("Macmillan Way", obviously)

OK, so all of the railway up to the viaduct should be in the route relation then. Is the walking route over the viaduct where the old railway was? If so, there probably shouldn't be separate ways for the footpath and former railway.
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks - When I find one of those I normally stick a note explaining what the problem is, like node/9183668826 .
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
In this changeset you've introduced a break in the Wye Valley Walk Relation (61495).
Although tree cover doesn't show the path, GPS traces do: way/892359052#map=19/51.75488/-2.67327&layers=G .
https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1cdO shows how things were before this change. Do you know if the route north from the road to the footpath is actually blocked?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
A quick question about the Wye Valley Walk. You've removed way/142984694/history here - it used to connect the old railway going south with the road by the pub and the "Wye Valley Walk" relation (61495) used to run along it.
There's now a gap, but looking at the imagery I'm guessing walkers would just continue south from the viaduct along the former railway?
Also, it's not clear that way/122131393 and way/64804979 should really be different things.
Unfortunately, I'm ot familiar with this area. Maybe you are and could fill in the gaps?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
In this changeset "highway=track" was removed from way/82122203/history but it still has "foot=designated" on it, and it;s still part of the Wye Valley Walk relation (61495).
If people are still able to walk on it I'd expect it to be highway=track or highway=footway or similar in addition to being railway=abandoned. Alternatively, perhaps foot and bicycle traffic has been diverted, in which case the Wye Valley Walk relation is probably also diverted?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I'm guessing that the "sidewalk=lift_gate" tag on node/6596090433/history might have been a bit of finger trouble?
Cheers,
Andy

(following conversation by PM)
I undeleted it in osm.org/browse/changeset/112692522 and re-added it to the WCP in changeset/112692917 .

Hello,
Was the deletion of the Llyn Coast Path http://osm.mapki.com/history/relation.php?id=1820886 in this changeset deliberate, or was another relation (perhaps part of relation/1820890 ) supposed to replace it?
Best Regards,
Andy

This was literally just the view from the ramp near Asda after trying to et something from Poundland and finding it shut. More checking needs doing, for example to see exactly which unit of the vacant ones JD Sports is in, and to add "old_name" where it's still visible, such as on Mothercare.

Also includes Easingwold from survey 6/9/2021

Although it's not signed, there's only really one way to get across the road between the two previously separate sections (well 2, if you count the traffic lights north or south of the junction), so I've filled in that gap too.

Presumably you do actually check that the thing that you are changing the tag for is a marsh?

For the avoidance of doubt - you cannot use Google as a source for data that you add to OpenStreetMap.

Hello,
The merge of two bits of road either side of the T junction at way/619762800#map=18/50.54113/-4.66787 made the Cornwall AONB not a valid multipolygon any more - I've snipped it off in changeset/112579279 so it should be OK again now.
Best Regards,
Andy

Firstly, "I think every place should have an English name, no matter if it's obsolete" is clearly rubbish. It'd be extremely offensive if I, as a native English speaker, insisted on referring to e.g. Dún Laoghaire near Dublin as "Kingstown" (its old English name) for reasons that I hope would be obvious,
Secondly, both Google and Wikipedia are sources that have licences that are incompatible with OpenStreetMap - we cannot use them as sources.
However, if you're living there perhaps you can find some on-the-ground evidence for Tavastia Proper rather than Kanta-Häme as the correct modern English name? There isn't an English name (or a Finnish name, or a Swedish name) for everything, and if one does not exist you shouldn't make one up for OpenStreetMap.
For completeness, the OSM Foundation's policy on names can be found at https://wiki.osmfoundation.org/w/images/d/d8/DisputedTerritoriesInformation.pdf .

Thanks.
One other thing to perhaps think about - if there aren't signs for these you might think about adding "ref:signed=no" or similar (there are a few variations on that; see taginfo).
Best Regards,
Andy

> You mean you want me to check the Hebrew name and match it with wiki?

No.

If you look at http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=2710783597 you'll see that your revert not only changed the name back from Arabic to Hebrew, it also removed the wikidata tag. That's why I said "presumably the wiki data entry https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1391891 is valid and needs re-adding".
That wikidata link links to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Quarter and https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AD%D8%A7%D8%B1%D8%A9_%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B5%D8%A7%D8%B1%D9%89_(%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%82%D8%AF%D8%B3) .

Hello Dev_Kittenz, and welcome to OpenStreetMap!
Are you sure that the English name of relation/1473990 really is "Tavastia Proper"? I used to work in Finland quite a lot and knew a couple of people from Hämeenlinna; I never heard them refer to the area around there as "Tavastia Proper".
What was the source for your change here?
Best Regards,
Andy

Please read what I actually said.