As I understand it (from talk on #osm-dev at the time) there were issues with the speed of the processing as well as the machine power issues, and since then other approaches have come along that essentially do the same job or better (albeit not on the main site). Someone asked the DWG what they can do about local area monitoring, which is how I noticed the wiki still pointed people at OWL. --SomeoneElse (talk) 20:58, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- I will fix-up the OWL page and references to it. Local area monitoring... hard when it comes to the web interface. For me RSS feeds (whodidit and filtered OSM.org) do a good job (in German). Yes, totally right to remove OWL. If its status would have been clearer, it should be gone much earlier. --Aseerel4c26 (talk) 21:04, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you. In the course of creating the original version, I did alert the community to the fact that a single account was being abused by this editor (which was fixed), but I was unaware that multiple additional issues later arose regarding this editor. Frankly I'm surprised it had much usage at all, given its frustrating interface design.
With pages like iOS, I attempted to make existing content more usable by removing abandoned and malfunctioning software and extraneous details. After doing that, the page started to look very slim, so I also went through the iTunes App Store, Google Play Store, etc. looking for OSM-based software to document on this wiki. To me, the purpose of these software pages is to document the OSM ecosystem as completely as possible. It didn't occur to me that it would be viewed as an endorsement, but I can see how it looks that way.
I'm totally in agreement about removing geoMapTool from the iOS listing and slapping a more prominent warning on geoMapTool. Sorry for the inconvenience this page caused your team. Hopefully there aren't any other major drivers of traffic to that application.