Hi. As per guidelines one language is enough except when one language has a broader page than the other: wikipedia=*#Secondary_languages . As there are interwikis, giving two links is redundant. I understand the problem can be a bit political though and I generally try not to touch areas that may be sensitive. I guess in the distant future we will move to wikidata links where all this won't matter anyway. :)

Hello Zbigniew,

Just to clarify, I do not have any plan about pl:. Whether the Polish community wants to use pl: rather than en: or not is completely up to them and independent from my corrections. I merely agreed that it would make more sense to favour pl: in Poland (even though technically any link in any language is fine). My corrections are simply about using the correct format as documented on the wiki: wikipedia=* (whether it is en:, pl: or anything else does not matter). At any rate, I do not plan to do additional corrections around Poland for a while. Let me know if I can help later on.

Regards,

Med

Hello Zbigniew,

I do not add new tags. I mean if there is a wikipedia:en=article, I transform it into a wikipedia=en:article. The issue here is that there was no pl link already. That being said I fully agree with your point. I will try to submit the idea to the osmose developers to see whether they can add a test when there is already an article present in the local language. I have seen the issue a bit all over the place in Poland. Maybe you want to raise the issue with the Polish community to fix that?

Regards,

Med

Hello Zbigniew,

The errors have been identified with the osmose tool: http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/ . The fixes are detailed here and follow the OSM guidelines: osm.wiki/Osmose/issues (search wikipedia in the page). In the present case the issue was that the links were listed aa "wikipedia:pl=article" when they should have been "wikipedia=pl:article".

Regards,

Med

OK, it should be fixed now. Thanks for catching this.

Arghh. Crap crap crap. I usually catch all those. My bad. Going to fix that right away. Regarding the individual link, I don't know. I can imagine it to be convenient when looking at an individual one. Not my choice though. I do not remove tags.

It depends what you would call mechanical. I am certainly not running a blind script. I get errors and fixes from osmose. I limit myself to trivial changes such as these ones. I also run the josm validation tool and I fix problems that appear to be reasonably easy to fix. I upload everything by hand in josm after all that. If you see any mistake, please let me know and revert if necessary. Thanks!

Note that if you want to revert all those changes, feel free. I have seen other changes similar to mines though, so I think this point really needs to be clarified.

I did not understand that page that way. To me "old tag" just refers to the deprecated tags and the "new tag" what should be used instead. It makes a direct link between wood=deciduous and leaf_type=broadleaved. There is no indication of a link between wood=deciduous and leaf_cycle=deciduous. I guess because that information actually should have been tagged as type=deciduous. I think that section should at least be clarified.

Hi,

I just followed the instructions after the deprecation of "wood". More precisely I am doing edits following this table: osm.wiki/Proposed_features/leaftype#Features.2FPages_affected . That being said, I initially thought the same as you.

Otherwise, I only touched the wood tag, nothing else, so it is not surprising that stream remains.

Cheers,

Med