Please do not attached ways going under bridges to those bridges. They are at different levels.
Do not unnecessarily split ways.
node/10562962454

You've duplicated a stile node.
node/10562962483/history

Do not split ways unless there is a difference in tags
way/1132923321

You've created 3 spurious/duplicating kissing gates & unnecessarily split an access land polygon
node/10562962486/history#map=19/51.36692/-2.34257

Similar here
node/10562962471

and here:
node/10562962474

Do you have a reason why this changeset shouldn't be reverted?

Hello again
When amending footways please don't miss out steps & bridges.

Have these two PROWs refs been removed from BathNES's database & has the route been officially realigned?
https://snipboard.io/8t5ibN.jpg

Is there a reason you've split this into an individual way?
way/1132923306

Has this PROW been officially realigned?
way/1132923334

What's wrong with this footway?
https://snipboard.io/yDwmHs.jpg

Hi

Are you sure this is a public footpath? It doesn't have a PROW reference.

way/1132923329

Please don't use highway=path. It was created by people who didn't understand the highway hierarchy. Use 'footway' instead.

There's no requirement to explicitly add motor_vehicle=no etc as 'footway' automatically excludes modes other than walking.

Have these paths been removed?
https://snipboard.io/4tAoUz.jpg

Bottom of path:
https://snipboard.io/zrcu4M.jpg

On the path looking down at Serpentine Lake
https://snipboard.io/cw20DE.jpg

At top of path looking back at car park:
https://snipboard.io/L0q7K2.jpg

osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Hi
Bond St station is already mapped

Please amend to this:
railway=subway_entrance

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-February/024101.html

Hi
Is this in use or disused?
way/226891882

Hi
node/269692305

All railway station in Britain are tagged as railway=station.

Classifying halts are considered too subjective. Request stops have their specific tag.

https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-February/thread.html#24097

Thanks.

What was the indoor map viewer?

Hi
FYI Level 0 is the default & doesn't require tagging.

What's the reason the main entrance is at layer 2?

Hi
way/174675400

I'm aware the area has been cleared of foliage, but how is it used as a track?

FYI
Waterways carry on under bridges.
way/1127838223

Yeas, but is it an admin boundary at any level?

This appears to be the governmental boundary for the area
relation/173478

Hi
way/835897345

You created a few place=village polygons around Cambridge. What was the reference/dataset for their boundary layout?

Not familiar with the area , but I'm uncertain it is a level 10 admin area or even one at all.

All the other ones surrounding it are civil parishes.

"The immediate one I spotted"

Great. Why didn't you say that in the first place? I would have concurred & fixed it.

That's not a town. Please remove that tag.

Sledge92 Please redact this inaccurate changeset.

Hi
A couple of years ago I contacted you privately about admin_level=11 tags, but received no reply.

Could you please confirm:

What data source did you use to add this boundary polygon? This & all your other additions appear very ad-hoc.

Which wiki page associates admin_level 11 with a boundary of a UK town?

Hi

Please don't add boundary tags to ways
way/1020818523#map=19/52.08677/1.29612

way/650597447/history#map=11/51.5401/-0.3282

Hi
To check, is the name you added to this path in the area, actually Public Right of Way references (prow_ref tag)? was it obtained from the local authority?