You are right, it seems that you only split a way that was already tagged name=Parramatta Liverpool Cycleway
Still, I don't think that the way(s) should be named like this. I'll try to find the initial mapper...

OK, thanks for the feedback :-)

OK, I've also removed the highway=crossing tags from the node, see changeset/64056131

Hi!
I've noticed some ways tagged as highway=escalator. Did you know the tag conveying? See conveying=*
The ways are not connected to the road network, so they will probably not help for routing, see e.g. way/507362405

Hi! I wonder if "Parramatta Liverpool Cycleway" really is the name of those ways. My understanding is that this is the name of the route relation, not the sidewalks.

Hi! You mapped a lot of sidewalks here as separate ways. Some of them end without a connection to the major road like here:node/4062814617
Are you aware of the tag sidewalk=* which makes it much easier to map sidewalks?
See sidewalk=*

Hi!
I've noticed that you changed a lot of ways here so that they are all named Constitution Trail. My understanding is that the ways should be combined in one or more route relations with this name.
Did you consider this?

I still think that you should have the tags on the way, I don't know if we need the relation at all. See osm.wiki/Tag%3Aroute%3Dpipeline

Hi! I've cone
I wonder if the Salt Creek Trail relation/72664 should be a continous route or if it is just a collection of cycleways. At the moment there are a few gaps and also a few ways which may not be not part of the rel (e.g. way/46426451) . Do you know more?

Hi!
Are you sure that the name of these ways is "Salt Creek Greenway Trail" ?
They are all members of a route relation called "Salt Creek Trail", so the ways probably don't have an own name, esp. not where they are sidewalks of major roads.

Hi! Please review highway=crossing used on ways around the roundabout, e.g. way/625803919
The ways should be tagged highway=footway + footway=crossing
and maybe further tags like crossing=island and the access tags like bicycle=yes where appropriate.

I think that is wrong.
The wiki says that the relation should be tagged with the same tags as the way but It doesn't say that the tags should be removed from the ways.

Hi and welcome to OSM!
You mapped a lot of sidewalks here as separate ways. Do you know the sidewalk tag which can be added to the major roads?
See sidewalk=*
I think you should use it here. Besides that you used highway=crossing +footway=sidewalk on some ways where
highway=footway + footway=crossing would be the correct tagging.
Hope this helps, happy mapping!

Hi! I think the Constitution Trail should be changed to a route relation. Parts of it duplicate other ways mapped as footways.
I've contacted you because the initial mapper is no longer active. This change would require to split some sidewalk ways like way/298683948
What do you think?

Hi! Please check position / size of Milner Library. It seems the roof is much larger than the building itself?

Ah, forgot to say that highway=crossing should not be used on ways, only on nodes. That was the reason why I looked at it in the first place.

Hi! Please review way/512161070
Both Bing and ESRI show a fence between the 1st and 2nd node, so it seems impossible to cross the roads there. I also don't think that you should copy data from a County Bike map, this is probably not a legal source.

@AlaskaDave: Thanks for the info. I see that you started to edit this, so I will not do anything else here.

Hi!
You removed most tags from the way describing the pipeline:
way/253952219
way/8987867

Hi and welcome to OSM!
Please check:
You also modified the road so that the tags are now highway=crossing;tertiary
way/109442133
To map a crossing you have to add a node on the highway, not next to it like here node/6024983714
See also highway=crossing