The warning you are getting are things you can and should fix.

See
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.97049&lat=-37.81152&zoom=18
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=144.96187&lat=-37.80920&zoom=18

Looks like 'Chatswood Rose' now... probably something else by the time they start to sell it .. if it gets to that stage. I'd wait untill they start to sell it before adding a name. The web link is broken .. I found it on Domain.

No Worries.

Hi
relation/10043896 .. only has inners?

Hi,

Welcome to OSM!

The closed way/725213138 for a building is not correct. The way should not double back on it self.
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.05718&lat=-37.97285&zoom=18

Do the simplest thing - just draw the outside of the building. This is its foot print on the ground.

Height above sea level is 'ele' in OSM terms.

The height key is from top to bottom of the object. If that varies lots then I'd leave it off or just do the significant bits. You can break the cliff up into connected segments and then just put the height on the bit that has it. Will anyone use the data?

Hi,

For cliff lines the NSW Base Map is quite good. Certainly better than what you can 'see' with imagery.

Questions
How did you determine the height of the cliffs? It is not something I'd tag here are the height varies considerably.
Are you local? Reason why I ask is one of your sources is GPS.

Way to make a mess and work for others;

Delete a relation and leave untagged ways behind.

Arr I see it now, the name is correct at the beginning.. but changes about 1/3rd of the way along??? Did you travel down all of this road?

Hi,
Where did you get the name 'Ettrema Tops Trail'? NSW Topo has "Pauls Pass Walking Track".

Hope the trip was good.

Another HOT mapper who does not fix their edits to OSM. Shakes head.

a) The name=* key is for the name only. It should not be used as a street address.
See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

b) There is a 'building=house' with the 'name=Paving & Tiling Solution'. Explain what this is? A firm? Someones home? What? These two tags look to be conflicting.

The area named "Private Lease" .. that is not a real name, but a description. Please do not use the name tag for anything other than the name.
Possibly the access tag could be used too?? access=private or customers???

Remote mapping these things is not easy. Form my view I see thing that have been labeled wetland .. and then a similar appearing area labels as scree IIRC. Others have comment elsewhere that there is no wetland on one place they know of that has been labeled wetland.

There needs to be more care in your edits. The base map has at least some ability to be verified and has been based on data going back decades.

That publication was not quoted as a source. Does OSM have the right to use it?

I have left a comment on your changset 73406830 some 19 days ago on this subject and you have made no response there.

Further comments have been placed by me on others of your changesets and there has been no response to those.

One other person has commented elsewhere that one of your additions, a small lake, to their knowledge is not there.. and they have personal on the ground knowledge .. not based on satelite imagery.

Multipolygon outer ways cannot share segments.
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=150.98431&lat=-33.91123&zoom=18&opacity=0.56

A google search for the village gets https://www.facebook.com/pages/Gillawarna-Village/167769939899763

Hi,
Not a matter of 'what I want' but what you want to map.

So, map what you want.
I'll only comment if something gets broken, if it appears untruthful or I think there might be a better way of doing it.

relation/10013098 has an error.
It is not closed, so it does not form an area. Way: 722675173 and Way: 722675169 cross but do not connect.

This error is reported by JOSM. Try just downloading the object 10013098 type relation and running validation on that alone.

relation/9853102 looks to be a simpler duplication of relation/9865313. relation/9865313 should have more inners .. and some of the inners need to have inners in them.. a real mess you have here.
I have deleted relation/853102 and one other relation that are simplifications of relation/9865313.

Will you correct the remaining relation/9865313?

man_made=geoglyph ...
is a large design or motif (generally longer than 4 metres) produced on the ground and

typically

formed by clastic rocks or similarly durable elements of the landscape, such as stones, stone fragments, live trees, gravel,

or earth.

I think what we have here is earth..possibly with some rocks and the stray plant so I think the tag man_made=geoglyph fits ... not a 'typical' geoglyph but one never the less.