Talk:OpenStreetMap is a social activity

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search


Brycenesbitt marked this page for deletion with the following reason: non-productive edit wars and unlabeled non-consensus editorial opinion. —M!dgard [ talk | projects | current proposal ] 06:19, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

I disagree that "OpenStreetMap is a social activity" should be removed, this point of view wasn't covered at wiki before. I'm not sure how deletion proposal will help wiki, please clarify? Xxzme (talk) 06:01, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
A wiki is a bad place for expressing opinion. Brycenesbitt (talk) 06:07, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Then we should revert all of your first edits and pages you create, right? Stub was placed to help users navigate wiki. Xxzme (talk) 06:10, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Your behavior and edits have been un-wiki-like. Many of your cleanup edits are good, but they come at a high cost. Please reconsider your own "social activity" here on this wiki. Brycenesbitt (talk) 06:22, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Again, topic OpenStreetMap is a social activity wasn't covered at wiki before. Why you think deletion of OpenStreetMap is a social activity stub will help wiki? Xxzme (talk) 06:25, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
How about if you create the page in a social way. Write it. Post it to a mailing list. Gather feedback and comment from other users. Then, perhaps, mark it as opinion and post it. But really, the wiki is a poor place for expressing your opinion. Brycenesbitt (talk) 15:59, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Wiki_Help#Getting_started_with_wiki_editing. Xxzme (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
OpenStreetMap is a social activity is main page in Category:OSM Community and shouldn't be removed, only replaced with better variant. If Brycenesbitt cannot give better look to this stub that's not problem of this page. Xxzme (talk) 06:28, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
It's only the main page in that category because you placed it there. How is that an argument?
For what it's worth, I support the deletion. You can start working on a page in your user name space, but please only don't move it to the main namespace, and especially don't link to it from highly visible pages, until it actually has worthwhile content. --Tordanik 08:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
That's not how wiki editing works. Even Steve words were significantly updated over time.
Yes I placed main page for category as described in Wiki_guidelines#Categories: A single line introduction should be provided for every category which should in general link to an appropriate 'main' page for the subject, ideally of the same name.
Since you are not putting effort to improve text at this page, I don't see how your opinion about "worthwhile content" should be considered about where this page is located.
Page was placed as main page for category according wiki guidelines. Yes it was me who did, not you. Xxzme (talk) 09:14, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
The words "in general" do not mean "always". If the need for such a page does not arise naturally, don't create it. --Tordanik 09:39, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
I need this page to explain category. I created it. It it clear now for you? Your suggestion is against Wiki_guidelines#Categories. Date to explain why we should remove page that explains Category:OSM Community? Xxzme (talk) 09:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
Proposal: first move the page to your test space until it meets a certain minimum level of quality (it need not be complete, it just needs quality). Then change title to "Editorial by Xxzme: OpenStreetMap is a social activity". Change page URL to "wiki/Editorials/OpenStreetMap is a social activity". Create a space for editorial opinion that does not need to conform to the consensus view. Brycenesbitt (talk) 18:44, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
What does minimum level of quality even means?
This page was placed to describe category Category:OSM Community according to Wiki_guidelines#Categories.
If you cannot improve this page, then there nothing to talk about. This is not my opinion. This is not only my opinion.
If you see how this page could be improved then do it! Wiki_Help#Getting_started_with_wiki_editing Xxzme (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2015 (UTC)

It's not unreasonable to simply make a start on a page and link it from some places in the hope that others will help improve it. That's a fairly normal wiki approach. However...

You do all these things too quickly and clumsily. The page appears to cover quite a broad sweeping topic area. A matter of principle for the project as a whole. Yet it doesn't do a very good job of explaining what it's about, and you haven't convinced anybody else in the wiki community that this page needs to exist or is worth working on. ...which is a problem because it needs work. It has lots of obvious english errors for a start. Lots of unfinished thoughts. And yet you have linked it from several prominent places.

-- Harry Wood (talk) 00:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I wasn't paying attention to the text, but to navigation and cross-links.
Intent of this article to provide simple interlocutory text about social aspects of OSM with cross-links. Why there community in OSM? Why QA is related to the community? [1] [2].
It was never intended as in-depth article. There dozens of introductions already (Main Page, Category:Portals) to cover them at single page.
Many of social aspects directly related to data and data quality.
It is linked from prominent places because it leads to top level cat [3].
PeterIto edits were coherent, but how explain them without writing "Introduction to OSM"? How community is related to data quality? How social interaction can improve data? Xxzme (talk) 08:00, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Xxzme you're creating a social page in an anti-social way. Please revert your own edits. Brycenesbitt (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
Creating stub is not anti-social. But you can skip this step and compare me with Hitler if you feel comfortable to ask these questions.
If you ignore need in this page spamming delete proposals instead of improving it - that's not my fault, I was focused on different topic.
Will you continue deletion proposal spamming or do have ideas how to improve this page? Xxzme (talk) 16:42, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
I feel this page can be improved by removing the contents, and the links to the page. The subject matter and approach are not a good fit for the wiki. This page is not ready even to be a stub. Work on it somewhere else, and bring it to the community when it shows promise. Brycenesbitt (talk)
Even [4] this was enough for stub.
OpenStreetMap is a social activity describes Category:OSM Community according to Wiki_guidelines#Categories,
No, I don't see how we should vandal pages at wiki and reduce navigation just because Brycenesbitt said it is not good fit for wiki. Xxzme (talk) 19:14, 9 May 2015 (UTC)
By arguing, you're missing the point. I will no longer interact with you. The original page at Introduction_to_OSM is much better than this one. Brycenesbitt (talk) 19:21, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

So did anyone figure out the purpose of this page yet? I see it's been mostly de-linked everywhere. Do we want to do a rename/redirect/delete?

It seems to me that most of the points, at least towards the top of the page, are advocating (in maybe an overly strong and opinionated way) using changeset comments i.e. not leaving them blank. Maybe this page is best redirected to Good changeset comments.

But the page title implies that it's something more than that, and I think that was Xxzme's intention. But the contents don't cover the broad range of topics the title would imply.

Another option which might make most sense. Move this page to User:Xxzme's user space "User:Xxzme/OpenStreetMap is a social activity" as a personal work in progress for him.

-- Harry Wood (talk) 14:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

It's been a couple years with no activity, and it's unlikely that the page will develop into something useful at this point – whether it's here or in the user namespace. I wouldn't be opposed to a deletion or move if you prefer these solutions, but for now I've turned it into a redirect to Good changeset comments. --Tordanik 14:09, 26 August 2017 (UTC)