User talk:Rtfm/SMB overview

Any constructive folks interested in improvement ?

So, there are some guys mentioning they don't like this overview and write whole books about it instead of improving the page. Any constructive input how to achieve the same goal better or what's missing / misleading ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 19:54, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

1. Move it to your user space and rename it like everyone has already suggested.

2. Blank it and rewrite it in an actually instructive way. That doesn't just involve a bunch of completely arbitrary tagging tables that contain information no company that wants to add their business to OSM cares about. For instance tagging usage numbers or images of breakfast sandwiches aren't really relevant helpful to business owners. Everyone knows what breakfast is and looks like. Especially a business that serves breakfast and would be using the tag. No business cares that the tag is used 1,586 as a node either. For one because it's nerd stuff (that you yourself talk down about) and also because the whole point in an instructive article is to spare people from having to decide on their own how and what to use.

3. Number 2 happening is completely contingent on number 1 happening and visa versa IMO. Also, it's on you to make the articles you create neutral, readable, and useful. Not other people. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:42, 24 August 2020 (UTC)

I was asking about something constructive and there's just the usual sabotage "Make "speeches", Talk as frequently as possible and at great length., Illustrate your. "points" by long anecdotes and accounts of personal experiences." reply, this is a typical |troll behavior. rtfm Rtfm (talk) 16:30, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

I thought it was pretty constructive. One man's constructive feedback is another's religious bigotry though I guess. Shrug. Whatever the case, I redirected it to your user space per the consensus. So, at least it's been dealt with. Although, really you should have been the one to do it, but I know your way more into throwing tantrums and attacking other users then doing things that are actually useful or constructive. So.... --Adamant1 (talk) 01:33, 24 September 2020 (UTC)

Move to User:rtfm/SMB_overview

The only unifying characteristic between the tags on this page is that they are a mix of some common tags, plus several rare tags which are promoted by User:rtfm. I don't think this sort of page is appropriate for the main page namespace of wiki.openstreetmap.org, which is used for explaining "de facto" and "approved" ways that objects in the OpenStreetMap database are mapped and tagged. This page is not helpful for new mappers and might cause confusion, by listing tags that have been used 2 times, and temporary tags (covid19:*) next to common tags. I think it should be moved to User:rtfm/SMB_overview --Jeisenbe (talk) 01:55, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

That's the main problem about naysayers : they never mention an alternative method. If you think it's "not helpful for new mappers", then tell the community what's your proposal how to offer small and medium businesses an easy overview (which are regularly not nerds). rtfm Rtfm (talk) 12:01, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

This wiki is not for businesses, but primarily for mappers, and secondarily for database users to understand the meaning of tags and objects in the OpenStreetMap database. In OpenStreetMap there is no distinction between how you tag a small business or a branch of a large corporation: HSBC, BankAmerica (1000s of branches, billions in assets) and a local credit union with a single location are all tagged amenity=bank. McDonald's is tagged amenity=fast_food, same as a local fast food eater with a single location. There is no difference between the way you would tag a small or mid-sized business, versus a large business.

The overview for new mappers (and new database users) is Beginners' guide, and also Map Features - both are linked from the Main_Page. For business that might want to use OpenStreetMap, there is the page Using_OpenStreetMap, and also Use_OpenStreetMap --Jeisenbe (talk) 00:00, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Rtfm, this page was not more accessible to small and medium businesses owners than Beginners' guide. Beginners' guide can be certainly improved but creating endless list of pages duplicating other wiki pages is waste of time. Please, please stop doing this Mateusz Konieczny (talk) 22:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Rtfm, du hast in diese Seite sicherlich viel Mühe investiert. Leider hast du dich damit in eine Sache verrannt. Es ist schlicht und einfach die dreihundertachtunzwanzigste Seite, die gebräuchliche Tags mit Fokus auf POIs auflistet. Es gibt genügend Listen-Seiten dieser Art. Je mehr solcher Listen und Übersichtsseiten es gibt, desto mehr Aufwand ist für ihre Pflege erforderlich und desto wahrscheinlicher ist es, dass die Inhalte im Wiki sich widersprechen, ohne dass es Meinungsverschiedenheiten über die Unterschiede gibt.

