Not sure what the logic behind marking a power pole with a transformer mounted on it as private is. Power companies have a right of access to their poles, no one else is bothered.

I have reverted the accidental change of farmland to water for you.

This change glued a road and path to a n underground pipeline. This is now fixed in changeset/168348957

This change appears to have deleted the bus stop node and moved its NAPTON tags onto the church building. You may want to check this.

tree_lined=both is probably the correct tag as the feature is a highway. In this case, the incorrect tag is natural=tree_row . Alternatively the tree_row tag should be moved onto new ways either side of the footway.

This arched gateway is fully above ground!- fixed in changeset/158533334

The best way to note this, is change the tag to:
disused:amenity=fire_station

This looks OK. The Tags are correctly placed on the 'way' that is the building outline and there is not a hidden 'node' behind it. When the building is rendered, then the icon and name are generated from the building tags. Your concern about the node automatically updating may be due to the delay between making an edit and seeing it updated in the browser.

Looks good to me. highway=path is the correct highway tag to use if you can't get a vehicle down it. Another possible is footway. Paths can be named so that is not an issue.

yes - fix it - It was created over 10 years ago when the tagging guidance may have been different.

Actually South-East but i can't change the description

this is not a football pitch so have removed it

Source for original underground cable was https://gb-power.russss.dev/#19/51.95380/-2.57050 which shows cable crossing but without node at self intersection. Cable is quite likely to cross without a join which otherwise would leave a pointless loop. However there is no way of knowing what is actually underground.

noticed this yesterday you may want to take a look at other work by newbe @James%20Bradshaw where he had added cycleways over other highways

Is this correct? The new polygon has been placed over the top of an existing polygon for Powick (STW) way/60858650. Frampton is south of Gloucester (way/1085608471). I think the existing way is correct so the new way needs to be deleted.

Not actually contributed by me but by people I know and trust in my local area -
Ways: 587327934, 587327936, 91968798
Changeset: 68236387

I have a problem with changes to small areas where you have removed leisure =common. Often these are separated by roads and are adjacent to larger common areas. Take a look at http://malvernhills.org.uk/looking-after/malvern-hills-map/ Changes like this need to be done with local knowledge and by examining the adjacent features not by a big edit that covers the whole country and can't be examined in achavi because it is too big.

My tagging was based on tag reports generated by OSMOSE https://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/ on elements that I had modified in the past and was trying to fix. I probably should have used the report false positive button instead of trying to fix them.
My decision to fix them was based on sport=equestrian where it says "Since this is a non-physical tag it should always be combined with some other (physical) tags" I agree it may not be an appropriate use of leisure=horse_riding in every case, so feel free to undo these changes.

You accidentally moved some nodes that should not have moved. I have reverted these in Changeset #122220619

Deletion of public footpath and Nursery Walk reverted in changeset # 113211241