I read over Wikipedia’s bot policy and it’s a great mature resource which addresses a bunch of the concerns here such as starting small & slow, doing trial periods with community feedback, good documentation, addressing specific concerns from others, etc. It’s pretty similar to what is already in the Automated Edits code of conduct and import guidelines just not quite as relevant to OSM.
I agree that if the barrier to entry is too high and there is too much discussion nothing gets done. The problem right now is getting everyone onboard with with the values mentioned above.
@LogicalViolinist and @DenisCarriere, I noticed you guys have gone ahead once again while there are still unresolved problems with your mass-editing. It seems pretty clear from your instructions that you are manually (re)importing offline data. If you’re edits are reverted again, could you please address some of the concerns? It would truly be faster and more productive for everyone to get along, discuss and resolve the concerns.
Here are some concerns I have:
-
follow the code of conduct and import guides code of conduct/import guides. for example:
-
make a wikipage which includes the procedure and notes on where and when it has been deployed.
-
Add an entry in the import catalog
-
make a more meaningful changeset description with a link to its wikipage. “Add #wikidata to #Africa places” suggests a project of some kind but doesn’t say where. When my edits were deleted, I had to do a bunch of research to find out what the #Ottawa project was all about.
-
initially run it in places of which you are familiar and edit often so it will be easier to spot mistakes. I feel like Africa should be the last place it should be applied. Maybe
-
-
how are you handling multiple matches?
-
what if an object already has a wikidata tag?
-
does that bug matter for this import?