You're welcome

Please check note/5340390

Please check note/5340247

Please check note/5340203

Thanks for your work and the information. It stands to reason that the description is not relevant to OpenStreetMap.

I will take this information into account in future revisions.

The phone number way changed again by me, because our both formats are not correct. ;)

changeset/183942256

Please check note/5313708

Is this only a shoes store? Please check the tag "ahop".

way/234317886

Which is the right surface? You added two tags with different values.

Please check payment:=** to enter the payment information.

Please check way/1517429677 it looks very weird

Please check note/5302377

Danke für den Hinweis.
Ich habe nun die Infos gemäß dem Wiki nachgepflegt und in Sites verschoben.

Ursprünglich habe ich mich hier etwas zu sehr auf die Presets in JOSM verlassen.

changeset/182488229

Please check note/5264537

Please check note/5260303

Thank you very much for the correction.

Re-added in changeset/181537676

After re-check the the wiki site of place=region and place=locality, I decided to continue to tag it as region.

Okay, fair enough, you’re certainly right about the very unclear and dubious boundaries. So a node is entirely reasonable.

My goal isn’t to force this relation into the database. Rather, I simply think it makes sense to include it in the database as a landmark. A relation has the advantage over a node of also representing the area’s extent.

All in all, I would now add it as a node.

Please check note/5256150

Please check note/5256142

This is by no means "arbitrary". The region is clearly documented in numerous sources. Only its exact boundaries are disputed.