Hello,
Is there a new cycleway here that fills in the gap in relation/173236#map=16/51.7379/-3.5204 , or has that not been built yet?
Best Regards,
Andy

Also survey 20/04 (tr9810b) and 27/04 (tr9828b)

Hello M-NCPPC_Import,
As suggested over at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/tagless-points-and-lines-in-greenbelt-md/97992/31 you need to stop now.
To summarise:
* you're still importing new data without a licence waiver in place.
* you still haven't discussed this import with the community properly so that people can check what you are going to do
* you are still importing obviously incorrect data like a "30 foot high shed" way/1166123026 .
If you don't stop this import voluntarily we will block the account and revert what you have imported so far.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

I've asked at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-africa/2023-April/000919.html .

How did you verify "Rua João Alfredo Fontenelle"? The "Fontanelle" name has been used by local trolls (believed to be mostly one person, but 30 or so accounts, most now blocked and self-deleted).
In this example a genuine local user removed the name in changeset/134513875 .

See also changeset/135322384 .
Although this did restore e.g. 11905688 as a multipolygon, other node and way edits in the area might mean that the location of the border still needs checking.

Hello,
We'll have to undo some of your changes in the area because of some of your changes have broken relations here. An example before: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1ubr and after https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1ubs .
I'll revert these problematical edits so that you can continue editing with unbroken relations.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello swordslife, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Please use changeset comments that explain a bit more about what you are doing than simply "new" or "change".
Any Questions, please don't hesitate to ask.
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks - and if you think OSM has got any of the routes wrong here please let us know (or just correct them!)

Ah - so it was. I hadn't spotted that.

Looks like I got the wrong number. I'll reinstate it.

Hello,
I wonder if the foot=yes on way/744174597 should perhaps be on the adjacent footpath?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the service=driveway on way/1160897019 should perhaps be somewhere else?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello John,
I wonder if the surface=grass on way/888252222 was supposed to be somewhere else?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the surface=asphalt on way/557136501 might be supposed to be somewhere else?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the surface=ground on way/194193169 might have been intended for the nearby bridleway?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the surface=compacted on the hedge way/1161092934 might have been added by mistake?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the prow_ref on way/299219517 should perhaps be on the adjacent road?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that "disused:admin_level=Ulex europeaus" on way/655452132 presumably isn't what was intended?
Cheers,
Andy

Hi Dudley,
Any idea what the "maxheight=b" on way/1004438011/history might have been intended to be?
Cheers,
Andy