Hello, I just noticed you moved the actual border of the Bioparco here from the position I have meticulously surveyed on the ground to a position that I do not think is credible, because it results in the centro Nuovi Orizzonti to be inside the Bioparco. Can you please share the sources of your edit? Here is a screenshot that shows what you did: https://ibb.co/c8HYf0X

back to OSM, I think you should indeed record the fact a settlement is considered cidade, vila (which by the way can also mean town or village, according to context) or aldeia (or more), but not in the place tag, it would go against its definition. You can find it here: place=city
I think you should have a look at admin_title https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/admin_title#overview
Or name:prefix https://taginfo.openstreetmap.org/keys/name%3Aprefix#overview
or maybe have a completely new key specifically for your situation.

It seems, cidade can also be translated to town, according to the context the correct translation may be town in many instances. It is not possible, unfortunately, to assume that the English idea of town translates perfectly to the exact same concept in other languages, often you cannot translate the same word 1:1 into the same word in a different language, you have to choose the correct corresponding word(s) according to the context and the definition / idea the languages have about these terms (what they can mean or not). Sometimes, there isn't even a single word in a language for a concept that other languages have a word.

Cheers,
Martin

The law does not define the meaning of the city tag in OpenStreetMap, I don’t question that you should tag legal settings if they are useful for the context, but I think if the implication would be to map European towns with 8800 population as place=city then the place value is not the right place for this. Maybe it has to do with translation? What is the portuguese term that you map to city?

Cheers Martin

Hi, it seems unconventional to promote a town with less than 9000 population to "city", referring to Fátima: node/563655196/

ich denke nicht, dass §186 StGB (Üble Nachrede) hier Relevanz hat, es kommt höchstens §185 StGB in Frage, der 186 ist für Fälle wo das Gesagte Unwahr ist.

this changeset is discussed here:
https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/revert-bulk-deletes-of-addresses-on-poi/113542

Hallo, habe gesehen dass du beim Bundespräsidialamt government=legislative getaggt hast, das ist aber falsch, weil der Bundespräsident als Staatsoberhaupt auch Chef der Exekutive ist.

Gruß
Martin

Hello, I can imagine someone thinking that after 20 years of mapping we still forgot to map the vatican city, because it is so tiny, but actually it was already mapped, so this is a duplicate. For this reason I have removed the node.

Hi, you have added a German name here which does not make any sense. Please only add names for languages which you know.
Thank you
Martin

Buongiorno Valestarkiller, e benvenuto in OpenStreetMap. Ho notato che hai inserito 3 nuovi parchi in estensione del Parco Marconi. Queste parti nuovi sono già accessibili? Generalmente, la soluzione se la risposta fosse sì, sarebbe di estendere il parco già mappato e non la creazione di 3 nuovi parchi.

Un saluto,
Martin

building=* non si applica, quindi non può essere il tagging migliore. Se non esiste un tag bisogna inventarlo.

Buonasera Claudio, ti segnalo questa nota: note/3743078

saluti
Martin

Buonasera Ceseprova,

e benvenuto in OSM, anche se ci sei già da qualche tempo, ma non ci siamo mai incrociati finora. Ti vorrei segnalare questa pagina del wiki, che spiega perché i commenti alle modifiche che carichi sono importanti: osm.wiki/IT:Good_changeset_comments

Saluti e buona mappatura,
Martin

Questo è uno sforzo veramente lodevole, comunque mi sembrerebbe quasi meglio togliere tutto il farmland e cominciare a disegnare farmland "veri"
Un saluto!

Thank you, SomeoneElse!

@silversurfer83 "This change here and the other subsequent changes in the same manner need to be reverted in my view.", fully agree, can you write to the DWG?

@ablevi202 "I would infinitely rather look at one large changeset when reviewing than track down every single local changeset someone makes."
If I were to track all changes by a certain user, then yes, but what people do (and what makes most sense, given that everybody is an expert locally but nobody knows the whole world), is looking at changes in their local area.

It makes their life harder because it gets into their way together with all the other wide spanning edits, so that it is harder to find local edits.
Guidelines ARE rules.

no worries, I just thought I'd point it out to you (because I was trying to analyze local changes and your changeset appeared), but you were by far not the only one.

Have fun mapping :)