piebro/osm-data huggingface dataset:
eggie (2023-08-18 05:48:33+00:00): Hoi... 
According the BGT/Kadaster is the streetname on the bridge Pereboomsteeg and the bridge:name Arisbrug.

See Kadaster/ BGT


https://www.verbeterdekaart.nl/#?geometry.x=132446.3&geometry.y=502871.16&zoomlevel=14.33

nicht 100 % garantiert  :)
Ein anderer Mapper hat die Brücke als 'Area' hinzugefügt.
Das meinte ich mit  Und... und... 
Es kan beide. 
Gruss
eggie
MrSledge (2024-06-11 15:17:34+00:00): Please add the tag "name" to the relation next time. It can be the name of the matching "Node", in this case "La Junta".
MrSledge (2024-06-11 15:19:34+00:00): 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.
miluethi (2024-06-11 15:43:01+00:00): I agree and I started adding names to all relations whenever possible. Otherwise with several unnamed relations in the same area, it becomes very quickly very complicated.
MrSledge (2024-06-11 17:12:38+00:00): 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!
patthoyts (2023-08-17 22:28:09+00:00): This doesn't seem like the correct edit. The underpass and the paths still exist but the underpass has been closed off now so cannot be used to pass under the road.
eggie (2023-08-17 07:54:53+00:00): Dag Matthijs.. Probeer direct op de bestaande adresnode bij te taggen. Dus geen extra adres aan te maken.

Format postcode heeft geen spatie in osm..
Ik heb wat aangepast.

MVG
eggie
Matthijsh (2023-08-17 07:58:10+00:00): Oke bedankt voor de informatie en de wijzigingen.

Mvg,

Matthijs
Tzene19 (2023-08-17 18:24:55+00:00): Correction: Source used was Maxar Secure Watch Imagery 2023-03-14
user_5359 (2023-08-17 10:41:38+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Please be careful when editing the map data. You moved the node https://www.osm.org/node/7007966167/history over 100 meters, so there were problems with the corresponding way. I have moved the point back to its original position.
user_5359 (2023-08-17 10:23:56+00:00): Welcome to OSM (again)! Please don't any standard name for objects.
user_5359 (2023-08-17 10:22:55+00:00): Welcome to OSM (again)! Did you see the way https://www.osm.org/way/297782942?
user_5359 (2023-08-17 10:19:21+00:00): Welcome to OSM! Note that OSM classification of the objects has the highest priority. Objects that have only one name, have little sense. As home page for the question "How do I describe you?" I recommend the website http://wiki.osm.org.
user_5359 (2023-08-17 10:21:22+00:00): Welcome to OSM (again)! Did you see the building https://www.osm.org/way/951357600? Is this a different post_office? Please merge the information.
Warin61 (2023-08-17 23:58:55+00:00): Hi
Multipolygon inner ways cannot touch the outer way ... 
See https://tools.geofabrik.de/osmi/?view=areas&lon=115.94432&lat=-32.08965&zoom=19&baselayer=Geofabrik%20Standard&overlays=duplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways%2Cduplicate_node%2Csingle_node_in_way%2Cduplicate_segment%2Cway_in_multiple_rings%2Cintersection%2Cintersecting_segments%2Cring_not_closed%2Ctouching_rings%2Crole_should_be_inner%2Crole_should_be_outer%2Cinner_with_same_tags%2Cways
watet3953 (2023-08-20 18:33:16+00:00): conducted a survey on that grass landuse in may 2023, it was turned back into grass after construction was finished
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139987033
Emilius123 (2023-08-16 22:19:57+00:00): Weiterhin danke an alle Supporter, ohne euch wäre ich nie so weit gekommen.

"Wer im Knast sitzt, kann sich auf die Freilassung freuen" - Martin Luther

------------------------

Worum ging es erneut? Achso:
https://www.openstreetmap.org/note/3731005
Emilius123 (2024-04-01 03:59:35+00:00): Junge, was ein Unsinn.
phschafft (2024-06-11 22:16:02+00:00): Hallo.

