Dear mr. Cooley,

As this is one of your first edits, it is understandable there are some mistakes along the way.
Also, there is a question at the end of this message, which I would like you to answer if possible.

These two changesets delete an existing object with correct details, replacing it with an 'identical' object. Although it likely has better geometry, it
- wastes other contributors' effort adding the correct details to the existing object
- has inaccurate details
(historic fort is for more modern fortifications,
building=no is only used to indicate something on i.e. aerial imagery is not actually building, but it is usually a redundant tag.)
- makes it hard for them to check changes made to this object and maintain the data.

Because of this, mappers should usually try to keep the history of such an object. See
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Keep_the_history

I have reverted both changesets
https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/171222692
and manually improved the geometry. (changes visualised here):
https://osmcha.org/changesets/171226412
(it now mainly matches the vegetation and the extent of the 'stone' surface visible below it, while checking it still roughly matches the outline on the War Office map available in the editor.)

Furthermore, I would like to know;
Does the 'Little Fort' mentioned here refer to the whole of this ringfort and this ringfort only?
https://athenry.org/record/kilskeagh-282/
In that case, it can be added as local name (as it is refered to locally)
loc_name=Little Fort

Could you also explain what the exact access permission situation is on the ground;
Can people visit the ringfort (or perhaps a surrounding field), do they need your/neighbor's permission, or is it a fully private area? If they can visit, what is the proper route to get there?

Regards,

Daniel