User:Mateusz Konieczny

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

I am operating User:MissingImageInfoBot and User:Mateusz Konieczny - bot account bot accounts.

You can help

mapping for tactile map

invalid Wikipedia links

If you are interested in wikidata=* and wikipedia=* - to see list of cases where human help is required and welcomed!

About me

OSM Logo This user submits data to OpenStreetMap under the name
Mateusz Konieczny.

OSM account My website my edits on wiki

/automatically generated list of various issues on OSM wiki is list of automatically detected missing articles on OSM Wiki and various other smaller issues

Table of contents

Important TODO

Less important TODO

Someone keeps editing street name with current date, old revision appeared in Google Maps, presumably together with other stolen data. Between 2018-08-03 and 2020-12-04 Google copied OSM data, including invalid data like name of this street. Not sure what is a good next step if I want to achieve more than Google hiding evidence.

It convinced me to - at least - to seriously treat claims of Google stealing OSM data. I need to verify street name, there is a vanishingly tiny chance of some weird changes to actual name, or that name on Google is real street name.

Anything else worth checking?

Google allows submitting feedback about missing streets - maybe they blindly applied it (rightclick on the map)?

Quick links

active sysops - deletions - blocks - page protections

user renames

make wiki easier to edit

Remove harmful templatification

This templates makes harder to edit for nontechnical people, make impossible to do page-specific tweaks in wording.

It is also making work harder for translators, especially as English language template stuck in article text makes editing confusing for people not using English as a primary language.

Common tags

  • template to aid removal: open page with template
  • edit (I do it in wikicode edit)
  • replace <template call> with {{User:Mateusz Konieczny/improve editability
  • use preview
  • copy generate wikicode into article, replacing template
  • now you can switch order or add page-specific text
  • use preview again to check is everything OK
  • save page


Replace with

Set a [[node]] at the center of the feature or draw an [[area]] along its outline.

Edit comment:

Remove [[Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:How_to_map_as_a_node_or_area|unneded template]] that makes harder to edit wiki, replace it with a freeform text.

Also may be useful: * {{Tag|name}} (or {{tag|noname|yes}} if it has no name)



Undocumented tags I just use but are without formal proposal. Idea from User:Malenki/undoc tags

Proposals may be created for some that are useful, frequently used or likely to be complicated. Voting will be initiated for proposals likely to get support in voting.

edit info about documentation of undocumented tags

tag taginfo reasoning status (see Proposal process)
Proposed features/man_made=meridian_marker - but page at man_made=meridian_marker exists
Proposed features/access=adherents There are some places that restrict entrance based on religion. For example places of worship where anyone may enter - but only if they are from a specific religion. For example mosques Morocco. This tag is deliberately religion and denomination independent, alternative is to have separate access value for each religion or its variant. access=muslim and so on

"Entry of non-hindus in the temple is strictly prohibited..."

Proposed features/access=muslims or maybe access=muslims?
What about big areas such as Mecca?

Tag:amenity=bicycle_charging_station Charging station for charging solely bicycles. For charging station for both cars and bicycles use amenity=charging_station
Tag:shop=snack (also cuisine=regional + regional=polish + polish=obwarzanek) For shop selling special-purpose baked things that is neither shop=pastry (are not sweet) nor selling general purpose bakery products. Maybe shop=bakery_snack? Proposed features/shop=snack
Tag:cave_tunnel=yes, original natural=cave_tunnel was changed as apparently JOSM validator expects natural to be areas and to not be used with highway=*
fee=no + fee:conditional=yes @ (temporary_exhibition)
Tag:?=? mark disappearing path I just discovered that tractype=grade5 is not useful as it covers all pure dirt paths. Key:trail_visibility ?
Tag:tourism=carriage_ride_boarding ??????? tourism=attraction + attraction=carriage_ride lub amenity=carriage_ride_boarding. ???? marks departure point of tourism vehicles - vehicles wait for tourists and depart immediately with interested tourists. Possibilities include horse-drawn carriages, melex etc currently active and useful discussion on tagging mailing list
Tag:access:conditional=complex for situations where access:conditional is unreasonably complex in use - first at
Key:access:complicated_conditional:image for situations where access:conditional is unreasonably complex - link to photo with the rules in use - first at
Key:service_times:mass When mass is conducted testing sheduled, posted to tagging mailing list (mechanical edit)
Tag:natural=windthrow Remains of a forest destroyed by a wind testing in progress, posted to tagging mailing list
Tag:man_made=goal A football goal - object on a pitch testing in progress
Tag:man_made=hay_rack for hay racks placed in the woods to feed animals during winter testing in progress, see Proposed features/amenity=feeding place, consider Tag:man_made=manger, amenity=game_feeding is quite popular
Tag:dual_carriageway=yes for oneway roads representing roads that are not oneway, as these roads have more than one carriageway and each is mapped separately tested, waits for a proposal (weird cases: (1) (2) )
Tag:service=turning_loop testing in progress
Tag:ticket=public_transport combined with Tag:shop=ticket testing in progress
Tag:topic=public_transport combined with Tag:tourism=information Tag:information=office testing in progress
Tag:traffic_sign=no_stopping instead of Tag:traffic_sign=PL:B-36, combined with Tag:traffic_sign_code=PL:B-36 send to @tagging
Tag:traffic_sign=no_parking send to @tagging
Tag:traffic_sign=oneway send to @tagging
Tag:traffic_sign=crossing instead of Tag:traffic_sign=PL:D-6, combined with Tag:traffic_sign_code=PL:D-6 and Tag:traffic_sign_detail=pedestrian_crossing testing in progress
Tag:traffic_sign=give_way (see Key:traffic_sign) instead of Tag:traffic_sign=PL:something-something testing in progress
Key:traffic_sign_contradiction freeform value, describes traffic sign inconsistencies testing in progress
Tag:amenity=hospital_department alternative to mistagging them as amenity=hospital or amenity=clinic idea from
Tag:area:highway=crossing Proposed features/pedestrian crossing as an area

