Welcome to OSM
The train station's network & operator are correctly tagged and there's no need for a linear platform when the polygonal one exists.

Strawberry Line is the name of a route which traverses along this path.
There are numerous routes traversing along this path, therefore the name shouldn't be on the way, but in it relation.

relation/5527957

node/3729401291/history/18#map=19/51.511250/-0.056924
operator is classed as London Overground not Transport for London

Provide more informative descriptions than "I have made the validator happy."

Hi What is ref:GB:HER:Angus?

There si already a railway=station tag. Please don't duplicate.

None of the tags, except a link to the other database are erroneous. OSM isn't a database dumb.

"There should be only one railway=station element for each station (refer to One feature, one OSM element)".
railway=station

node/26479890

https://dataportal.orr.gov.uk/statistics/usage/estimates-of-station-usage

"As of March 31, 2024, there are 2,585 mainline railway stations in Great Britain, according to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) data portal." (Due to be updated next month.)

"Respectfully".

What are these tags?
lastModifiedBy = RichardLucking
lastModifiedTime = 2017-07-12 07:50:39
openbenches:id = 31

node/10785675252/history/2

Welcome to OSM.
I've reverting your changeset. The railway=station node is distinct from entrance tags, of which there may be many, scattered well away from the actual station, especially in London. Station nodes for 2 platform, two track station the node should be placed between the tracks & near to the middle of the platforms.

Is there a building with barriers & ticket office etc?:
building=train_station

The wall is still there:
https://maps.app.goo.gl/tzp6JcfoPCijfeAp9

way/457668182/history/3

There are already the correct number of railway stations tags. This is train station building.
What is ref:cranmore?

I think it's better.
highway=bridleway is used where there's no signs of motor traffic.
https://www.bing.com/maps?&cp=51.337633~-2.163893&lvl=15.111282&style=s&pi=0&v=2&sV=2&form=S00027

Those two tracks are designated as 'Byways' which OSM tags as designation=byway_open_to_all_traffic
From Wiltshire Council:
{ "type": "Feature", "properties": { "PARISH": "HILP", "TYPE": "1", "REF": "HILP21", "PATHNO": "21", "LENGTH": 841.0, "LYR_NAME": "Byway" },},

Please revert.

way/152244682#map=15/51.33730/-2.16476
These are tracks designated as byways.

There are already the correct number of railway stations tags.
The original tag is correct.

That's a big roundabout

I started a discussion on Talk:gb.
Your previous changesets have been reverted by others.

As I wrote in that page's discussion section:
"This behaviour needs to be stopped. If the official name is 'St', to represent 'saint', as listed in street gazetteers or signage, then that is how it should be in the name tag (ground truth as it's known in OSM). If computer programmers (not computers) can't write code to distinguish abbreviations then they probably shouldn't be contributing to OSM."

There's no need for bicycle=no as highway=footway auto negates bicycles

way/234778671
This path stopped at the admin boundary as the prow_ref only applies to that administration. You need to add a separate way the abuts it on the other side of the boundary.

On what grounds have you made these amendments?