Where is this data sourced from? The changeset says "Esri World Imagery", which seems unlikely to be sufficient for the detail provided.

If this is properly open now, then we should probably remove the access=no ?

Possible dupe of this node 40m away? osm.org/node/4395792106

Are you sure the parking north of Casey Indoor Leisure Complex is 'private'?
I don't recall seeing any particular restrictions in that area. It might possibly be 'customers'?

Thanks for checking.
The source on your changest is 'survey' - so I assumed you'd actually been there to verify. If you're mapping from imagery you should set the source appropriately.

Isn't there a toilet block at the south of the carpark? Maybe this element should have been moved?

The bridge that you've added is across the park boundary and not the stream.
Are you sure you've drawn it in the correct location?

2 Questions.
Where are you sourcing the information for the location and nature of this historical (and now non-existent) rail infrastructure, as there's no source attribution?
Given this rail infrastructure isn't visible on the ground any more and has been completely removed, shouldn't it be removed from the map?

Hello Elly, welcome to OSM.
I wondered where you got the name for the beach, as it's not possible to see the name in the aerial imagery?
It's important that we only use data from permitted sources.

What is your data source for the name of this beach?

Welcome to OSM.
The version of the running track that you've drawn does seem much nicer than what was before.
However it is recommended to modify the existing ways rather than to delete and redraw. This history of changes is useful for knowing the source of contributions and respecting the work of those previous mappers. osm.wiki/Keep_the_history

Hi there, welcome to OSM.
This changeset includes different sorts of changes which are 150km apart. Generally it's recommended to keep your changesets as focused and local as possible.
This one should probably be 2-3 changesets.

To be honest I'm not sure why these railway lines are even mapped. There's no source information for the original geometry. The lines and the route of the lines is not evident in the real world, there's a great big shopping centre and carpark there.
osm.wiki/Tag:railway=abandoned
says "A tag to map former railways, where the rails have been removed but the route is still visible with ties/sleepers, signals or other railroad right of way signs or infrastructure."
I'd say none of the mapped abandoned rail lines on the Mornington side of the Nepean highway meet this criteria.
(General comments for all to respond on - not directed at you Ewen)

There's a clear mapillary image for one of them. The others are unclear in mapillary.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=794920641165298&lat=-37.945557237183&lng=144.99789445468&z=17&focus=photo&x=0.39344660239325757&y=0.7305136029809556&zoom=1.8575851393188856

I'd probably want to tag these as highway=residential and access=permissive.

There's mapillary imagery, although the sign is very hard to make out.
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?pKey=831792124100124

I believe the top of the sign says "Central Park Estate. Private Property"

The estate has fair coverage in mapillary, but the signs on the way in and out are skipped.

How did you source these changes? It's impossible to tell from Bing maps if a path is a cycle path, shared path, or walking only path.
The path 31659577 is now walking only, and yet it forms part of a LCN cycling relation, and for years has been mapped as a cycle path.
A small amount of searching gives us this map, which shows Hallam Road having a "Other Path Link" type with a bicycle and pedestrian illustrated. https://www.casey.vic.gov.au/hallam-valley-trail
The more northern part of this path was changed from cycling to foot only by you some 30 days earlier.

There's archives of talk-au at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-au/

There are 30 modified ways in this changeset, mostly path->footway tag changes.
What does this have to do with the changeset comment of "updates to cycling permission to align with Victoria Road Regulations" ?

I've returned these 3 to bike=no