That may be the case, but access tags in OSM reflect verifiable legal restrictions, not subjective opinions. Pedestrians use the highway by absolute right unless there is a traffic order and associated signage (pedestrians prohibited, TSRGD diagram 625.1), which is not the case here. If it were the case, it would render 8 bus stops legally inaccessible.

There are tags you can correctly add to help pedestrian routers decide whether or not to use a road:
maxspeed=*
sidewalk=*
verge=*

Tagging, including absence of pavements/sidewalks, updated in changeset/171080923

In a mowed area of grass?

Are you *sure* that this open air sports court is a building?

way/1328976827

Dragged nodes reverted in changeset/171077931

Are you sure that the area of grass visible in the aerial imagery is now woodland?

Unfortunately you've dragged a couple of nodes here, extending an area of grass across two roads and causing a kink in Springwood Avenue.

Which map feature was not the correct size?

I've reverted this in changeset/171077509

+source=Bing street side imagery

+source=Bing street side imagery

Thanks for updating this, but please use access=private for this rather than access=no. They're not synonyms and access=no on its own means nobody can use it unless it's overridden by other access tags.

Thanks for spotting that - I should have noticed and fixed it when I updated the bridge signs and restrictions.

You could have read the documentation from links within the iD editor which you used, to understand the meaning of a tag before deleting or changing it. If you really didn't know what the effect of deleting the highway tag would be, you shouldn't have done it. I apologise for using the term vandalism when reckless might have been more apt.

Give way markings aren't crossing markings.

Give way markings (two parallel rows of dashes) aren't crossing markings.

I'm actually based in London rather than Manchester, but stayed there last weekend. I noticed some unusual behaviour planning running routes and while using StreetComplete/SCEE and decided to take a closer look.

In the last year, there was a Map with AI project using a task manager to add pedestrian infrastructure in Manchester (and in several other cities in the UK and US). While this is a good idea in principle and could provide better routing for pedestrians and those with mobility or visual impairments. In practice having separate sidewalks and crossings added as a checkbox exercise by inexperienced mappers with inadequate supervision and review can produce results which are worse than if nothing had been added. Typically, we end up with mis-mapped crossings, crossings at a crossroads where 8 sidewalk ways and 4 crossing ways share 4 kerb nodes (causing routing along edges which do not cross roads to traverse misplaced kerbs), unconnected/dead end sidewalk segments, separate sidewalks added to minor roads with no crossing infrastructure, and pretend crossings added in an attempt to make the preceding item "work".

In this case, it was one or more MwAI users who added incomplete separate sidewalks parallel to Store Street where it passes in a tunnel underneath the forecourt of Manchester Piccadilly station. They failed to add appropriate layer or tunnel tags to those sidewalks and must have ignored editor warnings about crossing ways. This was compounded by VLD292 simply connecting those sidewalks with that of Piccadilly Station Approach without adequately checking aerial or street side imagery to establish whether they were physically connected, which would have confirmed that they are not.

Pedestrian mapping at major transport interchanges in particular needs to be done carefully by experienced mappers who actually care what they are doing. A missed plane, train, or coach resulting from failing to take a short-cut which does not exist could be very expensive and inconvenient.

(User reported to DWG)

I have deleted these useless sidewalks. As a pedestrian, I find it terribly inconvenient to move 5 metres vertically between footways, even when there isn't solid concrete inbetween. I have deleted this useless and irresponsible fiction.

The mapping of pedestrian infrastructure in OSM is actually used by real people in the UK and doing it badly causes real inconvenience. This is an area where doing the job badly is invariably worse than not doing it at all.

Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

You inadvertently dragged part of a building and a fence on Old Queen Street onto traffic lights on Broad Sanctuary. I've restored them in changeset/170733792

I see that you added layer=-2 to the sidewalk of Jermyn Street / Duke Street St James. It seem unlikely that it is actually subterranean, so I am guessing that you used Rabid's helpfult feature to let you hide a potential problem with a highway-building intersection. Please either fix the problem or ignore it rather than adding fake layer=* tags.

Was there any particular reason why you replaced sidewalk:both=separate with sidewalk=separate on Poland Street, Great Pulteney Street and Lexington Street?

(Already fixed by another user)

Pedestrian only crossings of public roads in the UK are *never* marked with dashes.

The dashed markings on Hulme Street either side of its junction with Cambridge Street are give way markings. They have nothing to do with the crossing other than the coincidence of proximity.