Yes, I agree.

Hi Ian
what is the nature of these zones?
They don't appear to be administrative areas or suburb or neighborhoods.
Also you seem to have deleted some wooded areas, a swimming pool area and a childcare centre.
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=125205823

Hi
please don’t add the name= tag to the houses. Other tags give that info already.

This shows ok in Tor browser now.
Also you can try deleting the cache on your pc (ontrol+r on a Mac).
I notice that the CyclOSM layer updates quite soon.

I don't know about OSMAnd and it may depend on if your using the paid version.
A good way to see the latest is to use the Tor browser as it is less likely to be caching the old imagery than other browsers and if it is out of date you can use a new Tor circuit for the site.
On my phone I use the Onion Browser https://onionbrowser.com/
Brouter web seems to update routing quite soon https://brouter.de/

Hi
I changed the tags to conform with usual practice.

Helipad seems to be rendered ok and displays it's name. I also added level=1 but not sure if that is need or correct.

Still two icons for hospital because the whole hospital ground is tagged amenity=hospital and also the multipolygon for the whole hospital building.
...probably ok I suppose.

Hi
you added amenity=hospital to the helipad.
I added it to the hospital multipolygon instead....and I tried to resolve the double tagging of the hospital.
But, not sure if the helipad will render ok.

Hi Sylvia
Good changeset comments are appeciated.
osm.wiki/Good_changeset_comments

fixed now

Thanks for the quick reply, I'll fix it today sometime.
cheers

Hi
you have added natural=tree_row to a couple of the ways that form part of multipolygon wooded areas here.
https://nrenner.github.io/achavi/?changeset=125101385
relation/7192178#map=13/-42.9831/147.2308
Was this intended?

Hi
Can you shift Roam to the building in which it is located. It sits between two properties at the moment.

Hi
You have left a few errors here…
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.09961&lat=-27.37669&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

All my comments should not discourage you from mapping. I am just offering guidance 🙂

I see why you are adding access=no now.
You are referring to no access for cars I expect. This is not necessary because that is the default assumption for cycleways anyway, so not necessary to add that tag in this case.

It is incorrect to change Light Road from a residential street to a cycleway.
There is a tagging scheme to indicate if cycle lanes are on the road (do a google search of osm wiki)
If the road is part of a cycle route, you just need to add that particular section to the cycle route relation.

Hi
Why has this cycleway tagged access=no?

Hi
Please don’t add names in this manner.
See the “name is for name only” section of this page
osm.wiki/Names
The description is unnecessary and the way to tag bicycle use is ok, is to add the tag bicycle=yes

HI
you appear to have shifted 9 Milton Way over to the left of Keats St and deleted 17 Milton St.
Do you want me to revert this?

Also I think there is a 15A located up a footway behind 15 Milton St and I might add that to OSM.

Here is an image description...
https://pasteboard.co/wKFsTLBa64d8.png