*Added area-subarea relations between North Eastern Savonia (6442819) and contained administrative elements and replaced url tag with matching wikipedia tag.

*Fixed area-subarea relationships between Kangaslampi (16248712) and contained administrative elements, since the contained elements appear to be independent segments labeled as administrative and of equal administrative level(9).

Hi miluethi.

It's exactly as you said. You might have noticed I have left other similar comments, that's because I work with software that uses OSM data to make an interactive map of the world, so if I come across unnamed relations I need to dig out these unnamed cases. I have also been naming relations based on the name of its Node(when the Node is used only in the case of the unnamed relation).

Thank you for your efforts and understanding!

Hi. I understand. That's strange, it would also be helpful to get some residents' input. Thank you for your efforts!

Tag "name" in relation/16947936?

Suspicious tag combination - boundary=administrative together with landuse=residential (1)
(Rationale: It is pointless to have overlapping, conflicting landuses.)

Also, add tag name to the relation whenever possible. In this case "Guachipilín"(name of the corresponding Node).

My mistake, "La Junta" was of a previously Unnamed relation. My suggestion still applies, though. Add the tag "name" to whatever relation you add whenever possible.

Please add the tag "name" to the relation next time. It can be the name of the matching "Node", in this case "La Junta".

suspicious tag combination - boundary=administrative together with landuse=residential (1)

"relation/14579948", and its matching Node.

It's a "Known settlement" with no name?

Hi.
The borders of Tanzania(relation/195270) are incorrect in the intersection with Kakamba(relation/8313939)(Tanzania is slightly crossing the borders of Kakamba). Please fix it.
Thank you!

If the boundary should be administrative what is the "admin_level"? Also, shouldn't this boundary be "boundary=disputed" instead(because if the dispute between The USA and The Marshall Islands for Wake Island)?

Hi Stellar Astrophile.

Please correct the boundaries of element "Susta-04"(relation/16171671), since it contains a stray way, "Nepal-India Boundary"(way/406873176), which is part of a "claimed boundary", Nepal Claim - Susta Area(relation/6094953).
Additionally, if this element's(relation/16171671) boundaries include this specific way(way/406873176) then all the elements that contain this element should also have the same boundary, all the way up to the country of Nepal, which they currently do not have.

Best regards.

Hola. Muy bien, entiendo el principio, pero no implica que las relaciones administrativas no deban tener nombre propio, ya que aquí se menciona lo contrario(useful combination):
osm.wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative

Además, mezclar "boundary=administrative" y "landuse=*" no es recomendable e incluso ilógico, porque los territorios administrativos pueden tener todo tipo de "landuse". Así que será o bien un territorio administrativo o bien un terreno con algún uso específico. Quizá pueda ser "landuse=institutional" o "landuse=civic_admin", pero no "boundary=administrative" y "landuse=*".

Saludos

Pero si es "landuse" no debería ser "boundary=administrative", como dice el aviso de josm. Además, se recomienda tener una etiqueta "name", como se dice aquí:
osm.wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative

Creo que si es administrativo no tiene sentido añadir la etiqueta "landuse", porque entonces el "landuse" debería estar en su objeto específico("way", "relation",...).

Me refiero al objeto "relation/2617361". He añadido la Tag "name" a este objeto, "Playa Honda".