Thank you for your contribution.
Regards.

1. It is useful that you recognized your mistake.
2. I did not see the "Commune" tag (you were the first to mention this to me), as I was busy checking the names of hundreds human settlements in Moldova.
3. No need to tell me what to do in this specific situation, like replacing something I did not edit or reporting things I did not notice.
When I discover something that I want to edit, I do not give advices, I go and edit it. And I know about DWG.
Regards.

Hi,
Where did I addedd the tag "place=Commine"?
It was there before my edits.
Best regards.

Could you be more specific before accusing of vandalism? What exactly you do not like in my edits? The names in Romanian of villages in the Republic of Moldova? This is the true on the ground, in documents, in written and oral communication, this is the reality.

Hello.

I noticed that you have changed the status of 3 areas, from "park" to "forest"; thank you for your contribution :-)

But the reason why I have initially marked these areas as "park", is because they have very small surfaces, and I know that in reality these areas are not forests, but actually are small parks (normally covered with trees).

So, my general question would be:
when do we start to consider a group of trees as a forest? Can we assume, for instance, that a dozen of trees, that grow very close to each other, represent a forest? I saw many examples in OSM where parks with compacts groups of trees are not always marked as forests? (for example, some areas from the New York Central Park are covered compactly with trees, but OSM don't reflect this).

I will appreciate very much your position on this issue.

Regards,
Oleg