I would say so. That is the way it is normally done in the UK, especially where the exact boundary cannot be determined. Such a node already exists, though.... node/26703040

Regarding admin boundaries, you might find this interesting: osm.wiki/User:Csmale/ukboundaries

Well, let's start with the fact that the admin boundaries in the UK are pretty much complete and correct. I maintain them personally. That's not to say there are no mistakes out there, but there aren't going to be many. If you see something you think is wrong I would be happy to investigate/advise specific cases.
Next thing is that, unlike many countries, the boundaries of administrative entities bear no deliberate resemblance to either electoral subdivisions, nor addresses, nor settlements. In general, named settlements don't have defined boundaries; there are huge areas which are not clearly in a single settlement - they may be "no-man's land" or it may be conjectural. St Helens is a good example; there is no documented boundary of an area called "St Helens" except the Borough (which contains large rural areas outside the town) and the parliamentary constituency which is a different game entirely. There is no town council, and there is no official boundary of the town (as a "settlement"). You cannot draw a line around the town and say that one side is categorically "in" St Helens and the other side is not. The fact that it would make sense if such an area would exist (looking at adjoining boundaries etc) does not mean that it does exist (remembering the OSM rule - one object IRL means one object in OSM).

District wards and civil parishes are connected only by coincidence. A ward is basically for convenience at election times (and are tagged as boundary=political), whereas a civil parish often has its own local council.

You seem not to be based in the UK, judging by the timestamps on youw work. I suggest you abstain from making changes to UK boundaries until you understand the system a bit better, lest you start to annoy people.

Hi, thanks for responding. I have taken the admin tagging off of your new St Helens boundary as it does not correspond to any (local) government entity. I see you have now tagged the source as "Ordnance Survey" - exactly which OS dataset did you use for the geometry (not just the existence) of this boundary? Is it possible that it is an electoral boundary?

Are you sure about this? There are several relations for Rochefort, as a settlement and as an administrative entity. I think you may have made a mistake here. Do you have personal knowledge of Rochefort? By the way, it is expected in OSM that you respond to changeset comments, and take them seriously. Thanks!

Hi... Can you explain the source of this boundary? It doesn't look like it is a real administrative boundary (a council area). It also looks too broad to be the real town of St Helens. What was your frame of reference?

Hi... I'm reverting this as Derby City Council is a Unitary Authority and as such carries admin_level=6.

Hi! May I ask how you determined the exact location of Windy Gyle peak? The boundary now seems to be some distance away from the *(accurately surveyed) {lat,lon} location given by the OS in Boundary-Line, although it does now align with some aerial imagery, which is known to be susceptible to misalignments.

I am not sure whether they are "needed" or not. That is very subjective - you might not see the point of label nodes, but clearly many people do. That's why you should discuss such things instead of deleting other people's work.

You might want to revert this and discuss it first. It could be considered controversial.

Where did you get this "border" from?

Hi... What "town" is your new boundary supposed to represent? relation/13466955#map=13/53.4512/-2.6779

Hi... Where is it written that 1900 nodes is the limit? Did you run into a problem with a specific tool? I always thought the limit was 2000 - see https://help.openstreetmap.org/questions/365/is-there-a-limit-on-the-number-of-nodes-in-a-way

How did you do this - just by dropping a couple of nodes?

Hi! Not sure this is a good move. Boundary relations support outer/inner roles in the same way as MPs. Other protected areas happily use type=boundary. As an MP it still shows up on a map but map not get found in searches on the data as type=boundary is kinda expected. What was your rationale behind the change?
Cheers, Colin

Hi! I know you are new to OSM, but can you please try to get into the habit of leaving meaningful changeset comments? No need to state what you are editing (that is obvious) but some background as to why, plus your sources, would be a good start.
Thanks, and happy mapping!
Colin

Hi,
How did you get these coastlines from the OS Boundary-Line data? I can't see these islets in the high water mark data, and they don't match the admin boundary either (which corresponds to low water anyway).

Hi Matt,
Welcome to OSM! You just put your foot in one of OSM's termite nests. I fully agree that consistency is worth a lot. However if you put it to the vote (another termite nest) I think there would be as many people supporting "St" as supporting "St.". When it comes down to it, there's no wrong or right, just personal preference. Mine happens to be without the dot, in line with documented BE practice and also slightly more concise, but far be it from me to suggest you reverse these changes.... It's accepted policy to avoid abbreviations in street and place names (i.e. write West instead of W, and Road instead of Road) but "St" is an accepted exception because these days the unabbreviated form is basically never used. If I changed "St Albans" into "Saint Albans" it would take just a few minutes before it was changed back.

Hi,
What's the background to this edit? Normal British English usage is to omit the full stop, as the final letter of the abbreviation is also the final letter of the full word, i.e. it is a contraction.

Hi... I'm not sure these historical names are appropriate on this specific relation. London was tiny then, not much bigger than the "City of London" today. I suggest you look for a place-node around the City for these names.