Cebderby (2019-11-04 17:11:08+00:00):  This changeset has been reverted for the following reasons:
  - you have again realigned existing well-mapped ways to unaligned Maxar imagery, an issue you have previously been made aware of, including moving a way to run into a mapped building which is clearly and obviously bad mapping.
  - added ways crossing without a connecting node, or added highway=crossing tag where there is no special crossing of any kind.  Ways that cross (on the same level) need a common node, but don't need highway=crossing just for the sake of it eg at footway crossing a service road or track.
  - added a kink to, and slightly laterally displaced, a railway line
  - created ways that nearly connect but are actually separate, useless for routing
  - created duplicate ways by deleting/merging nodes without the necessary care, and also by adding new way starting from wrong node
  - created a likely false connection to a road junction which is (historically and in imagery at least) not available - due to quality of this and previous edits, it cannot be trusted that this change is real, have to assume not (West exit of Back Northgate)
  - deleted a well mapped way and added a new one (with bad alignment) thus loosing both history and accuracy
  - moved a well mapped road and junction to connect to a (Naptan imported) bus stop node, then moved that node
  - moved a well mapped footway to run diagonally through the centre of buildings shown on the imagery
  - moved a node that has address as well as shop tags from one location to another in the town, rather than marking the original  shop as vacant (or as appropriate - actually still operating according to Boots' website) and updating the new location details as appropriate
  - adding duplicate POI, again - you really should know by now that buildings as well as nodes can carry shop/amenity information
  - removed a fixme regarding a missing road name without adding a name

Also note for consideration:
  - changeset, as usual, covers a wide area of the town with many different changes which will have to be accepted or reverted as a whole, changesets that are smaller in geographical area and subject would be better reviewed and accepted (or not)
  - changeset comment "I have added paths , roads and traffic lights" isn't too bad but does not entirely describe changes made - simpler, more focussed changesets are easier to describe too.
  - started moving traffic lights back from stop line to junction points having previously moved them the other way
  - started re-adding cycleways, having previously added them, then later changed them to foot only (after which they were removed as ordinary sidewalks adding no value).  Consequently it is hard to know whether to trust the cycleway as real (ie. signed)
  - (re)added traffic_signals:direction tag on lights at stop lines on oneway ways which is completely unnecessary, and very wrong on lights at the junction.
  - a fixme for maxspeed check was removed/resolved with speed changed to 20 mph.  But 3 adjacent roads were not changed from 30 although one other had the fixme removed.  This remains utterly unconvincing, in the absence of reliable evidence these ways have been set back to 30 mph with fixmes removed.
  - re-added mapped footways which are merely sidewalks: foot only, separated from road only by kerb - adding no value - they are the same route and way as the road.  There are places where this has been done, with care and precision, but creating poorly aligned and badly connected ways makes the map worse not better (complexity, routing, appearance etc)
  - added footways on the edge or, or through, areas without considering the relative position eg inside a construction site
  - generally well below acceptable standard of editing

The following changes (only) have been reapplied:
- added a cycleway on the south side of De Lacy Way, connecting (not stopping short of) Skinner Lane
- adding the missing traffic light from the quarry exit to De Lacy Way, fixed the direction tags on adjacent stop lights
- applied name typo correction on post office in WH Smith's

Pontefract and the surroundings are fairly well mapped with ways well aligned.  If you are ever tempted to move a way or feature, you MUST consider first that the imagery may be out of alignment.  In general you will not need to move ANY of the ways in Pontefract unless there is new construction work to realign them.  But the Maxar imagery is very badly aligned in this area (worse than elsewhere) -
 Always compare the existing mapped features to the imagery first - in Pontefract the mapped features are correct and the (Maxar) imagery is wrong!
 
As many as possible of your many previous errors have been fixed at the cost of many hours (actually days) of action by other members of the OSM community.  In contrast the total amount of positive contribution to OSM of your edits has not been great.  This cannot continue.
Due to the repeated very bad quality of your edits, any future edits will be closely monitored and reverted if not up to standard.