Hi, I’m struggling to understand the Wiki regarding tagging for mobile repair shops. I mean places that only repair phones, not mobile phone shops which repair them as an additional service.
Until now I always mapped them as shop=mobile_phone + mobile_phone:repair=yes ¹, but today I saw in the shop=mobile_phone wiki page that craft=electronics_repair + electronics_repair=phone exist.
If you visit the craft=electronics_repair page the suggested tags are repair=mobile_phone and electronics:repair=mobile_phone, notelectronics_repair=phone
So we have mobile_phone:repair (933 uses), electronics_repair=phone (591), repair=mobile_phone (65) and electronics:repair=mobile_phone (0) which all mean the same thing, the last two being listed as main tags in the craft=electronics_repair page instead of electronics_repair=phone despite being less used (and not used at all in the case of electronics:repair=mobile_phone).
The problems seems to be that electronics_repair=* key is deprecated (while the sub-value =phone wiki page doesn’t mention it). The banner says “The reason is documented in Deprecated features.” but I couldn’t find the reason there.
¹ I guess because the mobile_phone_repair=* pages says: “Add mobile_phone:repair=yes to a feature which is also tagged as a shop= or other main feature tag. In case of a dedicated shop, shop=mobile_phone should be used.” But at this point I guess the sentences meant “dedicated to mobile phones” and not “dedicated to mobile phone repairs”, maybe it should be phrased differently?
It is not, if you look at page Deprecated features - OpenStreetMap Wiki that template links to, you’ll find no mention of it. It seems to be user rtfm doing random undiscussed wiki edits according to his personal preferences. (something I’ve seem them being accused of several times previously).
If you ask me, feel free to revert that last wiki edit to previous status quo, and point to this discussion for reaching consensus.
(offtopic from Mobile phone repair shops, but relevant to the wiki in general)
Yes, they have been and continue to be a problem. Their OSM account has just emerged from a relatively long OSM editing block. See also previous OSM blocks.
If you think that their activity on the wiki is bad enough to warrant a block, please message one or more wiki admins to request it. I’m on that list, but as I’m not one of the main wiki editors I don’t think that it would be fair for me to act unilaterally (but am more than happy to provide evidence and support). For more about this user’s intent and activity, see their user page and talk page.
I believe that Ti-Lo/RTFM’s contribution to the project as a whole has been profoundly negative.
If you think that their activity on the wiki is bad enough to warrant a block, please message one or more wiki admins to request it. I’m on that list, but as I’m not one of the main wiki editors I don’t think that it would be fair for me to act unilaterally (but am more than happy to provide evidence and support). For more about this user’s intent and activity, see their user page and talk page .
If you’ve already messaged one or more wiki admins and have not had a response, please send me an OSM PM or raise a DWG ticket.
Somewhat separately to that, I’ve rolled-back the offending wiki edit and asked RTFM to join the discussion here.
But seems there was no response from any wiki admin (based on the last Mateusz message from 12 April). @Mateusz_Konieczny do you have any additional information about this situation?
That’s a wiki page that I didn’t know existed and don’t watch. Like I suggested, "please message one or more wiki admins " if you want something to happen.
Hi, on behalf of the wiki’s administrators, allow me to apologize for the lack of a timely response on this request. Sometimes it’s unclear whether a request is straightforward and uncontroversial enough to act on immediately. In this case, the original set of pages being requested for deletion seems to have been turned into redirects, which seems like a reasonable course of action, while another related set of pages is currently requested for deletion.
As for the user discussed above, their case is being handled on the wiki and I’ll refrain from discussing it tangentially in this thread.
