Hi, welcome to OSM. Just a tip generally the name tag is used for proper names, not to describe things osm.wiki/Good_practice#Don.27t_use_name_tag_to_describe_things.

So usually XXX Fire Trail, is there a signposted name? If not you can just omit the name tag.

Simply motor_vehicle=private is a much more common practice where only authorised vehicles like emergency services and maintenance workers can drive access=*#List_of_possible_values

access=permit is used commonly but not documented, so I can only guess it's more applicable where you can anyone can apply for a permit?

Hi welcome to OSM. Could you please provide your reasoning for this change? leisure=nature_reserve says "A nature reserve is a protected area of importance for wildlife" which this aquatic reserve seems to match. This can be tagged together with the protected_area tagging, which covers more detail than nature_reserve. What's area=yes needed for? The fact that this is a closed way indicates it's an area already.

Hi per railway=station#A_Simple_Railway_Station and public_transport=stop_position the stop_position can still have the station name, so I'll add that back in.

Yep I just noticed and fixed the building tag.

I've just now restored the retaining walls you added, so the pedestrian area change you made was reverted + the area to node was reverted, but retaining walls added was retained, was that everything?

I've reverted this change until it can be discussed. Personally I think the area is better as it covers the whole station area. It's more consistent with all the other metro stations and eventually we'll get around to converting all train station points into areas.
railway=station#A_Simple_Railway_Station indicates it's reasonable to map as an area.

Hi just a few tips, junction=roundabout implies oneway=yes so there is no need to add the oneway tag junction=roundabout.

Also you deleted the cycleway:left tag and added cycleway:right both =no. Is there ever a case where you have a cycleway on the right side (inside) of a roundabout? Do you need to say =no here? https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/171015278

Hi while it's not harmful to specify lanes:forward and lanes:backward, where the lanes tag is already set and is even and where oneway is not yes, then it's assumed forward and back are just half of the lanes tag.

Hi I've reverted this change because as you said yourself, it does exist on the ground, and generally if it exists on the ground it's fair game to be mapped see also osm.wiki/Good_practice#Map_what.27s_on_the_ground. I have updated it to use the power=minor_line tag which is a better fit for these smaller lines power=minor_line

hi for future reference if you want to to make a note without editing, just add a note and please don't use the viewpoint tag as a note.

Hi looks good, but I noticed a couple you did as multipolygon relations but they only have a single outer member. Any particular reason these weren't just done as a regular way?

According to amenity=ferry%20terminal it should be public_transport=stop_position not station. I think this point was meant to only represent the stop_position in the public transport relation osm.wiki/Public_transport#Service_routes. Have you considered all the wiki documentation for this change? I haven't taken the time yet to fully dig into it, but are you sure this change is correct?

I did a Mapillary survey, path is open so I removed the access=no.

I did a Mapillary survey just now, confirmed that a block is restricting vehicle access, but bicycle and pedestrian is still accessible, I've updated the area just now.

Hi, for https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/22978301 what does access=no mean?

Hi what's the access=no here for? If it's open, you can just leave off the access tag.

Hi, welcome to OSM. This section of light rail is electrically powered from the ground via APS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ground-level_power_supply. I've updated the wiki at electrified=* to note this value. I believe electrified=no should only be used for rail which is not powered and not the case here, so I've reverted this change.

Since it was created and last edited in 2012 if you couldn't find it probably okay to delete.

Hi there doesn't appear to be any park here based on the aerial imagery, so this change has been reverted. If that's not the case if you could help contribute some OpenStreetCam or Mapillary or photos of the area to confirm.

Actually way/679354513/history should have public_transport=station and way/34891023 should have railway=station per railway=station one is from the train network perspective and the other from the passenger perspective.