I’m working on updating some of the information on the Edits to Avoid page.
Have a look at the working copy here:
https://wazeopedia.waze.com/wiki/USA/User:Mvan231/Edits_to_Avoid
Glad you’re off to a good start. Some comments in no particular order:
-
The community has a love/hate relationship with scripts. In principle, and often in reality, they are wonderful editing aids. Also, Waze keeps making the vanilla WME more complex, but also harder to do the job right the first time, and one or two scripts (like JAI) are becoming essential to edit correctly. That being said, it does happen from time to time that editors of every rank from R1 to R6 use scripts without really knowing what they are doing and leave behind problems that they are not only unaware of, they are unaware that they even edited a given location at all. So, generally, we try not to encourage new editors to start using scripts with our first breath but leave it for an “advanced” section late in the article (which is why the “third-party scripts” section of this article is all the way at the end).
-
Good to mention Discord, but PM is still the official communication method when trying to reach an editor, because it is the most guaranteed communication path (we all wish it were 100% guaranteed but anyway). That needs to remain clear, because we have had new editors say things like “well I was on the chat, so if you couldn’t reach me that’s your problem”. We don’t want to say anything that could encourage those folks.
-
New figure for “trying too hard” is OK, caption will have to be modified as there are no longer six times as many extra nodes as necessary in the “avoid” construction. I bet though that you might be able to find even more powerful examples of “trying too hard” – perhaps other editors can help you track down these things. Put out an APB for “trying too hard” examples and you’ll probably be flooded with them
Good work and carry on 
A couple of thoughts
- Waze Map Editor is a Waze page but doesn’t have a Support link. Think that it would be better to say While in the Waze Map Editor, select the Editing Forum link in the lower left of the screen. (From most other Waze pages, select support and then “Community Forums”, then near the top left of the screen.) Then select ‘’‘# new messages’'.
- Chatting while editing is available via WME Chat. The window shows what others are saying but you must be visibile to talk. Being visibile also makes it easier for other editors to find you to help answer questions or provide unlocks. Since WME Chat can clear when you sign off other methods primarily Discord (to a lesser degree Slack or Google Hangouts) link editors together. Look at your local Regional or State page for information.
- Think it would be better to state first what Waze is vice what it is not. “Waze is specifically designed to assist motor vehicle drivers (private vehicles, motorcycles, and taxis) to navigate to their destination (named business/venue or address) and to avoid traffic.” This the sentence on what Waze is not.
- Recommend changing “government data” to “government classification and Waze’s functionality” in the road types section.
- Red roads section. Mention to turn on the GPS layer to see if roads that have been built since the aerial photo are live.
- Disconnected/disjoint segments section. Think the “Otherwise delete the segment.” should be changed to “If a segment is not correct and does not add functionality to the map, then and only then delete the segment.”
- Might want to show a classic P single segment parking lot road as an example of the disconnected/disjoint segments. Especially where the one junction node is on the rest of the segment but there are no turn restrictions.
- Since we are now in the USA wazeopedia, change the “Many countries have their own unlock/up…” to “Each US Region has its own unlock/update forum.”
- Consider adding to post in the appropriate Discord channel (Slack/GHO) for the unlock. Have a link to the above description of Discord.
- Consider adding a section after Corrupted turn restrictions for “Improperly enabling turn restrictions” The example for corrupted could be used and show how the right AGC to the right AGC would bypass the straigh thru. Also show how on the main segment the right TR being allowed might make the AGC be avoided.
- Misunderstanding the “Highway” road type section. At the end of the mistake second paragraph, consider adding “This is why minor and major highways and freeway road segments have higher lock levels, to help prevent their breakage.”
- We use functional classification as an input to selecting the road segment type. Think it would be better to say "Road typing is done by assessing its significance relative to nearby alternatives based on the applicable Department of Transportation’s functional classification (FC) and Wazes conversion rules.
Such situations often … road type according Waze’s USA community standards (link to Quick reference chart). - Response to misunderstanding the “Highway” road type section should be changed to Consider finding a senior editor to help determine the correct classification. At a minimum you will need teh government FC map and the Waze conversion rules. Have the senior editor lock the affected segments and post a map comment explaining any changes from normal road selection.
- pictures for misunderstanding the “Highway” are way outdated since mH is shown as yellow.
- Response to Unnecessary representation by divided one-way segments. Consider changing “Check with the local Area Manager, local senior editor, or State Manager.”
- Walking trails, etc appear to be changing, probably should update to the new items, but appear they may still be tweaking in the editor.
- Misuse of Area Places Recommend changing Response to read “First, ensure you are familiar with the applicable State and Region standards for area and point places. Some regions may depart from national place guidance.”
- Change “and adjust it location for best routing” to and adjust the entry point for best routing"
- Consider removing the paragraph that starts with "always, before … " I don’t thing we normally wait weeks for the original editor (who may not be active anymore) to fix. If you leave in then change the Champ reference to similar in 16 above
- UR section. Not sure as important anymore since have to be Rank 2 editor. Refer them to be familiar with the Region’s process. Remove the 7 day reference for closing and follow up request. State Rank 1 editors can only close their own. Also the part about open to all or proprietary should be in the Region state pages. Add often senior editors give the new editors a little more time to work the response.
- Closed URs don’t disappear from the map. SO the Response section should probably change to "Once closed, a UR will remain accessible for several days. Response via the app is no longer possible. If the appropriate layers are activated in WME the conversation between reporter and editor can continue via WME for about a week. Note this takes a lot of additional effort by the reporter to figure out so please do not close URs early.
- Constructive work for new editors, PURs and PLA MPs… PURs and PLA MPs… PURs and PLA MPs Think we should mention them since they can be a pox. Did I mention new editors can do PURs and PLA MPs?
- Consider removing the riskiness of adding parking-lot roads. Already covered above. Have to give the new editor something to do and PLRs are often the only unlocked segments in a major metropolitan area.
- Let’s remove WME Validator and replace it with Magic. I would also consider removing WMECH since not as intuitive and the first three are a pretty good start for the adventuresome newbie.
Great discussion of ways forward with the article. I’m happy with the community taking the article where it wants to go, but would like to clarify the original intent of the article.
The idea from the beginning was that new editors, some of whom may be hard to reach and some of whom are not contributing as positively as they might think, would somehow be sent a link to this article as a sort of emergency measure. A kind of, “if you aren’t going to read any of the documentation please read at least this.”
That unique focus differentiates the article from pretty much all the rest of the wiki. The broader wiki is set up as a “how to” guide for those who want to learn before they do, but this article is set up as a “how not to do” article for those who have already started and are making some common mistakes. So, that is why the article is written from one end to the other with the misunderstanding stated first and the clarification second, including the “What Waze is not for” principle subs5 mentioned as quoted above.
I realize the idea here was just to change this one item and was not aimed at the whole article.
But, I originally got so much pushback on the perceived negativity of this article that it seems important to offer as much clarity as I can on why it is the way it is.
It’s also because of this unique target audience that the article emphasizes getting and responding to PMs. If too much discussion of other modalities comes in up front, I fear it could dilute that message. Perhaps the alternative means such as Discord could be left to an addition at the end of the article.
The reason PMs are critical is that they are (1) still the closest thing to “guaranteed” communication that we have to reach new editors who may not “have their ears on”; and (2) PMs – at least when sent to only a single individual – offer a “read receipt” functionality. You know when the recipient has read them. This is incredibly valuable in determining how to move forward with a given editor.
Hope this helps!