User talk:Angoca

From OpenStreetMap Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Prueba de zona de discusión

Esta es una prueba de cómo se ve la zona de mensajes directos para discusiones.

--AngocA (talk) 23:33, 10 December 2021 (UTC)

Hey! Esta es una respuesta a este ejercicio... --rodrigo (talk) 16:53, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

Redirects

Hi,

I usually do not delete redirects such as WikiProject Colombia/PreguntasFrecuentes because they might help people to find the page they are looking for. Most of the redirects are created automatically when someone renames a page. Thus, links on other webpages such as https://forum.osm.org still work with the old link.

Cheers, --Tigerfell This user is member of the wiki team of OSM (Let's talk) 14:22, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi Tigerfell, Thank you for the explanation. I supposed something like this, because you do not delete all my proposals. I am just organizing the Colombian pages, which were a disorder.
Best regards, --AngocA (talk) 04:32, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Closing notes

Re: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=Organised_Editing/Activities&curid=228335&diff=2272088&oldid=2270590

Are you closing older notes without verification or fixing them? Solely because they are old?

It is normal that there are many notes present and waiting for local verification. Please do not close notes solely for being old or made edits blindly based on unconfirmed notes.

It is fine to close notes that are outdated, unclear or useless but "keeping just a small quantity of recently opened notes" is highly harmful.

Have you discussed it with local communities at least? Using all methods specified on contact channels? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:41, 27 February 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mateusz.
First of all, we trust in the notes. I mean, we believe they were created with a purpose, to indicate a difference between the map and what is on the ground. Based on this, we do not need to go to every single note place and verify the content of the note to see if it is correct. If someone wants to make vandalism, it won’t create a note, it will do the vandalism directly on the map.
Second, when we say that we process notes, this means we read the text, we analyze it based on local knowledge (that's why I don't close notes from other places than Colombia), we perform a change on the map, and finally, we close the note. Even, if the note is not clear, we leave a message asking for more details. However, sometimes we know we will never receive feedback, especially when the note is anonymous. In this case, we leave a message, and we close the note. For us, the notes are the best interaction place between map users and mappers, and in a global context, we have forgotten this. In fact, we are trying to revive this, and we want to make sure, our map users are heard, but this can only be done by processing the notes few days after they have been created, not years after.
Third, we have already done this activity in Colombia, last year we resolve thousands of notes. The Colombian community was more than informed. We invited all Colombian mappers, and many of them joined us. We notified them by mailing list, Telegram channel, wiki, and events. We received comments and we did adjustments in our activity. But the community agreed with us to close all old notes. Now, based on the Colombian experience, we are extending this initiative to other Latin American countries. And regarding the Latam community, it has been also notified; in fact, in our first meeting of this year, we agreed that we will do a Notathon periodically. For this, we have created the event, we have published in different places and the people who assist to the events know how to proceed with the notes.
By resolving notes, we have involved mappers in this OSM feature, and it had given us the opportunity to work together, to tighten our efforts for the same purpose, by working locally.
Finally, by leaving old notes opened, this does not provide anything. No one will see them, no one will go to the place and verify if this is correct. This is not Germany where there are thousands of mappers looking for details to map; instead, we are just a few, and there are many problems in our maps, even bigger problems than notes. By processing notes and processing them on time, this will make our Latin American maps more updated, with a community of mappers integrated, and the map users heard. And when a user is heard, he will continue contributing to the map, or he can even become a mapper.
(We already discussed this in the https://t.me/osm_notes_latam channel.)
--AngocA (talk) 14:57, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Case4-normal.png ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Angoca}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified March 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 20:30, 25 March 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Image 2022-02-08 12-15-14.png ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Angoca}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified March 2022}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:58, 28 March 2022 (UTC)

Missing file information

Hello! And thanks for your upload - but some extra info is necessary.

Sorry for bothering you about this, but it is important to know source of the uploaded files.

Are you the creator of image File:Case11-normal.png ?

Or is it copied from some other place (which one?)?

Please, add this info to the file page - something like "I took this photo" or "downloaded from -website link-" or "I took this screeshot of program XYZ" or "this is map generated from OpenStreetMap data and SRTM data" or "map generated from OSM data and only OSM data" or "This is my work based on file -link-to-page-with-that-file-and-its-licensing-info-" or "used file downloaded from internet to create it, no idea which one".

Doing this would be already very useful.

Licensing - photos

In case that you are the author of the image: Would you agree to open licensing of this image, allowing its use by anyone (similarly to your OSM edits)?

In case where it is a photo you (except relatively rare cases) author can make it available under a specific free license.

Would you be OK with CC0 (it allows use without attribution or any other requirement)?

Or do you prefer to require attribution and some other things using CC-BY-SA-4.0?

