In an attempt to achieve the same goals, what I do is review, after the mapathon, the changesets since many times the tiles are not finalized. I try to review the mapping within the week following the mapathon

Greetings,

Puxan

Hello matien-vdg (automatic translation)

I share all the opinions expressed in favor of improving the quality of the new additions of mappers. A few months ago I already put in my diary an approach on the subject that I do not see in everything that has been said here. It’s about the mapatones. I think most of the new additions to OSM are through mapatones. In this section it is possibly easier to intervene.

Standards that could improve the quality of mapping in mapatones:

1.- Do not admit new mappers to the mapathon who have not completed at least one tutorial on the web (learnosm.org, the one included in the iD Editor help,…). I see that currently mappers are supported that have not even registered yet in OSM. Those who have not been able to complete that minimum previous work can be directed to a next mapathon

2.- The organizing team must commit to reviewing all the changesets of the mapathon in a short period of time (7 days?) And send a report of it to each mapper. If necessary, the number of mappers is reduced to the number that can be reviewed by the person in charge of each room.

3.- The organizing team should ensure the category of those responsible for each mapping room.

For me another added problem is that of the language. I am not fluent in English enough to be able to advise without fear of making translation errors that may annoy the mapper. Maybe at some point the language that the mapper speaks should be included