Hi, I'm very sorry I did indeed try to look into this quite thoroughly but was only able to establish that Dougism was a fiction. Indeed often a quite crude if not rude fantasy. If you can show some form of verifiability as to the physical on the ground presence of the feature then I would indeed reconsider. The POI was in private farm grounds, only open one minute a week, all very suspicious.

I welcome you to show me wrong and I'll apologise profusely.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I tweaked the buildings as they are all joined together and the same size.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

If there is a locked gate it's better to map that gate rather than tag the path as access=no because there would surely be access to the gate from either side of the gate.

Regards Bernard.

I made a mistake, (I forgot to upload an edit when I stopped for tea), is that hate or merely someone trying to help? You choose whatever you wish, it will be your decision, you will have to live with it. For myself, I will never hate anyone, ever, for any reason.

The edit over a large area was a mistake, however, it makes nothing worse. It may require a bit more thinking but that's all. You may even gain from the experience.

Sincere Apologies Bernard.

Fiction removed.

Hi, you added bridge tags to all the path sections, about three-quarters of a mile, no problem I've removed those tags.

Regards Bernard.

No response so I've reverted the school outline off of the path.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I tweaked the address a bit to go with OSM practice. If you want to add the flat numbers and maybe entrances there is some guidance here:- addr:flats=*

Need any help please just ask.
Regards Bernard.

Hi, Why do you keep deleting areas, it can clearly be seen that the meadow areas were separated by highways? If they need amending please amend the existing features thus keeping the history.

Please don't connect new areas and fences to highway centerlines, this is not ground truth.

Please respond to comments on your changesets.
Regards Bernard.

remove fiction names.

Field outline removed from highway centerline.

Hi,
A tree row would not likely be directly on top of and joined to a ditch it might be slightly to one side and not joined. It's also unlikely that gates would be directly joined to ditches, a gate might be joined to a bridge on a track or path going over a ditch.

Please try to avoid joining area outlines to the center lines of highways.

Does the path Way: 40592439 go through the gate Node: 9021351750? If so they ought to be joined together so the gate is a barrier to the path.

Regards Bernard.

It's also a good idea and good OSM practice to limit changesets to 10 or 21 objects. Thus it is much easier for you or anyone else to see any mistakes and make corrections. And it would have been easy to reinstate the objects you deleted.
In this changeset you've added 124 objects, imagine trawling through them to pinpoint a mistake.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

It's OSM practice that amendments/corrections when needed are made to any originally mapped objects rather than deleting and redrawing the object. In your deletion of 24 objects you have, (probably inadvertently), removed all of the histories that were associated with those objects. Would you please consider reverting this changeset and correcting rather than deleting objects?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

I don't think the shop is really joined to the centerline of the highway? Could you please position it more precisely?

Regards Bernard.

Hi, Welcome to OpenStreetMap.

What was odd about the footpath, it can clearly be seen on Bing imagery? If you know the area perhaps you could improve the footpath mapping rather than merely deleting it. I could reinstate the path so you can improve it, if you wish.

Regards Bernard.

Hi, You've now made the footpath (Way: 4715818) zig zag in and out from the school boundary. The school boundary also now crosses into a garden of Crabtree Lane. Surely this isn't right? I did correct the path line yesterday. Do you want me to correct it again or can you correct it?

I've removed more building height tags of 2 metres, (six and a half feet) which don't seem right. Building height is usually taken from the average terrain level to the high point of the roof, as per the link already commented.

Regards Bernard.

Square up buildings.

Square up buildings.

Square up buildings.