Ich war heute vor Ort und konnte das neue Haus nicht finden. Stattdessen Stand ich vor einem Parkplatz. Ich bin mir jetzt nicht ganz sicher was hier schief gegangen ist. Gegebenenfalls kannst du hier nochmal einen Hinweis zu geben?
Dennis Lehmacher (2024-06-12 17:10:50+00:00): Danke für den Hinweis, ich werde es korrigieren. 
Für die Feuerwehr Griesheim bekommen wir immer flächennutzungsänderungen mitgeteilt. In diesem Fall leider nicht.
gormur (2024-08-04 22:49:44+00:00): Hi! and welcome to OSM.
Thank you for your first contribution :)
OSM tags aren't always easy to learn. If you could try to explain what you mean by name=champ and natural=HERVE, maybe I can guide you to some better tags?
Supaplex (2023-08-17 05:47:31+00:00): 已經有official_name了
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139987623
Fizzie-DWG (2023-10-01 01:41:27+00:00): DWG revert:

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/141971614
spughetti (2023-09-16 12:37:23+00:00): Hi aselvadeasfalto, this changeset has left quite a lot of orphan nodes. Are you planning on finishing this import?
aselvadeasfalto (2023-10-14 16:30:53+00:00): Hello,
Sorry for the late response. I meant to revert my changeset immediately and star over, but for some reason I couldn't download the Revert Changeset plug-in to JOSM. In the meantime, real life has got in the way and I haven't been able to rectify this. I think it's still better to delete and start over; I still have a local copy of this edit. If you or anyone else wants to do it, be my guest.

Selva
spughetti (2023-10-14 17:18:25+00:00): Hi aselvadeasfalto, thanks for your response. 

For some reason my revert only deleted about 8% of the orphan nodes, so I'll try to get someone with more experience to look into the issue 

I did my revert using the osm-revert site (https://revert.monicz.dev/). It's very user friendly, I prefer it over the JOSM reverter. It usually works just fine lol.
spughetti (2023-10-14 17:23:23+00:00): You can find my revert at https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142585933
aselvadeasfalto (2023-11-11 15:13:19+00:00): Hello,
Thank you so much for your help. In the end I just went and deleted the remaining orphan nodes (changeset:143903717), as I think it would be a waste to also revert the parts of the changeset with no issues.
spughetti (2023-11-26 22:37:32+00:00): 😸👍
aselvadeasfalto (2023-08-17 00:13:57+00:00): A quem encontrar isto, esta edição foi uma importação do JOSM que por alguma razão correu mal. Os orphan nodes que aparecem na verdade fazem parte de linhas e polígonos no meu ficheiro .osm local. Estou a tentar resolver a situação, sendo que provavelmente faça um revert deste changeset.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139987766
MxxCon (2023-08-22 02:29:54+00:00): Hello.
Could you please explain what did you map here?
I-495 is already fully mapped.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139987921
USHR_Chris_M (2023-08-22 18:24:34+00:00): The issue is the lane I've marked which is a west bound lane that moves through the east bound traffic. Opens at certain times of the day. This is to chart that moveable barrier bi-directional lane.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139987921
CurlingMan13 (2023-08-23 14:13:30+00:00): There are so many road intersections - ran across this by accident.  Seperate lanes should not be mapped, such as how turn lanes at an intersection and those paths are not mapped seperately.
NorthCrab_upload (2023-08-16 23:20:24+00:00): Zauważyłem, że Twoja zmiana zawiera niepoprawne adresy. Przygotowałem listę obiektów do poprawy oraz dodatkowe informacje:

Duplikat adresu w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/3485250738
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/802135938

Nazwa ulicy nie istnieje w okolicy.
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/888415035
https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1198821354

Pozdrawiam! 🦀
Piotr Strębski (2023-08-17 00:17:04+00:00): zrobione!
AngocA (2023-11-28 02:33:45+00:00): Living streets are not a valid road type in Colombia:
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Colombia/Guide_for_mapping#Motorized

This kind of roads exist in Europe> https://www.livingstreets.org.uk/ but we don't have those characteristics in Colombia
AngocA (2023-11-28 02:34:12+00:00): The lower hierarchy in rural areas are "unclassified"
Fizzie-DWG (2023-12-19 08:45:52+00:00): DWG revert

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/145281733
Tomas Straupis (2023-08-17 05:29:32+00:00): Just for you to understand. Your change practically deletes wikipedia data as literally NOBODY (no map, no app) is using subject:wikipedia. So after your change users will not get this information. You have decreased the quality and usefulness of data.
Necessarycoot72 (2023-08-17 06:38:32+00:00): > Your change practically deletes wikipedia data as literally NOBODY (no map, no app) is using subject:wikipedia.

