PesachZ wrote:I'll start by suggesting Hospitals, police stations, fire departments, national parks, airports etc. Places of significant infrastructure and navigational importance should be locked to rank 4 or 5.

I completely agree with this but we should make sure all possible information for these places are added and up to date to the best of our knowledge before locking them. I started this thread in Pennsylvania to help PA editors get started not long ago. I feel like all the places listed in that thread should be at least locked to rank 4 or higher. I recently finished doing this for all the State Police Barracks in Pennsylvania which are locked to rank 5.

The problem is, we only have 2 or 3 editors in PA who are rank 5 and maybe a dozen rank 4. Requests to lock a Place would have to be done by a senior editor.

Setting locking standards based on the type (considering the region, AM, CM, RC etc) is a good start. We can work with what we have and adjust as needed.
Locking these landmarks isn't to limit lower rank editors. It's to rather eliminate unnecessary re-work.
We have many other issues and images to focus on too.

PleaseDriveFast wrote:

MGODLEW wrote:The problem is, we only have 2 or 3 editors in PA who are rank 5 and maybe a dozen rank 4. Requests to lock a Place would have to be done by a senior editor.

While I agree with all posts, I'm concerned about the amount of moderation required by senior editors or the possible frustration of lower ranks not seeing edits made in a timely fashion.

Since the places can be moderated by L2s, I suggest designating a few categories to this group and laddering up categories to higher ranks. I do agree hospitals, government services (police, fire, etc.) and state parks should be locked to 4 or higher.

It would be nice to have some form of super admin access to area managers regardless of rank the ability to moderate places. AMs should be more careful in their place acceptance than the general user.

Currently, that's not possible. We've asked Waze awhile ago for AM's to be able to edit higher road ranks in their AM area but we didn't get anywhere with that. With that experience, I'm guessing super admin access technically might not be possible.

MGODLEW wrote:

PesachZ wrote:I'll start by suggesting Hospitals, police stations, fire departments, national parks, airports etc. Places of significant infrastructure and navigational importance should be locked to rank 4 or 5.

I completely agree with this but we should make sure all possible information for these places are added and up to date to the best of our knowledge before locking them. I started this thread in Pennsylvania to help PA editors get started not long ago. I feel like all the places listed in that thread should be at least locked to rank 4 or higher. I recently finished doing this for all the State Police Barracks in Pennsylvania which are locked to rank 5.

The problem is, we only have 2 or 3 editors in PA who are rank 5 and maybe a dozen rank 4. Requests to lock a Place would have to be done by a senior editor.

While I agree they should be edited correctly with as much info to the best of our knowledge before locking. I think we should be able to go with what we know and not have to research extensively before locking. If other editors have now information to add/change later, they can always suggest an edit.

I'd also recommended the guidance be "lock as high as you can, up to the standard". So a rank 3 AM could at least lock everything to 3, until someone higher gets a chance.

It just occurred to me, rest areas, plazas, and welcome centers on the interstates, should be on this list as well. I just had to fix one yesterday which had the adjacent gas station image and details added to it, duplicating the gas station point place which was already marked properly.

Sent using Tapatalk for Android 4.4.2

MGODLEW wrote:The problem is, we only have 2 or 3 editors in PA who are rank 5 and maybe a dozen rank 4. Requests to lock a Place would have to be done by a senior editor.

While I agree with all posts, I'm concerned about the amount of moderation required by senior editors or the possible frustration of lower ranks not seeing edits made in a timely fashion.

Since the places can be moderated by L2s, I suggest designating a few categories to this group and laddering up categories to higher ranks. I do agree hospitals, government services (police, fire, etc.) and state parks should be locked to 4 or higher.

It would be nice to have some form of super admin access to area managers regardless of rank the ability to moderate places. AMs should be more careful in their place acceptance than the general user.

I'm really happy to see this topic. I just ran into a case where I saw a pending update to delete a portion of the Shenandoah National Park. That made me go "woah" and then I looked and the entire middle section of about 50 miles of the park is GONE (near Elkton, VA - US-33). It must have been deleted before the 3.9 changes.

I alerted the RC (CBenson) and locked the bits I could at 3. All of those places were created/modified 2009 by admin(staff) and are pretty complicated polygons. Hopefully not hand drawn and hopefully able to be retrieved from a backup if so.

It's a sad fact that as Waze gets more popular, vandalism will follow -- just like Wikipedia and other similar things. Controls are needed, even though at times they are frustrating to trustworthy lower ranking people such as myself. But it's just a necessary structure to prevent chaos.

So yes, even if us 3s can get a locking standard partially implemented up to 3 until they can get locked higher if appropriate, it's better than leaving all these critical items at 1. It doesn't take much effort to get to 2. I got there in my first week.

+1 to airports, park & ride/commuter lots, bus stations, train stations, hospitals, police stations, fire departments, and other major destinations being locked to 3-5 depending on the coverage of AM/SM/CM/RC in that locale.

some of this was implemented in CT already by AndyPoms, some I have been considering now that places has gone live. In less populous areas like CT I'd focus more on major infrastructure items like above. in a place like Manhattan, I could argue for considering very popular (but not critical infrastructure) places such as freedom tower, central park, times square etc to be locked 5. as you say, this would prevent inadvertent changes.

I think the former should be codified, and the latter should be reasonably suggested at the discretion of the local managers.

In the same vein, if we are going to talk locking of places, we need to make sure the configuration of locked places is consistent around the country. As the places system matures, and as the app (hopefully) catches up (better searching, categories, waze being default search engine, having a way to identify which provider a result is from, etc) - I think there is great value in expanding the concept of standardization, not only in locking but more importantly in naming/configuration.

Example: Marriott Hotels (Marriott, JW, Courtyard, Springhill Suites, etc). Once the app search feature is more mature, we should find a way to standardize the naming so that the full legal name ("Denver Courtyard Downtown") and more fuzzy search terms ("Courtyard", "Courtyard by Marriott", "Marriott", "Hotel") all show the Denver Courtyard Downtown in the result list. Apple and Google maps both do a fantastic job of this.

totally forgot to mention gas stations. this has been talked about in detail in a separate thread, but gas stations really should be locked. i've seen a lot of destructive edit suggestions where, for example, people are at a costco, trying to change the category to "shopping", but didn't realize they were actually trying to change the costco gas station, not the costco itself.

Poncewattle wrote:Hopefully not hand drawn and hopefully able to be retrieved from a backup if so.

Hand drawn no- those would have been imported with the base map.

Able to be retrieved- I've heard of such things in the past, but I'm guessing getting WazeHQ to do this for something that's not critical infrastructure would be a long shot. If someone deleted the entire city of Nashville maybe, but a single park area is probably not worth the effort :/


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk