I was cross-checking Bing with Esri (which is usually more recent), and Mapbox, along with Google and street view. If it has changed since all of these I couldn't find it. Apologies if I'm wrong.

That's just the way I've always done it and is consistent with many others.

Hi, my mistake. I knew the town didn't have the "u" so I assumed the railway station didn't as well. I will fix.

Perhaps. I don't have a strong preference for one or the other.

The name of a location, street, etc. can't and shouldn't be determined by "community consensus" (how is this determined anyway? Has there been a survey of the local community?) unless that community consensus has been successful in convincing the legislators or officials who make rulings on such things and then only once such decisions have gone through the proper channels, in this case, if a change from Wattleglen to Wattle Glen has been gazetted. It matters not what the operators might think, but what the official rulings are.

Hi.
First of all, the option for mapping razed railways exists on OpenStreetMaps; if this shouldn't be done, the option shouldn't be there in the first place. But it is there, so can be mapped.
Secondly, many such closed and razed tramlines are mapped in European cities, so why not here?
Thirdly, the mapping of disused, abandoned and razed railways and tramways is a resource for people interested in them and is depicted as an overlay in OpenRailwayMaps, but is not depicted in OpenStreetMaps and therefore does not add any confusion to people only utilising OpenStreetMaps.
As for the sources, there is plenty of data available for the former tram routes which I have used as well as my own personal knowledge of when they were still open.
I hope this helps. Regards, Supt.

My apologies. I thought it was reopened again. My mistake. I will revert it.

I don't get it Diacritic! I got rid of ways where there were no physical separations and you've put more in, even more than before my edit.

Sorry, will fix the offset.

Disused are rendered on the standard OSM as dotted grey lines, but abandoned and razed are not rendered.

OHM doesn't overlay former rail tracks onto current conditions as far as I can tell, so it wouldn't be as helpful. From what I've seen on OHM, not a lot of data exists at the moment.
Former railways are depicted on ORMs the world over, giving much material for rail enthusiasts to track former railways. I don't see why others would object to this, particularly as they don't show on OSM.

I thought I explained that. Mapping them as disused, abandoned and razed gives them visibility on OpenRailwayMaps which is where rail enthusiasts go to find where railway tracks are and once were. (https://www.openrailwaymap.org/index.php) They don't show up on OpenStreetMaps so it won't confuse those users.

Disused means they are still there, abandoned means the tracks have been removed but the right-of-way is still discernable, whilst razed means there is no trace.

For enthusiasts wanting to know where a railway was, all of these tags are helpful. If they shouldn't be tagged as razed, why is razed an option?

Okay, I have searched for where these rules are spelt out and cannot find them. Can you give me the link so I can read it for myself?

Maybe they should, however, abandoned and razed are options on OSM which then display on ORM which a lot of rail enthusiasts use as they overlay former railways onto current conditions, whereas OHM aren't as well presented. There should be no problem with them being mapped on OSM as they are invisible on that.
I have therefore reinstated them.

The mapping of abandoned and razed railways on Open Street Maps, whilst dot depicted in Open Street Maps, is depicted in Open Railway Maps, which is of great interest and help for people, usually rail enthusiasts, wanting to know where railways once were.

The Gordon Avenue busway was already there as a separate carriageway; I just edited it slightly. I added the Railway Terrace busway to match the Gordon Avenue as evidence I've seen of other busways, they are shown as separate carriageways.

I really do get the feeling you are stalking me when I am accused of doing things that were already there.

Hi, I made the change for two reasons: to make it consistent with the similar features in Devonport;
and the government declared some years ago that the Tasmanian ferry had the status of a national highway, so the entry and exit points for the ferry are part of that highway status.

Hi again, I am just doing what I and many other editors have been doing for a very long time. Between the two lanes of a divided road is part of the road they are within, they are not an extension of the road they intersect with and they don't carry the name of the road that intersects with it.

Hi Diacritic, me again. I disagree; it should be the gazetted name. Just because the operator uses the wrong name, is no reason it should be perpetuated.