Proposed automated edit - removal of crossing:markings=yes tags introduced in undiscussed automated edits

[Mateusz_Konieczny]

@SomeoneElse

From a personal point of view it’d be great to have thoughts on how we can catch situations like this where someone has been many good-faith changes that actually weren’t valid partly because the editor they were using was a bit “economical with the truth”. This ediitor was clearly trying to improve OSM; it’s a real shame that they were misled into making the edits that they made.

editors should be more clear that QA suggestions may be wrong, specific cases were not reviewed by human and that blindly applying them is a bad idea

See for example Make issue warning clearer when offering to add `brand:wikidata` or `brand:wikipedia` · Issue #6517 · openstreetmap/iD · GitHub that I opened in 2019

@Minh_Nguyen

Within England, iD and Rapid are suggesting this pub operator on the Chinese restaurant, which is arguably an editor bug

for now I opened NSI suggests to change chinese restaurant into pub · Issue #10940 · osmlab/name-suggestion-index · GitHub

(see also Nonsense suggestion to change post-high school into kindergarten · Issue #10939 · osmlab/name-suggestion-index · GitHub and Incorrect iD suggestion at Orlen brand · Issue #10926 · osmlab/name-suggestion-index · GitHub and other problems I reported/fixed )

@Minh_Nguyen

I don’t know if the mapper in question has How Did You Contribute bookmarked, but in my personal opinion, this tool is a major part of the problem.

I agree. For many people it induces them to apply all iD suggestions and Osmose suggestions not matter whether they make any sense or not.

Has DWG tried to write to Pascal, asking them to remove QA stats? It was nice idea but it went wrong.

(I tried writing some time ago, maybe I should write again? Or start a thread asking for such change?)