You approached the mapper in a quite high-handed way. And you provided links to OSM Wiki (Verifiability and How We Map) in two of your initial comments, and those are what he apparently mistakenly referred to “Wikipedia”, but should be clear from the context. I can completely empathize with his being annoyed with your formal, high-handed approach followed by a revert.

Mapping proposed/planned objects has been controversial to an extent, but the community has usually tolerated them. We have Wiki pages on the proposed: lifecycle prefix as well as railway=proposed.

4 Likes