The alignment looks good, thanks :)

Just another quick tip - if you press the Q key having selected a building it will "square" it so the corners aren't wonky.

Also, do you know if this road is actually open to vehicles? note/2610482

I moved the block you added onto the A78 to the service road: node/1287060514 - as I assume it's not on the main road :)
Have those traffic lights for the junction and pedestrian crossing been added recently as they aren't visible on the aerial imagery?

Thanks for the reply. If the tracks are still in place but not in use then it should be tagged as railway=disused (instead of abandoned, which is where the tracks have been lifted by you can still see the alignment)

Hi, have the tracks been lifted from this branch?

This change has been reverted. Please check the Bing imagery which clearly shows the road has been rebuilt with a curve.

Hi, please don't forget to "square" buildings instead of drawing them inaccurate and wonky. Also make sure you check the alignment of Bing imagery as it's usually offset compared to the OSM data.

Hi, welcome to OSM and thanks for the edits.
Not sure if you're aware but the Bing imagery is out of alignment - you can go into the editor's background settings and use the imagery offset to fix it (type in 1.5,-2.6).
I've fixed the building that you moved and also this recycling node as I think you dragged it across the map
node/498847384

Ok I've marked it as access=private so it should be faded out a bit

Hi, welcome to OSM. I've added this feature back to map - just because it's not public doesn't mean it can't be mapped, it can be tagged with access restrictions if needed.

I've fixed the buildings you added - just be aware that the Bing imagery is slightly out of alignment here so needs to be offset before being used for editing :)

What's the reasoning behind changing the cycleway alongside the tram into a footway and bicycle=no?

Why have you deleted all of these trees?

Well an office is not works=* so I've changed it to landuse=commercial :)

Hi, did you mean to add man_made=works around an office? way/919353697
You also deleted this node, but didn't retain any of the name/product information: node/6887221688/history#map=18/55.91440/-4.19851
And is this actually landfill? way/919353695

There's the talk-gb mailing list: https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb (there's a talk-scotland one as well but it's not exactly active).
Also the OSM forum and help sites listed here: osm.org/help

Think this track and path are duplicates? way/917623432
way/635420680
Also, if you are using Bing imagery please align it with the OSMUK Cadastral Parcels overlay or use offset 1.5,-2.6 in this area. Otherwise you're going to be mapping out of alignment with the current OSM data.

It's tagged as a tunnel already way/791082706 but if it's not big enough for a vehicle then highway=path would be better

Sorry but I've had to revert the deletion of this track. As you can see from https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/6757517 there is a tunnel here.

In future if you aren't sure whether something exists it might be worth leaving a comment on the original changeset, or using the "add a note to the map" to highlight the issue to other mappers.

Hi, if this is the incorrect name then do you know what the correct one is?

Thanks for the reply - just remember that Bing imagery is there as well! :)