This is a private facility. There is no public access except to customers. Even if there were then it would be access=permissive, not foot=yes.

`foot=yes` indicates that everyone has the legal right to access a place on foot. This is a private jetty, there is no public access.

access=*

Replacing wrong tags with more wrong tagging is hardly an improvement. Map changes should be individually reviewed unless there has been previous discussion of the edit in line with the automated edits code of conduct. Transmuting nonsense into more nonsense helps no one.

osm.wiki/What%27s_the_problem_with_mechanical_edits%3F

Why would they be tagged with the default assumption for that wetland type?

They're mangroves tagged in outside of the coastline, how could they be anything other than salt water and tidal?

Please don't put building tags areas that aren't actual buildings.

You needed to create a changeset spanning three continents to add "a missing road segment"??

Please save in between edits in completely different areas.

Is this not `emergency:amenity=social_facility` + `emergency:social_facility=shelter` rather than `emergency:amenity=shelter`?

Really?

I don't have a strong opinion on this, but I do think this feature has much broader recognition than Null Island.

I've struggled to tag facilities like these in the past. I think the most appropriate tag we currently have is `emergency:social_facility=shelter`.

emergency:=**

This seems to be a duplicate of: way/594022184

Is this the name that's actually on the sign?

Please use different changesets for uploads in different continents.

osm.wiki/Changeset#Geographical_size_of_changesets

Reverted due to prohibited source, see:

osm.wiki/Google

Reverted due to prohibited source and duplication of existing ways.

Please save in between edits in different continents.

What is the benefit of removing the human readable tag in favour of something more opaque?

Have you visited all of these yourself?

This new outline way/1413830616 seems to be a duplicate of both node/502475589 and ways 35039221 and 880148326.

If all the construction is complete and this is fully opened, shouldn't they be merged into a single "Arle Court Transport Hub" area? (as the council seems to call it: https://www.gloucestershire.gov.uk/ACTH )

Additionally, why have you added a new node (12992317188) for a multi-storey car park rather than adding the details about this parking area to the building outline (way/1243333964)?

osm.wiki/One_feature,_one_OSM_element