intanto ho modificato il tag "name" togliendo la parte che non era un "nome". Suggerisco di riflettere, se forse avrebbe più senso invertire i tag "name" e "alt_name", se localmente il nome principale è Premassone (non l'ho fatto perché non conosco la zona).

non entro nel merito del sentiero esistente o meno, ma per mappare nomi alternativi bisognerebbe avere un nome in ogni chiave, quindi alt_name va bene, ma “name” no perché ci sono due nomi e altri simboli (parentesi)

and someone reverted the edit so that the halt was again a subclass of station. I am mainly concerned with OpenStreetMap and do not want to go into edit wars on wikidata, which has their own rules. The relationship of wikidata items and OpenStreetMap objects is not identity, it’s more: “a similar concept”

FWIW, following our dialogue I fixed wikidata, both the La Giustiniana object but also the railway halt item, which had stated that halts were a subclass of stations, which they are not, and also that they were distinct from stations, which they are.

Anyway, if you did not find official information about the station status, and all you got was a different statement in wikidata compared to OpenStreetMap, what made you believe wikidata was right and OpenStreetMap was wrong?

in Italy at least, this is the significant difference which I am aware of. Actually, there could be switches, but for a halt they have to be “permanently” blocked with appropriate devices.

If you want to learn about the license problems with wikidata you can find the information here: osm.wiki/Wikidata
For wikipedia, the problem is incompatible licenses (also found in the osm wiki)

Generally, you should check the aerial imagery and usually you can already see whether it is a station or a halt. Did you retag more halts? Did you do it systematically?

The source for the claim is the Italian wikipedia, but there it is writtten that it is a halt: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stazione_di_La_Giustiniana
basically an error in wikidata. Generally the OSMF-policy does not allow taking information from Wikidata / Wikipedia.

Ciao Davide, ti segnalo che hai introdotto un doppione di railway=station qui:
node/12912681097
L'ho appena sistemato.

Hi, I noticed you retagged the train halt La Giustiniano from railway=halt to railway=station, your comment is misleading and I beliebe the edit is wrong, because it is not a train station, it is a halt (no possibility to change from one rail to another). Can you explain your sources?

Anscheinend gibt es den Weg doch: https://community.openstreetmap.org/t/unbefestigten-pfad-im-nsg-furs-betreten-im-tagging-auf-no-setzen/117903/37

Do you know the automated editing guidelines? You can find them in the wiki

Yes, this is one of the uses: compare official length and length in OpenStreetMap. You wrote “deleted redundant length tags…” in the changeset comment. Please answer the question whether you know the automated editing guidelines.

the length was referring to the tunnel, not to the way, it would be pointless to tag the length of the way because it is already in the geometry. Have you heard about the automated editing guidelines?

undiscussed mechanical edit, not useful, potentially removing useful information for no benefit

Kommen die multiplen motorroad Werte hier:
way/838172117/history/1#map=10/14.7742/74.2243&layers=N evtl. vom mergen von highways mit inkompatiblen Eigenschaften?

Hi, absolutely, I didn’t question this was a good faith edit, just wanted to tell you it’s better to keep traffic signs on the side of the highway.

Happy mapping

fixed it

Hi, I noticed that you have moved a traffic sign from it's actual position to the middle of the road (part of a highway), this is not helpful, as it would loose the implicit information of direction. Case is this: node/1389062964

yes, this is the same as implicit, maybe 14 years ago it wasn’t clear which tag to use? Can be changed to implicit