Hi 😀 Mateusz Konieczny <matkoni...@tutanota.com> skrev: (22 augusti 2020 10:51:49 CEST) >(1) Wikipedia may strongly encourage or mandate it in theory, but there >are >still edits being made without any citations
Yeah I know, but the point is its really hard to create a new article in WP without references without it being flagged for deletion. So by "threatening" with deletion they raise the bar for inclusion and hence hopefully raise the quality too. We have no system to flag for deletion, nor to verify an object. > >(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. Is this relevant to the discussion? I proposed a button that makes it easy for a user to state 1) I attest this is correct (no proof or anything required) NOTE: a malicious user could of course mark all objects in the database as verified, so we probably need a way to handle vandalism, but my implementation is a first draft so feel free to suggest improvements. 😀 > >It makes impossible to require citations for everything and requiring >people >to contribute to Mapillary or equivalent would be an unreasonable >burden. I'm not suggesting requiring that, but we should motivate the user to reference a source and make it dead simple to do so. But this is off topic for this thread IMO and we probably need a new system for that too because our current changeset references does not add much value IMO. > >(3) Yes, better verification tools would be likely better. So what do you think about the proposed system? > >(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). No. Thanks for the link 👍 Cheers pangoSE _______________________________________________ talk mailing list talk@openstreetmap.org https://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk