The area is ~ 100km east to west and ~ 50 km north south. Bit crinkly with edges and inner holes .. but it is a bit big for a dam.

Think you meant to target something else ... certainly made this area look as if the sea had risen a lot. :)

Hi,
relation/6361203 .. was tagged as a treed area .. you have added tags
name=Murchison Dam and waterway=dam ...

No .. this very large area is not a dam. I have remove these tags and reinstated natural=wood.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM.
The 'Unnamed' track you introduced,
it got linked to an administrtion boundary and then draged the admindoundary awya from where it should be. I have undone that.
The name of 'unnamed' is not good ... use noname=yes. The name tag should ONLY be used for names, not other things like saying it has no name .. if a description needs to be added then description=* can be used.

This track has a lot more detail in it if you look at the LPI Base Map.

Hi,
Looking at ways 565191189 and 565191193 ... these were not connected.

But I question the road classification! Most people here walk. I would think that these would be better classified as tracks .. looking at Digital Golbe Preium they are certainly smaller than the main connecting roads. They may even be 'paths' where no car (or 4WD) can go due to the width.

Next .. the surface=unpaved is a usefull addition tag.
Please consider this in your edits.

Hi,
This has duplicated streets with a tag @id=way/somenumber ... these ways have no function... and generate errors ..
I'll leave it to you to fix the rest of these errors...

Hi,
This dragged a node some 900 meters westwards .. making Isabella Drive wrong. I have moved it back. Take care.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM.
Relations cannot share segments on outer ways.. So I have moved the tags on these relations to the individual ways and then deleted the relations.

HI,
Welcome to OSM!
Are you local to this are?

A small improvement ..
way/564917682 does not connect to way/564169861 .. they overlap but a routing engine will not think they are connected. I have merged nodes so they now connect.
I have also added the tag surface=unpaved.
There is a lot more to map in this area. If you are local you may know of a name for this road .. that would be helpful.
Keep mapping. And thanks for your contribution.

Hi,
The entered buildings are not 'square' ... i.e. 90 degree corners.

In ID you can use S to set things 'square' see osm.wiki/ID/Shortcuts#Modifying_objects

Of course not usefull for those buildings that are not square.

Hi,
When you divide a road into two .. please include the road name, if present, on the new section. Thanks.

Hi,
Looks like you added tags on the ways of the relation/8042202 - Lake disappointment. These tags are duplicated of tag in the relation and should not be present.
The tag intermittent=* .. should only have yes or no as a value, dry is not a good value .. see the OSMwiki intermittent=*

Yay. Valid according to osminspector. PT assistant thought it was valid before osminspector but more changes were needed. Don't think PT assistant was worth it for me. I do have some more to do before I'm happy with it. I'll do the original relationship and then do a diary entry on my thoughts on how to do a v1 to v2 conversion.

Reverted.
This changeset;
broke relations for St Peters and Alexandria.
displaced Campbell Road from the location given by LPI Imagery.
It may have had impact on other things.

May be so. But less understanding?

There is a present relationship that 'does' this line ... but osminspector reports it as not good. That has been ther for quite some time.
This is my attempt to get an 'osminspector good' train route for public transport v2. I think yesterdays effort was undone by assuming the old relationship had the station/stops in the correct order. See how this goes, does not have many platforms, don't know if these are essential or not.
If it works I'll convert the past relationship over to be correct.

Hi,
The way/560844072 you entered tagged leisure=pitch .. what sports are played here?

Replaced way/543024409 the rings touches itself.
If you are going to map such detail .. do it well.

You have broken a administration boundary .. many times. That is going to involve a considerable amount of work and time to fix. It may be easiest to simply revert your changes to anything to do with this boundary.

Any unnamed road could have a name added later. All 'we' have is the LPI Base Map (unless you survey .. and even than the sign could have been removed) so I use that .. and I also tag source:noname=LPI Base Map Feb 2018, This is the truth .. and 'we' can do no more. Adding fixmes all around the place just clutters the data base. If you know some thing is in error but not certain of what it should be than I'd use a fixme, otherwise an note or a comment depending on how much attention you want to attract.

Hi,
Using the base map you can see that this road leads to a farm (the homestead [ranch] has the name Wyoming) - so it is not 'unclassified' but 'service'.
Also the base map contains road names .. you can see this one has no name so noname=yes is a suitable tag. Note you must zoom in to say a 50m scale in JOSM to see the road names - and you need to pan around the road to check it too. And some roads change their name - so best to check at both road ends for the same name.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM.
These 'Horse Paddocks' ... you have tagged them as;
'buildings' that is an error.
'surface=ground' ... grass is a better description.
'name=Horse Paddock' .. that is a description .. not a name, so description=horse paddock is better.
Take a look on the OSMwiki?
name=*#Additional_data

Also take a look at the LPI Base Map too, that has additional information that the LPI Imagery does not have. It shows some of the paths are tracks .. and have names.
Keep going - your doing good stuff .. just minor details that can be better.

Errr .. I think that is the wrong thing to do for this way.

While it may remove the 'errors' in osminspector .. it may confuse the real problem here.
Best to contact a local and have them look at it.