Hello,
I think that this might have accidentally created a gap in relation/1957067 - I've filled it in by splitting way/1301613924 in two and adding the relevant part to the relation.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
Just to let you know , I've moved a few ways from the superroute relation/9481976 to the part 1 route relation/5479823 . It is confusing - in iD the relation id is hidden so it's not really clear what you're adding.
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Hello,
Just spotted you've changed the name of relation/10529390 to be the description again rather than the name. I changed it in changeset/142413576 following the broad consensus of https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/proposal-use-description-instead-of-name-for-route-relations/104656 . I tend to agree with the forum discussion in that once "from" and "to" have been added to superroute members the "name" should just be the name, but it is true that many relations (in the UK and elsewhere) do have descriptions as names - do you think it's worth raising it in the UK bit of the forum specifically?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello - there's a problem with the Sperrins AONB at the moment, there are some duplicate entries in the boundary.
way/1291745514 and way/343718558 are two, but there are more.

I'm guessing that the "clothes=men" tag on way/107045740 might not be valid any more?

I got a chance to map out some of the new trackways tonight. Some of the accesses (e.g. where the new car park will be, and from Moor Lane to the west) aren't open yet but some are (from Moor Lane to the north), so you can get most places internally. I'll try and upload and map those traces over the next couple of weeks or so. Next, weather permitting, I'll try and add the missing hedges, the internal fence details and where the trees exist already - some broadleaved ones are already poking out of their tubes at the eastern side.
Not looked at west of Moor Lane or south of Wetherby Road yet.

As with many of your other edits, you'd managed to duplicate an existing feature (now a footpath, formerly a railway) in the wrong place, possibly because you have never actually been there and are relying on poor quality aerial imagery.
I've corrected this example of the problem in changeset/150746211 but there are many others along this line.

Hello,
way/1278075660 is an unfeasibly large building. Can you help us by saying what you are trying to add here?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the path from the southwest joins either a little bit south of a little bit south of this stile - can you remember which it is?
Best Regards,
Andy

I don't think that "shop=mobility" is correct here. That'd be a place where you _buy_ mobility scooters. Shopmobility places tend to be tagged differently, see https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L8068 .

I've added "cuisine=pizza" to this because I think it's a fair bet :)

https://www.yorkshirewater.com/media/f10fpjkw/yky-bioresources-market-information-2020.xlsx

Hello,
node/11742283562 seems a bit odd - there's a gate in the middle of a stream and then a bit of a gap until this node?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
There are a few "meadow=padd" around here - see https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1HSE . Is that a misspelling of "paddock"?
Best Regards,
Andy

I believe that you've significantly misplaced way/963064447 (in fact, most of it it should not exist at all since it's basically mostly way/124121572 ). When NPE maps were created, there was a significant error added that matches your alignment. I lived there for many years and spent a lot of time making sure that what was mapped in OSM mapped reality (including former railways). You have undone much of that hard work.

Thanks for updating this - but just for info if you look at http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=2519639 and zoom in on Burntisland you'll see a little gap and an extra bit along the old route that hasn't been removed yet.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that there's actually a connection to the road at node/11655801931 (at least for foot traffic) as well? Or is there some sort of wall here?
Best Regards,
Andy

Just wondered if relation/10841834 should really be a "historic=tower" - I wonder if maybe something like "townland" was what was intended?

... based on my visits around that time not selling 98 octane was pretty unlikely too. Obviously it's now 2023, so different again.