Also: Key:recycling:plastic_bottle_caps

Proposed features/opening hours:signed=no

Proposed features/free permanent exhibition

Proposed features/shop=snack

Proposed features/insulated

Proposed features/Customer service

Ascended values

tag taginfo reasoning status (see Proposal process)
Tag:amenity=traffic_park cases: Proposed features/scaled down streets that may be used for traffic safety education or as a type of a playground
Tag:street_vendor=yes marks shop as a street vendor Proposed features/street vendor=yes (36 uses) - currently active and useful discussion on tagging mailing list
Tag:man_made=bridge I only started vote on proposal
Tag:man_made=carpet_hanger Proposed features/carpet hanger


Mechanical Edits

(edit), see Automated Edits code of conduct

See to see list of cases where human help is required and welcomed!

Bot edit usefulness

My idea is that automatic edits are OK given edit where

  • human making such changes would not cause a reasonable protest
  • human would edit in the same way or human would make more mistakes
  • preparing program and discussing automatic edit will take less time than a tedious manual edit
  • probability that human during editing would spot major issues not detected by validators is not significantly higher than during normal editing (human will spot mistakes during any editing anywhere, automatic program not spotting problems during editing is harmful only if unusually many major issues not detected by validators would not spotted)
  • edit is accepted by OSM community in discussion (even if somebody is convinced that edit makes perfect sense one should not make if community opposes. It makes sense even if edit was really a good idea)

Overall my vision of automatic edits is that it allows to do incredibly tedious and boring edits, with less mistakes than humans. It allows humans to make more productive editing.

I consider importing addresses from high-quality sources, removing invalid objects imported due to poor processing of source data (importing objects marked as not existing), retagging building=building to building=yes to be good examples of such edits.

Assuming that address dataset is on suitable license and so good that after importing it OSM dataset will cause less mistakes than after surveying the area, why not import it? Except rare cases it will take less effort to do that and people can spend survey time on objects that are not easily importable.

Assuming that some large-scale retagging is clearly desirable - what is the benefit over doing it manually object by object over running scipt and spending hours of freed OSM time on something more useful like going on walk and surveying local area (or tracing forests or improving OSM editors or helping newbies or going through what JOSM validator reported).

Local communities

  • Poland
  • USA: talk-us mailing list and slack
  • Australia: talk-au mailing list
  • GB: talk-gb mailing list
  • Ireland: talk-ie mailing list

Standard disclaimer, add to bot edit requests

In case of any questions about bot edits I will answer them (and answered all that I got so far).

In case of any damage caused by bot edit I will fix it (so far it has not happened).

I have experience with automated edits, see for list of approved and successful bot edits.

Yes, editing element will cause it to be edited and change "last edited" date. Effect will be exactly the same in case of using bot and manual edit (which I will do anyway in case of rejecting this automated edit proposal). Note that in case of bot edits you may filter out bot edits marked as automatic.


Waiting period to give time for response or processing of external issues

Waiting period - supported by discussion, all raised issues solved

This tasks can be started at any moment

Active tasks

Tasks active for a single run

Tasks active forever, until revoked by a community

Past, no longer active tasks

Ended without a single mechanical edit, typically rejected ones

Not listed here

  • Reverts of undiscussed mechanical edits - as explained by DWG - automated revert of an undiscussed mechanical edit may be done without any discussion and is exempt from Automated Edits code of conduct

Data quality issues

In some cases below mechanical edits may be useful. Many are fixable only by a manual review.

Mechanical Edits at OSM Wiki