Although you did not originally map these paths/footways, most really do not exist in any meaningfull way.
Especially 841759797.
These routes vary from year to year and even month to month and are mainly sheep tracks. It is misleading and even dangerous to suggest that someone lost in low cloud or whatever will be able to find a clearly defined path.

I have known and mapped this area over many years so have local knowledge.

Ah. I had not thought of looking on that commercial map site :-)

I don't like deleting other people's work without checking with them.

I have removed the emergency Phone fro the layby on node/1615630717,
osm.org/?mlat=51.83207&mlon=-1.82008#map=19/51.83207-1.82008&layers=D
after a video survey that showed no trace. Knowing the area a little, it does seem unlikely that it was ever there. It looks from the istiry as if you first mapped it.

What gave me pause was that the person who had added the footpath had joined it to the road on the other side of the bridge. Instead of just extending said road. That suggested that the road might not continue under the bridge.

Actually, I can see that you have merged from "here".

That is what it looked like, but with the two ways, one a footpath and the other road not quite coinciding, I though it best to leave it until someone local could fix things.

Have you merged the two ways? I haven't looked yet. Too late tonight...

Residents of Cornwall will be very surprised to find that there any any mountain ranges in the county!

Please correct or delete this: it is clearly wrong.

Why do you think that this is heath rather than grassland?
I have surveyed much of the area which I have known for a great many years. Such a large area contains a variety of vegetation, but it is mainly grassland.

There is definitely no shoulder on the A436 near the Frogmill which is where I first noticed this mistake.
And I am confident that this is true right up Fox Hill to the old Air Ballon roundabout. What was your source? You said survey, but that can't be right in those areas.

I will remove the tag on the parts that I know and have repeatedly surveyed, not least with video.

Perhaps you need to check the other parts that I have not surveyed.

I wondered about that, but was too lazy to check the wiki. Now fixed. Thanks. I see that I even mentioned it in the note :-( It was 5 years ago...

Whoops. You are right, I didn't scroll down the history far enough...

The discussion on the taggng list has moved on, and people have supported adding a depth tag even when it is only a guess. So perhaps I will leave it. I think 0.5m was my best guess when I mapped it.

Apologies...