Bitte bedenke beim Anlegen von Seiten im Wiki, dass dieses Wiki sich an Mapper und Datennutzer richtet. Für Externe ist es aufgrund seiner Inhalte, Konzeption und Gestaltung ungeeignet. Seit mehreren Jahren geht in OSM der Trend dahin, das Wiki nicht als Allzweck-Informationsportal für jede Zielgruppe zu nutzen, sondern Inhalte für ausgewählte externe Zielgruppen auf externen Seiten zu pflegen. Zum einen lässt sich dort die Gestaltung auf die Bedürfnisse der Zielgruppe anpasen (Übersichtlichkeit, Leserfreundlichkeit, …), zum anderen sind die Inhalte aus einem Guss. Ein Beispiel hierfür ist learnosm.org. Wenn du wirklich etwas erreichen möchtest, wäre es weitaus sinnvoller, du würdest die kritisierten Inhalte und andere relevante Informationen zu einer unabhängigen, Website zusammenstellen, die man ganz normal als Website im Internet veröffentlichen und auf nationalen OSM-Websites verlinken kann. Falls ihre Inhalte, ihre Gestaltung und die Art und Weise, wie die Seite gepflegt wird, die Zustimmung anderer Aktiver finden, könnte ich mir auch vorstellen, dass sich ein Local Chapter findet, das der Seite eine Subdomain seiner nationalen openstreetmap.<tld>-Domain spendiert.

Eine solche Übersichtsseite muss dem breiten Konsens der Mapper-Community entsprechen. Damit meine ich weniger die graphische Gestaltung, sondern vor allem die Inhalte. Eine solche Seite sollte sich auf etablierte, verbreitete und von einer großen Mehrheit tolerierte/anerkannte Tags beschränken. Leider wird der von dir angefertigte Entwurf als ein weiterer Versuch deinerseits verstanden, bestimmte Tags, die du gerne verwendest und verwendet sehen möchtest, zu bewerben. Seiten, die sich an Dritte richten sollten, das OSM-Projekt so darstellen und beschreiben, dass möglichst viele Mapperinnen und Mapper damit den Inhalten zustimmen. Sie sollten keine persönlichen Sichtweisen als die einzig wahren verkaufen.

Gerne gebe ich dir Ratschläge, wie du deine Bemühungen so weiterentwickeln kannst, dass sie nicht augenblicklich auf Augenrollen, Abwehrreflexe usw. stoßen.

Kennst du übrigens schon OSMMyBiz? --Nakaner (talk) 12:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Interessant finde ich die Formulierung "Externe", sind das so eine Art OSM-Ausländer ? Speziell dese Seite braucht eigentlich überhaupt keine Pflege, da sie nur vorhandene Daten tabellarisch zusammenfasst. Ist genauso hanebüchen wie (automatische) Adressblöcke mit dem Hinweis auf "Lesbarkeit" wieder zu entfernen, anstatt das template entsprechend anzupassen. Und der Hinweis auf externe Seiten ist zwar höflich fomuliert, aus meiner Sicht aber auch nur ein "verpiss Dich" aus unserem Wiki einer sehr kleinen clique rtfm Rtfm (talk) 21:05, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

"in diese Seite sicherlich viel Mühe investiert.[...]. Es ist schlicht und einfach die dreihundertachtunzwanzigste Seite, die gebräuchliche Tags mit Fokus auf POIs auflistet. Es gibt genügend Listen-Seiten dieser Art. Je mehr solcher Listen und Übersichtsseiten es gibt, desto mehr Aufwand ist für ihre Pflege erforderlich" - allein in diesem Absatz steht so viel Blödsinn drin, dass ich mich über Deine Mühe wundere, so einen langen Text zu schreiben. Das erste wäre mal "viel Mühe investiert" : Genau das ist die Motivation, dann müssen das andere nicht mühsam aus dem Wiki fummeln. Auf der anderen Seite ist es aus technischer Sicht überhaupt keine Mühe, da die Syntax für die Tabellen ausgesprochen einfach ist und diese automatisch aktualisieren, was auch das Argument mit der Pflege ad absurdum führt Und bitte mal die 380 Seiten verlinkien, die genannt wurden. Hatte das schon mal weiter oben erwähnt, aber daruf kam nichts. rtfm Rtfm (talk) 17:42, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Redirect to Beginner's guide

If there's no interest in moving this to user namespace, I suggest redirecting to Beginners'_guide. See discussion above --Jeisenbe (talk) 23:35, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

How do you define : "no interest" - by whom ? rtfm Rtfm (talk) 00:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Since it was your article orginally, you could move it to your user page namespace. Otherwise it should be redirected to the existing page Beginners'_guide as suggested. --Jeisenbe (talk) 00:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

