Hallo, die Bearbeitungen in Sachsen und in der Antarktis liegen ja doch sehr weit auseinander. Wenn die dann in einen Änderungssatz gepackt werden, liegen Ostafrika, Indien und Australien komplett mit im betroffenen Gebiet. Naja.

>Way: Finanzamt Hameln (100575712)
That is not the name of the building but the name of the governmental agency in the building.

Its not the farmyard nor the farm house nor the barn to be named, but the geographic locality.

Unfortunately the Australian Tagging Guideline are lacking from the information how big an "isolated_dwelling" can be, see place=farm

Please do not create overlapping areas. I revert this changeset in #81567266

As said, I added some sources on the fence mapping to the OSM. After downloading relation/10703889 the relation and it's members the sources are easily selectable with this JOSM search query:
(child (type:relation id:10703889) OR child (child (type:relation id:10703889)))

Riverbed is where no plants grow. LPI NSW aerial was used for the creek.

Neglecting overlapping areas is an issue, https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/2020-January/013535.html

Seems that you have switched off a lot of your validator. Didn't JOSM throw a warning for the overlapping building conflict on way/759930996/ ?

Why do you switch off the validator and downgrade the quality off your mapping?

Yeah, Bing shows a dam on the left hand side of the "whole" and the base map a water collection.

The tree area on the park needed an own OSM aera to avoid the "overlapping areas problem" like here changeset/80872208

I consider the effects and the aftermath of the December 2019 bushfire as historic for the town of Cobargo.

Correct. It is the site of the winery.

"addr:housename=Breakfast Creek" is set for the house and it looks pretty fine.

No "address name" is set. The whole postal addressing of the house in OSM fulfills the scheme: addr=*

I named the farmhouse according to the Karlsruhe Schema.

> it was pointed out that the fence is not visible on imagery,

I could see the surroundings of that special fence on long parts. The contrary opinion – invisible fence – is also correct but luckily only for smaller parts.

Please take notice from the fence edit I made the day before. It was based on the knowledge that the fence must be somewhere at the border.

The first try was the border crossing at Collins gap with an already mapped cattle grid, see node/7205341210. But the aerials showed only some 20 m of fence south of the buildings.

The first crossing where Mapillary showed the rabbit sign was the Border Road near Killarney, see source of node/7205325473. With other Mapillary photos the fence situation on that crossing became clear. I was able to map the fence 3.5 km eastwards and 15 km westwards. And then I stopped mapping because of lacking visibility of the surroundings of the fence in the aerials.

The LPI NSW Aerial for node/7205341210 shows the problem clearly. With todays training it is clear that fence is 71 m further up North from this node and that the last segment I mapped was a private fence.

The next day I found the "Rabbit Fence" Road and that lead to the Granit Belt Drive near Cotton Vale. Again good On the Ground image https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=i3QCjdFP4wrPeQvf6IEs2w showed the fence. The next farm to Northwest also had a cattle grid on the driveway so it became clear on which side of the road the fence is.

Unfortunately I did not map all those minor points with the first upload. After writing this reply I will add the clues used for mapping and come back to this when ready.

I therefore hold the position that either the fence itself or at least its surroundings are visible on large parts.

>so how are you determining the exact geometry to use?

I did not mapped the 'exact' geometry, I mapped a guess where the fence probably would be.

Currently nobody knows where the fence is. We only have the data from the agricultural department (Thanks Mike!). But this data makes the problem even worse. Because on small parts of my guess are better than their data. It seems to good to be only a guess.

As the Lineage descriptions history tells, the data was made in 2008 with Garmin GPS (5-10 m accuracy) ???? and in 2013 'updated' using Aerials from 2013.

So the agricultural department did the same that the other fence mappers and I did. They mapped aerials.

Unsurprisingly the results are very similar.

Farmyard is added now.

Hi,
with this edit you deleted a shed that was mapped as destroyed, see way/764679113/history

Even worse, you replaced it with an intact building, see way/771003529
This shed was destroyed by the fire on 2019-12-31, please see https://www.instagram.com/p/B7NA1cMHvGe/

Please feel free to check the data already present in the osm before you overwrite and delete it.

