On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 3:34 PM, andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> wrote: > On 2 February 2012 19:28, Martijn van Exel <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 11:02 AM, andrzej zaborowski <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> On 31 January 2012 18:51, Paul Johnson <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Looks like about 4% of Austin was balrog-kun; I'm in the process of tagging >>>> that odbl=clean right now per his previous request. >>> >>> I don't believe I made any non-automatic edits in TX, and those are >>> already considered clean by the license plugins. >>> >>> Note also that if you use odbl=clean you need to make sure other edits >>> in the history are ODbL-clean and as far as I know there's no general >>> way to do that. >>> >> >> Are they also considered clean on >> http://odbl.poole.ch/usa-20111208-20120201-poly.html ? There's still a >> whole lot of 'dirty' edits by you on there. > > 82k ways, so yes, looks like some of the name expansion changesets are > still counted dirty. Simon Poole mentioned on IRC something may be a > little off in his latest stats.
Well I just found 8 TIGER name expansion changesets that have a total of ~113,000 ways in them and weren't listed on the changeset override page because they didn't have the bot=yes tag. I have added them: http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Quick_History_Service/Changeset_Lists#balrog-kun_bot_edits_with_missing_bot_tag Toby _______________________________________________ Talk-us mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/talk-us
