Hi Violaine_Do,

I have seen on couple of your changesets that you are changing boundary=land_area to boundary=administrative.

The problem that is happening is that now we have 2 relations for the same administrative unit, one with just land area and another one including water area.

Is there any consensus withing community about how admin_level=6 boundaries should be represented on OSM?

If there is one, can you, please, remove duplicate boundaries?

One of the examples of duplicate boundaries:

osm.org/relation/16120494

osm.org/relation/1363094

Hi Koreller, thanks for the reply, I do respect the knowledge of apm-wa and I am fully aware of what he did in Turkmenistan and OSM. Hats off for that. And to be clear, I am not arguing, I am just debating the way of tagging in order to make it precise and functional. I agree with apm-wa fully about Ashgabat not being the province, however, there are lot of similar examples around the OSM world where these "equivalent" things are taken into consideration and mapped with same administrative level because function on the ground is the same.

This is why I have sugested adding one more tag, place=city and place=province to make clear what is the type of the place but per my opinion and as I understood your comment Ashgabat has same administrative power as provinces, therefore I suggest keeping admin_level tag unchanged.

Sorry if my comments were understood as arguing or disrispecfull towards Mr Allan Mustard. I admire his enthusiasm and what he did for Turkmenistan OSM

apm-wa, as Koreller stated "City with the status of a province" qualifies it to be tagged with the same admin_level tag on OSM. It does not promote it to be a province, just levels its administrative power. All provinces have welaýaty in their name tag. Ashgabat is a city and no one claims it is a province. There are lot of examples similar to this one accross the OSM where the same tagging has been applied, usually with capital city of the country, which has 2 administrative relations, one that showed its level of power, and another one with the same members which describes it as a city.

Also, Ashgabat is further divided into districts, as provinces.

Will adding place=city and place=province on these admin_level=4 relations in order to distinguish differences be good enough solution?

Hi Mazda05, I say that you have changed a lot of admin boundaries in Krimea. I have a question about couple of admin_level=6 relations that are currently overlapping with larger polygons.

osm.org/relation/3826848/

osm.org/relation/3826856/

osm.org/relation/3826860/

osm.org/relation/3826847/

osm.org/relation/3826854/

osm.org/relation/3826845/

Are these now admin_level=8 or historic boundaries?

Also what about these:

osm.org/relation/3826844/

osm.org/relation/3826864/

osm.org/relation/3826900/

osm.org/relation/3826882/

I agree that Ashgabat is not a province, that is why I stated that it is "equivalent to a province". By administrative division of Turkmenistan amendments from 2018 and 2022 city of Arkadag become an administrative center of Ahal velayat instead of Ashgabat. Ashgabat is excluded from Ahal velayat and now has its own administrative boundary.

ili, možda bolja solucija, da ispravim da name bude bez crtice, a da svima dodam official_name sa crticom, mislim da tako imamo manje posla?

Ali da znaš, nije to jedina ulica sa tim problemom, dosta ih ima u Aleksincu koje imaju zvanično crticu, ali nisu u RGZ upisani sa crticom. Ako hoćeš mogu da ih sve sredim, zajedno sa adresama, i da ti pošaljem koje su pa da ih ubaciš u dina, samo mi treba par dana, malo sam u gužvi

Службени лист општине Алексинац (http://aleksinac.org/index.php/euprava-2/registar-propisa-2?task=callelement&format=raw&item_id=1475&element=f85c494b-2b32-4109-b8c1-083cca2b7db6&method=download&args[0]=0c97f837a4a68c1c116240a6a37e2c60)

Страна 233 (у пдф је 200) за насеље Мозгово, под 11. стоји
11. Улица Јована Митића-Ђорђа,матични број 701165010126

Hi, it looks like there are too many false clothing shops added in this changeset. Can you please review this edit and do the clean up?

Fixed, just go and investigate if there is something that I have missed to fix

I will try to do it, please stop editing for couple of hours, so I can go and check errors which will occure due to conflicts with new chagesets.

Hi FanMentzena,
can you please check relation osm.org/relation/17868724 it it is valid and fix the boundaries or to remove it if it is not a valid admin_level=8 relation

Hi Вальдимар
can you please finish the relation for Бірінші Мамыр ауылдық округі it is currently broken (osm.org/relation/18704686)

Awesome job!!!

Can you double check the name of the bus station on node 1363981093, does not look correct

hi antimusicovy,
I have seen that you have changed name:en of Глиняна to Hlyniana, probably due to how you pronounce it, but I think that is not the best practice. Name:en should be the either official name in english language, or left empty (not to use transliterations and other variants)

Hi Bentar,
this changeset broke 20 coastlines. Are you aware of the issue, do you plan to continue with the changes in the area, or should this changeset be reverted in order to fix the broken coastlines issue

Znam da tu ima gomila bus ruta i eurovelo takođe, sređivao sam ih segment po segment (forward, backward) pogledaću da vidim šta se dešava. Neke bus rute su bile i po gradu polomljene pa sam ih sve ispratio

Hi apm-wa, actually, I think you have mistaken border and boundary. Border is a way, boundary is an area. Also, pero OSM Wiki, it says it is an area osm.wiki/Key:boundary so area=no has no point at all.

Should we revert this, user is not responding, and there is no info about any correction of the borders between Belarus and Poland?