I sympathize with the local editors dealing with deletion of some mH and MH roads with no trace in TX. I don't know the extent, but certainly is a headache and an insult to the editors that worked so hard to get the roads to where they were navigable. I offer my help to them if they wish.
I think the problem with large metro areas is the possibility for vandalism from visiting editors or from rebelious teenagers getting their hands on their parents laptop. The knee jerk reaction to lock higher may really not be so much about the worries about actual editing, but a visiting editor can simply delete without doing any traceable editing and being only a rank 2 or grandfathered 3 (with less than 25,000 edits) could cause deletions of mH and MH in Nevada without being noticed until UR's start showing up perhaps days later, and causing many many hours of work to fix. If we lock higher, then it doesn't keep someone from creating a parking lot road and trying to attach it to the locked road, but we will find it with validator as not being attached. So I don't see any drawbacks to locking higher, because I don't see it preventing a new editor from trying to edit the roads that truly need editing. I do see it as being incentive to learning how to edit and finding a way to communicate with more experienced editors. I see it mentoring lower ranking editors that they focus on tweaking the main roads and completely ignore the obvious needs on the ps and streets, and even parking lot roads still needed to access businesses off the main collectors and arterials. Unfortunately, sometimes the best new editors actually don't like to socialize as much on PM's, gho or now slack. Admitably on the behalf of new editors, working on more important roads generate a much higher satisfaction level and feeling of making an impact. This is WHY more communication with new editors is so much MORE important as the US map is maturing than ever before. They may even read the wiki and try to work on the roads they drive to work and shopping, just to discover they can't. If we don't establish required communication earlier with new well intentioned editors, then yes... we will disenchant them by not allowing them to edit. What tools do AM's, SM's and RC's have to communicate with new editors? We have to kind of just find them by their mistakes and hope they eventually check their private messages IF they've set it up on their profile.
I think we need to emphasize reading the basic wiki prior to going very far with edits, maybe a checklist of reading requirements before getting to rank 2, and additional advanced wiki reading and state and regional forum awareness before getting rank 3. At least an acknowledgement that the material is available for reading. There is a continuing need to keep new editors from being "invisible" and also not having their profile set up to have a working email or PM's. Places being added by "trusted" Wazers has an obvious need to improve on standards both on adding the places as well as approving the places. (to include appropriate pictures)
I subscribe to the idea of major metro areas being a higher lock standard than rural areas. One particular reason being newer editors not understanding FC standards and a rank 2 trying to change a mH back to ps because they don't think the road segment qualifies for anything with the name "highway" in it. The same could even apply for editors with some history that have rank 3 that change MH to a lower level and ignoring a FC conversion. There is a possibility that even within the city itself, major impact roads (Like S Las Vegas Blvd / AKA "The Strip" should be locally locked even higher than the FC would imply.
FW & ramps 5
MH 4 URBAN / 3 rural
mH 3 URBAN / 2 rural
ps 2
st 1
At grade connectors locked at highest lock on connecting segment
5/4/3/2/1 easy to remember sort of?
The reason I would want a higher lock in urban areas for MH or mH is that in NV we have essentially matured the map to the point that we know they are accurate enough for a lock, and we have established communication with the active area editors. ALSO the reason for higher lock on mH and MH is that in Large Metro areas like Las Vegas, we have a huge influx of 41 million airport passengers a year from all over the world, and many drivers that have their own standards in their own parts of the world that might try to edit Las Vegas without reading the Nevada Wiki page or even understanding US standards and try their hand at editing. I don't think in NV we are exempt from waze "terrorist" activities and deleting roads.
Perhaps the real issue here is that we need an automatic alert in Waze that identifies any editor based on rank that is deleting more than one ps, mH and MH. Realistically, when is there any need to delete more than one or two roads designated as ps or higher?
I think the problem with large metro areas is the possibility for vandalism from visiting editors or from rebelious teenagers getting their hands on their parents laptop. The knee jerk reaction to lock higher may really not be so much about the worries about actual editing, but a visiting editor can simply delete without doing any traceable editing and being only a rank 2 or grandfathered 3 (with less than 25,000 edits) could cause deletions of mH and MH in Nevada without being noticed until UR's start showing up perhaps days later, and causing many many hours of work to fix. If we lock higher, then it doesn't keep someone from creating a parking lot road and trying to attach it to the locked road, but we will find it with validator as not being attached. So I don't see any drawbacks to locking higher, because I don't see it preventing a new editor from trying to edit the roads that truly need editing. I do see it as being incentive to learning how to edit and finding a way to communicate with more experienced editors. I see it mentoring lower ranking editors that they focus on tweaking the main roads and completely ignore the obvious needs on the ps and streets, and even parking lot roads still needed to access businesses off the main collectors and arterials. Unfortunately, sometimes the best new editors actually don't like to socialize as much on PM's, gho or now slack. Admitably on the behalf of new editors, working on more important roads generate a much higher satisfaction level and feeling of making an impact. This is WHY more communication with new editors is so much MORE important as the US map is maturing than ever before. They may even read the wiki and try to work on the roads they drive to work and shopping, just to discover they can't. If we don't establish required communication earlier with new well intentioned editors, then yes... we will disenchant them by not allowing them to edit. What tools do AM's, SM's and RC's have to communicate with new editors? We have to kind of just find them by their mistakes and hope they eventually check their private messages IF they've set it up on their profile.
I think we need to emphasize reading the basic wiki prior to going very far with edits, maybe a checklist of reading requirements before getting to rank 2, and additional advanced wiki reading and state and regional forum awareness before getting rank 3. At least an acknowledgement that the material is available for reading. There is a continuing need to keep new editors from being "invisible" and also not having their profile set up to have a working email or PM's. Places being added by "trusted" Wazers has an obvious need to improve on standards both on adding the places as well as approving the places. (to include appropriate pictures)
I subscribe to the idea of major metro areas being a higher lock standard than rural areas. One particular reason being newer editors not understanding FC standards and a rank 2 trying to change a mH back to ps because they don't think the road segment qualifies for anything with the name "highway" in it. The same could even apply for editors with some history that have rank 3 that change MH to a lower level and ignoring a FC conversion. There is a possibility that even within the city itself, major impact roads (Like S Las Vegas Blvd / AKA "The Strip" should be locally locked even higher than the FC would imply.
FW & ramps 5
MH 4 URBAN / 3 rural
mH 3 URBAN / 2 rural
ps 2
st 1
At grade connectors locked at highest lock on connecting segment
5/4/3/2/1 easy to remember sort of?
The reason I would want a higher lock in urban areas for MH or mH is that in NV we have essentially matured the map to the point that we know they are accurate enough for a lock, and we have established communication with the active area editors. ALSO the reason for higher lock on mH and MH is that in Large Metro areas like Las Vegas, we have a huge influx of 41 million airport passengers a year from all over the world, and many drivers that have their own standards in their own parts of the world that might try to edit Las Vegas without reading the Nevada Wiki page or even understanding US standards and try their hand at editing. I don't think in NV we are exempt from waze "terrorist" activities and deleting roads.
Perhaps the real issue here is that we need an automatic alert in Waze that identifies any editor based on rank that is deleting more than one ps, mH and MH. Realistically, when is there any need to delete more than one or two roads designated as ps or higher?
Re: Revisiting Lock Level Standards - Regional