Hello,
Are you sure that the "naptan:AtcoCode" on node/5784071207/history is correct? This appears to be in the museum; I'm guessing the code is for Didcot Parkway node/6605149662 .
Best Regards,
Andy

I suspect that way/521292120/history is not any sort of storage tank - by the name and the location I suspect it is a filter bed in a sewage works.

Please use sensible changeset comments that explain what you have actually done, especially when doing reverts.

To be clear - if you're performing automated tag changes (e.g. from "landuse=something" to some other tag) without any other investigation) then that's an automated edit and needs to be discussed.
If you're changing "highway=pirmary" to "highway=primary" than that's just fixing an obvious typo and doesn't.
If you're looking at the "suggestions" from iD or Rapid, some will be in the former category and some in the latter. You as a mapper make the decision to make the change - if you are just "trusting the tool" and not reviewing suggestions then it IS an automated edit and MUST be discussed.

This one had `landuse=conservation` (which is relatively rarely used, but see landuse=conservation ) - that sometimes means "there is something else going on, beyond just being a nature reserve", or it might be "it's a tag left over from 15 years ago and doesn't add any other value". You've added `blundary=protected_area` but without any protection information; without extra tags (see boundary=protected%20area?uselang=en-GB ) that is basically uncomsumable.

With regard to "random outdated tags in RapId" if you are performing what is essentially an automated edit (whatever tool you are using) then you must follow osm.wiki/Automated_Edits_code_of_conduct and discuss - the UK forum https://community.openstreetmap.org/c/communities/uk/86 would be a great place to discuss. Some of the changes suggested by iD / Rapid are sensible; some are questionable and some are utter garbage.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello Numbergod,
Is was wondering what the changes to way/103827772 were here? The changeset comment is just "Fixed various issues"; what actually was the change here?
Best Regards,
Andy

A web search right now (Google or DDG) only finds (a) OSM (b) SABRE and (c) other user-contributed data such as "Litter on slip road verge. Ducker Holt Interchange, Marr, Doncaster, South Yorkshire, England, DN5 7AS, United Kingdom".

Here's the diary entry:
@SomeoneElse/diary/397310

when one changes a cron job on the server that has the database for https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html sends me an email if relations might have a new gap, like

Change in relation components for Capital_Ring_Section_10 6473820
3c3
< 1
---
> 2
relation/6473820
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=6473820
http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=6473820

Hope this helps!

Thanks!

Thanks!

Hello,
I wonder if you might be able to fill in some of the gaps that there are in https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=6490318 ?
(you can use https://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=6490318 to "re-analyse" after fixing some to see what is left)
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks!

Hello,

It looks like this edit might have created a gap in the outer way of 8815682, the High Weald National Landscape relation. I've joined it up in changeset/165504890#map=20/51.1964417/0.1558513 .

You can check relations by using the "validate" button in JOSM.

Best Regards,
Andy

Hello, a quick question about the Rob Roy Way:
There's a bit of a gap currently at relation/189465#map=18/56.527225/-4.111209 . Do you know if that's deliberate (maybe the bridge can't be used for some reason) or accidental and just needs joining up?
Best Regards,
Andy

Best of luck, and I'm sure I'll call in once you've opened.
Today I'll have to carry on to the Cross Hills tap...

Is this definitely open?
Other sources suggest it may have closed late last year.
Hopefully it has reopened :)

Thanks - makes sense. I've changed it to "farm_auxiliary".

EV1 should be OK here now: http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=9540148 .
Also EV2 http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeRelation?relationId=5479822 .

Thanks for updating this to say that the change was based on local knowledge.

Thanks for confirming local knowledge here in the update to way/507631409/history .
(to anyone else spotting this - it's clearly visible on OSM-compatible imagery too).
Local knowledge I presume also applies to way/498577935/history (which is in the same area, and from which another mapper has removed the Google tag)