I'll add the definition from the Rome statute that, by my read, establishes a war crime when there is intent to commit the civilian strikes:

     Unless otherwise provided, a person shall be criminally responsible and liable for punishment for a crime within the jurisdiction of the Court only if the material elements are committed with intent and knowledge.

    A mistake of fact shall be a ground for excluding criminal responsibility only if it negates the mental element required by the crime.

From that text, it sure sounds to me that these attacks are going to be legal. The article describes them as 'indescriminate', but they were specifically targetted based on a mistake of fact.

There's certainly evidence that the US was neglegent in relying on old information without verifying. That's serious and reprehensible, but I don't know that that rises to the level of a war crime.

I'll add that it's not what I want my country's military to be doing and that if I had any power, there would be consequences for the people involved in decision making that led to this, as well as changes in procedure to reduce this type of mistake in the future, and a settlement paid to the people affected by this strike.