Hi... Can you explain the source of this boundary? It doesn't look like it is a real administrative boundary (a council area). It also looks too broad to be the real town of St Helens. What was your frame of reference?

Hi... I'm reverting this as Derby City Council is a Unitary Authority and as such carries admin_level=6.

Hi! May I ask how you determined the exact location of Windy Gyle peak? The boundary now seems to be some distance away from the *(accurately surveyed) {lat,lon} location given by the OS in Boundary-Line, although it does now align with some aerial imagery, which is known to be susceptible to misalignments.

I am not sure whether they are "needed" or not. That is very subjective - you might not see the point of label nodes, but clearly many people do. That's why you should discuss such things instead of deleting other people's work.

You might want to revert this and discuss it first. It could be considered controversial.

Where did you get this "border" from?

Hi... What "town" is your new boundary supposed to represent? osm.org/relation/13466955#map=13/53.4512/-2.6779

Hi... Where is it written that 1900 nodes is the limit? Did you run into a problem with a specific tool? I always thought the limit was 2000 - see https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/365/is-there-a-limit-on-the-number-of-nodes-in-a-way

How did you do this - just by dropping a couple of nodes?

Hi! Not sure this is a good move. Boundary relations support outer/inner roles in the same way as MPs. Other protected areas happily use type=boundary. As an MP it still shows up on a map but map not get found in searches on the data as type=boundary is kinda expected. What was your rationale behind the change?
Cheers, Colin

Hi! I know you are new to OSM, but can you please try to get into the habit of leaving meaningful changeset comments? No need to state what you are editing (that is obvious) but some background as to why, plus your sources, would be a good start.
Thanks, and happy mapping!
Colin

Hi,
How did you get these coastlines from the OS Boundary-Line data? I can't see these islets in the high water mark data, and they don't match the admin boundary either (which corresponds to low water anyway).

Hi Matt,
Welcome to OSM! You just put your foot in one of OSM's termite nests. I fully agree that consistency is worth a lot. However if you put it to the vote (another termite nest) I think there would be as many people supporting "St" as supporting "St.". When it comes down to it, there's no wrong or right, just personal preference. Mine happens to be without the dot, in line with documented BE practice and also slightly more concise, but far be it from me to suggest you reverse these changes.... It's accepted policy to avoid abbreviations in street and place names (i.e. write West instead of W, and Road instead of Road) but "St" is an accepted exception because these days the unabbreviated form is basically never used. If I changed "St Albans" into "Saint Albans" it would take just a few minutes before it was changed back.

Hi,
What's the background to this edit? Normal British English usage is to omit the full stop, as the final letter of the abbreviation is also the final letter of the full word, i.e. it is a contraction.

Hi... I'm not sure these historical names are appropriate on this specific relation. London was tiny then, not much bigger than the "City of London" today. I suggest you look for a place-node around the City for these names.

To produce the GPX files on the OSM wiki I wrote a program to wrap the conversion/splitting process, which uses MapWinGIS as the GIS engine. The transform I declare for the input files (straight from OS) is "+proj=tmerc +lat_0=49 +lon_0=-2 +k=0.9996012717 +x_0=400000 +y_0=-100000 +ellps=airy +towgs84=375,-111,431,0,0,0,0 +units=m +no_defs" and the projection I request from the reprojection is "+proj=longlat +ellps=WGS84 +datum=WGS84 +zone=30 +north +no_defs +towgs84=0,0,0"
Does this help? If you have a QGIS project you could share I could look at it from that angle.

What is your ultimate source? The existing admin boundaries come from the OS. I guess any misalignment could be due to the transform applied from OSGB to WGS84. I know I spent quite some time on getting the right transform - there are various versions in circulation. The transform I use aligns with the results that others get, and aligns nicely with natural features etc.

oops sorry, I see that you have reused the existing nodes, but you have moved them over... Interested in the background to that!

Hi Jack, thanks for sharing the ways between the admin and ward boundaries! I notice your boundaries seem a bit offset by a few metres compared to the OS boundaries... Is that the reason you delete the existing nodes and create a completely new way instead of just splitting the existing one? I would like to understand where the offset is coming from though... Can you point me at your source and/or send me one of your data files?

Hi,
I have adjusted this ward boundary to follow "accepted good practice" by sharing a way where it has a common boundary with other admin/political areas. It would be appreciated if you could follow this model... If you have any questions please feel free to ask.

And are you sure that it's ok to add data from the OS API to OSM under the terms of the OS API Licence?