Starting mapper here. I came by this object because it was reported that the wikipedia tag was not functioning. It is tagged as wikipedia=nl:Raatakker;en:Celtic field. As the wikipedia tag does not allow the ; separator the first solution a got to was to split into wikipedia:nl=Raatakker and wikipedia:en=Celtic field. But after some more reading on the wiki I came to wikipedia=nl:Raatakker. Problem solved. Well, technically yes, but not quite.
I had a look on the article and concluded that it was not about this specific object but about the object type. Now I think it should be tagged as archaeological_site:wikipedia=nl:Raatakker. Am I on the right track here?
Side-note: The website tag goes directly to a pdf document. Would it not be ābetterā to use the url tag for that?
You should only give a Wikipedia link once, so use either the nl:Raatakker article or the en:Celtic field article as a reference. I would use the NL article, which is a bit more comprehensive. In very rare cases, you can also set multiple Wikipedia links, see the section on Secondary languages.
For the link to the pdf document, I would also prefer the url here, as it is not the main page, but merely a source of information.
Hello Andreas,
Thanks for your reaction. How about the other part of the question? The wikipedia article is about āRaatakkersā in general and not about this specific one. What do you think, should the tag be changed to archaeological_site:wikipedia=nl:Raatakker instead of wikipedia=nl:Raatakker?
I must apologise: Between the intention to help someone and the surprising call from the kitchen āDinnerās ready!ā (You should always listen to your wife in such casesā¦) I was too fleeting and only had the ātechnicalā aspect in mind.
The more I think about it, the more questionable it is for me to even link to a wikipedia article that has nothing to do with the object itself! A Wikipedia description of the tag used belongs more as an example in the OSM wiki.
The article to be called up with the website (better url; at the moment it has hung up) is certainly the source of information that best fits the object.
As far as I understand the Wikipedia page describes the type of archaeological site, not the specific archaeological site. In this case Iām not sure a Wikipedia link would be useful, but if Iād want to add it, Iād use your suggestion and add archaeological_site:wikipedia=nl:Raatakker.
from Germany