Hi webfil,

In this change (and the others like it) I was focused on cleaning up the admin_level=6 (MRC) boundaries. I did fix issues when I saw them on smaller administrative areas but there are >1000 municipalities in Quebec so I didn't check every one. So there are definitely still issues or inconsistencies that should be fixed but it would be a big project.

I remember looking at Cookshire-Eaton specifically because it is part of an urban agglomeration while also being a part of an MRC, both of which are usually tagged admin_level=6. I made sure the city was mapped, but the agglomeration is currently unmapped.

I placed the Cookshire-Eaton node with a goal of having a node and a boundary relation for every administrative area, with matching name, and place tag on the node. There is not any guidance for that on the wiki but I have found that JOSM, osm-carto, and nominatim all seem to prefer it like that. And yes I did choose place=city because of the administrative status, not realizing how it would compare to Sherbrooke. That could be fixed.

I don't think that those two nodes are duplicates, given that the population center called Cookshire and the municipality called Cookshire-Eaton seem to be different concepts. However I would say the Cookshire node could be the admin_centre and Cookshire-Eaton node the label of the Cookshire-Eaton boundary relation. I'm not sure why I didn't do it that way in this changeset.