Hmm, in that case it's probably best to remove the "no" tag, and leave it up to routing software to decide what's best to route.
In this case you should add tags for that.
way/129775961 has max speed tagged, but way/85395164 doesn't.
Neither have the existence or otherwise of the pavement tagged.
See sidewalk=* for how to tag pavements (the sidewalk tag is used). If there are none here then sidewalk=no would be best.

Hi, you requested a review of this.
Thanks for updating here, if this whole area is now a construction site then you could change the outline of those ways to reflect that.

No worries. I thought it was, but also wanted to double check since you'd requested a review.
Here you'd actually also moved the edge of the field (the field and the path were stuck together). I've been in and fixed that for you.
Happy mapping!

Great, no worries

Hi, you requested a review of this edit.
It looks good, to me as you've only changed the name.
Are the opening hours the same as before?

Hi, you requested a review, and this looks good. It would be best to square the corners (right click and select "square")
I've done that for you here.
Also, it you know the addresses of nearby houses then please add them too
Happy mapping!

Hi, you requested a review of this edit and it mostly looks good, thanks for adding this path.
Just a couple of things, first the name should only be used if that is actually a signposted name, what you've put looks more like a description.
Also, you should leave the general access tag unset (rather than "no" which you put), since it's tagged as cycleway the fact that there's no access to cars is implied by that.

This edit looks good too, assuming that pedestrians are not allowed on those roads (tagging the access as no means they're not allowed, not just that it isn't advised).

Hi, you requested a review of this edit and I'm happy to say it all looks good.
Welcome to OpenStreetMap and happy mapping!

Hi, you requested a review of this edit.
Is the southern section of Colebrooke Lane private for cars too? You've only set it as private for pedestrians at the moment.

Hi, you requested a review of this edit and my only comment would be that setting the general access to private (access=private) implies that same access for all types of transport, so there's no need to set motor_vehicle and foot to private as well.

Hi, you requested a review of this edit. It looks like you've added lots of detail to Daisy Grey, which is great.
Just wondering if The Fox is permanently closed? In which case it might be worth changing the tag to "disused:amenity"="pub", rather than "amenity"="pub"

Hi, you requested a review of this edit and I'm happy to say it all looks good.
Welcome to OpenStreetMap and happy mapping!

Hi, you requested a review of this edit and I'm happy to say that it all looks good to me!
Happy mapping!

Hi, you requested a review of this edit. I'm not quite sure why you've moved the edge of the residential area here. I'm not local to the area, but from aerial imagery, it seems that it had been in the correct place.

Looks good, there was a tag "FIXME:nsl" where the previous mapper had said "inferred single-carriageway NSL - remove this tag once verified"
So I've now removed that.
Also, there are a couple of bits in Warmington where you haven't changed the speed limit. Are they still 60, or did you just miss them? (Easily done)
The sections in particular are:
way/103721364
way/355287213
way/355287219

Hi, did you request review because you were hoping for someone local to confirm that this is in current use?
If so, probably best to leave a note instead as that can more easily be spotted later

Looks good, it looks like you have all of the important information tagged on the house.
Is it really that shape though?
If it's actually rectangular then you can right click and square the corners.
Also if you know the area it would be great to add addresses nearby too. Either tagged on the buildings or as new points.

Hi and thanks for adding this.
Couple of things, first I initially got access denied on the image, but it now seems to be working (may have been my end?)
Also, your description is a bit long. You've linked to your website, which has those details and more.
The wiki: description=*
suggests keeping the description to a few words or maybe a couple of sentences.
Also, it's worded a bit like an advert, which OSM isn't the place for.

Looks good to me