Hi could you please advise the rationale behind theses changes? To me these look questionable and I don't think we should necessarily be actioning all JOSM validator issues.
---

Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/161476767

hi thanks for the edit here. Per osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only the name value should only reflect the street name, in this case being a private driveway it likely doesn't have a name therefore name should be omitted/empty.

The fact that it is a Private Driveway can be specified with access=private + highway=service + service=driveway, then it being a shared driveway is specified with driveway=pipestem. I've improved the tags based on this.

thanks i missed this one.

I was going to suggest we disable suburb, postcode, and state in iD as it's only in rare cases when you might need to set them, and the trouble they cause by people adding incorrect or superfluous data is real, but I realised that might not be the case in every state? Do you know if we need these for any states still?

Still I thought name:etymology was meant to only contain the persons name, as it's "intended for a name or sometimes a word", further details could go in `name:etymology:description` or `name:etymology:note`. We could just delete the whole `name:origin` that was there and got moved to `etymology` if it's an issue.

name:etymology=* says "This key is intended for a name or sometimes a word, but not a full etymology tracing the evolution of that word, as one would find in a dictionary."

Previously the etymology value was "Lt.William Bradley" but you've replaced that with what was in the origin key which was more like a description. Seems wrong per the current documentation of the tag.

This has been reverted in changeset/161433740 since it seems they do exist in some form on the ground. Tag improvements welcome.

This has been reverted in changeset/161433740 since it seems they do exist in some form on the ground. Tag improvements welcome.

This has been reverted in changeset/161433740 since it seems they do exist in some form on the ground. Tag improvements welcome.

This has been reverted in changeset/161433740 since it seems they do exist in some form on the ground. Tag improvements welcome.

This has been reverted in changeset/161433740 since it seems they do exist in some form on the ground. Tag improvements welcome.

> The vandals are those who cut illegal tracks through National parks, destroying the environment and habitat.

Correct.

> I am simply upholding Parks department policy.

And I'm simply upholding the OpenStreetMap community policy.

Parks Victoria can do more if they want to work with OpenStreetMap, and I hope they do. While it's great they publish content under CC BY 4.0, like other Victorian departments osm.wiki/Australian_Data_Sources#Victoria they could complete a waiver so it's clear we can use content they publish to improve OSM.

For example https://www.parks.vic.gov.au/-/media/project/pv/main/parks/publication-uploads/dandenong-ranges-national-park---map---ferntree-gully-area_08032023234117695.pdf?rev=77059838aa194edaa1d3f3136cbdfaab is CC BY but not available for OSM to use due to this.

Along with this and a more pro-active collaboration with OpenStreetMap around the current situation on the ground would be helpful.

These ways have seen been re-added by another user, which is disappointing that this changeset happened and could not have been reverted sooner. The original contribution by @DM9 was lost now.

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/161408810

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/161408810

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/161408810

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/161408810

This changeset has been reverted in changeset/161408810

While it seems the tagging could be improved, it's also clear that in some shape or form the ways can exist in OSM, so reverting to bring the ways back. Further work needed to determine the best way to tag these.

and um, not good to delete an existing feature, to just re-add your own

further Austlink is the building, do they actually have a company office here?