It is normal to respond to these change set comments.

And you learn best by improving your own edits. The relation/9906791 still has this error.

These will need to be removed. wetlands, cliffs.. possibly other things. I recommend that you do it.

Hi,
relation/9986828 has the same tags on the outer ways as it does in the relation. The tags on all the outer ways of the relation should be removed.

This is relations broken ... 9973516 Boralma

Good Luck.

I use https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=146.90548&lat=-36.12732&zoom=12 to check for my own errors .. updates ever 24 hours.

Byawatha not byawatha?

Also extraneous way deleted from this admin boundary and North Wangaratta.

No response.

Shadows do not necessarily indicate cliffs, they can indicate depressions. Look at the LPI imagery .. no cliff. Look at the LPI Base Map .. no cliff

As a person who has walked in this area... No. No wetlands.

LPI Base Map shows wetland that is some 300m by 100 m, see Way: 26538921. I think I can find other areas of smaller areas too.

No.

You cannot possibly tell that is is or is not wet land from the imagery.

Wetland in the LPI Base Map is shown, this area is not mapped as wetland.

Cease mapping what you cannot see and remove those areas that are questionable!

Hi,
relation/9916297 looks to be the same as the relation you have tagged as wetland, yet this is tagged scree.

Again.. have you been here?

Hi
relation/9919734 does not look like 'wetland' to me? If it were true wetland then I'd expect it to be on hte LPI Base Map and it is not.

The stated sources are all satellite imagery. Not ground survey? Have your been there?

From that description.
"The building outline represents the area of land covered by the union of all parts of the building. The outline may in most cases also be considered the building footprint. This is A CLOSED WAY or multipolygon tagged with building=*. "

A multipolygon outer ways cannot share segments. The one here breaks that rule. There is no need to a multiplygon as this building is not complex enough to demand one.

The main perimeter of the building surrounds each and every building:part=* and as such are part of the main perimeter...

The relation is not required. Delete it.. but before you do .. copy hte relevant bits on to the single outer way tagged building=* (not the parts).

The outline way building=* can have all the common information of the entrire building - address, operator etc. The building:part=* says they are members of the building.

Hi,

The relation for Waranga Crescent has a problem. The outer ways of a relation should not touch one another. In this case it looks to me like the rear building is a garage and that can be separate building that touches the home. I'd put the address and other data from the relation on the home, and delete the relation.

Hi,
This has problems!

First .. it does not need to be a multipolygon, not complex enough.

The single outer way for the building should have the tags of the relation .. it is the entire building.

The building:part=yes might be tagged building:part=retail?

Apart from that .. very nice!

Hi,

The OSM 'railway station' encompass not only the building but the platforms and tracks ... and probably the signal box.
See railway=station

Hi,

Would be good if you added the surface to the rest of the road .. surface=paved would do. This is viewable in Ersi Clarity.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM!

The warning you got is because the footpath does not connect to anything. A person can get out of their car and walk along the road, but they cannot get to your path. Normally the path is extended to the road and the end node of the path is joined to the road. This makes computer routers recognize that people can get from the road to the path.

Next - when you mapped the path you went back over a segment - this creates a 'duplication'. And that can cause problems. I have correct this. Please try not to go back over things.

There look to be a number of paths here. Are they 'paved' or 'unpaved'? You can map this using the surface=* tag.

It comes up on OSMInspector. I use it daily to check my own work ...
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.51123&lat=-38.67350&zoom=6