Thanks now OK.

Sorted.

Hi, I've amended the track, path and old railway tagging, (removed duplicate rail line).

Regards Bernard.

Amended track names and status.

Hi, I've removed the duplicated sections of highway, access=no and path tags. Added track agricultural to the ways as this is what they appear to be. Tweaked the track and area lines to reflect Bing images. It may be that there is also some access to fishing areas.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I reinstated this track, tagged it as agricultural, added a gate barrier.
Please amend existing not delete and add incorrect features.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I've removed the duplicated section of highway then tagged the ways as service roads for allotments.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Thanks for trying to correct the error by adding back a path. Unfortunately this wasn't quite correct. (Please if amendments are needed amend the original mapped features if possible, this keeps the way history.)

I've removed your access=no path and reverted back to the features that were deleted. I tagged the track access=agricultural and added a gate access=agricultural. fences added back as well. It now looks pretty much like the Bing imagery. If tweaks are needed please do so.

Regards Bernard

No response so tag reinstated.

Hi if the path is a right of way then there is access and by foot is public not permissive. I've amended a few tags.
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap, and thanks for contributing.
I've removed access=no from the path as this indicate there is no public access. If it's a public footpath then clearly there is access to it. I've added designation=public_footpath and changed surface=trail to surface=ground.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

Has the bicycle parking been removed? If not would you please reinstate it.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Sorry about that I was looking to amend the shed outline as it showed up in OSM Inspector. I couldn't see exactly where the shed should be, I thought I had backed out with no change but I was obviously wrong. I've now reverted my change here so I'll leave it to you.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, this section of the drive is private but foot only is permissive.
Is the drive a permissive path on foot to Scadbury Park Local Nature Reserve?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, I removed the path as it duplicates a highway. I added foot=permissive to the gate. the drive and ways off of it should now be route able.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.
Your new path has been drawn on top of an existing path, thus making duplication of ways. Amendments should be made to the existing way, this will keep all of the history. If you need help removing the duplication and making amendments please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

No response so I've removed the incorrect data.

Hello and Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You have requested a review of your this and two other changesets where you've deleted quite a few tracks. These tracks seem to be genuine on the ground features clearly visible on available imagery, I would think also mostly able to be verified by a survey. Thus it's my opinion that these deletions should be reverted to the previous state. I can't think of any valid reason for the deletions, perhaps you could enlighten me as to your reason.

These tracks can be amended to show agricultural or private status. The gates I can see on imagery can be added as barriers to the tracks. If you need help re-instating the tracks and amending them please just ask.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, just add level=-1 on the culvert. This shows the relation between the two objects, (the highway implied as layer=0 with the culvert below tagged level=-1).

Hi, There's a duplicated highway, path on top of Denehurst Park Way. The areas that you've joined to Denehurst Park Way need to be amended to get to the duplication. This is the problem with unnecessarily joining areas to highways.

Please decide what you can do about all those park areas, then I can get to and remedy the highway duplication.

Regards Bernard.