I was scheduling to eventually reply to this note in the coming weeks, but ok.

---------------

Re "local knowledge", at least in theory there is a real person behind the account that made the change, so a bad edit is still blamable and/or bannable.

Re the Wayback Machine link, nope, it's fundamentally still "trust me bro" but more glorious and sounds much nicer. Plus some other possible issues.

On the surface level, that document only explains the Chinese name, and doesn't mention any English names. The name is still (partially) unsubstantiated. Normally this is salvageable, but there's more.

I think Internet Archive is an US entity of some sort. I am unfamiliar with US laws (US Fair Use might permit this usage), but by quoting upon the Wayback Machine, this really feels like infringing upon the database rights of the IA, which OSM really tries to avoid.

Then, this document came from the HK-gov (allegedly so), but the original was retracted/updated after it was submitted to the Machine, so normally we shouldn't even be able to see this version of the document. That time I read through the Cap 528 (Copyright Ordinance) several times over, and then seeing this situation, I really feel like this copy is an unauthorized copy of government documents, and we literally can't use it.

And then, if we need to quote upon the Machine, we will now need to trust an extra organization that that they are "clean", so to speak. Recent governance records of the IA is frankly not good (you are telling me, the Archive was hacked and then stayed broke for 2 whole weeks with no actions?!). Also see ongoing citation crisis at Wikipedia, also involving a supposedly "clean" archive.

Way too dangerous; just don't do it.