Hello ConradWard,

Thanks for your contributions to openstreetmap.   

I noticed this changeset as some of the relations showed up on osmi as possible errors.
https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=-70.74545&lat=43.96406&zoom=15&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways

At a glance, there are a few things you may want to look at.
1) the relation 16218293 is a multipolygon with no other tags (e.g. landuse, forest, etc).  That is unusual since it is a now an object that doesn't designate anything. The same could be said for some of the other multipolygons in this region including 16219408.  I think they are not really achieving what you had in mind.
2) perly pond way 150511049 (as well as several other ways in this area) is a member of 10 relations, including 3 natural woods and 1 managed forest.  I suspect that's a few more than necessary.

Cheers,
scarapella