In order to help tidy some of this stuff up, https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2aUO is a query for nodes and ways last edited by @VLD292 in Northern England, and https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/2aUP is the Southeast. There's some "unclear sourcing" at the very least in there - for example, way/1355696177 has added "surface=paving_stones" with "source=Bing", but a glance at the Bing imagery in iD shows that the alleged pavement surface is entirely obscured by a large building.
For those reasons we're reliant on people on the ground to tidy these errors up, but they will be able to look at https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=21941706 and see previous problems that were reported and treat anything by VLD292 at Facebook as "in need of remapping".

1) "wiki" is not a source.
2) If you're going to fiddle with values in OSM please try and contact data consumers first.

I've removed the name from relation members (and some outliers) in a series of changes from changeset/171240691 to 171241261.
In a couple of places the added names here didn't match the route that OSM had. See changeset/171241261 and changeset/171241089 for those. Given that the route changes in places to prevent erosion, it'll need a survey to see which is correct currently.
Personally, I tend to add route markers to help reconcile them - see e.g. relation/4092633 for a work-in-progress example of that.

Hello,
Just wondered where the wheelchair tags on node/735945109/history came from?
Best Regards,
Andy

Ah - thanks!

node/13099017794 has no NCN number on it.

However, someone's attempt to remove the signage pointing northeast at node/10863834705 has been only partially successful.

Hello,
What does the changeset comment "approved AI buildings" mean?
Best Regards,
Andy

... and the northwest change I've done in changeset/170994103 .
I've explicitly added that back as "not a path", to stop someone adding it from imagery (where it is still somewhat visible) or GPS traces.

Hello,
I've edited the southeast change in here in changeset/170993268 .
The key changes were:
1) ensure that the actual OSM ways (with e.g. sac_scale) were restored, so that everyone can see that they are not "regular paths".
2) ensure that they were NOT tagged "highway=path", so they won't appear on regular maps and apps.
The iffy ascent through the "ford" I've changed to "highway=scramble" - that shouldn't appear on any regular "walk in a park" apps any time soon. If even that's still wrong, let me know and we can change it again.
The other one way/1192129593 I've changed to "not:highway=path" since it seems to be a bit of wishful thinking on behalf of someone or their GPS.
Looking at the GPS traces osm.org/#map=20/56.6577074/-4.9896357&layers=HG is helpful - they're all over the place, and most people making this "ascent" do so to the west of where the previous "path" was in OSM.
Best Regards,
Andy (from the DWG)

It is possible to revert a whole changeset, but it might be easier just to remove the names where they've been added. I'll have a go at doing that. That way, the 626 node changes won't get backed out too.
Best Regards,
Andy

Brighouse, from survey, 11/07/2025

> Indeed, some months ago we detected vandalism in UK counties

who is "we"?

Are you sure that way/579582322 is really a guest house and not just an occasional short term let?
I didn't notice a guest house here the last time I walked past.

Hello Flap Slimy Outward,
Andy from the DWG here.
Whenever you're thinking about making significant changes like this it's always a good idea to discuss with the relevant community.
In this case, asking about it at https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/in/136 would have been a good idea.
Beyond that, I'm really interested to know where you got the idea that "India prefers" from? In reality, it's extremely complicated, and the names that people use are affected by political affiliation as well as language (you're from the US, so that idea may not be unfamiliar to you).
With India this has happened before - see https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/osm-deep-history/#/node/424314145 - last time it was a well meaning European who thought that the people in India who had decided what names to use for their country were "wrong".
Often a good question to ask in this situation is: "how come I, a mapper from place X, is thinking about making a change to place Y, when the people from place Y haven't made that change already?".
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Re "the best way to proceed is to take the matter to the relevant OSM communities" it's normally good practice to do that _before_ making changes such as this (and that applies anywhere in the world). There are all sorts of edge cases out there.

See changeset/170683167

Thanks - I've re-added it to the relation so that http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=13159639&noCache=true&_noCache=on and http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=13159639 look OK too.

Hi Jim,
Any more thoughts? You have an email from the DWG (sent 06/08/2025 11:18) - just reply to that and it'll go on the ticket.
We do need to do something here to guard against someone re-adding without difficulty information.
Best Regards,
Andy (from OSM's Data Working Group)