On 8 Aug 2009, at 11:11, Simon Ward wrote: > On Fri, Aug 07, 2009 at 01:11:02PM +0100, Nick Barnes wrote: >> To my mind, nobody ought to be able to edit live map data unless: >> >> 1 - They have uploaded n tracks, >> 2 - They have had m edits approved by a moderator >> 3 - They are vouched for by somebody who has made many many edits >> >> (insert 'and' or 'or' or 'and/or' as appropriate) > > It has already been said, but I think raising the barrier to > contribution is the wrong way to go.
+1 Wikipiedia does have a restriction for new users in regard to uploading images. Only after a number of unchallenged edits (or a period of time - I am not sure ) is a user allowed to upload images. Given that image uploads are potentially particularly problematic and given that Wikipedia, ie primarily about the written word then this limitation seems reasonable. > > Instead, I’d like to see a way of saying someone has verified the data > without changing it. This has been talked about by others before, > and I > think every State of the Map conference has had presentations on the > subject. +1 I suggest that this should be done at the level of a change-set, not at the feature level. There would a change-set patrol page/rss feed with an indication of which pages have been patrolled and by whom. Change-sets can either be approved or challenged. A challenge might be on the basis that it was an honest edit by an inexperienced contributors or blatant spam etc. There would then need to be a process to review challenged changesets further and resolve any issues. Here are details of Wikipiedia's Patrol pages http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Patrols I like this group, the 'Wikipedia:Article Rescue Squadron' complete with emergence vehicles and flashing lights! Gives a clear message of support for new users that is very encouraging. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Article_Rescue_Squadron Might it also be appropriate to only allow people to review change- sets only when they have themselves made a certain number of edits that have not been challenged? Not beyond trickery, but the level of trickery needed would be much higher than currently and would be sufficient for most purposes. I really really think we need a new email-list for vandalism related issues - There is a 'data working group' chaired by Mikel but Mikel is probably not even on this list and I can find no information on the foundation website about their activities. I realise that some members of the data working group are on this list but that is by chance. I am keen that working groups get better integrated into the wider community and discussion and feel that the main talk list is just to busy for such a debate. Regards, Peter _______________________________________________ Talk-GB mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-gb
