Додао сам gpx trace @Aleksandar%20Matejevic/traces/12094371

Hi Sheikh Salah,
I have seen that you have deleted East and West Jerusalem:
https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/13958423

https://pewu.github.io/osm-history/#/relation/13958424

but I can not find any source for this claim of yours. Could you provide some official source for this change?

Здраво Вања,
жена ми је активни планинар и додајем на основу gps traces које прикупи са својим друштвом "Брђанка" из Алексинца. Ово је ишла нешто невезано за друштво и акције, па ми пада на памет да је пут обрисан јер можда није главна стаза, али дефинитивно су ту прошле. Не могу сада да пронађем тај trace, али послаћу ти чим га нађем.

Ok, thanks.

Thanks for details. Like I said, we will go and fix these, just wanted to be sure that there will not be someone else then requesting to revert the changes.

As for some sings on the road:

Pihlajaniementie

https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=62.257069400000006&lng=21.743292600002974&z=17.57330179130633&pKey=666318848184789&focus=photo&x=0.16466148175384443&y=0.537453875300027&zoom=1.9387539598732837

Patorannantie
https://www.mapillary.com/app/?lat=62.255617799997964&lng=21.746264399999973&z=17&pKey=143715228386775&focus=photo&x=0.283936833072656&y=0.4590130394675816&zoom=2.5850052798310448

Harjunpääntie
https://www.google.com/maps/place/60%C2%B004'41.6%22N+23%C2%B038'19.8%22E/@60.0785387,23.6387796,3a,16.2y,52.52h,85.41t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1srqjh5vnVkrzxF0JbXnO8EQ!2e0!6shttps:%2F%2Fstreetviewpixels-pa.googleapis.com%2Fv1%2Fthumbnail%3Fcb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile%26w%3D900%26h%3D600%26pitch%3D4.588176714423497%26panoid%3Drqjh5vnVkrzxF0JbXnO8EQ%26yaw%3D52.518237217447414!7i16384!8i8192!4m4!3m3!8m2!3d60.0782222!4d23.6388333?entry=ttu&g_ep=EgoyMDI1MTAwOC4wIKXMDSoASAFQAw%3D%3D

Hi houtari,
thanks for bringing this issue up to conversation. I have saw that 329 road segments do not have Swedish as their primary name and 185 of them are named by our team.

We will deep dive into this and correct the issues. However, there was a complain from the community when we asked about adding default Sweeden name in these parts of Finland, and the answer was not all of the roads have Sweedish name as a primary one. This is why we added Finland name as default in name value, however, we also added both name:sv and name:fi variants and so both data exist in correct manner. It was expected that community will react and correct name tag using local knowledge.

If you are 100% sure that name should be the same as name:sv in these cases, we will go and fix the issue. Can you claim that is the case?

The German name Preßburg was the primary name used for the city until 1919.

Ok, you map it for rendering on www.openstreetmap.de/karte but still, not a valid data. Preßburg was the name, but now officially, as you say it is Bratislava. I do get it that people in Germany refer to it as Preßburg but it is old name, and it is tagged as such. I would recommend that for the rendering on www.openstreetmap.de/karte developers use old_name:de. This is not a single case, I have seen and corrected couple of name:de changes to some names that were used only during occupation in WWII and it was never official name of the place.

Hi berjk,

Please do not change name:de tag with old names of the cities. There is already old_name:de=Preßburg attribute present for Bratislava, and if you want to add old names to some other towns, please use old_name:de= tag

Hi Sandalss,
are you sure that Relation: Dama wa at Ta'ieen Province (19570210) should have two outer members? Previous version where these areas were under one larger seems more accurate. Any source that confirms this new state?

Hi NFZANMNIM,

are you sure about this changes from admin_level=5 to 6? Can you specify the source? And can you fill the gaps on admin_level=5 or 6, depends which one is appropriate?

HI welzheimerwald,

Are you sure about this removal? The Wien relation is present at admin_level=4, admin_level=5 and now there is a "hole" within admin_level=6 which is strange. Can you recheck this deletion since here https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_der_Bezirke_und_Statutarst%C3%A4dte_in_%C3%96sterreich it says that Vienna is both a federal state and a political district and therefore also a municipality

Hi andershl, plase, proceed with the edits, if something is broken, I will jump in and fix it. Your edit was of a great value; it needed just a small adjustment so no need to stop editing because of this. Keep going and happy mapping !!!

I saw that you have created relation/18131866 but it can not be admin_level=7. Can you doublecheck this attribute?

Hi STRANNIK_MINSK,
In this changeset you have changed the geometry of relation/8144294 and relation/6722714

Both of these are now invalid boundaries. Can you fix this or should I revert them to the previous state?

Don't worry woodpecker, this was more for Elizabeth BS, disputes can be resolved with disputed_by and claimed_by tags, but not with wrong boundaries or corrections just in your opinion. My suggestion in all disputed regions is to create 2 relations, one de facto and one de jure, with claimed_by and disputed_by and everything is then mapped correctly, both variants are present. There are many disputed territories around the world with a larger area than this one river island and all local communities are having a chat and found solution that works for them all. Just by finding some map does not mean you should go over and apply it.

Hi, Elizabeth BS, stop making some changes that are not accurate even according to your source. I have georeferenced it and fixed everything, but you keep adding some boundaries which are not accurate. Then woodpeck_repair revert distroyed it also. I will fix this one again. Everybody in the world know about famous Tres Fronteras and how it looks.

Hi Abdhmir,
I see that you have removed admin_level=6 relation and created new with admin_level=5 value. Can you also add admin_level=6 relations for this area?

Can you check your edit for Tanauan, it looks suspicious that is admin_level=4 since it is already under relation/1504427

This does not seem like correct admin_level, since it is already under admin_level=4 relation relation/1504761 Can you double check your edit?