This is the fault of the app or service, Not OpenStreetMap. OSM mapper should be mapping what's on the ground. Not what happened in history. If you have an issue with this tag, you should go to forum or wiki talk page and post your dispute.
Tomas Straupis (2023-08-17 07:30:42+00:00): That is YOUR theoretical opinion lacking any understanding on how IT systems and processes work. You know nothing about the events, about this site, you've never been on this site or in Lithuania, you do not know people who map here, you do not know services we create, you do not know people who are actual users of this data and our services. Therefore you are totally irrelevant here and impotent to do any good for us. Why are you getting into this?
Necessarycoot72 (2023-08-17 09:10:40+00:00): This will be my last comment on this.
Your woefully neglect to follow fundamental guidelines that all user have to follow is truly a shame.

I will be asking other users how to handle this situation.
Mateusz Konieczny (2023-08-17 10:55:05+00:00): Thread was started at https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/how-to-handle-user-who-disagrees-about-changes-to-a-feature/102567

@Necessarycoot72  - if you start such thread you should notify involved people (except cases of blatant vandalism)
spughetti (2023-10-17 18:48:09+00:00): Hi spyderkavin, I've reverted your changeset. It contained a lot of errors and inaccurate data.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/142726096
Fizzie-DWG (2025-04-13 04:50:05+00:00): DWG revert - undiscussed Organised import from unknown source

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/164879119
ChaireMobiliteKaligrafy (2023-08-17 09:32:29+00:00): It is mapped as a mulitpolygon, since the motel has three associated building. This is usual to map associated building (same business) as multipolygons.
eggie (2023-08-17 10:48:08+00:00): Dag noon....   
temporary:maxspeed kan ik niet in de wiki vinden.

Waar heb je dat gevonden? 
Wel kennen we .. even als voorbeeld.. maxspeed:conditional=50 @ (2023 Aug  20-2024 Apr 3)

Maar voor een korte periode hoef je het niet aan te passen. 
Hoelang gaat dit dan duren?

Graag reactie
mvg
eggie
mueschel (2023-08-17 10:11:12+00:00): Hi,
please don't add tags like these to OSM - project specific data needs to be kept in a separate place but not in the main OSM database.
mueschel (2023-08-17 10:16:29+00:00): Hi,
please check the objects you added here - they look like buildings but don't have a 'building=*' tag.

And: Please write useful changeset comments, describing what you edited.
Apirnus (2023-08-17 03:27:27+00:00): And updates other stuff too, namely removes tag from Laki and Karjavälja crossing that allows pedestrians to walk on vehicle path as per LS22 lg3. Updates sidewalk tags.
jb54osm (2023-08-17 10:23:19+00:00): Wat desk research gedaan. Volgens de kvk is het filiaal al tijden dicht. Obliekjes laten een zelfde beeld zien: wel RABO-blauw en/of Geldmaat-geel in de zijstraat, en een oranje bord op de luifel. Het filiaal is ooit op een niet-BAG-node toegevoegd en -denk ik- daardoor ontsnapt aan updates, want het is nu een restaurant Surinees. Ik stel voor: node verwijderen.
A67-A67 (2023-08-17 12:48:11+00:00): Dankjewel! Als het adres twee keer in OSM staat, dan kan de node inderdaad verwijderd worden.

