There's also a dragged node on way/1111001526, probably easiest to revert the whole changeset. There's also no usage at all for that tag in AU, plus someone else has raised privacy concerns on another changeset.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163463834

Sometimes an edit like this is best done on a wide scale in a single changeset. It's been discussed, all the edits are related, and the discussion is linked.

Hi, information from a council's Your Say page is generally copyrighted, meaning we can't use it. Are you able to either confirm this in person, or using another source?

Thanks for that! The Wiki has some good resources in regards to allowable data sources, Australia has a list here: osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Sources and a global list is here: osm.wiki/Potential_datasources

Still need to double check the licensing, you'll see in the AU list that there's some under CC-BY-SA which we normally can't use, but we've received a waiver from the data owner specifically allowing us to use it (we can't meet the attribution requirements as per the license, but often we'll get permission to have it listed elsewhere)

Freely available doesn't mean compatible with the ODbL, which is required when using external data sources in OpenStreetMap as that's the license OSM itself is released under.

You've added a tag as part of this changeset, addr:street=From. You'll either want to remove that, or update the address tags in general to reflect the new address.

If you're not sure of the licensing right now, it might be best to consider reverting this changeset, unless you're able to find some source with all of these details.

Hi, are those sources available under an open license? Having a look at metar-taf.com, there isn't any mention of a license, which means it would be copyrighted and unsuitable for use in OpenStreetMap.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163309358

Hi, you've set the street address to just "From"
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163309884

Hi, what is the source for these changes? Also, you've added power=plant and an alt_name tag to way/698041954, which is a road.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163190661

Hi, is the AEMO MMS database available under a suitable open license? It's not a listed data source in the Wiki, and if it's suitable it would be great to add it there.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163219645

Thanks for that! I'll have to double check Every Door's handling of 1800 numbers.

I've made those changes in changeset/163142250
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163128092

A better way to do this might be oneway=yes and oneway:bicycle=no, because now you have a highway segment that is impossible for other vehicles. Those two tags together should allow for the bicycle routing to work correctly.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163128092

A better way to do t
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163128092

Hey there, good work! One suggestion would be to press Q to square off any building you draw, it should handle the 45 degree angles fine in iD as well.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/163006483

Without a source backing it up, agree with reverting it.

What would make this road a tertiary road, considering it's just a small section leading nowhere? You've also made the _link roads a normal tertiary road, which is wrong, they should remain trunk_link regardless of how Forsyth Road is classified, as they should correspond to the highest classification they're connected to.

You had drawn it as if it was a real, functioning road. If it is planned (which I haven't been able to find any proof of so far) then there are suitable ways to tag this, however this generally wouldn't happen until construction has started and it's obvious where the road is going to be.

What's the source for this? There's also the service roads that haven't been renamed.