Hello,
osm.org/way/1278075660 is an unfeasibly large building. Can you help us by saying what you are trying to add here?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the path from the southwest joins either a little bit south of a little bit south of this stile - can you remember which it is?
Best Regards,
Andy

I don't think that "shop=mobility" is correct here. That'd be a place where you _buy_ mobility scooters. Shopmobility places tend to be tagged differently, see https://github.com/SomeoneElseOSM/SomeoneElse-style/blob/master/style.lua#L8068 .

I've added "cuisine=pizza" to this because I think it's a fair bet :)

https://www.yorkshirewater.com/media/f10fpjkw/yky-bioresources-market-information-2020.xlsx

Hello,
osm.org/node/11742283562 seems a bit odd - there's a gate in the middle of a stream and then a bit of a gap until this node?
Cheers,
Andy

Hello,
There are a few "meadow=padd" around here - see https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1HSE . Is that a misspelling of "paddock"?
Best Regards,
Andy

I believe that you've significantly misplaced osm.org/way/963064447 (in fact, most of it it should not exist at all since it's basically mostly osm.org/way/124121572 ). When NPE maps were created, there was a significant error added that matches your alignment. I lived there for many years and spent a lot of time making sure that what was mapped in OSM mapped reality (including former railways). You have undone much of that hard work.

Thanks for updating this - but just for info if you look at http://ra.osmsurround.org/analyzeMap?relationId=2519639 and zoom in on Burntisland you'll see a little gap and an extra bit along the old route that hasn't been removed yet.
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that there's actually a connection to the road at osm.org/node/11655801931 (at least for foot traffic) as well? Or is there some sort of wall here?
Best Regards,
Andy

Just wondered if osm.org/relation/10841834 should really be a "historic=tower" - I wonder if maybe something like "townland" was what was intended?

... based on my visits around that time not selling 98 octane was pretty unlikely too. Obviously it's now 2023, so different again.

3 of them (1029956922, 1029956923, 1029956924) also have a "peak=yes" tag. If this is really a "natural=peak", then adding a node where appropriate would also make sense.

What I can't see is how you'd easily cross east to west. Also, lots of other NCN52 is missing here.

It looks like osm.org/way/1101338499 is an invalid duplicate of what is now a cycleway.

Hello - just checking - can shop=vacant be removed from https://osm.mapki.com/history/way/617266279 ?

Hello CESTU,
Please use meaningful changeset comments that explain what your are changing and what the source was.
Best Regards,
Andy

@અંકલેશ્વર does this need reverting?

Hello,
I think something's gone a bit wrong on the wikidata side of things: https://www.wikidata.org/w/index.php?title=Q116774792&action=history . I've changed "promotory" to "promontory" in OSM, but wikidata still has it in the item description.
Cheers,
Andy

Hello and welcome to OSM!,
Please don't "label" routes like this. Many of the ways that make up the Pennine Way have other names; many are also part of other routes.
If the name of a route is in OSM, then maps that want to can use that, for example https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#18/53.36923/-1.82544
(there the route name is in purple the thing in brackets is the local footpath reference, and the duplicated Pennine Way name in black is the name added in this changeset).
Also see e.g. https://hiking.waymarkedtrails.org/#?map=11.0/53.3745/-1.7819 .
Best Regards,
Andy
PS: any questions, please don't hesitate to ask!