You could focus on the Top 5 users and ignore the rest. I updated the sheet above.
As you contacted the two top users already you covered 457 out of 515 matches. The next frequent tags of wilderness_hut are “Wiwut jojo” with 16 nodes and “Russ McD” with 14 nodes. which all seem to be in version 2, so needing an additional click to check what the actual change was.
I checked some of the other users’ nodes and the situation isn’t clear cut. One of them was an actual guest_house but because the bungalows were in a grassy area, the mapper used the wilderness_hut tag incorrectly. It should have been tagged tourism=guest_house. A few were so obviously wrong I deleted them instantly.
I will concentrate on only the two aforementioned users, Aruno and M’Topp Ekkara. I will try to contact them again through the PM system and if they don’t respond, we can delete their nodes and that will clear up almost 90% of the nonsense. The ones that were edited by Russ and me were attempts to transform the original mistagged “huts” into something more useful. We can just ignore those for now.
Addition of wilderness_hut tags was a hallmark of MAPS.ME users; it seems the app misguidedly offered this as one of the basic tags. Most should probably amenity=shelter.
I cleaned one village of area=yes
My method was to use filter in JOSM
(1) ctrl+f with search “area=yes inview”
(2) press q to square all of them
(3) unselect valid geometries
(4) delete everything else
(5) ctrl+f with search “area=yes inview”
(6) replace area=yes with building=yes
I plan to continue.
Note to self: http://osmose.openstreetmap.fr/en/map/#zoom=14&lat=16.27705&lon=103.14222 is very useful
Thank you very much of helping to clean up the mess from various organized mapping activities.
A small improvement to your process could be to check that area=yes is the only tag. Query is then:
inview tags:1 area=yes
This prevents the loss of potentially useful tags. Sometimes only the name tag given in addition, but frequently it is possible to guess from the name what attribute is missing. Google translate can give hints whether something is a school or temple.
I also noticed that in Isaan we had larger imagery offsets in the past. So try to find GPS tracks nearby to align the position of the polygons.
Depending on the person adding the geometries, you might find that some are quite ok, once rectangular and offset corrected. Others had drawn around shadows or other visible imagery artifacts. Ways with 3 nodes are often badly representing buildings. Ways with 5 or more nodes tend to be some strange outline polygons.
JOSM can filter with “type:way nodes:5-” in addition to the above query for them.
A a final quality check, you can select all elements and run JOSM validator. There should be no overlapping/self-intersecting geometries.
Regarding osmose: I recently optimized the generation process. Its update process is fnished before Noon Thailand time, taking data snapshot from roughly 6 hours earlier. Updated daily.