I presume you are referring to node/438645423
Just had a look - my first thought was that I was adding the altitude of the peak, based on an information board - however the elevation information was already there! I'm assuming I had selected the node to copy the spelling, but must have forgotten to deselect it when I added the information board (which is definitely not on the peak). I've now removed those tags (see changeset changeset/49149403). Thanks for picking up the error.

Could you please have a look at some of the additions in this changeset? Some of them are paths (probably OK), but some sections are tagged as motorway, also some nearby paths are mapped as secondary and tertiary roads (aerial views look like paths). For further info, have a look at highway=* .

If you stay behind the cliff then it is a lifeline!
These nodes were positioned from GPS, with names from the nearby signs. The positions of Malaita Point and Eagle Hawk Lookout on the LPI map are incorrect. (If you look at the LPI imagery, you can just make out the car park for the actual location of Eagle Hawk Lookout.)

I'm just making it clear that these edits are based on information obtained while visiting Europe in person.

I'm just making it clear that these edits are based on information obtained while visiting Berlin in person.

I have been thinking about this changeset over the last couple of months. I revisited the duplicate ways at changeset changeset/46547845 and I was going to let you know here at the time, but to be honest I couldn't be bothered. In fact I couldn't be bothered with OSM at all up until now (I had some local edits to do but didn't feel like doing them until now). The reason is that I was unhappy about some of the comments made here.
To be clear, I am not talking about issues regarding tagging changes. What I am talking about is the accusation that I deleted objects without checking (when I was actually deleting duplicates). Christopher had the decency to ask what I had done. Nakaner on the other hand accused me of deleting the bus platform at Schönefeld and a mystery building in Strausberg. He asked the rhetorical question 'do you have local knowledge' (implying that as I'm editing from Australia I couldn't possibly know). He then questioned my other recent edits as being 'mechanical by definition' - I take this to mean my previous changesets (the ones marked 'from Europe holiday' - i.e. I had actually been there).
I didn't say anything at the time as I thought it best to leave it, but unfortunately I wasn't able to stop thinking about it. After this comment, I am not planning to say any more on this topic.

Sorry, I haven't had a chance to reply to any comments until now. (I replied to Christopher just before leaving for work this morning local time, Polarbear's first comment arrived as I was checking Christopher's query, and I didn't have a chance to address it before leaving.)
I have no problem with you reverting the edits (as you have already done). Just a couple of notes about the above comments to clarify what I had done.
The bus platform (way/447221657) was a duplicate way (duplicate of way/447221466 - shares the same nodes).
The only buildings I deleted were duplicates. (I didn't delete all the duplicate buildings e.g. some were part of relations, so I left those ones alone.)
Regarding opening hours, I used the opening hours tool in JOSM to fix the formatting. The times for Wednesday We 13:00-19:00 overrule the times for Mon-Thu, so my version is correct (your revised version looks clearer - thanks).

I deleted several duplicate ways, including the roof at Potsdam Hauptbahnhof - the way way/403603246 (which I didn't delete) had duplicate nodes and duplicate tags to the way I deleted.

I was wondering about this way:

way/371182878

It's marked as source = GPS tracks

When I visited here in 2010, the first section of the Big Bend track had been realigned (see the ways marked 'Big Bend Walk'). I was wondering if the old track had been reopened, or whether this way is traced over the GPS traces from before the realignment. Could you please clarify this?

I don't have my voice recordings from last year, so I don't recall the sign. There must be a Norah Creek somewhere, as there is a Norah Creek Road nearby! I'm not planning on going that way for a while, but I'll try to remember to check sometime with a survey.

Also, the tags religion/denomination tags should be religion=christian denomination=jehovahs_witness - see denomination=* for info

For the outline of the land around the Kingdom Hall, you can use landuse=religious - see landuse=religious for info.

OK - change made at changeset/40611879

See discussion at changeset/36774727 regarding increase in layer (nearby way/39196209 is footbridge, covered by these roads, but not connecting with these roads)

The construction=minor tag was added 3 years ago. I don't recall any work when I went through a year ago., so it should be safe to delete this tag.

Just letting you know that I have corrected the junction of Willow Vale Road. See changeset at changeset/37053627. Note current imagery (Bing, Mapbox and LPI) is out of date.

I'm just letting you know that I have reverted this section of the Great Western Highway to 'trunk'. Reasons: Route number is 'A32' (rather than 'M32'). There are several at-grade intersections. There is direct access to properties from this road (including houses and a fuel station). Please see discussion on the talk-au mailing list for more info.

I've checked my voice recording from my recent trip - Willow Vale Road definitely does not join Princes Highway.

Just a note about Willow Vale Road - I think it doesn't joint the highway here (just the ramp). If you use imagery, it may be the old imagery taken just prior to the newly-opened reconstructed highway. (LPI imagery still shows the old highway.)

Regarding tagging of asphalt roads: the Australian tagging guidelines state "you don't need to specify the surface=paved key/value pair as this is assumed" - this is not the same as saying we don't tag asphalt (etc) for paved roads. I think the asphalt tag should be replaced. If the tag is missing, it isn't clear if the road is paved, or if no-one has bothered to check the surface.