Switch to full style
Post a reply

Fixing UR's in NJ

Tue Nov 26, 2013 3:42 am

  • If a UR is older than a week, it gets marked as "not identified" unless it's something that is obvious and can be fixed (but just fell in between the cracks).
  • If there's active conversation going on between the reporter and editor(s), and it's older than a week, don't close it out.
  • If it's under a week old, and no one has commented on it, make an inquiry with the driver to see if they'll respond. So, leave it open.
  • If there is an inquiry and no response, contact one of the editors who have commented on it.
  • Intall and use this script to see various filtering options to show/hide update requests.

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:03 pm

Thanks, orbitc. That's exactly what I'd been doing anyway, with one twist of my own on point 2:

If there's active conversation going on between the driver and editor(s), and it's older than a week, don't close it out.

If I see the conversation itself has become stale, and the last comment is the editor asking the driver a question over a week ago, I will make a judgement call to either ping the driver again, solve it myself, ping the editor on PM, or just close it as being unresponsive.

Does this seem reasonable to you?

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Fri Dec 20, 2013 5:33 pm

qwaletee wrote:Does this seem reasonable to you?


Yes, that sounds reasonable.

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Wed Jan 15, 2014 3:21 pm

A large majority of the UR's are related to incorrect address or GPS location being off. As we know the POI database is handled by Google, so the correction needs to be fixed on their end. Is it the responsibility of the map editor to contact Google to fix the address? Should we come up with a standard or template, if there isn't already, for responding to these types of UR's?

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Wed Jan 15, 2014 3:25 pm

Nel101 wrote:A large majority of the UR's are related to incorrect address or GPS location being off. As we know the POI database is handled by Google, so the correction needs to be fixed on their end. Is it the responsibility of the map editor to contact Google to fix the address? Should we come up with a standard or template, if there isn't already, for responding to these types of UR's?


You can suggest them to try to fix the issue themselves and/or try to figure out the search engine by asking them and fixing it yourself.

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:01 pm

If you can produce the same error in Google and know the correct location, it's easy enough to request a fix in Google and mark the UR as solved. If you don't know the correct location, you can invite the reporter to request a fix in Google, but the former solution promotes a much better experience with Waze to the reporter. :)

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Wed Jan 15, 2014 7:08 pm

Although, most location related issues, seems like comes from Google, Google isn't the only 3rd party search provider. It's best to ask to the driver to find out which 3rd party search providers did they use.

Re: Fixing UR's in NJ

Mon Jun 23, 2014 3:38 am

There is also some more detail about handling URs in the Wiki, which describes the etiquette of dealing with URs and the process for solving them. There is also a forum discussion on using "canned responses," found here (samples begin around page 12): https://www.waze.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=129&t=78759
Post a reply