You seem to have added building=* to areas that should be tagged with building:part=*, with an enclosing building=* area. See osm.wiki/Key:building:part

Why have you removed the tag when according to the wiki it was tagged correctly? (See osm.wiki/Tag:highway=services?uselang=en-GB)

I don't understand why either if I'm honest. At least it's sorted now.

Why have the turning lanes in this junction been changed from "links" to "roads"?

Is this only accessible privately, or is it just privately owned? If it's just privately owned operator:type=private may be more appropriate, as access tags represent whether access is allowed.

+ added speed camera relation

I find it hard to see how you might have come to that conclusion. If you perform an internet search for "Kirby Muxloe Interchange" there are numerous results pointing to J21A, and using the name word-for-word.

Whether a name is used in an official capacity or not, that doesn't detract from its existence in common usage. As I'm sure you're aware the name=* key is intended for the name most commonly used. If not for the junction number being quicker to spell out, this would be the obvious way to refer to the junction.

Hi, what did you delete in this changeset?

I also must note that nothing about the existing tagging excluded bicycles - cycleway tagging is just used to identify explicitly designated cycle routes. bicycle=yes on highway=footway/path/track is more appropriate where there are no blue signs or council-published cycle route maps.

Please stop renaming junctions to carry the name of the through-route. Standard practice is to either tag the junction name or noname=yes on the way.

Hi, can you explain how this regards brands?

What made you delete the names from the exit nodes?

The junction is named in https://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2013/2639/pdfs/uksi_20132639_en.pdf

At the very least I think it should be tagged under official_name

Also added fences, abandoned but still present sliproads

Also added + tagged alleys

Also added crossing tags, signals

I've seen a lot of crossings with differing tagging specifically in London, namely crossing=traffic_signals on nodes and crossing=marked on ways and it seems to be a result of your edits.

crossing=traffic_signals is the most accepted way of tagging signalised crossings in the UK both on the node and the way. Why don't you match the tagging between the node and the way?

The currently accepted tagging for busways is highway=busway and highway=residential is definitely incorrect. Whether or not a feature renders on OSM carto, features should be tagged correctly and not however looks nicest. See osm.wiki/Tagging_for_the_renderer

Nah it's the renderer. The new busway tagging has only recently been adopted and hasn't yet been incorporated by OSM Carto. highway=busway is definitely the current tagging scheme - see osm.wiki/Tag:highway%3Dbusway

If you search "Golden Valley Bypass" you can find lots of articles and other sites referencing the "A40 Golden Valley Bypass," and with there being a B4063 Gloucester/Cheltenham Road via Golden Valley, it makes sense you'd call it that. OS may not recognise the name but it certainly is used.

OS OpenMap says the name is Roman Road, do you think that would be a suitable change?