Hi there and welcome to OSM!

A couple of quick tips, you've made a changeset that spans two continents, and left a very non-descriptive comment.

I'd recommend reviewing the following wiki pages for some tips around changeset size and comments:
osm.wiki/Changeset
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

I'd also recommend squaring off buildings using the Q button (works in both iD and JOSM) unless a building is 100% not a rectangular shape.

On node/11415684525, you also need to put the phone tag as an international format. If the phone number isn't one dialable from outside of NZ, it can go in a phone:NZ tag. I believe +64 3 231 3481 would be the correct way to do this.

Outside of that, looks pretty good, thanks for contributing, and feel free to jump into the various OSM community spaces!

You said "fortera has gone ahead and split the roads now." I was asking where I had done that.

I apologise for the mistake, it appeared that you had with the new ways you created, which is why I asked. If you had said you hadn't first up, I would have gone and double checked straight away and just fixed that section instead.

Where have I split the roads? The road is split south of Ames Drive, and already was split, and north I actually merged a series of sections mapped as dual carriageway that aren’t.

And by engaging in changeset comments constructively, you can say that if that’s the case

You’d made enough of a change to show that you’d made several ways, which means you’re making changes to intersections without actually looking at them. I’d recommend at least seeing what aerial imagery shows when making that much of a change

This here is a perfect example, DataSA's dataset does in fact list Ruskin Road as a local road, but OSM (and anyone looking at the actual use/purpose of the road) wouldn't think that it's a residential road, especially with the info we have on how we classify roads

And the problem is that government source doesn't match OSM's tagging. Just because a source exists that we can use, doesn't mean we bring it in 1:1. Ground truth always prevails, that's at the core of OSM, and we can't assume that external data is perfect as is for OSM.

Local in DataSA doesn't specifically mean residential, and DataSA's classifications aren't 1:1 with OSM's classifications. A 100km/h road that links two localities, with the only houses on them being right at the ends in those localities, doesn't meet the description of highway=residential (highway=residential)

highway=tertiary is meant to be used for roads connecting towns/localities, exactly like this. (highway=tertiary)

osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Roads has a good comparison of the two (and other highway tags) with an Australian perspective.

Hi there Sydney Airport Parking, you've removed amenity=parking from this and another object, that tag is what actually marks these as parking areas, you'd want to add those back in!
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/145023241

I’m just going to quote myself: “I've driven through here nearly weekly”

Hi there, is there any particular reason why you've split Main North Road near way/1230460423, there's only painted lanes there, which shouldn't result in the road being mapped as dual carriageway (osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway for reference).

Both Bing and ESRI aerial imagery don't show any physical separation, I've driven through here nearly weekly and never seen physical separation either, plus there's no need for that for routing to occur (as per your changeset comment).

Best way to represent the turning lane there would just be with turn:lanes tags. Don't need additional ways or the restriction relation, and it reflects ground truth then.

I didn't update anything to do with naming, the update was to the highway classification. This was mapped based on what is on the ground.

This is based on surveys, aerial imagery, and local knowledge.

Why has Sixth Street been changed from residential to tertiary, yet Ruskin Road has been changed from tertiary to residential? That makes no sense at all.

Ruskin is a 100km/h road linking two locations, and definitely wouldn't be considered residential at all, if it's not tertiary it should be unclassified.

Sixth is a small residential street with a turning circle, definitely not tertiary in any definition.

Hey there, are these areas actually named (with signs or something verifiable on the ground) Overnight Camping and Overflow Camping or are they just descriptions?
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144984632

Hey, this has been constructed and was mapped during a survey, and the building you've added has been completely demolished. I've reverted this changeset due to those reasons.

I've updated the way to reflect what I've mentioned above.

Hey, what you've put in name should really go into a note tag, and then you can set noname=yes to indicate the lack of name.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/144885836

I did notice that today funnily enough, looks fairly accurate at least.

Seems a bit odd, I'm able to see both ESRI and ESRI Clarity over this area