De meeste Rabobanken zijn ruim 10 jaar geleden toegevoegd en daarna bijna niet meer aangepast. En juist in de afgelopen 10 jaar is het grootste deel van de bankfilialen gesloten, waardoor er veel verouderde informatie in Openstreetmap staat. Ik ben het nu aan het nalopen.
A67-A67 (2023-08-17 17:27:54+00:00): Ik heb de Rabobank Theresiastraat verwijderd.
watmildon (2023-08-17 04:14:52+00:00): whoops, meant this to be a couple of state edits but used Upload and not Upload Selection. Sorry for the huge bbox.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2023-08-18 06:25:52+00:00): Hi StenSoft, 
why have you removed the Wikipedia tag from Chiang Mai Province? Why are you doing this? Please revert your change and if you have done this in the past please go and fix these. Wikipedia tag is legal and it is there for the reason.
julcnx (2023-08-18 08:21:10+00:00): I have reverted the wikipedia tag removal in changeset: 140045321
Thanks for reporting it.
            ---
            
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139993537
NyanSten (2023-08-18 23:09:14+00:00): The wikipedia tag should reference Wikipedia in the local language, not English, but generally just wikidata is enough because that references all languages available on Wikipedia.
Aleksandar Matejevic (2023-08-21 16:19:24+00:00): I have found out that you have removed Wikipedia links in New Zealand also, even if they were in English, the official language, so please do not remove Wikipedia tags, they are here for a reason, if you want you can replace the English version with the local language version, but if there is no local version, leave English or whatever one is added.
user_5359 (2023-08-18 05:00:47+00:00): Hello! Please take a look on http://www.osm.org/way/1050717204.
What is the mean of the tags
shahrdari:districts = 4
shahrdari:name:full = شهید مظفرینیا (سراج)
shahrdari:name:main = شهید مظفرینیا
shahrdari:name:secondary = سراج
?
secondaryhighway (2023-08-18 06:33:27+00:00): Hi, these are the names of the ways that are registered in Shahrdari (Muncipality)’s database for adding ref codes to ways, 
shahrdari:districts is a list of districts the ways are in (ie; 4, 4;8, etc)
shahrdari:name:raw (previously full) is the full listed name for the ways, which may be outdated or contain two names.
shahrdari:name:main is the main name of the road, listed as bold or underlined which has been seperated for easier management and since persian formatting sometimes makes the raw version hard to read
shahrdari:name:secondary is the most of the times old name the way is known by, normally listed in brackets.
All of these tags are added to make sure the refs are not added incorrectly, this is not as important for 3 digit refs which have already manually been brought into the map, but will be very important for 4 digit refs which I am yet to bring in to the map.
gscholz (2023-08-20 10:22:14+00:00): Hi DiogoBaptista98,
this changeset has created several errors in the OSM database regarding self intersecting lines:

https://overpass-api.de/achavi/?changeset=139994222

I have reverted it to fix those issues.
Kind regards
Guido
DiogoBaptista98 (2023-08-20 17:08:12+00:00): Why have you reverted an edit without discussing it first especially with a user with a lot of work? this was totally  impolite! And so why did you reverted all the edit putting all the work in the trash for a mistake just on one way? You should have reversed only one way. Very bad service here!
gscholz (2023-08-21 05:42:57+00:00): Hi DiogoBaptista98, ,
thanks for your feedback. If you are familiar with the OSM tools, you can just revert may change and fix your errors your own way. Anyhow I recommend to use JOSM capabilities and fix those errors before you upload them. May be you like to educate yourself about its internal validator:

