This looks like a good start, I think it's okay for the building outlines to be rough initially, anyone is free to improve if they like.

Just as @nevw said why were a bunch of buildings deleted? It's okay to delete them if they were demolished, but that's about the only case they should be removed. If they are not "important" it's still okay to be in OSM if they are standing.

PS. Your edits go live immediately, there is no approval process.

Are you absolutely sure about this? Wikipedia says "From north to south, the three main sections are Queenscliff, North Steyne, and South Steyne" which could imply the whole thing is Manly Beach, with that bottom section being South Steyne Beach.

I have no issue with aggressively removing future edits which look like this, as it appears they are using a Geocoder to get the location, which we likely can't include the derived information from. Someone who has local knowledge would never put it in the wrong suburb!

sport=cricket_nets has over 1000 usages https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/sport=cricket_nets. Even though there is some debate about it's use, I think it's better to use that tag, and drop the descriptive name tag.

+1 indierokkr, only taking the sporting fields as leisure=pitch inside a leisure=park makes sense here.

Nice work here.

A question, what is way/399566412 is it a hall, classrooms, administrative section? I'm not sure amenity=townhall is the best tag here. just building=school would probably suffice.

you've added this picnic site over a residential area, could you move it to the right location based on the LPI Imagery which should be clearer here?

Thank you @SK53 for being on top of this! I agree, the maps referenced are Copyright, and don't even appear to be under an open license, let alone with the extra conditions OSM requires.

It shouldn't display like that though https://github.com/osmlab/osm-deep-history/issues/19.

Either way the data in the description means nothing so we should remove it. I am wondering where this data was originally imported from though, since we can't use the CC BY license tasLIST data I suspect it might have come from.

Thanks @tonyf1, the user account is very blatantly spam.

why was railway=station removed? I don't see any other railway=station for Central that existed at the time. https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/xW0

Someone since created node/5124591624 but I'm tempted to delete that and put it on way/34891023 per railway=station. Renaming it to simply "Central" not "Sydney Central" on the node.

I've reverted this for consistency with the naming of all other train/light rail stations.

The fact that it is a light rail station is implied by the fact that it's on railway=tram

Wardell Road is kind of broken now with the oneway next to the twoway segments.

We should try to avoid dual carriage ways like this, it just adds unnecessary complexity for what gain?

Looks like that goes back to older versions of the way https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/238028224

Did you see node/434350593 ? Looks like the train station already exists in OSM.

Echoing what @Warin61 said, great start here, but these look like they should just be a single way down the road centre line (not a oneway way for each lane).

I agree with @mueschel that we should be using the `ref` key ref=* for external references. So ref:capad or something like that.

The description of the AUTHORITY field sounds like it should go into the OSM operator tag operator=*

Per the CAPAD waiver, we don't need to provide attribution on the object level it's covered by the generic attribution statement at osm.wiki/Contributors#Department_of_the_Environment_and_Energy

ie.

operator=Western Australian Department of Parks and Wildlife
ref=WA31362

Your edit looks good, thanks.

Just noting this isn't necessarily oneway=yes, since there are no white arrows on the ground or signage explicitly for oneway, plus there are >>> signs for the downward direction.

That said it's not clear to me what "no through road" means here, so I'm okay with the oneway tag.

I couldn't find the sign at http://www.rms.nsw.gov.au/documents/business-industry/partners-and-suppliers/guidelines/complementary-traffic-material/tsdsect10v12-i.pdf