Coordinator: GizmoGuy411 & ARC: RoadTechie | SkiDooGuy | JoeRodriguez12
------------------------------------------------------------

Post Reply

Region Wide Place Locking Standard

Post by SkiDooGuy
Hello everyone!

So in an effort to start standardizing some things across the GLR a team has gotten together and started working on some items.


The one I am bringing to the table here is one that has been in place in Michigan for a while, and other people use it here and there.


I would like to set the standard of all "completed" places be locked at rank 3.


Completed

A place that has the name, address, phone number and website in it. All efforts should be made to gather hours and services as well. But as those can be extremely time consuming in some cases, they aren't as important. If an establishment doesn't have a website, then of course omit it.


Why R3?

Most of you have heard of IGN editors. For those that haven't they are a company Waze hires to come in and deal with the overload of place updates we see. For the most part we do a good enough job that they don't come around as often as they used to. That and Waze has told them to only touch major cities or ones past a certain age. IGN is notorious for rubber stamp approving everything. They don't worry about correct spelling, name, location, etc. Nor are they concerned about overwriting data on an already approved place.

For the most part IGN are R2. There are a couple R3 running around, but the majority are R2. So I have been locking place to R3 to much avail. The quality of places in the test areas that are monitored have much less place quality degradation. There are more PUR's that we see, but that gives us a better chance at filtering out the poor edits.


Any editors below R3 can still make edits and get credit for the edits once they are approved by a R3 or above. But for the most part, once a place is "completed" there usually isn't much updating to happen unless the establishment changes.

Almost everyone is active in a hangout locally where they can get uplock assistance if they aren't a R3, but they can also use the unlock/update forum for uplocks as well as unlocks.





Please provide any input you have on this as I am sure there is some angle I am missing.


Thanks!
SkiDooGuy
Coordinators
Coordinators
Posts: 2546
Answers: 1
Answers: 1
Has thanked: 432 times
Been thanked: 1437 times
Assistant Regional Coordinator: Great Lakes Region
Local Champ: Canada, USA
Country Manager: Canada, USA, Palau
Rank 6 editor

Post by vaindil
I normally disagree with Ski as a rule, but this is the exception. :P I've seen way too many terrible places last edited by IGN, this really works.
vaindil
Beta tester
Beta tester
Posts: 126
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 80 times

Post by JustinS83
I am in full support of this.

This also helps protect against the new editors that quickly rank to R2 (or "trusted" R1's) and are then able to make changes to places without it triggering a PUR. This can happen with non-editors where they get the trusted status and are able to add terrible (inappropriate, blurry, irrelevant, etc.) pictures or create new places while driving, which can end up a mile+ from the actual location, which then presents problems with Place routing.
JustinS83
Waze Global Champs
Waze Global Champs
Posts: 1418
Has thanked: 211 times
Been thanked: 2334 times

Post by zohar760
100% on board with this. It's worked wonders in the Detroit area and across the state, and is a great way to filter incoming place information so you don't end up with lazy formatting and places getting moved into a road or parking lot by a user on the move.

Plus, I'm all in favor of disenfranchising IGN as much as possible. :D
zohar760
Waze Mentor
Waze Mentor
Posts: 146
Has thanked: 121 times
Been thanked: 83 times
https://s.waze.tools/s0050.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/c5s.pnghttps://j.mp/1lkM3dIhttps://wiki.waze.com/wiki/images/c/c1/ ... Tester.png
SM: Michigan
AM: Detroit & SE MI (Wayne/Oakland/Macomb counties) | Marquette County MI

Saving the world - one UR at a time.


Post by roadtechie
Sounds like a great idea. I am in 100% agreement. However, since you brought it up I think we should also discuss what the locks should be on all places. Hospitals, universities, police stations, fire departments, ect. Should anything be locked above L3 and if so what should it be locked to.
roadtechie  
Local Champ Mentor
Local Champ Mentor
Posts: 724
Has thanked: 1069 times
Been thanked: 258 times
-Roadtechie
https://web.archive.org/web/20161030115 ... s/lcus.pnghttps://web.archive.org/web/20161030115 ... ls/c6s.png
Assistant Regional Coordinator | Great Lakes
Local Champ Mentor | USA
Country Manager | USA

Post by Lonewolf147
roadtechie wrote:Sounds like a great idea. I am in 100% agreement. However, since you brought it up I think we should also discuss what the locks should be on all places. Hospitals, universities, police stations, fire departments, ect. Should anything be locked above L3 and if so what should it be locked to.
In Wisconsin, KB and I set our locking standards to the following:
Airport : 5
Hospital : 4
Fire Station : 4
Police Station : 4
Large areas - (State Parks, if mapped, etc.) : 4
Gas Station : 3
Most other places should be locked at 3, once completed.
Feel free to use that as a starting point for discussion :)
Lonewolf147
State Manager
State Manager
Posts: 374
Has thanked: 174 times
Been thanked: 129 times

Post by OhioStMusicMan
Let's do it. We can at least say L3 minimum and then flesh out other, higher locks as necessary.
OhioStMusicMan
State Manager
State Manager
Posts: 165
Has thanked: 59 times
Been thanked: 69 times
Travis
Area Manager: Central California
State Manager: Ohio

https://s.waze.tools/beta.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/s0400.pnghttps://s.waze.tools/c5s.png