I think that, in general, parens should not be used in names. For each of these locations, I'd put the primary version by itself in the name field and the version you have in parens as an alt_name value.

I looked to see if there were ISO language codes for Acjachemen, Luiseño, or Tongva but apparently there are not. If there were, then the primary name should also be put in a name:isocode field.

The way would be osm.org/way/1377679079

People have hiked all over these hills and there are at least some published descriptions of hikes from PMC to the top of Mt Pinos, Sawmill & Grouse. But those are, at best, routes rather than trails.

I harbor a strong suspicion that your route up from the trail into Wind Wolves to the old 4x4 track on the top of the ridge falls into that same category.

Does way 1377679079 actually exist? I haven't seen it on any other maps including USGS and USFS and I don't recall seeing any evidence of it at the lower end when I have hiked toward the Wind Wolves Reserve from PMC.

Is tourism=viewpoint the correct tagging for this? Typically a viewpoint has a view of more than just surrounding trees, a building and the sky. . .

And there certainly is no sign or other item showing this has the name of "Viewpoint at the end of the Universe".

Unfortunately, I don’t see a good existing tagging on the OSM Wiki for a location used for star parties. So I don’k know what else to suggest. I will start a conversation on the OSM help forum to see if anyone has a good suggestion.

Looks like the Antelope Valley Astronomy Club and the Ventura County Astronomical Society both have star parties in the area. But the ones currently listed on their websites direct people to the parking area on Frazier Mountain Road behind the Chuchupate Ranger Station.

That does not help with the tagging though. My guess would be one node per club/group with the following tags:

club=astronomy
name=Antelope Valley Astronomy Club
website=https://www.avastronomyclub.org/
description=Star party location

Are there organized clubs that actually meet there? If so then tagging could be club=astronomy could be used along with the name and contact information.

In my chatting over the years with various people with telescopes there I don’t recall mention of an organization or club. But then again, I was not asking that type of question.

How can it be a permanent man made item if it is also a "bring your own telescope"? I know for a fact that there are no permanent structures in that parking area though some amateur astronomers have painted alignment marks for their equipment.

This is the location that the Pine Mountain Club residents have their "Community Emergency Response Team" (CERT) equipment stored and also where they do their training. I believe the CERT falls more under disaster_response than mountain rescue. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_emergency_response_team

There is a location tagged with mountain rescue fairly close near by at osm.org/way/85211449 which is the base the the volunteer backcountry ski patrol that works with the US Forest Service.

For what it is worth, I am a volunteer with the backcountry ski patrol and have a cabin in Pine Mountain Club, thus the "local knowledge" source.

Isn't the 25 mph speed limit a conditional one (when children present or school in session)? I think some form of osm.wiki/Key:maxspeed:conditional would be appropriate rather than changing the maxspeed value.

Please be a little more geographically compact with your changes. Having one change in California and the rest around Tampa, Florida makes it harder for people monitoring changes in their local area to figure out what to check.

I know there is a big change on inter-city highway road classifications going on. Maybe I missed one on classifications for within cities and towns. Before I revert I will bring this up on with the OSM California group on Slack.

I see you have changed a number of features that have "point" in their name and are listed in GNIS as points to areas. What is your basis for selecting the area. For example, San Mateo point has no obvious area boundaries in Bing or when visited in person. How did you decide what to draw around?

I see you changed a number of roads in my area to residential based, apparently on Bing Imagery. Do you have any other basis for this?

In several cases the roads in question are heavily used as feeders and in some areas have businesses.

It has been about 3 months since I have driven to Oracle but I have driven there quite a bit over the years so I am familiar with the road.

You show connections from the current highway to the old in places I do not recall nor do I see in current aerial imagery. In addition, those abandoned sections are not signed with a name.

What are your goals for adding in these non-existent connections? Why the name?

foot=*, bicycle=*, and horse=* are generally indicators of the legality of using the path. So foot=no says foot traffic is not allowed which seems odd for highway=footway.

SAC scale osm.wiki/Key:sac_scale trail visibility osm.wiki/Key:trail_visibility and the width=*, surface=* and incline=* you used all together are, I think, the best we can do with current tagging to indicate the difficulty of the trail so that the individual hiker can decide if they want to try it.

For mountain biking there is also the mtb:scale osm.wiki/Key:mtb:scale which can help a bicyclist decide if they want to attempt it.

On way 907726590 I am confused by the combination of highway=footway and foot=no

Is it or is it not a footway?

Hi, Your change set comment really does not say what it was that you were improving. And looking at the edit I don't see any substantial change either. Can you be a little more clear about what your edit is about?

Thanks!

A signed speed limit of 32 MPH? Seems highly unlikely to me. I guess I’ll need to drive by there this week to check this out.

You should merge the existing building nodes with the building outlines you import. Otherwise you end up with duplicate houses and, depending on your editor, warnings about buildings within buildings.

re: osm.org/way/892777482

Are you sure about this informal path? Last I hiked the area (about 6 months ago) I saw no evidence of it. And there are no GPX tracks on OSM showing people have gone that way. I don’t see it on any of the normal JOSM aerial imagery either.