If you are the author: Please add {{CC0-self}} to the file page to publish the image under CC0 license.

You can also use {{CC-BY-SA-4.0-self|Angoca}} to publish under CC-BY-SA-4.0 license.

Once you add missing data - please remove {{Unknown|subcategory=uploader notified 2022, May}} from the file page.

Licensing - other images

If it is not a photo situation gets a bit more complicated.

See Drafts/Media file license chart that may help.

note: if you took screenshot of program made by someone else, screenshot of OSM editor with aerial imagery: then licensing of that elements also matter and you are not a sole author.

note: If you downloaded image made by someone else then you are NOT the author.

Note that in cases where photo is a screenshot of some software interface: usually it is needed to handle also copyright of software itself.

Note that in cases where aerial imagery is present: also licensing of an aerial imagery matter.

Help

Feel free to ask for help if you need it - you can do it for example by asking on Talk:Wiki: new topic.

Please ask there if you are not sure what is the proper next step. Especially when you are uploading files that are not your own work or are derivative work (screenshots, composition of images, using aerial imagery etc).

If you are interested in wider discussion about handling licencing at OSM Wiki, see this thread.

(sorry if I missed something that already states license and source: I am looking through over 20 000 files and fixing obvious cases on my own, in other I ask people who upladed files, but it is possible that I missed something - in such case also please answer)

--Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for a quick reply! If you are author I would strongly encourage {{CC0-self}} or at least specify {{PD-self}} "PD" covers wide variety of cases Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Attribution

Hello! And sorry for bothering you, but descriptions of files you uploaded need to be improved.

You have uploaded files which are licensed as requiring attribution. But right now attribution is not specified properly.

Please, ask for help if something is confusing or unclear in this message.

Please, fix that problem with this uploads - note that images with unclear licensing situation may be deleted.

Attribution may be missing completely or just be specified in nonstandard way, in either case it needs to be improved. Note that using CC-BY files without specifying attribution is a copyright violation, which is often unethical and unwanted. So clearly specifying required attribution is needed if license which makes attribution mandatory was used.

If it is applying to your own work which not based on work by others - then you can select own user name or some other preferred attribution or even change license to for example {{CC0-self}}

For your own work: ensure that it is clearly stated at file page that you created image/took the photo/etc

For works by others - please ensure that there is link to the original source which confirms license and that you used proper attribution, or that source is clearly stated in some other way.

Especially for old OSM-baded maps, made from data before license change on 12 September 2012 you should use "map data © OpenStreetMap contributors" as at least part of attribution

For old OSM Carto maps, which predate license change on 12 September 2012 you can use a special template {{OSM Carto screenshot||old_license}}

Are you really author?

Are you really author of material at https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Contributors.png ? Including author of the text? Or have you just taken screenshot? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 08:00, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

What do you think? AngocA (talk) 15:06, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Statuses

Are you the same person as Angoca commenting in https://github.com/taginfo/taginfo/issues/366 ? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:52, 13 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mateusz, yes, I am the same person. Also, I am the same person that asked about the Deprecated tag: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User_talk:Maro21#%22Deprecated%22_tag_change_to_%22ValueDescription%22 where you talked about the Data item with Maro21.
In fact, I want to organize the Spanish pages. I started by creating many missing pages for Keys and Values in Spanish. I am also synchronizing the description between the wiki page and the data item in Spanish (we have much less red pencils that a month ago).
In the beginning, I just wanted to have this page: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Objetos_del_mapa with all entries in Spanish (many of them had the English description because the Spanish entries didn't exist), and using only valid values (not deprecated, nor proposals, etc.). However, I have learned many things from the wiki, and now I am doing something more significant, like including more entries on this page (cuisine, shelter type, wall, etc.) and only using TagList template for the tables. I could say that currently the Spanish version is more complete than the English one.
Now, I would like to have dynamic tagList tables with only valid entries, and that's why I created the GitHub issue (that Joto blocked) to have an automatically updated table. I believe this page could be the most important wiki page when showing the OSM capabilities to someone new. By showing only the accepted values will be better, and having something automatic will be easier to maintain this page. That's why I would like TagList to have that extra option; once we have the option, we could refactor the Map Features page. If the Joto excuse to not do this is is because there are many spellings for the status, then I would like your help to generated the list of discrepancies to fix them, or if you show me a better method I will do it. AngocA (talk) 14:11, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
I think we ask joto to unlock this github issue, because the status are no longer a mess in the wiki. AngocA (talk) 17:38, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I made a list of the dubious statuses and it had no Spanish pages. I made list of the most dubious statuses and it is here, feel free to use it or not. This is just list of the most dubious ones, if you process that I can list more Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 15:08, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

