awesome, thanks!!! If you have any spare time, would love your help with the other disambig cleanups - there are only about 500 left in the world :)

Edward, please double check - you added a disambig wikidat to node/4796615840 - I found it via osm.wiki/Wikipedia_Link_Improvement_Project (disambig section)

You misunderstood. I used MediaWiki & Commons to store errors that I found in OSM. There were several people who went there to fix uncovered issues. Also, realize that there are plenty of people who gave up arguing - see last discussion osm.wiki/User_talk:Yurik Another point - I don't think adding crappy new edits manually is more important than keeping good data. I prefer less but better quality. And again - I have data to proove that it WAS bad quality, and now it has been improved. So perhaps visit my wikipedia improvement page and fix a few issues? Lastly, it is impossible to persuade everyone, especially for such a large community. And it doesn't need to.

Thanks! I think it would be better to use "subject:wikidata" for both of them. As for the wikipedia link - its a link to part of the page - which means the wiki page is not "about the feature" - so perhaps we should use something like "related:wikipedia" ?

I hope to use it, but it does not work with OSM object IDs. You cannot give it a set of OSM objects, and say that these tags are wrong, and should probably be another set - please confirm. You can give it a few broken polygons and tell people to fix it.

I reverted all items tagged as lists in wikidata. There were a lot of them, and added a fixme note. The wikipedia tag description in the osm wiki says that we should only use it if the article is about the place. A list is a collection of such places. We should start a discussion on a talk... I'm not sure I have enough time to handle it though :(

Cool, will you be able to fix it? There is a lot of backlash currently for me to edit in DE, I'm waiting for things to settle a bit. Thx!

I agree with everything about operator:wikidata & brand:wikidata.

The first portion about key:wikipedia -- from the osm wiki: "only provide links to articles which are 'about the feature'. A link from St Paul's Cathedral in London to an article about St Paul's Cathedral on Wikipedia is fine. A link from a bus depot to the company that operates it is not (see section below).".

So I don't think node/3376969992 should have a wikipedia tag, only operator:wikidata or brand:wikidata.

And yes, I am not sure if we need wikipedia tags there at all, but other community members keep saying they need them :(

Reclus, I agree with you 100% ! That's what I meant. We should rename "wikipedia" tag into something else, like "operator:wikipedia" or "brand:wikipedia", etc. And we should add corresponding "operator:wikidata". All these objects need to be fixed: http://tinyurl.com/y94mwwsg

fair point (and no, I come from Wikipedia background and really don't like sockpuppets). Take a look at the #osm-ru IRC channel - the channel topic says: "https://telegram.me/ruosm >> жизнь переехала в телеграм" (there are ~250 people there). Also, IRC channel gets a copy of every message from Telegram.
My message was posted on 9/12 - Всем привет. Я в последнее время занимался интеграцией с Викиданными, пытаясь их чуток причесать. К примеру, часто используется тэг wikidata/wikipedia вместо более точного operator:wikipedia, или subject:.., brand:.., и т.д. Теперь когда у нас есть возможность проанализировать OSM вместе с Wikidata в одной query, предлагаю такие ляпы исправить. Например, очень много ATM указывают на банк с помощью wikidata - надо-бы их заменить на brand:wikidata (у АТМ может быть оператор, но не банк?). МакДональдс яркий пример - оператор там не подходит, так как он разный в разных странах. или даже местная компания, а вот марка универсальна везде, и позволяет легко их всех находить... Мысли?
edited
Для самих wikidata/wikipedia -- использовать их только если сама вики статья имеет те-же координаты. Другими словами - только при соответствии 1:1. Статья про OSM объект, и объект ссылается на статью

Andy, that article is very long, and only mentions "Automated edits/username" once in middle. Noone has mentioned that specific piece of information until you did yesterday, and I immediately complied. Until I saw it, I was fully convinced I followed all other rules outlined there. It would have helped everyone to simply say "in addition to everything else you are doing, please add a page XXX to describe it, thanks". About 4 days : https://lists.openstreetmap.org/pipermail/talk/2017-September/078805.html was the last email tangentially related to the proposal.

My tool simply shows a search result, just like OverpassTurbo, so hard to fix that :). I agree that it probably doesn't make sense to tag these objects with the brand. Does it make sense to mark them with wikipedia tag?

The problem is that anyone using iD editor who adds "de:Liste der Stolpersteine in Ludwigsburg" wikipedia link would automatically also add the "wikidata" link. I don't think either wikipedia or wikidata link should be added, because that page is not about that node.

Hi Michael, it would be fairly easy to find such objects with http://tinyurl.com/y9crhydx - it shows 3900 objects in the world. The problem is that once wikidata ID is removed, it won't be possible to find them anymore. Would it make sense to use a different tag from "wikipedia" for these? E.g. "related:wikipedia" ? Because these pages are not about these objects, pages simply mention them.

Serious? The automated edits were marked with the word "auto", and I kept saying I was doing them mechanically after the discussion! You correctly pointed out that I forgot to add the auto/username wiki page, which has already been rectified. This is something you could have told me a very long time ago, instead of wasting many hours and aggravation. This sounds very much like the worst possible government bureaucracy imaginable.

P.S. I meant these objects: http://tinyurl.com/y94mwwsg

Доброго, а что за relation relation/4045952 ? Очень напоминает collection, а в ОСМ по правилам их лучше не делать. Подумываю удалить если это так. Спасибо!

OOOPS, sorry, I meant brand:wikidata and operator:wikidata :) There are currently many objects like node/773508846 - it has wikipedia/wikidata instead of brand:wikidata and operator:wikidata. Can you fix them too? Thanks!

Hi, many Deutsche Post have "brand:wikidata", but others use "operator:brand". Should they use the same?