Cities aren't a meaningful administrative unit in England. The previously and correctly tagged admin_level=8 corresponds to "Metropolitan districts, non-metropolitan districts, London boroughs".

In England, admin_level=10 is used for parish councils.

Please read the following before you "correct" any further administrative boundaries.
boundary=administrative#admin_level=*_Country_specific_values

As this could break queries, I have reverted your changeset.
changeset/153122564

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for updating the map.

Although the iD editor you're using unhelpfully presents all the common access tags as if they all need to be completed, you usually don't need to change them on highway=footway lines. The default access allows pedestrians and forbids everything else. The other access tags are only needed where there are exceptions.

osm.wiki/OSM_tags_for_routing/Access_restrictions#United_Kingdom

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

In most cases, you don't actually need to add oneway=no to roads, as they are two way by default. Adding the tag does no harm, but it is unlikely to have any effect on routing software.

oneway=*

@InsertUser Thanks. I'll leave it in DWG's hands.

500 of these possibly re-inserted in changeset/152889949

All of these are at version 1, so they have been created (or re-created) rather than restored. This means the the entire edit history of these objects has been lost.

Please could you supply some information about the changeset(s) which deleted these objects. This changeset and the changesets which deleted the objects should be reverted.

Rather than deleting features which exist and are visible on aerial imagery, it is far better to add appropriate access tagging to indicate that they are private. If a feature is deleted, it is likely to be re-added later, without the access tags.

You may find this page in the wiki useful, as it addresses a similar issue.
osm.wiki/Why_we_won%27t_delete_roads_on_private_property

I have restored the parking area and added appropriate tags in changeset/152875149

No problem, thanks for replying so quickly.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap. Please could you explain why you added and then removed ~50 buildings?

Please also supply a meaningful changeset comment.

Thanks.

Unfortunately, this created an issue rather than fixing it. Adding motor_vehicle=designated means that the road is intended for use by ALL motor vehicles. Signage at the entrance is no entry (for all vehicles) except local buses.

TfL and bus company tow trucks and Newham street cleaning vehicles have explicit permission which is covered by access=private.

I have re-tagged the roads as access=private + bus=designated and removed the motor_vehicle=designated tags.
changeset/152728183

Why delete the website tag, rather than add a schema? It's https://www.leshuttle.com/

Thanks.

This POI is not a historic memorial, it's an artistic representation of fictitious and therefore ahistorical character.

A statue, bust or blue plaque commemorating Peter Pan's author would be a historic memorial.

I would have the same objection if any statue or sculpture of a character from myth or legend were tagged as a historical memorial.

Hi,

I can see what you were trying to do with this edit, but the tag motor_vehicle=designated means that it is designated for ALL motor vehicles. Think of the designated access value as being like yes, but stronger. For example, public footpaths are generally tagged designation=public_footpath + foot=designated.

The previous tagging of access=private + bus=yes means that buses may always use this road, but other transport modes, like TfL tow trucks and Newham street cleaning vehicles may only do so with explicit permission. It might make more sense to change it to access=private + bus=designated

Did I miss tourism=artwork + artwork_type=sculpture being deprecated?

How can an artistic representation of a fictional character possibly be a memorial? It's clearly a tourism=artwork, not historic=memorial. Please revert.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap and thanks for adding this public footpath.

If you're updating public rights of way in this area, you might find this resource useful:
https://osm.mathmos.net/prow/progress/oxon/south-oxon/

I've added the PRoW tags to the path you added.

There may be a reasonable case for making it access=destination, but this user's edit to the Browning Road bridge in #152538450 suggests that they're trying to fix a bug in routing software by editing OSM

Reverted. If you don't understand the tagging, please don't change it.

The camera "catches" people who make a deliberate choice to break the law by deliberately ignoring a traffic sign.

Reverted.

Not being able to use this as a short-cut is access=permissive (as previously tagged) or access=destination. If your routing software sent you this way, you should file a bug report with the software provider.