[OSM-talk] Call for verification (Was: Re: VANDALISM !)

[Mateusz Konieczny]

(1) Wikipedia may strongly encourage or mandate it in theory, but there are
still edits being made without any citations

(2) Wikipedia is explicitly forbidding original research, OSM is explicitly encouraging it
The best edits are where people map things not mapped anywhere else,
or at least not mapped in any other open data source.

It makes impossible to require citations for everything and requiring people
to contribute to Mapillary or equivalent would be an unreasonable burden.

(3) Yes, better verification tools would be likely better.

(4) Have you seen 
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Microgrants/Microgrants_2020/Proposal/Map_Maintenance_with_StreetComplete
(BTW, I really need to finish my resurvey opening hours quest for StreetComplete).

(5) Anyone with any real knowledge of OSM is already aware that it has mistakes
"Hey, here is proof that OSM have mistakes" is not interesting in any way.

Aug 22, 2020, 10:26 by pangose at riseup.net:

> Hi 😀
>
> Mateusz Konieczny <matkoniecz at tutanota.com> skrev: (22 augusti 2020 09:55:10 CEST)
> >"It a playground with half-ass quality more than an authoritative and
> >verified source of information (like e.g. Wikipedia)"
>
>>
>>
> >I am not sure whatever you claim that
> >Wikipedia is
> >"playground with half-ass quality" or
> >"authoritative and verified source of information".
>
> I meant that a verification system does exist in Wikipedia and they now require references on all statements to keep up the quality of the articles which is sane IMO. We have no such system.
>
> >OSM would benefit from better verification
> >tools and so on but insult-laden post
> >filed with misunderstandings will not
> >lead towards them.
>
> Sorry if it came across as harsh, I get your point and will try to moderate my criticism a little more. 
>
> I love OSM and have contributed a lot over the years and recommend it to everyone I meet who uses maps. 
>
> I just sent a follow up email with a suggestion for implementing such a verification system.
>
> I still believe we have data with bad quality in many places (in Sweden). I have to fix stuff often when I visit new places apart from all the stuff we are missing. We are basically trying to keep up with an ever changing surrounding without a good way to indicate our data quality. 
>
> We can do better, but we need a new system that make it easy for contributors to verify our precious data (see my previous email).
>
> Cheers
> pangoSE
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/attachments/20200822/946c9b3d/attachment.htm>