Hi, what evidence have you that these are signed as A roads?
I am local and am they are certainly not signed as A roads and it is very obvious that these changes will cause some very stupid routing.
In OSM we map what we see and this type of armchair edit is extremely unhelpful.
Cheers Phil

I was only joking with you, hope you enjoyed Offa's Dyke.

That part of Shropshire is very Welsh, driving out that way you feel like you are in Wales long before you leave Shropshire.

Trefonen is in Wales? :)

No response so reverting

Sorry about that, I will re add the lanes.

Cheers Phil

No response, so have fixed

Hi, welcome to OSM. This is a very odd changeset, please could you explain?
Cheers Phil

Hi, this edit look a bit strange and I was wondering why you have changed the lifeboat station into a ferry terminal?
Cheers Phil

Alwyn
I am soory but was not aware of you asking me a question, but if you can point me at it?

Phil

Hi, this edit has gone a little bit wrong. You have added a name to a postbox, which cannot be correct.
I am reverting this change.

Hi Narod
This series of changesets have made this section of the A444 incorrect and very misleading.
Separate ways should only be used when there is a physical separation, which is not the case here.
If you want to represent lanes you should use lane tagging.
You have also broken the connectivity of footpaths, which no longer connect at osm.org/go/eu2oE9TpZ?m= and at osm.org/go/eu2oE4JoE--?m=
Also you have made the properties at the later location only accessible when travelling south, which imagery shows not to be true.
Please continue adding to OSM, but please do not add misleading information.
Cheers Phil

Please slow down and take account of existing mapping.
When adding osm.org/way/701095360 and crossing osm.org/way/166262202 you have ignored the presence of osm.org/node/1777223086 and osm.org/node/1777223094.
The service road should obviously intersect the footpath between them.
Cheers Phil

What source are you using to map the Kennet and Avon Canal Trail in OSM?

If there is no on the ground verification, and we certainly cannot refer to most of the other maps you have quoted, it is not helpful to map users to direct them to take the B4385.
At best this should be tagged as an unsigned:ref.
Cheers Phil

Hi
Please ensure that you are using the latest imagery and mapillary. The gaps were closed some time ago.
Cheers Phil

Hi, there is no need to add station to the name of a station. We know what it is.
I have restored the correct name.

Hi, when converting a way with defined access rights to another please ensure you maintain those.
The bridleway link in the existing way information will show you that a bridleway implies also foot and bicycle access,
The correct tag for horses is horse=yes and note that OSM tags are lowercase.
Cheers Phil

Please could you explain why you believe that this is public right of way for motor vehicles, despite existing tags saying that there isn't?
The existing ways are tagged as
designation=public_footpath which is a legal definition indicating that this is most definitely not a right of way for motor vehicles.
There could well be private motor vehicle access here, for owners to access their properties or for those that they invite, such as someone delivering parcels.
Cheers Phil

Hi
Please could you tell me the source you are using for this change?
It seems very unlikely and I do not recall seeing any such signage.
Cheers Phil

What sources have you used which would suggest that this is a public right of way for motor vehicles?
Cheers Phil