but does it exist on the ground? In your previous edit you set access=private but now deleted?

https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/1424686327

if it's non-existent, fine to delete, but if it exists but not accessible then access=private is the way to go.

osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

for next time, leave off the "kmh" if it's km/h, that's assumed by default.

you seem to be quiet on top of construction changes, could you check the change at changeset/172465660 ?

are you sure about that? It was only just changed to construction back in May and the new temporary onramp added way/1423785982/history.

Are you sure these are more recent changes than those made a years ago?

Also way/1106729756 connects to the tunnel, which is still marked as underconstruction so you've just opened the onramp leading into a dead-end once you reach the tunnel. I think you might be mistaken?

hi, all your changesets have now been reverted. You're changes appear to be vandalising the map. Please discuss anything you think was mapped correctly.

reverted

I've reverted and repaired this changeset.

I've reverted this change as it added a British power operator to a VIC power pole.

I'm not sure what node/3073194802/history was about so I've reverted this changeset.

This looks like a driveway rather than unclassified road.

Deleted highway=path way/208005959 exists on the GPS traces layer and at least at some point has existed. I suspect it'll still there in some form, but perhaps needs informal=yes and updates to trail_visibility? What's it like on the ground now? When did you last survey here?

Deleted Lookout node/2183037852 does exist https://flickr.com/photos/136319147@N08/23208429036

The other tracks you haven't provided any justification for why you're deleting them, the current situation, when you surveyed etc. beyond just "Fixed" as such I'll revert these deletions.

If the tracks are just not official tracks, mark them as informal=yes.

If they are overgrown use trail_visibility=bad/horrible

If there are signs saying no access use access=no

If the tracks are not used anymore and reclaimed by the bush, use a lifecycle prefix.

Please reply back with further information.

I'll restore this under the lifecycle tagging per osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Cycling_and_Foot_Paths#Legal_Access

It's clear from other mappers that there was once something here, are you saying it's completely grown over now with no evidence of a path anymore? When did you last survey/check this?

we don't use addr:city it doesn't form part of the address. We use addr:suburb which would be Ironbark but we don't generally tag addr:suburb or addr:postcode since these are all derived from the admin boundary relation/3079197#map=17/-36.755106/144.263760

motor_vehicle=yes means the public can drive their car through there, if there's a locked gate then it would be motor_vehicle=private.

Imagery isn't clear but there looks like there may be a gate near Acacia Road.

Is this a shared path that both bicycles and pedestrians can use? We should set the access tags, `foot` and `bicycle` access=* to provide both access if that's the case on the ground.

was it intentional to remove highway=track on this one https://osmlab.github.io/osm-deep-history/#/way/538859620

relation/16094298 there does not appear to be a Nature Reserve named Kogolup Lake Nature Reserve. Where did this name come from?

Thomsons Lake Nature Reserve is already mapped and named at relation/12942872

hi, please see osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property for why we don't delete roads on private property.

In this case I've updated the tags to mark it as a private driveway.

It seems like it should be "Cubbie" not "Cubie"?