Thanks for adding more content to OSM. But all three areas added are overlapping with at least one existing area. The big one overlaps two areas (creek and the landuse=residential).

JOSM has a Data validator which detects such problems. Have you switched it off? Please check under Preferences - Data validator that all checkboxes are marked.

Please feel free to correct the overlappings.

With this edit you cracked the Dingo fence here: node/7135126158

Welche Datenkonsumenten werten das Merkmal landcover=greenery aus?

Well, we can see in the LPI Aerial:
a). A horse here -36.38543, 149.89142
b) a trailer to transport two horses here -36.38496, 149.89167 (Bing has two trailers there)
c) a stream flowing through the meadow way/772369871
d) a footprint structure on the grass typical for meadows where horses are living (bad grass around the stable and near gates and water places) and
e) a big difference in grass texture to areas nearby which are clearly lawns.

Free and non-free sources offer information about the fence, its surroundings and other trivia. And I used them all.

The copyrighted book about "The Easter Bunny and the Rabbit Fence" is one of them, see https://books.google.de/books?id=PMz3CJdd-e0C. This made me feel bad. My work might still be incomplete because the mapped fence does not run through Goombi as described in the book. A dilemma.

I hope it is OK for the DWG that all (even copyrighted and technically copyprotected) sources can be used to form a personal idea how such a fence needs to be built and maintained and might look like. For example this non-free https://www.facebook.com/DDMRB/posts/1949264168460782 leads to Karara. As a search result for "rabbit fence" in JOSM/Nominatim I found two roads way/333041274 (plus way/765928303) which gave an idea where the fence might be.

The rabbit fence is accompanied by two maintenance tracks (I got this idea from several photos from Facebook). It has also thither meshes than cattle or sheep fences. Therefore it looks darker. And a lot of its corners and gate posts are stabilized with metal frames, see here https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=TbHwfNUCAJMdLDqCqcnkvQ. These features makes the rabbit fence distinguishable from other fences in the aerials.

Wikipedia has a list of the eight councils financing the fence. Screening the aerials in south wester direction of the villages of these LGAs and their predecessors brought me a big step further.

Three sections of the fence have already been mapped by others, see way/738488848, way/658389012 and way/658389016.

Using the hopefully free image https://www.mapillary.com/app/?focus=photo&pKey=ce_D9g3dadKv6KeF78wP9A and the next one gave the idea how the construction looks when the rabbit barrier needs to cross a road. This was a big help for finding this node node/7205852660 near Chinchilla.

Some "educated guesses" were made. For example the node node/7205852638 and its neighbours were mapped to the idea that the fence would no run through the sewage handling area.

Another guess was that the fence line goes up further North at this node node/7205864196. At first the fence going westwards looked better. And I did a few nodes on that route. But then the misses came: No grids, no gates and no maintenance tracks aside. So I guessed that this structure way/771871452 needs to be a cattle grid
to keep on going.

The final guess to be described here is that this part way/771871458 was only formerly the rabbit fence. It is not in use any more because the coal mine expanded. Bing shows nothing on the new route, but the newer Esri images do show the fence.

To conclude: While still having some guesses I was convinced that the data taken from allowed sources is good enough to be seen as "reliable" and therefore I uploaded.

1) Please let me know if the statement above is not enough to answer the first question.

2) For the guesses I made one factor was which councils pay for the fence. This information comes from the DDMRB. I consider this information as free.

In future someone might notice this gate node/7209079924. It has an URL tagged to an article which describes it and shows it. No data from that article was uploaded to OSM, only the URL directing to it. Please feel free to give some thoughts about this.

It seems that you have moved this toilet node/3709202664 accidentally 750 meters away.
Please check your edit.

>Source of the path 'Sculpture Walkway'.

You can see the bridge over the drain in the LPI aerial.

'Cobargo Apex Park' is the common name for that area. It is local knowledge.

The boundary is clearly visible in the LPI aerials.

Nobody uses 'Cobargo Town Park'. A web search for this term gives zero results. Seems that the LPI map guys are the only ones using it.

The sculpture walkway has it's name from the sculptures it is leading to. This is local knowledge in Cobargo. Formerly it was called Riverside Walk too.

You can see the handrail in both sources attributed in the changeset comment. No need for writing them down again here.