What are you trying to map here?
It seems an odd thing to place in the driveway of a residential property.

vandalism deleted

Hi
inner parts of multipolygons cannot touch part of the outer ring so the way you are using them is not valid.
I think you don't need to use any multipolygons to map this area as it complicates the area unnecessarily for other mappers.
Each of the blocks could have a simple polygon and be tagged landuse=residential or you could have a much bigger polygon (including all the residential streets in the area) tagged as landuse=residential. Residential parks are often included as part of the residential area too but you can exclude those if you prefer not to.
Here is an area near me that is mapped with a simple polygon around each residential block of houses - there is no need for multipolygons to be used here.
osm.org/#map=18/-27.20985/153.01471
Although he could use a simple polygon, the mapper that did this has used a separate one member mp for each block because he will split the sides into multiple segments as he maps in far greater detail as in this area nearby.
osm.org/#map=18/-27.21190/153.02439

...but he is still only mapping each block of houses with the one polygon or multipolygon and not trying to combine multiple individual blocks in to a multipolygon.

If you use just a simple polygon for each block you no longer need to worry about duplicate segments either.

It may be easiest to revert the two problems areas I have left comments on.

Hi
there are further problems to fix here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.09668&lat=-26.67230&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
You seem to be proceeding without a complete understanding how multipolygons need to be constructed correctly in the osm.
You need to understand the info provided here on our wiki
There are also examples of correct and incorrect multipolygons.
osm.wiki/Relation:multipolygon

I guess they don’t need to be open source but do need to be released under a licence that is suitable for osm or obtain explicit permission from the database owner/custodian to use in osm.
osm.wiki/Import
For mapping businesses, etc it is ok to use the address and contact details listed on their websites.

Osm is not like conventional maps often used in gis in respect to layers. Osm doesn't have separate layers for different categories/themes.
Property boundaries are not normally mapped and such datasets are often not open source. Mappers instead try to map fence lines which are evident on satellite imagery. If the bounds are known or evident on imagery for things such as shopping centres, schools, parks then these are normally mapped but individual housing plots are normally mapped by mapping the fence lines and the buildings and the address tags are usually added to the primary building or on a separate node in the centre of the property if buildings are not mapped. The addresses are often done in bulk by import where data sets become available and it is common to add a separate node for those. In Australia all the state and most suburb or administration boundaries are mapped so it is not necessary to add these to most buildings.

Hi, I have updated the house tags to fit with conventional used in osm. The suburb, state are not needed as the boundaries of these are already mapped as is the residential area. I have mapped the fence lines to describe the shape of the plot.

Hi
the tag name=Private is no needed as it has the tag access=private
Names are only added to things that are named i.e. a sign

Hi
There’s more work to be done here
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.10039&lat=-26.66889&zoom=13&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Hi
There are a few errors in the multipolygons. You may need to refer to the wiki.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.08750&lat=-26.68750&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Impeccable source.
Is it a bridge or a culvert or a ford?

Hi, what is the source for this name?

Reverted now, feel free to edit area again.

Reverted now, feel free to edit in the area again.

Hi Ben, I think I will revert this tomorrow as osmi still picks up various problems.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=153.53322&lat=-27.42522&zoom=16&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

Ok, thanks. Accidentally shifting nodes is easily done in the iD editor.
I’ll revert it tomorrow.

Hi, are you able to try fixing this?
https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=130096138
..or would you rather I revert it?

Thanks for clearing that up Nigel. Since sending my comment I have been more diligent and and looked at it in more detail. I am pleased to see it is reverting to a more natural state with time gradually healing the scar. As a result of the bushfire I suppose there is not much point in mapping the area as natural=wood until the area recovers.

This JESUS LIVES nonsense is just vandalism. Just map the actual individual trees if you must subject the OSM to this.