I created all these Spanish pages, and I have remove the invalid status in the Key/ValueDescription.
I would like to know how can I find the invalid status for only Spanish pages? Via Sophos? I prefer to only modify Spanish pages, to have a set of pages in only one language aligned with the real status. Also, it is easier to argue this modification with people that speaks the same language. AngocA (talk) 05:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Data items - P28 images - without "File:"

Hey Angoca, I just want to ask you to set images in data items without the "File:" in front of the filenames. Otherwise displaying in {Description} box on the linked feature page will be broken, if there has not yet been set an image. --Chris2map (talk) 20:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Thank you for the comment. I have already notified this and the new pages I have created do not have the prefix. However, the documentation is not clear about that, when creating or modifying data items. That's why I made that error, because it needs the prefix in ValueDescription tag, but not in the data item. At this point, I do not know which pages have the prefix, because I have created thousands of wiki pages in Spanish, modifying a lot data items. AngocA (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Fixed some more. I think now we have almost all of them. --Chris2map (talk) 19:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
Great and thank you. How did you find all these occurrences? do you use Sophox for querying this? I would like to learn. I want to improve the Spanish pages, because they have a lot of issues and the information differs from the English version (status, feature type, groups, etc.) AngocA (talk) 19:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)
I simply looked at your contributions page [1] in namespace "item" and used browser search function (Ctrl+F) to find "File:". --Chris2map (talk) 20:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Dumplings, not donuts

ES:Tag:cuisine=dumplings describes... donuts.

Probably a wrong redirection as if you go from there to English you're redirected (as expected due to the content of the page) to Tag:cuisine=donut --Nospam2005 (talk) 20:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Corrected. AngocA (talk) 15:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)
OK! Thanks, feel free to remove this section for readability. --Nospam2005 (talk) 16:27, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Source

I added missing source info in https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/File:Frailejon.png as "own work" which I am pretty sure to be correct but please correct it if I am wrong Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 19:21, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, it is my own work AngocA (talk) 23:14, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

ES:Tag:bicycle_road=yes

Do you mind if I delete ES:Tag:bicycle_road=yes? Then I could move ES:Key:bicycle_road to this place as the article describes bicycle_road=yes tag. The same I did with the English version: Tag:bicycle_road=yes. maro21 14:56, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Please, go ahead. No problem from my side. Thank you for keeping the wiki synchronized. AngocA (talk) 21:54, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Mensajeros Urbanos

I am reviewing https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution entries and encountered Mensajeros Urbanos that you added some time ago (thanks!).

Sadly I cannot verify this one easily, current version is incompatible with my phone.

Is this app dead and defunct (probably not, was updated in 2022). Can you test are they still using maps, are they still using OSM and is there a proper attribution?

Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 07:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mateusz. The application still has the issue of no attribution. However, the application has not been updated yet: https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=co.mensajerosurbanos.app.cliente&hl=en - Jun 13, 2022
I contacted them, they replied me. I forwarded the communication to the Colombian mailing list https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk-co/2023-February/004713.html AngocA (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
As part of your review, have you planned to have a unique list for all languages? like the one for admin_level: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Tag:boundary%3Dadministrative#10_admin_level_values_for_specific_countries
This prevents double entries. AngocA (talk) 16:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
" have you planned to have a unique list for all languages" not sure what you mean by that Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 21:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
This list: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Lacking_proper_attribution#List_of_usages_lacking_proper_attribution
is different from the Spanish one: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/ES:Falta_de_atribuci%C3%B3n_adecuada
from the French one (very extensive): https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/FR:Manque_d%27attribution_appropri%C3%A9e#Suivi_des_demandes
And check, and arab seems to have their list. AngocA (talk) 02:46, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Ouch. Good point, I have not noticed at all. Maybe I should ask French community (and others) to try synchronizing their list with canonical English version? Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 05:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
This is the unique page for lacking of attribution for all languages.
https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/User:Angoca/lacking
This could be integrated in all languages. Eventually, an extra column could be included to indicate the language. And the two tables should be merged into one.
Please, view the code of this page. It points to https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Lacking_proper_attribution AngocA (talk) 14:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
https://forum.openstreetmap.fr/t/manque-dattribution-appropriee-and-lacking-proper-attribution-osm-wiki/16458 Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 06:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Why don't we create a page like this: https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Template:Admin_level_10 but for lacking of attribution.
And then, we invite the French community to incude their entries there. In that way, each language page, will point to that Template, having only one list in the Wiki, { {Admin level 10} }.
I am going to create a mock to show you what I mean. AngocA (talk) 14:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

That's why I told you to have a multi language table, like the one admin_level. In that way, tha same templateTable is on all languages, and there is no need to sync. AngocA (talk) 12:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://wiki.openstreetmap.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Angoca&oldid=2577936"