This edit was incorrect - you shortened the 40 zone at both ends. I've reverted this at changeset/151800314 (checked by survey)

Confirming that maxspeed is correct here (checked on survey)

You may have noticed that I ended up not reverting any of your changesets at the time. I've checked some of them in-person on my recent holiday. Regarding this changeset, The Lakes Way is definitely maxspeed 80 (as mentioned above). Old Soldiers Road does not have a speed zone sign on survey at either the eastern or the the western end (apart from the 60 zone entering Diamond Beach)

Thanks!

Regarding the southbound heavy vehicle checking bay at Mount White - you added some maxspeeds for this - was this from survey? The reason I ask is that at changeset/129801794 another user has changed these maxspeeds to 60 and 80, rather then 20 or 40, based on "NSW Speed data". Some of that user's other edits have been erroneous, so I have suspicions about that user's changes here. Thanks.

Do you have a source for the maxspeeds inside the tourist park here? It seems unusual for these to be maxspeed=50. They were previously marked as maxspeed=10 (I don't know if this is the case now). Thanks.

Could you advise what the source of these water points are? Most of them seem to be in the middle of a river.

stweb: When I surveyed Bald Hills Walk in 2014, I saw that Bundar Trail did continue west - I added a fixme for this, and it looks like nevw subsequently added this. I haven't been back since to check if the track is still there (I only spotted your edit by chance when checking something else). P.S. your choice of language was... unwise

It's been almost four years since I surveyed this, but I recall seeing some wooden name signs (as well as the red/white hiking markers). Is the Great North Walk the name of the track *and* the name of the route? (similar to how road routes can also be the name of the roads)

Changeset has been reverted at changeset/150170434

Jungle Circuit had been partially deleted by NPWS staff. NPWS has elsewhere deleted tracks despite them being still present on the ground. (At present survey is impossible as the descent from Govett's Leap is closed so I can't check in person.) I have asked for further information several times on the reverted changeset, but have not had a reply.
As NPWS seems to be discouraging access, I will add access=discouraged to these tracks (the entire loop, not just the parts NPWS had deleted).
Once the Govett's Leap descent is reopened, someone will need to resurvey to see if the track is still visible.

Just another reminder. I'm planning to revert this (in line with similar NPWS edits), possibly with some tag alterations, but it would be helpful to know if you have actually looked at the condition of the track (as opposed to assuming there are no traces left).

Just a reminder regarding these questions. On the talk-au mailing list there has been discussion for some time regarding NPWS staff deleting tracks when other lifestyle tags may be more appropriate. Having the correct tagging can also prevent another user re-adding the deleted tracks later.

Can you clarify a couple of details here? Is the track no longer visible on the ground? What damage has there been from the fires/floods (presumably the 2020 fires and 2022 floods)? Is only part of the path damaged rather then the entire path? The reason I ask is that in OSM there are 'lifecycle' tags that are preferred, rather than deleting the ways, which can include marking a visible track as access=no, or adding a disused: prefix to the appropriate tags. As Rodriguez Pass is currently closed, I'm not able to have a look for myself.

I've uploaded a photo of the sign at osm.wiki/File:End_of_track_sign,_Apsley_Falls.JPG . I didn't take any photos of the path.

On the mailing list, I mentioned the sign at the start of the 'controversial' path - I'll copy the description I gave on the list here:
On the left side of the sign, there’s a warning icon (exclamation mark), then “No safety rail”, another warning icon (man falling off edge of crumbling cliff), then “Unstable edges”.
On the right side of the sign is the text “End of track, no safety rail beyond this point”.
The sign is there to discourage walkers venturing further south, but it’s not technically a “do not enter” sign.
If we were to use a lifestyle prefix tag, I was thinking of disused, rather then demolished or razed, as there was still a visible path (not actively removed - at least not in the first section that i rechecked).

I have just received a private message from someone from NPWS. In summary, NPWS has officially closed the track, don't add it again. (There was nothing on the ground at survey to indicate it was a closed track.) If it is genuinely closed, then access=discouraged may be best changed to access=no, or possibly use the 'disused:' prefix. My edit had been discussed on the mailing list prior to reversion - I'll send a note back to the mailing list for further discussion.

Can you provide some more info on this (as there are edits all over NSW based on information provided to you). How is the information provided? Is the information coming to you directly, or are you working for a company? Is this information being checked prior to uploading? Thanks.

Regarding way/234876550 - I know your edit was a while ago, but can you confirm the current maxspeed? The reason I ask is that there is a user (possibly from overseas) maxing maxspeed changes from 'NSW Speed data', but there have been multiple problems with that user's edits from this data. See changeset/147434523 . Thanks.

Regarding way/1207081884 - can you confirm the current maxspeed? The reason I ask is that there is a user (possibly from overseas) maxing maxspeed changes from 'NSW Speed data', but there have been multiple problems with that user's edits from this data. See changeset/147432769 . Thanks.