I'm now running a couple of checks of add:postcode values in the UK. The results can be seen at the pages linked from http://robert.mathmos.net/osm/postcodes/ if you fancy helping to check and fix any of them.

Can I ask what your source is for the postcode you added to Nattor Farm in way/400009733 and if you're sure it's correct?

According to Code-Point Open, the centroid for PL20 6PG lies about 15km away, close to a hamlet called Nattor (node/330256644). I wonder if there is another Nattor Farm there, and you've got the two mixed up.

Can I ask what your source was for the postcode "NE61 6TN" you added to way/221630765/history and if you're sure it's correct?

According to Code-Point Open, "NE61 6TN2" corresponds to a residential street about 3.7km away from the location of that node.

I think you created the node node/4770679165 for 239 Rayners Lane in this changeset. Can I ask what your source for the postcode of "HA5 4QT" is, and if you're sure it's correct?

According to Code-Point Open, the postcodes of th houses along that stretch of road should either be "HA2 9TU" or "HA2 9TX".

Are you sure the postcode of "B92 7AW" on node/4533741026 is correct? According to Code-Point Open, that postcode is located over 3km away from this node.

Are you sure the postcode of AB12 4SP for way/8038364 is correct, and if so what's your source for it?

According to Code-Point Open, AB12 4SP is for properties on a residential road, Clochandighter Drive, about 2km away.

The node node/1911766624/history added in this changeset seems to have a consistent address and postcode, but is not located in the right place. If the addr4ess is correct, surely it should be located at osm.org/#map=19/55.84837/-4.01978 .

In this changeset, you've created a node node/4776270621 with an address, but tagged it as a bank/building society. Abbey Street appears to be a residential street, so are you sure this is correct?

The ways in question are way/116516240 and way/484923139 . One appears to have been created by me, but was only the result of splitting the way to alter the highway=* tag on one part. The name="Path #1" was originally added by mapper cyclingmatt 6 years ago.

I agree "Path #1" is probably not appropriate as a name. But it will need someone with some local knowledge or access to the Definitive Statement / GIS data under a suitable licence to work out how best to tag this path.

It's the latest release of Code-Point from around the middle of January 2017. The points are a delivery point of an active postcode unit, chosen to lie closest to the geographic centroid of all delivery points for that unit.

It's quite possible that postcodes for a very new development are missing, and it's also possible that some old postcodes aren't removed promptly.

Apologies if the original one I "corrected" was already right. "BA1 1XF" isn't in the current version of Code-point Open, and instead there were two units located directly within the development. A source tag would have made me look more carefully though.

(The only definitive source of postcodes is Royal Mail. You can check an individual code at http://www.royalmail.com/find-a-postcode -- but you can't then use that information in OSM.)

It would appear so from the Code-Point Open data: http://oscompare.raggedred.net/?layers=BFFTFF&zoom=18&lat=51.3806&lon=-2.36582 .

I didn't check (carefully) or alter the number -- just corrected the collection times and added the box design. It's quite possible the plate now says B4, so if you think that's what it should be, then feel free to fix it.

Hi, did you make a mistake in the postcode for the house at way/479080611 ? -- There seems to be a number missing before the final two letters.

Is node/4693769397 correct?

The postcode (with corrected formatting) of NN18 0EG appears to be accurate, but from Bing arial imagery this appears to be a residential area, and an unlikely location for a wine bar.

In this changeset, you appear to have added lots of useful address information to the houses. However, many of the addr:postcode values on the buildings have been set to the literal text "<different>", e.g. way/219288498/history . I assume this was not intentional and it might be the result of a bug in the editing software you used.

A map showing all the objects with addr:postcode=<different> (including ones outside the UK) can be found at https://overpass-turbo.eu/?w=%22addr%3Apostcode%22%3D%22%3Cdifferent%3E%22+global&R .

I don't suppose you know any of the actual postcodes for the houses in the area of your changeset and so can fix them? (Be careful not to use any copyrighted datasets for this though.)

Oops -- now fixed, thanks.

Could I ask what your source for the postcode added to way/342156579 is, and if you are sure it's correct?

Code-Point Open has the centroid of "NR9 3BH" over 9km away from the church.

Could you have a look at the postcode you put on node/4599011671 ?

It's currently written as "LE3 OUR", with a letter "O" at the start of the second group. This character should always be a number.

With the obvious replacement of "0", the postcode becomes "LE3 0UR" -- but as far as I can see, this code belongs on the neighbouring street of Oakthorpe Avenue.

Are you sure the postcode of "CH46 7SJ" on node/4597864960 is correct? According to Code-Point Open, that postcode is actually located over 1.3km away on Mallard Way.

Are you sure about the postcode on node/4516185304 ? According to Code-Point Open, "BS16 7JR" is located about 1.5km away and is assigned to houses on Johnson Road.