https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/JOSM/Validator
Guido
user_5359 (2023-08-17 05:57:51+00:00): Welcome to OSM! I remove your SEO SPAM entry (mostly foreign keys). For a better description please read the wiki (https://wiki.osm.org).
AngocA (2023-08-17 14:57:36+00:00): Hi Sary, I see you are modifying the same area I am working on.
Just to inform you that I use an aerial photo I took with a drone, with is more precise than Esri or Bing.
If you are going to work on this:
https://map.openaerialmap.org/#/-74.06621932983398,4.711421092617277,18/square/03223211212103021212/64cbff8a23e51c0001889ad4?_k=pnp6mj
and
https://map.openaerialmap.org/#/-74.06621932983398,4.711421092617277,18/square/03223211212103021212/64cc446423e51c0001889ad8?_k=i40r4u (this one has a small offset - https://offsets.textual.ru/?filter=area&fid=29018 - the first one)
SarygamyshLake (2023-08-18 16:34:04+00:00): Hi AngocA, Thank you for uploading and sharing this great aerial imagery, and letting me know about the offset here. I’ll let my team know about this and I'll be sure to reference this in the future. Thank you!
phoenixsaigon1698 (2023-08-31 07:25:58+00:00): Trong một changeset mà anh xóa tới 110 way_id là sao vậy anh?
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139995778
Dao Quoc Huy (2023-09-09 01:12:35+00:00): Đã thảo luận tại: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139686453
            ---
            #REVIEWED_BAD #OSMCHA
            Published using OSMCha: https://osmcha.org/changesets/139995778
mike140 (2023-08-21 05:47:18+00:00): Навіщо цей контур містечка, якщо там вже є один, та ще й з іншою назвою?
mike140 (2023-08-21 05:47:29+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/1198874298/history
mike140 (2023-08-21 05:50:00+00:00): https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/286434165
Dimitar155 (2023-08-19 08:43:07+00:00): Промяната е частично върната, виж предишните дискусии: https://resultmaps.neis-one.org/osm-discussion-comments?uid=5260763.

https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/140085600
aceman444 (2024-03-18 21:45:18+00:00): Vidim, ze ste sa nepoucili z minulosti ( https://www.openstreetmap.org/changeset/64207120 ) a zase si tu robite vlastne omalovanky v rozpore s pravidlami OSM (kazda plocha je mala farma, aj ked to farma nie je, ale napr. parkovisko, ci len akysi "privat" neviemco). Ta "Zakladna skola" je zaujimavy objekt, dodnes som nepochopil co to je. Ale skola zrejme nie. A vrcholom je, ako ste si cely rezort vlastne znicili vytvorenim objektu https://www.openstreetmap.org/node/11121374337 bez nejakych funkcnych znaciek (ktore by urcili co je to za objekt, momentalne je to bodovy plot, cize nezmysel).
ovruni (2023-08-17 07:34:03+00:00): Hola, he notado que en este conjunto de cambios se han modificado varias calles, muchas de las cuales tienen una alineación a Bing, incluso una vía de frontera se junta con calles, que además no son indicadas dentro del comentario del conjunto de cambios. Por lo que he revertido el conjunto de cambios. Para cualquier consulta sobre el mapeo de OSM en Perú tenemos el canal de telegram https://t.me/osmpe de la comunidad de OSM en Perú 
Saludos
nslxndr (2023-12-16 20:53:17+00:00): Szia!

A nemzetközi wiki szerint egy olyan út között, ami highway=primary és egy olyan út között, ami highway=tertiary, a highway link highway=primary_link kellene legyen. Ez így konkrétan le van írva a highway=primary_link wiki oldalán, illetve a https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Highway_link gyűjtő oldal és minden konkrét _link oldala is írja, hogy a két összekötött út közül a magasabb osztályú szerinti link alkalmazandó.

Az 168280963 azonosítójú út kapcsán vettem észre (de valószínűleg több másik is érintett), hogy a primary_link helyett átsoroltad tertiary_link értékűre. Ez csak véletlenül, tévedésből sikerült így, vagy érhető el esetleg olyan magyar vonatkozású wiki oldal, ami a nemzetközivel szembemenő gyakorlatot fogalmaz meg?

Látom ugyan a changeset kommentben említett forrást, de azon túl, hogy a használata vitatott, nem vagyok róla meggyőződve, hogy ha ott valamiként be is vannak osztályozva ezek az ún. önálló kanyarodósávok, az felülírja a nemzetközi OSM irányelvet, hacsak nem született valamiféle magyar közösségi konszenzus, aminek eredménye összegezve bekerült legalább a magyar wikibe. (Hiszen úgy lesz hivatkozható, mindenki által fellelhető, egységesen értelmezett, és következetesen eldönthető, hogy mikor és miért járunk el másként. Különben pl. az adatbázis felhasználó szoftverek fejlesztői sem tudhatják, hogy mifelénk más a módi.)
NightH (2023-12-17 11:52:30+00:00): Szia!

