I didn't change anything. I just revert a changeset mine. Tagging is as before.

Hola, de qué fuente obtuviste los límites del parque? Gracias.

I didn't add the tag name:en of Tierra del Fuego, but thanks for notice it.

Hello, here there is an opened boundary relation named Thondwe EPA: http://overpass-turbo.eu/s/f7x

Thanks for the info. The problem is there are various complex lakes for an multipolygon relation. Great Slave Lake can be a sample.
Regards.

Hello SK53, I'm sorry, apparently I had to read more about it. Before my changeset I didn't know that it was a community decision tag Great Lakes as natural=coastline. But I found strange to see Lake Ontario tagged natural=water and Lake Superior tagged both ways. I thought I was helping with a multipolygon conversion (most of people have difficulty with that). Not that I want to impose my viewpoint. I'm available to help if you need revert part of my changesets. About the rendering it's a problem of Mapnik. Could be requested a natural=water rendering in higher zoom levels like natural=coastline.
Regards.

In this changeset I put source "OSM Inspector". Then you can know that I solve errors in coastline lines (like intersections with itself): http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=coastline&lon=-7.28129&lat=57.13217&zoom=14&opacity=1.00&overlays=coastline,coastline_error_lines,line_not_a_ring,line_overlap,line_invalid,line_direction,questionable,coastline_error_points,unconnected,intersections,not_a_ring,double_node,tagged_node

Someone drawing a new coastline, but he didn't complete the work and he didn't remove the old coastline. I only delete the old coastline and fit the boundary to the new coastline (before it was fit to the old coastline) for not to break the boundary relation.

You're welcome. Also if you use JOSM editor you can run the validator, then you can detect any error (like coastline intersections or gaps) before uploading data. Regards.

Do you refer to Treaty of 1908? So you have a source? I haven't found it. But, lakes and rivers are natural features and the lower limit could be the influence of the lake over the river and the upper limit could be the place where the water begins decrease in altitude, I think.

OSM wiki rules say you can use waterway=riverbank or natural=water + water=river. It's an user decision. I prefer the first because with it you get the "desired" rendering.

English is no my mother language. I was just doing an observation. You not consider the comment as an "attack". Must be careful with automated data import. You should think that not all users fill source tag with Bing when it's necessary.
I'm not mapping here, but in your import data you broke the coastline in many parts and I detected that from OSM Inspector.
You can check here the actual coastline (the blue line) and the coastline before this changeset (mapnik rendering): http://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=coastline&lon=-79.54139&lat=56.80294&zoom=16&opacity=1.00&overlays=coastline,coastline_error_lines,line_not_a_ring,line_overlap,line_invalid,line_direction,questionable,coastline_error_points,unconnected,intersections,not_a_ring,double_node,tagged_node

Regards.

In this import you have replaced some data with resolution worse than they had before (Bing Imagery).
For example here: osm.org/#map=18/56.81269/-79.59474
Press edit button and compare it!

In fact, this rectangle doesn't represented the disputed territory. The claimed boundaries are different. Nevertheless, official cartography show a gap in this part of the boundary, like as Google Maps or Here Maps: http://tools.geofabrik.de/mc/#8/-49.5192/-72.7423&num=4&mt0=mapnik&mt1=google-map&mt2=geofabrik-topo&mt3=nokia-map

Unfortunately OSM require closed boundaries. This is the official map of 1998 Treaty between Argentina and Chile: http://www.difrol.cl/index.php?option=com_docman&task=doc_download&gid=182&Itemid=

The rectangle define the area of cartographic studies for a future demarcation of the boundary. Perhaps is better only keep boundary=administrative tag.

This rectangle isn't a "country", add administrative tags is wrong. This is only used for close admin relations in an area where Argentina-Chile boundary have not delimited.

Creo que es mejor mapear los usos de suelo con polígonos pequeños, un polígono grande no ofrece ninguna ventaja y es difícil de manipular para usuarios con poca experiencia, que pueden toparse con el límite de 2.000 nodos por segmento. Esta creo que es la mejor forma de mapear grandes bosques por ejemplo: http://prnt.sc/abnkm6
Saludos.

The wiki seem suggest tag all lakes as natural=water: natural=coastline#What_about_lakes.3F

There are a lot of "large lakes" tagged as natural=water.

Here you can see Lake Ontario was tagged as natural=water since august 2015 not for me: http://www.imagico.de/map/coastline_quality5_en.php

If you decide revert it, you should explain in the wiki about the lakes tagging as natural=coastline, because now the wiki "suggest" tagging inner waters as natural=water and not reintroduce this tag.
Note that tag natural=coastline was removed from Lake Ontario a long time ago.

Hola, hay que tener cuidado con los identificadores de caminos porque en la mayoría de los mapas se encuentra desactualizado. En este caso es Q-304, no Q-34. Yo ya los corregí todos para esta zona. Aquí aparecen actualizados para la provincia de Biobío: http://www.vialidad.cl/areasdevialidad/gestionvial/Paginas/Homologacion.aspx

Hola, los límites del municipio de Río Turbio están mal. La ciudad queda fuera de estos límites y además traspasan a territorio chileno.

Hola, ¿le puedes echar un vistazo a la relación #5604956 (Área Natural Protegida Loma de las Tapias) modificada en este conjunto de cambios? Se encuentra abierta y desconozco los límites exactos para cerrarla.

Justo encontré en este enlace una foto de la muni con su nombre: http://rbb.cl/dlds