is this campaign documented somewhere?

Ok great, thanks for replying. One nice thing you can do is indicate your source in the changeset. You can do this by adding the "Sources" field underneath the change comment. If you've personally been there, you can say "survey", and also add "website" if you verified the info on the business's website. This isn't mandatory, but it can be helpful for other mappers looking at your changes.

Hi, what is your source for this addition?

Hi, what is your source for this house name? If this is the name of the owner of the house, it is not appropriate information for OSM.

Here is the sign: https://imgur.com/a/Hl2w0A4. It's on a lamppost right next to this bench: node/9301030872.

Hi, not sure what your source was for this change, but I go through this area frequently and this area is a signed bicycle dismount zone. See also https://ucla.app.box.com/v/UCLA-Bike-Map. I've corrected this way here: changeset/123495910.

Best,
Will

On Sofi stadium's website (https://www.sofistadium.com/parking-information/), the Red Zone appears to be on the site of this construction area: way/893989427, directly south of where you added it, which, again, appears to be a sub-division, not a parking lot. Can you clarify if this is where you meant to put this feature?

So has the residential area (I mean, the walled area along Renaissance Way, Medici Ln, etc.) been demolished? If so, the houses should also be deleted. I'm thinking you might have accidentally marked the existing sub-division as a parking area, but I have not personally been to the location to check.

Hi, it looks like you renamed this residential neighborhood as "Red Zone", did you mean to do that? way/900319284

Reverted in changeset/123240069, with the gas station turned into an area.

Hi, welcome to OpenStreetMap! In this changeset, it looks like you extended a roof to cover the whole area of a gas station. Areas mapped with a building= tag are supposed to match actual buildings on the ground. Here, the buildings are a roof over the fuel nozzles and a separate convenience store building. If you want to indicate that a whole area is part of a business, you can draw an area with the proper amenity= or shop= tag, but don't add a building= tag. I'm going to try and repair this one, but something to watch for in future edits.
Best,
Will

Hello, it looks like you removed amenity=place_of_worship from this church, and added building=church. These two tags are not synonymous, as building=church indicates the building was built as a church, and amenity=place_of_worship indicates it functions as a current church. I am going to re-add these erroneously deleted tags.