I started a discussion on Talk:gb.
Your previous changesets have been reverted by others.

As I wrote in that page's discussion section:
"This behaviour needs to be stopped. If the official name is 'St', to represent 'saint', as listed in street gazetteers or signage, then that is how it should be in the name tag (ground truth as it's known in OSM). If computer programmers (not computers) can't write code to distinguish abbreviations then they probably shouldn't be contributing to OSM."

There's no need for bicycle=no as highway=footway auto negates bicycles

way/234778671
This path stopped at the admin boundary as the prow_ref only applies to that administration. You need to add a separate way the abuts it on the other side of the boundary.

On what grounds have you made these amendments?

public transport tags shouldn't be included on tourist railways.

'public transport' is a *separate* tagging schema from railway=*
schema. They're added by users sue to an inept decision by the developers of the iD editor.

My request was for you to clarify why you think that svg image you posted is correct in deciding what a station is based on points/switches that are separate from the actual station.

From railway=station

"In Britain, after a discussion, railway=halt has been removed. All are now railway=station. It was felt the definition of halt was too ambiguous & subjective for OSM. Additional, objective, sub-tags are being added to stations such as request_stop=*, usage=*, platforms=* etc."

Discussion:
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-January/024096.html
https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-gb/2020-February/024097.html

Please explain why you believe track points, or lack thereof, often hundreds of metres from a railway station, defines a railway station.

Stop editing entities you've no comprehension of.
node/3773122118/history/41

This isn't Bath Sushi.

There is already a museum. Please don't duplicate. OSMand should show existing objects.

way/49797415/history/21
This street isn't signed as 'Saint.'
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=51.509729776633&lng=-0.12699710985027&z=17&pKey=1214950026423558&focus=photo&x=0.7226245723186094&y=0.3672774430618049&zoom=2.8147174770039425

The operator is London Overground
node/7147509522#map=19/51.648031/-0.052630

See also:
changeset/169906065#map=17/51.455434/-2.557610

I think he needs a zero hours block to grab his attention.

These are not busways. Look at the wiki. Stop vandalising the OSM database.

It's a public footpath
https://www.bing.com/maps?osid=fec7fbd3-bd5a-4785-88a8-fe66e2928af3&cp=51.376106%7E-2.385843&lvl=16.9&sty=s&style=s

Reverting changeset. Please don't make OSM less detailed & accurate.

Ah, that's changed a bit.
Given the bicycle road markings, separate pavements & cycle route relation, I think the Barton Hill Road section should be tagged as cycleway.

Ah, scrub that. I forgot what amendments I made myself.
However, do you know if this bollard is installed and actually blocks motor vehicles?

node/9261024541

I can't see it in this image taken in late May.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GrvwWqQX0AAEWx4?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

Hi
node/9261024541
Is this new bollard in the middle of the road? Does it prevent access by motor vehicles?

There's no sign of it in this image taken at the end of May, after the planters were installed.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GrvwWqQX0AAEWx4?format=jpg&name=4096x4096

To check: is this section of road definitely two way?
way/25873999

If do it means traffic can still go from Barton Hill to Morley St by driving around this as Ducie Rd has been made two way:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4559672,-2.5638002,3a,60y,310.76h,83.57t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s29z5ZhK5-VIgt7FPO2Pxxg!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D6.429596981969809%26panoid%3D29z5ZhK5-VIgt7FPO2Pxxg%26yaw%3D310.7598879993715!7i16384!8i8192?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MDcwOS4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D