I don't think a redirect to the Beginners Guide is appropriate. First, the intended target group appears not to be new mappers in general, but people that want to put (only) their business on the map. Second, unfortunately the page title is not really helping those people to find this page, and the page content certainly has a lot of room for improvement. Currently several people waste a lot of effort and time in an edit war over this page. This does not improve OpenStreetMap or this wiki in any way. Imagine what we could get if you all would put your energy into creating a page that helps small businesses to put themselves on the map instead. My suggestion is to move the page into the user namespace of Rtfm, name it e.g. "Draft: HowTo put my business onto OpenStreetMap", and get everyones help in creating the content that helps people to do what the title suggests. When the content eventually looks like the page would be helpful, and there is rough consensus there is no harmful or misleading content on the page, then lets discuss where to put it in the Wikis page tree. --Lyx (talk) 18:32, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

I"m sure everyone except RTFM agrees with your solution. The problem is that RTFM is unwilling to do anything you recommend. As you can see by his revert today. Were he made it clear in his changeset comment that he thinks there is nothing wrong with the page as it is and that everyone who has a problem with it should essentially shove off. Going by his past behavior, I'd guess his sentiment would also include any edits to the article to make it more neutral. Especially since he has a history of reverting any edits to articles he creates. Personally, I'd love to see a good, neutral, guide for small businesses. The solution isn't to keep this one here as is until that happens though. Nor is it us "proposing" an alternative like he suggests we should do. Especially since he refuses to propose anything himself, let alone did he propose this article anywhere before creating it, and he has a long history of ignoring consensus. I guess we could create a separate page that would co-exist with this one. Except I don't think that creating two separate wiki's, one for people like him who are unwilling to allow for even minor quality adjustments to their articles and one for everyone else, is a good idea either. --Adamant1 (talk) 06:01, 20 August 2020 (UTC)

@Lyx: Please see the deletion request comment that was written by RTFM calling us (including you) trolls and accusing of us (including you) of being paid editors, just because we want the article drafted. It should pretty clear from it that he is unwilling to be reasonable about things. Let alone draft the article as you have requested. BTW, I asked him for a link to the article that he says names us all as paid editors, but he hasn't provided it. I definitely don't think an article is the appropriate place to make those kinds of accusations or to call other editors trolls. He reverted my attempts to remove them though. Adamant1 (talk) 02:50, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

Discuss everything to death, proposals to do a proposal and senseless deletion or redirect requests

Instead of putting your energy in the above mentioned points, better help to improve the content. Or mention how the same goal may be achieved better. That's in short what Lyx said, it sems just it was too diplomatic to be understood. Some might also not want to understand because of which problem ever (if they're not paid  Internet_trolls). As long as there's no better way to do it, leave the actual one as it's more useful than nothing or redirects which don't got anything to do with the topic. This is NOT only meant for this page, but in general rtfmRtfm (talk) 18:10, 22 August 2020 (UTC)

That's not all Lyx said. He also said it should be moved to your user page so that goal can be accomplished. Since it's not going to be as the article stands currently. Moving it to your user space where it can be worked on and renaming it would actually get things done. Whereas, doing exactly what you want every time we get in these disagreements, because you have to have your way and think everyone is out to sabotage you, doesn't get anything done and never has. The only reason there has ever been a problem is because your completely unwilling compromise and do what anyone recommends. Even it comes from admins. That's it. Otherwise, there wouldn't be an issue and things wouldn't be talked into the ground. Period, end of story. You could have just sent this article to your user space and renamed it. Neither is that big of deal like your making them out to be. Both are just a basic part of quality controls in Wikis. Just get over it and draft the article instead of throwing a tantrum about it. Seriously. That your always unwilling to do simple things like those, and always make everything extremely personal/contentious,is 100% why this is or anything else is even a problem. You've had the same problems since you started editing and with pretty every person you interact with. You want there to not be problems anymore, stop being petty about everything and compromise once in awhile. --Adamant1 (talk) 08:40, 23 August 2020 (UTC)

Simply re-creating copies of this page in the global namespace is not acceptable

I have removed the copy in the global space. The content of this page is not ready for the global wiki namespace yet. What I don't see so far are any efforts to define a target group for the content, and content that is tailored to help the target group. If this is to target business owners that don't know much about the workings of OSM, this page doesn't help them because they don't know what a "tag" is in OSM context and the basics of OSM editing. If they are experienced mappers they don't need this page because the content is already available on the usual documentation pages that they already know. Until there is visible progress on this issue, the page should stay in the user namespace. --Lyx (talk) 09:06, 3 December 2020 (UTC)