Nem igaz, hogy az említett útszakaszt primary_link-ből átállítottam volna tertiary_link-re, ezt könnyen lehet ellenőrizni is: https://www.openstreetmap.org/way/168280963/history

A changeset lényege az volt, hogy rendbe rakjam a Pécset ötletszerűen secondary-ba sorolt utakat és a helyükre kerüljenek, mint tertiary. Ennek megfelelően kerültek a secondary_linkek tertiary_link kategóriába. Igen, valóban javíthattam volna a hibás secondary_linkeket primary_link-re, de feltételeztem, hogy azok helyesek voltak. Legközelebb majd erre is figyelek, köszönöm a hosszas leírást.

Megkérdezhetem, hogy az említett, 11 éve hibásan szereplő útszakasz összes szerkesztőjének megírtad ezt az észrevételedet, vagy csak nekem, az utolsó szerkesztőnek? Lehet a többiek is értékelnék a hasznos tudnivalókat.
NightH (2023-12-17 19:47:56+00:00): Segítségképpen itt van egy overpass-turbo lekérdezés, ami listázza az összes olyan pontot, ahol highway=primary és highway=secondary_link/tertiary_link vonalaknak van közös node-ja: https://overpass-turbo.eu/s/1EVf 
Jelenleg 381 pont, nem egy nagy szám, ha lesz érkezésem, akkor végignyálazom. Addig más előtt is nyitva van a lehetőség a javításra.
nslxndr (2023-12-17 21:35:27+00:00): Igazad van, a példaként kiragadott 168280963 azonosítójú út valóban secondary_link volt már a szerkesztésed előtt is, nem primary_link. De a kérdés szempontjából tulajdonképpen nem is az volt a fő szempont, hogy mi volt előtte, hanem hogy mi lett, mert azt szerettem volna megtudni mi alapján lett, ezt végül is megválaszoltad. De ha a teljességhez igényled, akkor tekinthettük volna példaként a 261093153 azonosítójú utat is, az a wikinek megfelelően volt előtte secondary_link, a módosítás után tertiary_link lett.

Hogy hány éve van hibásan és kértem-e mástól is magyarázatot a szerkesztéséhez, az szintén nem releváns, legalábbis abból nem következik, hogy akkor senkinél sem kérdezhetnék rá. De egyébként igen, rákérdeztem más olyan szerkesztőnél is, aki hasonlóan néhány hónapon belül több meglévő utat érintő changesetben ilyen jellegű utat átsorolt nem a wiki szerinti célosztályba, hogy mi alapján járt el, mivel ehhez jellemzően alapos indok szokott szükségeltetni. Én ugye a nemzetközi wikin túl mást nem találtam, hátha tudnak valamit, amit én még nem. (Általánosan elterjedt gyakorlatot vélt felfedezni, de akkor lenne róla wiki, különben csak megszokás.) Ezeket pedig közösségi szerkesztés lévén szükséges megvitatni, hogy egy irányba tartsunk, az esetleges félreértést és ötletszerű válaszokat megelőzendő igénylik a kifogásolt probléma világos és pontos megfogalmazását és hogy mit vár a kérdező. Ha nem kérdezek rá, csak csendben átszerkeszteném őket, akkor nem jut el hozzád vagy hozzám a megfelelő információ, és az egyéni meglátásainkat követve akár tudatosan akár tudattalanul edit war lehetne belőle.

Arra természetesen nincs kapacitásom, hogy minden egyes szerkesztőtől megkérdezzem vagy felhívjam a figyelmét a wiki irányelveire, de mint írtam a célom egy kellőképpen hiteles forrás volt (ha van ilyen), potenciálisan arról tudó szerkesztők egyikétől. Mindenesetre örülök hogy hasznos információval szolgáltam, mert akkor bízhatok abban, hogy hasonlóan alátámaszthatóan vitatott helyzetben te is egyeztettél volna a szerkesztőtársaddal.