Way 1157557045 had what appears to be likely intended as addr:unit filled in for the city name. Haven't done multiaddress mapping but is it considered appropriate to have a space after comma or not? Found this through https://maproulette.org/challenge/50145/task/260457230 and can fix if I'm properly inferring surrounding and intended values.

There are ways to undo edits too; keeps more historical content and reuses existing nodes with their exact existing locations but isn't something to stress over.
You had both amenity and disused:amenity. I removed first as it implies a restaurant people could actively go to. Second could likely go but does seem to match the 'disused:' tag purpose so I wouldn't call it wrong; if they modified the insides to not be restaurant ready then we would call it wrong.
I changed disused:operator to disused:name as name is something people would be more likely to run across in old sources like street imagery and consider adding first. I use it as a "please don't carelessly add it back" and don't expect Culivers to reopen here. Realistically we could likely do a single disused=yes to minimize tag clutter while getting the point across that it exists but isn't used.
Not familiar with end_date nor could I make any useful sense of it for openstreetmap use so I didn't touch it. Don't know if any consumers process this tag to disable amentiy=, remove building=, etc. in any useful way.
Thanks for mapping.

Is there a reason for man_made=bridge and bridge=tags to both be on bridge areas? Wiki mentions using man_made= for areas and bridge= for ways.

Correcting myself, franchise 'location' is closed, while that franchise has other locations active still. I can try to undo and correct if outcome is desired. It had been more than a week since I was last there and location was definitely closed with name removed from building and sign

Franchise is closed, but they didn't remove the building on their way out; can we undo and just remove relevant tags, maybe changing 'name' to 'disused:name' to avoid possible accidental retagging?

On footway=crossing osm.org/way/942413941 what is meant by access=yes and layer=-1 tags on this way?

Are we expanding bus lane activity to its own ways now on flat streets? Thought general trend was that a continuous surface was not normally divided but rather has other tags on a single way to describe its use such as lanes:bus=* or lanes:psv=*.
If we are, the way on the left should not be access=no as it also is dual use for other vehicles as a turn lane correct? Same scenario of usually each lane of the not physically divided road area is not individually drawn but normally done with separate tags that I've seen.
Another question if we do this now, do we need to set all adjacent road access rules+turn restrictions to set possible valid flow paths?

Not sure why it was placed in the parking lot; moved to within building from old notes I had. https://www.modmanbarber.com/ looked to be a website but says the barbershop is now closed though no announcement on facebook. Website says you still accept appointments. Is that correct, or are you still open with the hours of 'Tu-Th 09:00-17:00; Fr 09:00-17:00; Sa 09:00-18:00; Su 09:00-16:00' or different now? If not still open there, do you have a new place you may want any help with mapping?

It still didn't exist back when I asked but seems to now.

Leaving the parking lot connects to oneway roads; why the turn restriction as it is the only valid choice?

I set opening_hours=closed (better than disused:opening_hours=... as they are not open to general public; guess I could have put 9-17 as I've overheard from phoenix, az employees doing final closing steps and some strict access= terms, but why try that hard for a short term tag) and changed shop=electronics to disused:shop=electronics myself on a # of them (all completed now?). Other tags 'could' be removed. I kept the name as I am not aware of the building names being removed in reality just as I didn't delete the building since it still physically stands. I left the name on the bowling alley near the Phoenix Fry's Electronics after I removed the other use tags as the vacant building still has signs on it while I have removed it form others I found closed with remnants such as discolored paint being the clue of what name was previously on it. Wish there was a more formal agreed time to say when the nonphysical stuff should go away (phone, website, wikidata, etc.) but nonphysical things on a map of physical things makes for weird questions.

I usually leave things like 'name' as is if the building still has it as retained signage until that is gone. Contacts direct people to website for how to reach out to the company for final things like customers picking up equipment being repaired or vendors getting product back which would still lead them to the location for now. Otherwise technically the phones may have had people talk to a call center elsewhere and website was not hosted locally for each store so those were really often redirects previously. Thanks for the edit!

Forgot to say I started viewing through https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=76868542 where I reviewed various red to green changes as usally weird on their own after seeing walkway/road at northern end of mall had a weird alignment.

I've noticed around metrocenter mall that there are many small groups of nodes that appear to be relocated; unless trying to realign only a few things based on known offset it looks like a possible move of many unintentional objects. The building northwest of the mall with Chipotle in it had doors moved to building edge which is just a roof and not the wall where I had located them at (shame on me for not finding a good way to represent roof extension that covers part of the walkway). Was there a different reason for the relocations of groups of nodes in this changeset?

Was any of this localknowledge based? Changelog mentions you used Bing aerial imagery which underwent some refreshing in recent months; current imagery doesn't show this here. My localknowledge tells me there is only parking there but I will verify in person if needed.

Not sure who you are or how you were invited to this conversation, but motivation accepted. ^_^ Still left apartment entry as I don't know why it was there. Seems i reached a edit comment limit so I stopped after only minor corrections after a bigger edit. POIs could use addresses, full names (not entirely visible on free street photos I found) and some were missing.

Not sure why there is an apartment tag here. From north to south the east side of the building is a loans place, nails salon, cricket, barber, and then I didn't get a look at the next spot then a vacant spot but didn't look at last two thoroughly. Or just go with your mapillary run on https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=TI1U80M8hBJdnrzRZTenYg&focus=photo&lat=33.58128254366197&lng=-112.1342834112676&z=17 as it looks reasonable per my memory. Those businesses on the right should be able to be on their own split of the building as it is the different address from the Fry's to its left. It was all traced weird anyway. Shall I split and retrace it?

Way: New River Trail (371126043) was changed to layer=-1 when it appears on satellite to be on top of the bridge. should the river be 1 and bridge contents be 2 os is there a reason why it is above ground with a negative number?

Was there any reason why both cycleway=lane and cycleway:right=lane were specified at the same time on east bell road?

I am not sure I understand the no u-turn restriction on the southeast end of 164th where it connects to west sheila lane. There doesn't look to likely be a restricting sign from satellite imagery and I do not find a openstreetcam or mapillary image to reference. Tiger has the name as 'Avenue' instead of 'Avenus' as it is labeled on its connecting piece headed southwest. If this was deleted then recreated to have it as 2 separate pieces, a way can be split so you can place tags on only part of it which leaves a visible history of the object and is important to save a lot of work if you get into refining details that only apply to part of a way. Thanks for the edit and welcome to openstreetmap.