Hi
I am not sure you can make the jump from electrified=yes to power_supply=yes without a survey to check what the mapper actually meant. It could mean that there is electricity for lighting. It would be unusual to provide mains power to a socket in a train shelter as these are not usually weatherproof.
I know that electrified is an odd tag, but rather than blindly fix you could maybe add a note so that a passing mapper can survey and check or simply ask the original mapper what they meant.
Odd tags can indicate other issues, blindly fixing them based on the wiki makes these issues harder to spot.
Cheer Phil

Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong. Sea Villa is already mapped and you have created a duplicate which needs to be removed.

Maps.me is broken when it comes to hotels as it does not display what is in OSM already, you should always check with another source, such as osm,org, before adding hotels with maps.me.

Also please keep your changes to sensible areas, this should have been split into two changes.

Cheers Phil

Also wondering why you removed the tags from the building and created a separate node?

I realise its not a clinic, but it would be better to have corrected the existing tags.

Cheers Phil

Also the general history tag on osm.org. When I am looking for changes in my area I saw this changeset, which having looked at it does not affect my area.

Hi
In OSM we have a rule one real life object = one osm object. There is only one hospital here. The extra hospitals should probably be tagged as building entrances, please to not mistag for the renderer.

Cheers Phil

Hi, what is the source of these edits?

Farmland seems very odd, I cannot imagine a farmer planting crops or grazing animals on an airfield?

Cheers Phil

Hi, welcome to OSM.

Unfortunately the Travelodge is already mapped, when it comes to hotels maps.me is very broken and hides existing OSM POIs.

I am reverting this edit.

Cheers Phil

Way way/761026742 is service, not residential also why have you put it as layer=-1?

Cheers Phil

way/761220808 is not an unclassified road, it is at best a track leading into a field, adding it as an unclassified road shows you are not applying due diligence when reviewing.

RapiD is very poor quality, and has too many false positives to be of any use. You certainly cannot map tracks through woods using it based purely on tree cover.

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has gone very very wrong.

We have been looking at Facebook AI over the last few days and it is certainly not ready to be used. You have clearly not understood what it has detected.

For example way/760814325 is a hedge as is way/760814327 and quite a few others.

Way way/760814329 is just a tramline left by a tractor, not a track.

This data you have used is too unreliable and this changeset should be reverted.

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edits has lost quite a lot of detail. Ashby Castle was mapped quite well, as a series of walls. Replacing them with a building doesn't really do it justice.
Have you actually been there?

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong.

This is not a residential road, no houses facing it, no proper junction with give way markings, low quality surface and it is very unlikely that a single residential road.

The position of cars suggest it is a car park.

Cheers Phil

Thank you

This is a new development, it was only built about a year ago, street names do not change and it is fairly obvious that the original mapper had the location slightly wrong. Maybe he only knew it was just off the roundabout by the Shrewsbury Club.

It is 100% Coracle Close

Cheers Phil

Hi, I would be very interested to see the evidence you used to map way way/50640363 :)

Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit has gone a little wrong, you have deleted and not replaced surveyed imformation.

Most importantly you have simply deleted Coracle Close, which had been added by a local mapper by going and having a look.

Whilst it wasn't perfectly mapped, it was not wrong and was added before aerial imagery was available. It was good enough to find Coracle Close. You have now thrown that information away, by deleting rather than improving on it.

Cheers Phil

Mike, this area is available in Bing Streetside which we are allowed to use.

I can see no evidence to support tagging these roads as private. In fact a right of way sign can be seen on Elstree Hill. The roads a unsurfaced which suggests Unadopted but access in OSM is legal, not ownership.

Using the available evidence I suggest that the access tags be removed and surface tags added.

Cheers Phil

Hi, welcome to OSM. In OSM we add things that exist, you have added a historic residential road that does not exist and passes through buildings. I have therefore removed it.

Hi, this edit has broken a lot of routing around the city.

You have added barrier=kerb to crossing nodes, which are in the middle of the road and hence blocking routing along these roads. Please could you explain why you did this, iD is not suggesting such edits to me?

Barrier=kerb should obviously be at the edge of a road, please take care when making automated edits suggested by iD.

Cheers Phil

HI, I think this edit has gone a little wrong as in this changeset you have changed several cycleways (which are part of a long distance cycleroute) to footways. Please could you explain your logic for these changes?
Cheers Phil