Not to be taken as gospel, but this OS map indicates paths. https://os.openstreetmap.org/#zoom=17&lat=51.49540&lon=-2.55259
Maybe worth a second look?

The P1 preset using foot=yes was to indicate official pedestrian access (PROW, Bridleway etc).
This is why double checking & possible upgrading to 'designated' is required.

Removing foot=yes without understanding why, will reduce the quality of the OSM database. .

Hi
Welcome to OSM.
To check - if there's a path under the bridge it would be best to do a survey & extend it so it joins other paths.

@ spiregrain Thanks for clarifying

@SomeoneElse. Osmose have imported JOSM's validator which also incorrectly claims: "Suspicious tag combination highway=cycleway together with foot=designated, use highway=path"
I queried it here: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/tagging/2019-July/046472.html

foot=yes/designated is a valid tag in OSM.
It can be used to distinguish the difference between an asphalt path through a housing estate & a route of worn grass around a field where the owner tolerate dog walkers.

I believe it was originally used as an indicator that it was a PROW. Tagging has progressed to be more specific, but foot=yes is a good indicator that rarely edited paths might need updating to PROWS

Out of curiosity, why are your amendments apparently random across the country?

Ah, apologies. I didn't load the relations. As you were.

To check Tom, why are you splitting ways, but making no tag amendments?

To check:
Where did you obtain the outline for the Wash? Why have you excluded the sandbanks? It doesn't look that accurate.
I may have missed it, but I thought the last discussion decided oceans/seas/area of open water to be named with a node.

I've started remapping manually on the user's other changesets (primarily railway stations). I haven't reverted as:
a) Others have added changesets after.
b) The user has added other data which /may/ be valid.
This one seems fully incorrect & 'clean' so should be reverted I believe.

Epsom Railway Station updates. Needs tweaking

FYI, In the iD editor there's a option to 'square' pitches/buildings etc - select object ,right click, Square.

Also, is this accessible to the public?
way/703365925

Names should be official/signed names. Use osm.wiki/Tag:'description='
osm.wiki/Names#Name_is_the_name_only

way/703365925

Hi
To check again, has the car park for the Bell Inn been dug up/removed? If it exists, it should still be mapped. Add access=no to indicate it's closed

Hi
Welcome to OSM

To check, is the Pathfinder Place development fully completed?
If it's still being built the tag to use is landuse=construction.
landuse=construction

Are any of the roads accessible?

"highway=sidewalk" is the preferred tag
Not true. There's no such tag

Oh, please; stop diverting.
It's a walking route. Do you have evidence of signage?

What evidence have you that this route extends into Bristol?

*inconsistent

Why have you removed foot/bicycle tags from established ways?

> From experience I prefer to have the name of a recognised route at regular intervals when no other name is relevant,

Inventing names to suit personal desires is not acceptable. OSM isn't designed just to suit the individual.

> "most names were invented at some point"

It is not the purpose of OSM to create those names. It reflects established, verifiable names.

>an intention to walk from Avonmouth to Woolwich in 2020

Perhaps you should wait until you've walked it before making shot in the dark amendments.