Thanks - I've also removed the building tag from the outer in changeset/164137615 (it's already on the relation) and moved the wikidata from the outer to the relation.

Probably not an obelisk lol...
As ever with these, the answer seems to be "actually a bit more complicated than that". Wikipedia describes it as a "navigation beacon": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaldon_Hill , elsewhere https://trigpointing.uk/trig/8861 it's an "Admiralty Navigation Beacon". It's certainly a beacon in the "you can see it from afar" sense, but whether it ever had a basket of burning wood attached I've no idea.
There are lots of OSMers in that general area and/or with a historic interest in these sorts of things - perhaps ask in the UK forum?

Unfortunately I had planned but failed to exclude some of the iD ones:
163476128, 163476238, 163476416, 163476742, 163479939, 163502236, 163502710, 163625364, 163625682, 163680698,
163709426, 163709463, 163748688, 163778513, 163778767, 163778850, 163779017, 163445439, 163445483,
163445569, 163461568, 163502449, 163625272, 163625740, 163709208, 163753811, 163753871, 163754006,
163778423, 163779222.
Some of those (see e.g. way/1365994052 ) were actually still not great.
There were basically 4 different sorts of editing ("add pools manually", "add AI detected pools", "tidy up AI detected pools", "add other stuff") mixed across 2 different accounts.
One of the reasons why osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines#Using_a_Dedicated_User_Account_for_Imports says what it says is to prevent problems like this from happening.

Hello,
I think that this edit has broken some relations in Dublin:

< -10709165 | Monkstown Parish
< -8851327 | Holy Trinity Kingstown Parish 1900

< -8856889 | Diocese of Dublin 1900

< -11298801 | Province of Dublin

< -15480473 | Killiney DED 1971
< -12498372 | Killiney ED

< -4622511 | Killiney
< -4622479 | Rocheshill
< -4592163 | Ballinclea
> -4486085 | Spinans West

< -4672601 | Killiney

< -4574127 | Rathdown

< -282800 | County Dublin

If you download each in JOSM and hit the "validate" button you'll see what has happened and will be able to fix.

Best Regards,
Andy

way/817805457/history looks like it should have been sanity-checked out of this change too.

Also ts1714b

Thanks!

This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 163851763, 163851833, 163852061, 163852132.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/163854413 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some French schoolkid vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/163854413 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some French schoolkid vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/163854413 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some French schoolkid vandalism

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changeset/163854413 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some French schoolkid vandalism

Hello,
A couple of relations here now have gaps in them, such as relation/3149263#map=17/52.192768/-2.229597 . Do you know where the Three Choirs Way tells people to go if they are going from Worcester to Hereford?
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks - I've edited it and it now looks like relation/4026281#map=18/51.308127/-0.614454 - is that OK?

Thanks - they have both reappeared:

10713a10714
> -5986877 | Sleveen East
10725a10727
> -5986752 | Lackaduff
55670c55672
< (55667 rows)
---
> (55669 rows)

Hello - a quick question about the cycle route at relation/4026281#map=18/51.308127/-0.614454 - do you know how it gets from the south bank to the north? There's a gap currently.
Best Regards,
Andy

Oops - I think that the merging of two bits of bridge into way/176962752 has broken a couple of relations - see for example relation/5986877#map=19/51.905440/-8.962245 . I've no idea if this was deliberately merged or just "something that Vespucci did". The "sticky-out bit" means that it is no longer a valid polygon. Would you like to fix that or would you rather that I did?
Best Regards,
Andy

Irrespective of local laws, wuld some sort of "hazard" tag make sense?
I think that there was some sort of discussion of "iffy" crossings on https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/do-we-really-need-railway-tram-crossing-resp-tram-level-crossing/118987 , but I might be wrong.

To be honest (and with reference to changeset/163383605 ) I suspect a bit of discussion would have helped here.
I'm confused by noexit=yes on node/8984377004/history . Presumably this is an unofficial (and hazardous?) pedestrian crossing?
I'd suggest that it needs discussion about how best to tag it.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello EditWatcher,
You've deleted a bunch of tags on way/731989519 including "oneway=no". Does that mean that it _is_ oneway, or something else?
Best Regards,
Andy