Are you sure about farmyard for way/131423194 ? It looks a bit of a stretch, given the picture.

The wiki unfortunately is subject to "the last editor" adding their interpretation; it doesn't necessarily imply consensus.
"The globally accepted tag for recording the largest settlement in an address" will probably have some support, "(i.e. the "postal town")" significantly less so. I'd suggest that you discuss these edits with the local community via the talk-gb list before continuing.
Another problematic example is way/529770236 . I'm sure that people there would give their address as "Farndale" rather than the tiny hamlet of Church Houses, or York (which isn't the nearest town; it's 34km to Middlesbrough and 59km to York).

I wouldn't read too much into the postcode - that is just to do with how a particular company chose to automate delivery of post; it doesn't really have any bearing on where places are legally or where the people that live there think they are.
For example, where I used to live the postcode was actually for a city in a different county (and not the nearest county - one further away than that!)

I am not convinced that this is correct. For example https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/125736027 is not in York; it's nowhere near. It's been in 3 or 4 different subdivisions since 1973 or so; it's now in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Yorkshire_Council which is a unitary authority, and in terms of ceremonial counties also North Yorkshire, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ceremonial_counties_of_England .

Hello,
What was the "lat/lon experiment with Bus Stop"?
Best Regards,
Andy

I'm familiar with the area, but have used the Esri imagery here (less tree cover) to help trace the bed.

(oops - forgot to also link node/11194634525 and https://map.atownsend.org.uk/tmp/175024.jpg )

I'm guessing it's just someone with a bag full of stickers and a bit of wishful thinking - a bit like the "Camino Ingles to Santiago" (sic) at relation/14638771 . Obviously there are dozens of "official" Camino routes (see e.g. https://caminoways.com/camino-ingles ) but those stickers in Yorkshire don't match anything that I've found on the internet. I suspect that your "Jerusalem Way" might be similar.

There are references to "a sticker" at https://threepointsofthecompass.com/2022/02/12/trail-talk-the-miners-way/ . No idea if you can tell whether that sticker is yours!
I suspect that the Jerusalem Way being referred to in that article is https://www.jerusalemway.org/en/route/ , which I guess someone could "extend" into Kent...

I'm guessing that perhaps relation/11167888/history shouldn't be "historic=ty", but what should it be?

Another puzzle - "historic=tower" on relation/10837218/history seems unlikely - or have I just misunderstood what it is?

Hello,
should "historic=sou" on relation/10117075/history perhaps be "historic=yes"?
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Hello meongseolin,

I changed the admin level of Somaliland from 2 to 3 previously, so I can answer this.

The way that disputed territories are handled in OSM can be seen at https://osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf . When we last discussed the status of Somaliland, there were things in its favour (largely economically independent from Somalia) and things against (recognised as independent by almost no-one internationally).

Before we make top-level changes to things like this, it’s important to discuss them - https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/general/38/none would be a good place to do that.

Best Regards,
Andy (from OSM's Data Working Group)

Also ts0608b, ts0617b

I've checked - there's nothing here.

See https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/language-used-in-uae-names-of-towns-cities-wadis-mountains-etc-the-law-requires-that-they-be-recorded-in-arabic-english/108270

See forum thread https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/someones-added-building-plots-as-buildings/101306

szia d zsolt!
Először is – ez a módosításkészlet eltávolította a tagi módokat a 23096-ból – ezt láthatja, ha az alábbi "osmChange XML"-re kattint, és megnézi az XML végét. Látható, hogy az utolsó néhány kapcsolatnak nincsenek tagjai.
Ez persze nem magyarázza meg a történteket. Biztos vagyok benne, hogy nem volt rosszindulatú (tehát a balint36 erre vonatkozó javaslatai nem hasznosak), de valami elromlott, és ha nem próbálja meg kideríteni, hogy mi volt az, előfordulhat, hogy újra megtörténik.
Amikor feltölt a JOSM-mel, összefoglalót kap arról, hogy mit változtatott. Talán segítene, ha gyakrabban töltenéd fel, kevesebb változtatással az egyes changesetekben?
Üdvözlettel,
Andy

Hello zsolt d,
First things first - this changeset did remove the member ways from 23096 - you can see that by clicking on the "osmChange XML" below and looking at the end of the XML. You can see that the last few relations have no members.
This doesn't of course, explain what happened. I'm sure that it was not malicious (so suggestions of that by balint36 aren't helpful) but something did go wrong, and if you don't try and find out what that was, it might happen again.
When you upload with JOSM you do get a summary of what you've changed. Maybe it would help to upload more often with fewer changes in each changeset?
Best Regards,
Andy