reverted

Thanks. Had done some sliced buildings before and plenty of other (not-so-)simple 3d buildings in OSM. No purpose made tools for making OSM 3d buildings, but I used a 3d CAD program 'OpenSCAD' (which uses a 'programmed geometry' approach rather than a more conventional drawing tool) to make an ideal (not achievable in OSM) model matching to photos and ground survey (for near-ground details and height estimates for these eg the loading area and pods relative to the riverside ground, plus did my own measurement of the outer diameter by standing under it and noting ground positions). Then I played with slicing the wheel and A-frame in OpenSCAD until I had a reasonable accuracy vs complexity compromise, and wrote out coords (x,y,z metres) for all the slice corner points. (Did some geometry roughly by hand in JOSM and saved the resulting file to see the format etc.) Imported all the calculated coords into a spreadsheet to rotate it to match the riverbank angle and convert to lat,long & z height and output as near as I could to a JOSM text file with node and way ids etc etc. Some search and replace with a text editor to finish off, if I remember correctly, then loaded to JOSM to review with Kendzi3d-dev plugin, and repeat until satisfied. Did some manual adjustment of the 'roof' slope angles for the lowest part of the wheel I think. Then lots of checking in JOSM then finally uploaded wheel, A frame+axle and all the ground fixed stuff. It's a monster, and slicing a triangular section wheel is a bit of a nightmare, but it worked.

Welcome to OSM and thanks for highlighting this change. The turn restrictions you added weren't quite right (should be 1 way 'from', 1 point 'via' and 1 way 'to' in each turn restriction separately. I've added these and the 4 way lights, dropped the no right turn out of Church Hill and very roughly marked the parts of the main roads which are likely now 20mph according to the notices about the changes that I can see. Also improved some alignments locally. Have a look and see if it seems ok, you can probably improve which roads are 20mph if you want. (Routers will take a bit of time to pick up the changes so won't change which turns are allowed for a few days)
Cebderby (Clive)

Damage and addition of grossly misplaced office node reverted.
See https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=142924563
for visibility of the damage and the tags you added for reference.
If there is a verifiable (ie. visible external signage) and visitable business office at the address you used, it might be appropriate to add a node at that correct location.

A quick search suggests this is long planned and permanent, it gets a mention here:
https://www.glanllyn-newport.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/newsletter-spring-2022.pdf
which includes the text (as of 1+ year ago):
"we are bringing
forward plans to close the junction between Bloomery
Circle and Baldwin Drive to vehicles and make this area into
a cul-de-sac as intended in the overall masterplan for Glan
Llyn. The road will still be open for pedestrians, cyclists and
emergency vehicles"
(which also suggests the main road is/will be "Baldwin Drive", which looks like could be set as tertiary).
This also seems to correspond with the overall site plan photographed here:
https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/2794612

I can only repeat what I said before: these ways *are* the A516. They do not have their OSM trunk status because of the connections to the A38, but because the green-signed A516 runs here on its way to the the A50 junction at Hilton. It is just a free-flow merge of 2 nearly equal status A roads. The only part of the A516 that does not carry its own ref is where the carriageway is shared with the main run of the A38 (and following the A516 route actually has its own continuous nearside lane both ways for the short distance until it divides again). By this logic, how much of the continuation of the A516 would be _link? - to the Mickleover S turns/roundabout?

There are also highway type changes hidden in these changesets, not described in the changeset comments, typically favouring 'unclassified' over previously set residential and tertiary choices.

You changed the route of the A516 from trunk to trunk_link, I've put it back to trunk, it's not a connection between A roads, it is the A road.

No, these *are* the A516, reverted.

It was necessary to reverse all your changes due to the damage caused. All the ways are already mapped. To add a cycle route, you would need to create a 'route relation' which you can name for example 'Ambon-Damgan' and select each of the existing ways that make up that route.
You damaged the D140 road, a track, an admin boundary, power lines and created multiple duplicate cycle ways, and a way which seems to be fiction. So everything is put back as it was.
[Google translate follows]
Il a été nécessaire d'annuler toutes vos modifications en raison des dommages causés. Tous les chemins sont déjà tracés. Pour ajouter une 'route' cyclable, vous devrez créer une « 'route' relation » que vous pourrez nommer par exemple « Ambon-Damgan » et sélectionner chacune des voies existantes qui composent cette route.
Vous avez endommagé la route D140, une piste, une limite administrative, des lignes électriques et créé plusieurs pistes cyclables en double, et une voie qui semble être une fiction. Donc tout est remis comme avant.

@ExoMal, you can (and should) achieve an order of magnitude better alignment accuracy using the UK OSM Cadastral parcels layer. Align the imagery to that (ignoring OSM mapped features) eg using low garden walls and pavement edges. Then align OSM data to that aligned imagery. This avoids repeated realignment to each new (often poorly aligned) version of imagery, and disturbing other users' good mapping

No problem. Yes, node or area are both ok for amenity, shop etc. The only information you didn't have is that "area" is just a way that is closed into a loop to form the boundary, and the only object types (that can have key=value tags) stored in OSM are really node, way and relation. So landuse areas, buildings etc are just stored as ways, although note you can also use relations (containing an outer and inner way loop(s)) to make areas with holes.

Welcome to OSM. It is entirely normal for a business or (in this case) amenity that occupies the whole of a building to have the tags on that building outline.
See amenity=pub
If the application you are using does not handle that, it is a fault of that application not the map. I have undeleted the building outline you wrongly removed in this changeset; do not delete valid mapping and degrade the map for your own benefit. (I have left the pub details on your node for now)

And the signposted permissive path?

Has the bridge at the upper lock been destroyed? Has the mapped permissive path been permanently closed?

The absence of a paved sidewalk does not make it illegal to walk along a road in the UK. In this case there is a verge; even if not provided it would be entirely legal to walk along the road. Your foot=no removed.

Welcome to OSM and thanks for adding your London showroom details, although your edit didn't seem to go as intended - you ended up with the London information on the Swansea location and also on a residential area around the London showroom.
I've reset the Swansea information and added a node in London which you can check/update as necessary:
node/4989144188/history
node/11042617097/history
Cebderby (Clive)

I've undeleted way/659403213/history
which carries a public footpath, wrongly deleted in this changeset.

Hi Phil,
There's a footpath-sized gap between the property boundaries on the Cadastral layer, but I've deleted this (non) way now, thanks.
Cebderby (Clive)

Reverted. This line was not a highway (hence highway=no) but the definitive line of the public footpath which the actual diverges from. It's correctly tagged and correctly exists.