Hi
The name tag should be for the name only .. not a description. In the case of multipolygon relation/12026324 named "Private Residence" but tagged as a garden... ... possibly access=private? and description=Private garden??? Similar comments for the house... adn 'residential garden'..
See osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

One member relations are not required, use tags on the simple way .. don't make it complex when you don't have too.

e.g Relation: 11863114

HI,
Multipolygon relation/12118792 has shared outer ways. That is against 'the rules' for multipolygons.
As the Multipolygon has no inners .. why make one??? Simply tag the outer ways as farmland and be done?

Kurraha Ridge (893580450, v1) is NOT a farmyard. Suggest this be changed to map the building with building=farm.

Roads leading to this homestead are NOT tertiary nor do they appear paved. highway=service, service=driveway would be more correct.

Access=private does not need tags of *=private added to it.

Hi,
Welcome to OSM.

The building=* is for the building only, not the building + grounds.

----------------------
You would be better using Ersi imagery here as it has more resolution.

Please edit these building so that they are the building footprint only.

Hi,
Problems with 1 or 2 of these?

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=145.45605&lat=-30.87017&zoom=6

Deleted.
And deleted another duplicated relation...

An alternative is to use a site relation - that does not confine to a simple area.

Try a site relation?
I am ware of various 'valley' mapping and have made a suggestion to one mapper.

Deleted 'park'.

Deleted name=Trees. Name should be for name ONLY.

relation/9267547 still broken.

2021 .. relation still broken.

Hi,

Some more thoughts on this valley stuff.

Possibly leave the natural=valley alone as the base of the valley and add a new feature for the valley area/extent/? That would them fit in with making the new feature a simple area without a center bit that I don't think gets used elsewhere in OSM? So natural=valley_area ?

HI,

multipolygons are for areas ... not un-closed ways. So Kanimbla Valley (12110843) is an error.

For the moment I would map that part of the Coxes from top to bottom as the valley.

Nortons Ck looks to be part of the Megalong Valley ...

Hi,
the tag natural=valley should be on a way, not a relation.
See natural=valley

Good luck.
I walked the Gross just before the fires, would like to go back but the eastern access points are still closed.

No. Do large scale if you want.. but try not to reduce the detail.
The Great Western Highway could be represented with 2 nodes, one at the start and another at the finish and a simple straight line between the two nodes. It would be there in its simplest form while the least amount of noise. But it would be useless for navigation ... OSM should contain the detail, but not the noise ... and that is the fuzziness of the real world.

Good luck.

Hi,
According to the wiki natural=valley should be a simple way along the valley floor ... not a closed area of the valley peaks with the valley floor...
This does throw errors on OSM Inspector.

At present most other State Forest in NSW are tagged with landuse, the trees are not mapped within them, though some have said they will map them.. but there is a lot to do!
There is one sawmill operated by 'forestry NSW' (or what ever it is called now) tagged landuse=industrial IIRC. And the Cumberland State Forest - mainly a PR place with some research facilities .. not certain what that is tagged now.

Note: most renders take landuse=forest and natural=wood to be the same thing and show them as the same thing. So for most there is no point to the argument... but me - I do render them differently.

Yep, there is a lot to do and ways on top of ways don't help.

More on "overfitted". There is a tool in JOSM to 'simplify ways'. It modifies a way so that the result is within x meters of the original and reduces the number of nodes used. The default value is 3 meters, I have found that can le3ad to a result that does not resemble the original, where as 1.5 meters works. I usually use it on the result of another tool to map water bodies called scanaerial. I'll try running it on the way your complaining of and see what it does... later.