I missed this change earlier by why was boundary=protected_area removed? It's a Wildlife Protection Area with protection_title tagged and should have protect_class=4.

2. It should be footway=crossing for the crossing sections not footway=sidewalk.

Please try to keep the history osm.wiki/Good_practice#Keep_the_history of objects

This way way/898239664/history could have been retained and amended into the new way you added way/1356111699/history

Keeping the history makes it easier for others to understand the history of changes and to attribute those who contributed.

I'll echo TheSwavu's comments, this was already discussed. It was a conscious decision not to merge addresses onto other features on the map as part of the import.

Firstly there's different ways addresses can be mapped, as a lone node, on the building, on the landuse representing the lot, and the import took the simplest option leaving it to local mappers to decide the best option for each location.

Secondly, there is more risk merging to buildings, particularly in areas of high density, like narrow terraces the risk of mis-assigning address to the wrong building was too high so this was left to be done manually.

The notion that it requires cleanup to attached addreses to buildings in an opinion about how addresses should me mapped, it's also not incorrect for them to be simple nodes, so I reject that they require cleanup. You may improve if you like, but it's not required.

way/526335498/history

what's the reason for removing the gas pipeline way/526335497/history ?

Per osm.wiki/Abbreviations we try to avoid abbreviations in the name no in this case the name should be "Avalon Beach Surf Life Saving Club" without the "(SLSC)" bit at the end.

If you want you could tag short_name=Avalon Beach SLSC

Thank you. This is because I was using StreetComplete EE trying to edit tags directly without any field presets to guide me.

could probably even mark it as disused then with disused:highway=path per osm.wiki/Lifecycle_prefix#Stages_of_decay

reverted in changeset/161852842

firstly way/1302411156/history was added July 2024 Bing, and Esri imagery don't have dates, DCS is from Feb 2022. If you haven't done a survey and don't have more recent imagery, then don't delete. Or better yet ask first.

secondly, if you check the original changeset I listed the source as Sentinel, obviously you didn't bother to check this otherwise you would see the construction.

I've since confirmed the rough locations via a survey.

This is not the first issue where you've deleted things based on outdated imagery, please take more care, review the history of objects you're unsure about and consider leaving a changeset comment first.

Please see osm.wiki/Why_can%27t_I_delete_this_trail%3F

Based on this guidance even if the trails have no public access, we still include them in OpenStreetMap data but with the appropriate tags setting no public access.

FYI footpaths should also have the footway=sidewalk tag

How did you trace or derive way/1326456127 since it doesn't appear on Bing Maps Aerial?

Actually I just realised I thought the tidal tag was meant to be used on any feature that is affected by the tides, ie. the full length of the waterway from tidal limit to where it ends at the ocean, but seems from tidal=* it should only be the small section between high tide and low tide.

Interesting. oneway isn't mentioned on waterway=* or waterway=flowline.

However while these are tidal bays and the current changes based on the tide, downstream is still towards the ocean and the way should be drawn that way.

What would oneway=yes/no even mean in this context that's not already covered by tidal=yes/no?

way/1279812527

I think calling this a building is a stretch. I believe it should be waterway=drain which I'm tried to document at osm.wiki/Sydney_Water#Sewage_Network

motor_vehicle=permissive means "Open to general traffic until such time as the owner revokes the permission which they are legally allowed to do at any time in the future." see access=*

It sounds like this one is not open to motor vehicles, but your tags indicate it is.

From Mapillary and imagery it just looks like an informally used path (highway=path) and not a track, in which case I'd just remove access=no and motor_vehicle=permissive

waterway=flowline was recently documented waterway=flowline as a suitable tag for this purpose and I've since apply the tag to these ways

waterway=flowline was recently documented for this purpose waterway=flowline