I guess it was important when it was a PIRATA buoy, but what is it important for now (assuming it's not at the bottom of the Atlantic, which alas is likely)

Hello,
You've undeleted it as "disused", but are you sure that there is something still there? The links on changeset/154996123 suggest "missing, presumed sunk".
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello,
I suspect that the highway=steps tag got accidentally removed from way/687378500/history . I've re-added it - hope that is OK
Best Regards,
Andy

Thanks for filling in this gap. I'm assuming that the other two cycle routes also follow this path, which gives as relation/1318928#map=16/51.54373/-2.63821 , relation/9540148#map=17/51.544247/-2.640468 and relation/5479822#map=17/51.544340/-2.639309 . Does that look OK?

I'll have to go and have a look the next time I'm in the area.

Ah - thanks for that.

Thanks - quite the outlier: relation/11237#map=12/53.7592/-2.1763 !

Also includes 11 bus into town

Just wondered is relation/20187045 spelt OK? ("d" rather than "t")?

What exactly is a "route=administrative"? I'm looking at relation/1549115/history and am confused...

You wouldn't happen to know if the sign at node/9047561434 is still there or if it has been taken down, by any chance?

Hello and welcome to OSM!
Just to let you know, there's a bit of a bg in the iD editor where it doesn't warn you if gaps appear in boundary relations like for example Iveruss relation/6445228 here. I fixed that in changeset/178134053 .
If you click on something in the iD editor (like way/1474379891 here) and scroll down at the left-hand side you can see a bit of information about what it is a member of, and if you hover the mouse over the blue bit for each it highlights them at the right (well, ish - there are some bugs in that too).
Best Regards,
Andy

The procedure for "I received the data from X" data is generally osm.wiki/Import/Guidelines .
I'd expect discussion to include whether the data is accurate (presumably yes) what tags are best, and does anything else need mapping at the same time. It likely does need discussing though.

Hello VLD319 - please take another look (see e.g. https://map.atownsend.org.uk/maps/map/map.html#21/51.42443/-0.01403 which has updated - OSM Carto has not yet for me). There's a crossing there at node/8257543236/history that is disconnected from the two new ways that you've just drawn.
There are also a number of missing driveways in this area - if you're going to add separate sidewalks, you really do need to finish the job.

If anyone would like to discuss this with the DWG please email data@openstreetmap.org with a subject line of “[Ticket#2025102210000455] 177962210” .

Actually - I suspect it might have been rerouted. See relation/2293737#map=17/55.647246/-4.813637 . I asked the person who added the new names in the earlier changeset.

Erm - "office=goverment" for a "building=houseboat" way/1410525442 ?

What actual evidence do you have for that any part of way/470459862/history is controlled by China?
AS I said at osm.org/user_blocks/19719 you really should discuss this in the forum .

Thanks!

I've fixed the two most serious problems in changeset/177845809 and changeset/177846221 .
The "30mph limits that should be 20" obviously need someone to survey them properly on the ground.