A manual output review for the changes I'm making is not feasible. There have been tens of thousands of changes and they are very focused. Only website tags with http where that url redirects to an https url are changed. And only the website tag is changed. The volume is too high to manually review this and the change is so very specific that it really doesn't need to be reviewed. The fact that there are other things wrong with an entity shouldn't be the concern of the bot. That will happen all the time and can't be avoided.

I imagine that there are tools already out there that look for improperly formatted things like postal codes and phone numbers and put them up for manual review. Maybe something like KeepRight already does this.

As for the drawbacks of unreviewed automated edits, I'm sure there are many, but I think I've done a pretty good job in keeping the types of changes so laser focused and well defined that it is hard to argue that the changes I'm making are in any way a problem.

As for how often this will affect you, I think the chances are pretty low. I'd love to hear otherwise of course. In the future, it will probably run maybe weekly or monthly. So the chances that someone creates a crappy entry that also happens to have a website that is http that will redirect to https and have this get created and caught by the bot script before you get to it is low.

Also, I'm not sure why you can't simply revert the bot's changeset, and then revert the bad SEO edit. You will be reverting a few other of the changes that the bot has made in that particular changeset, but you shouldn't worry about that, it will remake the changes a week or two later when it goes to process everything again.

Also, at some point, this bot will likely be run across the entire planet. So if you have any ideas (like not modifying brand new entries that are less than a week old), we should definitely work those out.

Is this just a general venting of frustration, or are you suggesting I should change the behavior of the bot? Maybe not operate on anything object that is younger than a day or week or something?

I'm not that familiar with the "brand" key outside of gas stations. I was just changing the http to https on the website key. If there is something else you think I should be doing, let me know.

I don't think `brand` is the right tag to use either way. A `wikipedia` tag could be added, but I still think the website tag is correct in and of itself. I'd prefer to see it be a link specific to that store (maybe a page that lists store hours for that location and whether or not items are in stock), but that's out of scope for the changes I'm making.

I removed yours from one parking lot and redrew some of them so you have an example to work from. I didn't finish the entire area. Just enough to show the correct way. I'm not sure if you've used this style in other places. This is just one I came across.

Hi Itachi, thanks for helping to improve the map. I wanted to let you know though that service=parking_aisle is for where you drive the car, not where the actual parking spots are.

Documented here: osm.wiki/w/index.php?search=https_all_the_things

It was meant to be U.S. only, but it looks like my geohashing is slightly off.

Is there a problem with the bot? I'd love to hear about it.

FYI, I've deleted the Restorative Farm since we aren't allowed to use Google as a source.

I'd like to get them toplogically correct again. Is that something you can take care of yourself? If not, I'll do it if I know that you aren't going to join them all together again.

As for moving the ways, it should be relatively easy to select all of the segments and move them all at the same time. Certainly less time than it will take me to correct the layers again.

Thanks.

Hi there dmich9. A golden rule of OSM is that ways cannot cross or overlap with themselves (without some sort of layer separation). Is there a reason you combined osm.org/way/648836698 back into a single way and removed the layer differentiation?

Hi there @thefra. A couple of things that new mappers should be aware of: 1) try to make smaller changes that don't span large geographic areas. 2) ways shouldn't zigzag all over the place. they need to reflect "ground truth".

I've deleted several of the ways that you've created as they make no sense.

Hi McClintock. Nice to see that your class has spurred some interest in adding to OSM. I made some changes to your "Sidewalk" and wanted to let you know about them so that you can improve your skills. The first change was that I removed the name "Sidewalk" from path since it really isn't a named sidewalk. In general, objects should be named with a description of what they are, they should only be named if they actually have a name. I see this often with parking lots improperly named "Parking" for example. Another problem with the sidewalk is that it technically isn't a sidewalk in that it doesn't border a street. It is more of a footpath so I removed the sidewalk tag. And lastly, it was connect to East 19th, but from the satellite images, it doesn't look like it actually continues on to the street. I removed that connection and added a bunch more paths around the area. My changeset is here: osm.org/changeset/66971636

Thanks for contributing. If you ever need help, please reach out. I'm happy to lend a hand to new mappers.

Why were those footpaths deleted? Was there a problem with them?

Can these really be considered parks? There must be a better classification for them. Especially since Shakespeare Garden is so micro.

Hi revent, many of the points in this change set already belonged to existing ways and your change has somehow moved them to the point where the ways no longer make any sense. I'd like to revert this changeset, but I wanted you to have a chance to manually revert the ways that are broken due to your change first. A (possible subset) of the broken ways are:

osm.org/way/168663239
osm.org/way/224020919
osm.org/way/479417367
osm.org/way/153687677
osm.org/way/92789869
osm.org/way/224020938

I'm seeing several errors in your imports where a way will double back on itself. For instance: osm.org/way/664255445. JOSM *should* be indicating this is an error if you use validation.

FYI, osm.org/way/663050651 was added where a road way already exists. I'm going to copy your surface=asphalt tag over to the older way and delete yours. Hope that's okay.

Looks much more "purdy" now. :)
Thanks for taking care of it.

Happy to help! I check a daily report for errors and do my best to keep the country cleaned up of a couple specific error types.

No problem! I don't mind cleaning up here and there if it means that map gets more detailed in the process.