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?

See osm.wiki/Dual_carriageway

There's no separation here, I'll revert this one.

plus you've messed up the branch node/10711420922/history

addr:postcode and addr:state are not necessary here since we have the boundaries of these in OSM already.

The addr:housenumber and addr:street can all be derived from the addr details on the center way/256702729/history there's no need to repeat this on each feature.

The use of the source tag is misleading since the source of the features is my survey, not the website.

The website tag should where possible be for the specific store, not the whole brand.

You've messed up the opening_hours using opening_hours=opening_hours=...

Phone numbers should follow the format at osm.wiki/Australian_Tagging_Guidelines/Australian_features#Phone_Numbers

Shouldn't name:en=Bennelong Point ? Otherwise we can't distinguish the different parts of the dual name?

I was then going to update name:etymology to name:en:etymology so the tagged etymology correctly relates to the right name between the two dual names.

I was planning on going through the GNR Dual Names to update in OSM but realised we don't actually have a documented consensus about how to handle them.

Thanks indeed the old name was officially discontinued https://proposals.gnb.nsw.gov.au/public/geonames/ecf1c667-60a9-471d-8be6-c9030c014a80 then the new name was officially assigned https://proposals.gnb.nsw.gov.au/public/geonames/791f60fa-e11a-4ad4-a530-1b0b693e5472 by the Geographic Names Board.

I think I've fixed up all the ones I could see for now.

I'm still noticing a lot of duplicated streams here, for example way/210580351 which it looks like you've extended to duplicate on top of the existing stream?

I realise this is from a year ago, but if it's an issue from your workflow it would be good to correct it. In JOSM it's a good idea to have View > Draw boundaries of downloaded data turned on and only edit data within that area.

I've left a comment at changeset/161227094 to try and gather more information.