Hi
When adding stops/platforms to public transport version 2 routes they must go before the ways and be in sequential order. The ways too must be in sequential order.

Your not interested... fine

Opps
This changed the North Scottsdale Regional Reserve relation... Looks like the northern section of the Great Forester River is used by the reserve boundary...

No need to apologise. And don't worry about making more mistakes - part of being human. Reason why I contact people is to let them know so they can disagree .... or take it onboard.

Hi,

Tree relation/7612020 has been broken by the change in way Way: 528241712.

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=150.92261&lat=-33.82944&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Possibly the tree relation is no longer relevant???

Hi,
The residential relation is wrong, there are 2 shared segments.
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.99331&lat=-41.08312&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

The orange bits are the shared segments. I'd simply delete those orange bits making a simply single way that can then have the tags one the way and so no need for the relation.

Hi,

I have made the Nation Bark boundaries conform to the government issued boundaries of 2020 - CAPAD. Please do not change these.

The NSW Golf Club boundary had a gap .. I have closed that gap as best I could using the Nationa Park boundary and imagery.

Note Coast line data in OSM is the high tide mark .. not the low tide .. and it may not be the park nor suburbs boundary.

Hi,
The relation/15820539 is not correct ...
Please read osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon#Multipolygon_created_by_only_one_polygon
Bsicly there needs to be an outer area ... and then inner areas - All of these are simple closed ways .. then make the relation. osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon#iD

Hi,
The relation/14687606 tagged landuse=religious and building=yes? In OSM building=yes mean that the whole are is a building .. see building=*
I think that you possibly mean that there are buildings here. In OSM that characteristic is not mapped, preference is to map the actual buildings. This tagging causes the building that are mapped in this are to be obscured.

I have found the DCS Base Map to be very usefull. And accurate to a great degree.
If you think that an intermittent river bed is a wetland .. so be it.

Hi,
No need for a multipolygon as there are no inners and other than trees these share no common tags.
I have deleted the relation, combined what were the other ways into singular ways and tag those as trees. This keeps thing simple.

Hi,
The Way: 1055704283 and Way: 1055704284 you added as fire stations for 'Fire and Rescue' on the DCS base map are 'Rural Fire Service' .. And it looks like it is a RFB ..https://www.facebook.com/TumutRFS/

Hi
Way 963500214 is in error.
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=147.25781&lat=-42.79120&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

As they are separate buildings they should have 2 separate ways in OSM.

Is it a current source of water?

Hi,

I'm rather confused by the multiple tags on this object.

A water well.

And a bubbler - projects a small jet of water upwards for drinking.

If it has both of these it may be better to separate them .. the well as a way and the bubbler as a node???

In that area of the world .. when it rains it all gets wet :) creeks, rivers, roads etc.

Looking at wetland=* there is not much that matches what happens out here. I have mapped and area in SA as wetland .. but with the tag intermittent=yes. I' use that tag here on any 'natural' water feature except a bore.

HI,

How is this church a 'monument'???

Some would claim all religious buildings are monuments...

If it is a church then it would have some religion associated with it.. Greek Orthodox?

Why not delete the relation yourself then? Deleting the outerway destroys the relation .. and that then throws up errors on the QA tools that I see.

So, repeating myself, I have deleted the relation...

A 'wetland' in OSM is usually wet .. this one would be seldom wet... I think it is a riverbank .. with the tag intermittent=yes.

Hi,

This is the second time you have removed the outer way from the relation/10406083 (highway=service)
I'll just delete the relation...