Thank you for confirming. I've updated its tags in osm.org/changeset/142966491 and moved it closer to the road outside the boundaries of the heath.

The "highway=rest_area" seems wrong to me. Aerial photography looks like more of an "amenity=parking", "parking=layby" where you wouldn't expect to find toilets. Does this seem reasonable?

I've fixed these and others nearby in osm.org/changeset/142106296

As ever, thank you for your helpful work to improve the map.

You have tagged these four new buildings with building=terrace, which is the tag for a row of terraced houses, not an individual terraced house: osm.wiki/Tag:building=terrace

It makes more sense to use building=house and house=terrraced here.

This change adds an embankment at osm.org/way/1098380785 that goes straight through an existing cycle path at osm.org/way/669688779 - it seems unlikely that this is correct so I have created a note at osm.org/note/3865001

Thank you for the helpful explanation. Your change would have been easier for me to follow if you had extended the existing way osm.org/way/83250677 instead of adding a new way at osm.org/way/1190965461

Thank you for this. I noticed a typo in the name of Albion Tap which I have fixed in osm.org/changeset/139960314

Thank you for adding this: I have added more details in osm.org/changeset/139960125

Hi, I realise these changes are from a long time ago, but you have mapped a castle at osm.org/node/2947977788 that aerial photography suggests doesn't exist, and probably hasn't existed for a long time.

I've created a note at osm.org/note/3835208 in the hope that someone with better knowledge than me can fix this.

Easily done: thanks for your quick reply.

Thank you for your work on the map. A previous discussion we had at osm.org/changeset/116631600 suggests this is incorrect. What do you think?

This change seems odd to me: you claim to have used OS OpenMap Local (October 2022) as your source but I do not see this road named on that map. Did you get the name from somewhere else?

Also, are you sure the road is named "Coblers" with one "b" and not "Cobblers"?

Thank you for improving the map.

This change adds osm.org/node/8645541477 tagged as amenity=bus_station, but it looks more like a depot=bus.

Also it looks like it's a duplicate of osm.org/way/41184797 so it might be worth deleting the node, copying relevant tags onto the way and fixing the tags to use landuse=industrial, industrial=depot, and depot=bus.

Does this seem correct to you?

Thank you for improving the map.

I notice you have tagged osm.org/way/222756984 as amenity=bus_station but its name suggests it's a bus depot: osm.wiki/Key:depot

Also aerial photography suggests it's part of osm.org/way/488047087 rather than a separate bus depot.

I think these changes might fix the unresolved note at osm.org/note/3762012

Well spotted: I hadn't noticed the way is already tagged as stepping stones. I agree it makes sense to remove the tags from the node in this case.

Unfortunately taginfo shows nothing helpful about other tags used for stepping stones: https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/tags/ford=stepping_stones#combinations

However comparing https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1xcR and https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1xcT suggests that flood_prone=yes has more use on stepping stones than intermittent=yes

Thank you for updating this. The fixme note is particularly useful. I've removed the old "disused:amenity=toilets" tag in osm.org/changeset/138268136 as the building shows no sign of its previous use.

Thank you for making this useful improvement. osm.wiki/Tag:ford%3Dstepping_stones seems like a more suitable tag than "ford=yes" so I have made this further improvement in osm.org/changeset/138267872

I haven't used Street Complete yet but keep meaning to try it some time. Thank you for letting me know.

Thank you for this helpful change. I notice both these nodes still have "naptan:verified=no". If these are nodes are tagged correctly in the right location you might want to removed this tag as described at osm.wiki/Key:naptan:verified