Nice, I only wonder why they weren't there to begin with. Could it have been removed by someone under the argument of Oaxaca being something owned by native Mexican indians?

Sure, I can do that as soon as it is possible.
If I may ask, what will be the name of the element, then? Will it just stay unnamed?
Having a government declare an administrative piece of land(which I'm assuming) without any name whatsoever does not seem to make any sense to me. If there is a source somewhere delimiting this element and this specific area it should be fair that it also has its name. So where is it?

Added only original name(in Farsi), not English name.

An equivalent example is saying London and England are subareas of the UK.
It is less redundant to say London is a subarea of England and England is a part of the U. K. .

Best regards

Took the name from the Node Center name.

I take it is just Getavan, I'll add it then.

Hi, what is the name of this element?
Thank you!

Thank you! You won't be dealing with my stuff so soon, since I'm done mapping the UK(England and Ireland were quite a doozie) but should I revisit it I'll bear your words in mind. 😊

But as always, if you tell me where I can find names for such objects I can correct them and remember it for future reference.

At the time I looked at the comment from the previous changeset in the history "Removing exempt roads from low_emission_zone...". Why is this an unnamed administrative object? I believe that by definition if it is administrative it is not unnamed and if it is it shouldn't be so.

I'm not 100% sure, I named it after the name of the majority of its ways. But why add an unnamed administrative object in the first place? Being administrative implies it is a defined object, so the real question is why is it unnamed to begin with?

The reasoning behind this changeset:

̶-̶ ̶H̶r̶o̶d̶a̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶a̶ ̶p̶a̶r̶t̶ ̶o̶f̶ ̶H̶r̶o̶d̶a̶ ̶D̶i̶s̶t̶r̶i̶c̶t̶.̶;̶ ❌
- Hroda is a part of Hroda Region. ✔️

Yeah, I also don't like correcting someone else's mistakes. I do know how to do those datafixes of changing the elements that contain others and changing the admin level, but thank you for offering to help me. I'm just thinking that if any problem happens on whatever changeset then someone will comment and I will correct my mistake.

Hi, I changed Tewkesbury because the element Chaceley(relation/6013725) has this element as its "parent" element. It didn't seem logical to me that a civil parish has another civil parish as its element and that both have the same administrative relevance, since it is then implied neither is more relevant than the other. Additionally, there is the fact Chaceley is not within the boundaries of Tewkesbury but that's just a detail.

*"Wikipedia" field, not "Wikidata".

Field corrected is "Wikipedia", not "Wikidata".