不是这样编辑的啊 关系：新兴县 (3031848) 只加边界里面的乡镇边界另外创建关系

你这样用JOSM更快 用ID事倍功半

thank you for you revert

Do not undermine China's actual control of the island's content

Do not undermine China's actual control of the island's content

Do not undermine China's actual control of the island's content

why delete node？

不要黏在一起

The source is based on the data from China's official mapping bureau, and their boundary data can be consulted for comparison.

I made some revisions based on the boundary data and actual satellite imagery. There are some discrepancies in the frontier. Of course, my guess may be wrong, but I try my best to be neutral. My amendment to this large boundary Is based on this logic, so nothing to say, I do not like to write a reason. Sorry

I made some revisions based on the boundary data and actual satellite imagery. There are some discrepancies in the frontier. Of course, my guess may be wrong, but I try my best to be neutral. My amendment to this large boundary Is based on this logic, so nothing to say, I do not like to write a reason. Sorry

？？？？ is 3

Do not change

Maliciously remove the Chinese

Unless tomorrow there is an incident in Huangyan Island, the ownership may change; I know Huangyan Island unlike China's other controlled islands in the South China Sea have built artificial islands, so regardless of both the political and military forces, but simply to consider one only by For a long time it is possible to say that boat control is unstable. However, since 2012, China has steadily controlled the island. The most active conflict state is also the last country that controlled the island. The Philippines has been unable to access the island. OSM expressed through the borders of the objective and practical control What is wrong?

OSM is the need to show the current actual situation, such as a county was canceled, I will delete; a rapid development and construction of a city in China, I will draw on the road, may be a few years after the planned changes have demolished there It is possible.
Not because the place is controversial and complex, we can not express the current situation through the country-borrower relation.

However, it is enough to comply with a stable control. Nothing in the world is immutable. It is a fact that China has stabilized control of Huangyan Island since 2012, and if you say the ownership change happened on the island a few days ago We may need to wait and see a few months no problem, but this is already a very stable long-term control.

This is a district-level unit in China's administrative divisions, including the Xisha Islands, which are actually under the control of China, and the Nansha Islands as a whole is not the same concept. Please do not arbitrarily modify it.

Please do not destroy

I disagree with the fact that the prime minister can basically confirm the actual control of China's South China Sea islands through references to wikipedia. For example, Huangyan Island is a stable stop for military vessels in Beijing and no other state forces can enter, and this is from 2012 to the present Therefore, there is no problem marking China as a border country.

At present, the islands in the South China Sea are basically operated according to who controls the country marked. Although the islands will always be in dispute, the control rights basically belong to the same country for a long time and basically do not have any problems.

我不同意，首相通过wikipedia的参考文献基本可以确认中国南海岛屿的实际控制，比如黄岩岛是北京方面有军方船只稳定停靠在内，其它国家势力无法进入，而且这是从2012年开始到现在了，因此标出国界归属中国没有什么问题。

而现在中国南海的岛屿基本也是按照谁控制就标注为哪个国家的关系来操作，因为岛屿虽然会一直有争议，但是控制权基本长时间稳定属于同一个国家，所以这样没有任何问题。