See comments on changeset/110097966 .I've deleted this in changeset/113672192 . Please do not add fictional data to OpenStreetMap.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

I've deleted this in changeset/113672192 . Please do not add fictional data to OpenStreetMap.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, on behalf of OSM's Data Working Group.

For completeness, there's now a discussion happening on the talk-nz mailing list at https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-nz/2021/thread.html .

Hello,
Can you point to where this "longstanding consensus" was documented?
Best Regards,
Andy

Sigh. And there was me thinking you were trying to find some sort of compromist.
For completeness, the other half of this discussion is on changeset/113586442 . There I asked kiwiAs to stop behaving like a stroppy teenager and to apologise to you; it now looks like you're just as guilty as he is of prolonging this edit war.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, from OSM's Data Working Group

Hello again kiwiAs,
You were asked (by private message and in the changeset comment above) to apologise to michael60634 and have not, as far as I can tell, done so.
For the avoidance of doubt - http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=248764278 shows that you have not, as you have said above, "corrected yet again the name tag", but have merely removed alt_name.
Sometimes people in OSM have different views about things - we need to discuss them like adults rather than sulking like stroppy teenagers and understand each others' point of view if the project is to avoid becoming full of pointless edit wars (and "a vs ā" is pretty high up the list of pointless edit wars).
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, from OSM's Data Working Group

Hello again,
Can you please eplain why the previous change to http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=248764278 to this one was "edit warring"? You've set the alt_name value back to the same as the name, which makes no sense.
It appears that the previous editor has accepted your argument that "most signs say a not ā" but you've still reverted their change to alt_name. I think that you owe them an apology.
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, from OSM's Data Working Group

Hello again,
Can you please eplain why the previous change to http://osm.mapki.com/history/node.php?id=248764278 to this one was "vandalism"? You've set the alt_name value to the alternative to what the "name" was, but how was the previous change vandalism?
Best Regards,
Andy Townsend, from OSM's Data Working Group

Silav Rênas Azad,
Li ser navê vî bajarî nîqaş hatin kirin
changeset/113104060, lê wisa dixuye ku ew hîn negihîştiye encamekê.
Hûn dikarin hin agahdarî bidin ku destnîşan dikin ka çima navê weya bijartî rast e?
Ligel rêzê,
Andy

Hello Renas Azad,
There's been a discussion about the name of this city going on in
changeset/113104060 , but it doesn't seem as if that has come to any conclusion yet.
Can you provide some information that suggests why your preferred name is correct?
Best Regards,
Andy

Reverts previous to this were done from the wrong user, from changeset/113562261 on for 4 changesets.

This changeset (and the 3 after it) should have been done from @SomeoneElse_Revert , not this user - sorry about that.

This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 113556168, 113556173, 113556179.

This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 113556168, 113556173, 113556179.

This changeset reverts some or all edits made in changesets 113556168, 113556173, 113556179.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 113565332, 113563927, 113566871 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some deletions in Chad following a request by the original mapper.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 113565332, 113563927, 113566871 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some deletions in Chad following a request by the original mapper.

This changeset has been reverted fully or in part by changesets 113565332, 113563927, 113566871 where the changeset comment is: Reverting some deletions in Chad following a request by the original mapper.

Oops - it looks like the tagging of way/971370581/history in changeset/109350798 makes this appear like "one big house". Presumably tthat wasn't what you intended?
Best Regards,
Andy

Hello and weclome to OpenStreetMap.
Are you sure that way/550006581/history is really no longer a road?
Best Regards,
Andy