Dinamik (2018-08-20 06:04:24+00:00): Dear colleagues, I’ll give a comment – sorry, if it will be a little bit short and/or not completely full. Your questions are welcome.

assenizator0, let us not to misinform them. You changed (modified or deleted) a hundreds of names waterbodies during a few days without preliminary discussion. When I manually correct a few of objects (returned name) and wrote you messages (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61762833, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61764808) with links to documentation (https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BA_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C#.D0.9E , https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:natural%3Dwater ), you wrote that didn’t understand me and immediately wrote a report about by my "wrecking activities". I think, you guess, that your actions against rules are not the best. It even looks like, that new account was created specially for modifying waterbodies. It's and interesting idea - they can think, that you had never heard about previous agreements and had never ignored many invitations for discussions, because you are a newcomer.  Please, stop making new changing of names of waterbodies before discussion end. It would be nice, if you return database to stable version.

woodpeck, the situation is not so complicated. There is Russian tradition/agreement not to shorten names of waterbodies and this agreement is documented:  https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:%D0%9A%D0%B0%D0%BA_%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D0%B7%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B8%D1%82%D1%8C#.D0.9E  ,   https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/RU:Tag:natural%3Dwater ). assenizator0 modified names (in a contravention of this agreement) of many waterbodies during a few days in semi-automatic mode, when I returned some names to their stable state, wrote a comments and invited to discussion, he immediately wrote a report to you. I believe, that in such situation he should firstly try to change agreement during conversations and only after that (in case of successful dialogs) he will be able to change names according to new agreement. Now his edits oppose current agreement, he doesn't try even to start discussion - I think, it is a violation of community rules. 

Let my try to explain you the origin of such agreement.

a) Names of waterbodies in Russian don't have strict corellation with their status in physical geography. Natural waterbody (lake in physical geography) can be called "пруд", "озеро", "водохранилище", "лиман", "ерик", "море"... Such words are parts of historically existing names.

b) Names without such words look especially ugly, when main words in names have form of adjective. For example, word "Судаковское" claim some another word, because "ое" is a words ending of adjective, which shows, that there is a main noun after adjective. Even spellcheckers can mark such single words as a mistakes, because noun is implied in case of adjective.

c) Order of words has meaning in Russian names. For example, "Петухов пруд" и "пруд Петухов" are different names: first means whose? - Petuh's, second means in honor of whom? - of Petuh. These words have different declensions. 

d) Such tradition is not unique for Russian language and/or Russia, you can easily find analogous names all over the world: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/325753188 (Lago Enol, not Enol), https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/34145701 (Бело језеро, not Бело), https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/50959610 (Odlezelské jezero, not Odlezelské), https://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/7337636 (Lac à l'Anglais, not l'Anglais), https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/40850063 (Lagoa Verde, not Verde), https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/4580524 (Bassenthwaite Lake, not Bassenthwaite), s://www.openstreetmap.org/relation/87400 (Lago Guaíba, not Guaíba).

So I really believe, that database should be returned to one-week-old state (stable state before unagreed edits) and user, who wants to change current agreement, should participate to discussion for changing of current agreement.

P. S. Thank you for you prompt about comments. However, it is not all as easy as it sounds. First user modified hundreds of objects against a current agreement in semi-automatic mode during a few days with common comment assenization - and it takes a weeks to return database to stable state in manual mode. Unique comments increase this duration to months and years. Comments' recommendation will work only in case of appliance for all users and all edits. I wrote public comments for user (https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61762833, https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/61764808), the goal of edits (return to normal state) is clear.