Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your change here. Things are looking great overall! Here's a suggestion, though. Sometimes, the "main" feature for a business is the outer boundary of the business. That's the case here. When it's like that, it's generally best to keep the building outlines fairly generically tagged, then add all the business details to the larger, main feature. That way things aren't duplicated. I went ahead and fixed that in this case.
Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contribution!

Regarding your changes in this area, everything looks great! Man, the geometry of the roads around here is particularly bad, huh. Many of these were imported from a government database called TIGER a long time ago. Much of it, such as around here, hasn't been reviewed or cleaned up.

Anyway, no problems with your additions here, so thanks. :)

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over this and your other recent changesets. In this case, you can see that the bounding box (rectangle that encloses all the things you changed) spans the country. Huge bboxes make it really hard for others to review your work, so we should generally save changes made in one local area before moving on elsewhere. Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!

Howdy! Since you requested a review, I looked over your change here. Looks great to me overall! One minor improvement I see is that instead of leisure=park, we can be more specific by putting leisure=pitch and sport=skateboard. I went ahead and switched that over.
Let me know if you have any questions or objections, and thanks for your contributions! Local knowledge is a super valuable resource.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything seems great to me! Thanks for your contributions.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. The lease thing is an interesting situation, but I think the way you did it is great! I see no issues. Thanks for your contributions.

Howdy! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. That's an interesting situation! I guess I don't know how Tesla nav systems interpret (or how much they rely on) OSM data. But it's worth a shot.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Great work! I see no issues. Thanks for your contributions!

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. Everything looks super to me. Only minor nitpick is that it looks like the driveway pad might have been included in the shape.
Thanks for your contributions, and again, welcome!

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your change here. Looks great to me! Thanks for your contributions!

Nice!
Also, it did just occur to me that they might not even be using OSM for the *address* part of the car's maps. Addresses are basically non-existent in lots of areas in OSM, so this whole thing might be an issue with whatever additional address data source they might be using (combined with OSM's streets or whatever). If any.
I guess we'll find out! Haha. You'll know your truck got an update when you see that parking area shape!

I get what you're saying. I think removing them is not the worst thing in the world, especially if you've been there in person. (I have a fairly strong opinion that local mappers should have more say than distant "armchair mappers" like myself!)
One thing also to consider is that if a trail exists in reality, leaving it in OSM but tagging it correctly (access=no, informal=yes) will do more to prevent some other unsuspecting person from coming through later and re-adding them anew. Either by in-person survey or more likely, by satellite, which won't tell them that it's private.

Hope my comments aren't coming across too abrasive! Thanks again so much for your local expertise and comments in general.

I marked your lot as parking. (You had tagged it as a park, like as in a public area with trees and grass.)

One thing to consider is that updates may take a while to trickle down to the end consumer, in this case your truck's display. This can take quite some time (or almost none at all) depending on the infrastructure in between. Since the data has to get through Mapbox's system, then Rivian's servers, then a map update to your truck itself, it might be a while.

Anyway, regarding the core issue, perhaps the spot you park is just ever so slightly closer to your neighbor's house than your own. How about this: We add your address to the parking area. Then the closest feature to your parking spot would have the right address. That depends on how Rivian interprets OSM's data, but it's worth a shot I think.

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. From what I can tell, there are no problems! There are indeed lots of relations involved, though, so perhaps a more experienced mapper can chime in.
Thanks for your contributions! (And nice job on this edit. I've briefly tried Vespucci, I feel like an edit like this one is quite the feat on a smartphone! Haha.)

Hi! Since you requested a review, I looked over your changes here. I'm no piste expert, but from what I can tell everything looks great! Thanks for your contributions.

Can I ask, what service are you using to see the address? Is it a smartphone app or a website? If you're just looking at the map on openstreetmap.org, it seems like your address is showing up correctly there already.

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your recent changes here. Everything looks great overall! Here are a couple of suggestions:
- highway=pedestrian is typically used for wide walkways that are sort of arteries for foot traffic (such as on a university campus.) In this case, I think highway=path and informal=yes would be best. (Your editor may show that as "Informal Path". The reason I think so is that it looks like this is a small foot path that isn't officially maintained.
- In OSM, we generally want to avoid abbreviations. That's because it's easy for computers to shorten a word (place -> pl.) but there can be some problems when doing the opposite.

Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!! :)

Yep, it's showing up! Looks good.

您好，欢迎来到 OpenStreetMap！ 由于您请求审核，我在这里查看了您的更改。 总的来说，事情看起来不错，但这里有一些建议：
- 如果有人可以从一个要素移动到另一个要素，则通常应该将道路和小径等要素连接起来。 在这种情况下，这意味着将路径连接到道路。
- 名称标签只能用于某事物的通用名称，而不是描述该功能。 所以对于这条小路来说，可能应该没有名字。 （highway=path 已经表明它是一条路径。）
如果您有任何疑问，请告诉我，感谢您的贡献！ （机器翻译）

Hi, and welcome to OpenStreetMap! Since you requested a review, I looked over your change here. Things generally look good, but here are a couple of suggestions:
- Features such as roads and paths should generally be connected if someone could move from one to another. In this case, that means connecting the path to the road.
- The name tag should only be used for the common name of something, not to describe the feature. So for this trail, there probably should be no name. (highway=path already shows that it's a path.)
Let me know if you have any questions, and thanks for your contributions!