The boundary relation/5657443 from the way/1016554163 looks to be in error using the DCS Base Map ... the error looks to be made by this changeset.

And relation/5657443 .. there could be others...

Should this changeset be reverted?

Wrong?
There are only 2 areas in NSW that are 'unincorporated'.

https://pastvtr.elections.nsw.gov.au/LGE2017/lge-unincorporated.htm

This changeset also broke the relation/5729534 the suburb of Sydney...

See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=114.67982&lat=-25.63163&zoom=14&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

relation/18159674 has only outers..looks like many of them should be inners.

Hi
Why a multipolygon for the Lismore Garden Centre???
It brakes the 'rules' fr a multipolygon - shared segment ..

I have transferred the tags to a single node. The 2 ways I have made on into a building the other a nursery

The guide is "one feature = one 0SM entry"

By putting a tree node inside a tree area it is effectually mapped twice.

Hi
Placing individual trees into an area marked as a tree area does not make sense. I have deleted the individual trees.
Mapping a row of trees as a tree area ... well OSM have a tag 'tree_row' for that...

I have simplified ways here too ... over 1,500 deletions...

Hi,
Would it not be 'better' (what ever that means) to join between the natural features to form a closed relation??? At the moment this relation throws errors ..

Done it myself - trees in the blue mountains... That automated tool put me in my place. Usually the tool is run with a 5 meter acceptable accuracy .. I run it with 0.5 meter as that to me retains more of the actual shape.

Umm .. we all make errors and the future is hopefully a long time. Keep mapping and don't be scared of making errors.

Issues;
Data bloat
Who needs more accuracy than 0.5 metres? Consider most people would be unable to resolve 0.5 metres...

There were two relation for the park.. pick one and one only?
One feature = one OSM entry.

I picked the one that looked to have the most detail.

When an area, such as a building, has the way cross itself ... what part is the area for the building? Is the small bit that is formed by the crossing part of the building or not?
This is not a personal problem for me but one of data confusion. See osm.wiki/Self_intersecting_way_reports

@ fortera_au
Driveways can terminate at garages i.e. a building. You might like to mention which driveway the comment is directed at?

Hi,
Welcome to OSM!
I have restored Node: 2548179394 back to where it was. This is used by administrative boundaries (suburbs etc) and is sourced from government data. Not the end of the world...
Keep mapping, have fun.

The pool ways have far too much resolution! They have been simplified with an automatic tool - maximum error of 0.5 meters.

Hi
way/891936930 crosses itself.

Hi
way/1317550766 crosses itself.

Hi
way/1317344351 (building house) self intercepts. Part of it looks like a separate garage.