Restricting Editing Privileges on Google Maps to Higher-Level Local Guides

[V_Run]

I would like to keep this post concise and simple as this has already been addressed before by @Briggs but haven’t gained the expected momentum. As a Local Guide for some time now, I’ve noticed that the problem of incorrect and bogus places on Google Maps remains largely unaddressed. This is a serious issue that, if not managed, can undermine the core purpose of Google Maps—to help and guide people accurately. I frequently encounter fake locations with incorrect details. While I always report these as a responsible Local Guide, only a few of my reports are approved. Instead of focusing on fixing these errors after they happen, why not prevent them in the first place?

I suggest that editing privileges on Google Maps be restricted to Local Guides at higher levels—perhaps Level 7 and above. While anyone should be able to upload photos, give ratings, and write reviews to earn points and gain levels, editing rights should be reserved for more experienced users. This could significantly improve the accuracy and reliability of information on Google Maps.

@Julie_A @TiffanyBnyc @DeniG @MortenCopenhagen @AdamGT @TravellerG @MoniDi

[MortenCopenhagen]

Hi @V_Run

There is already an elaborate trust system in place on Google Maps when it comes to getting edits approved. It is not linked to LG levels but your performance as a Maps editor. If you know the guidelines correctly and collect and use the feedback you get on individual edits you can become able to predict the outcome of your edits pretty well. Doing this you will be able to boost your approval rate.

It is unclear if you provided feedback, flag or attempted to fix (remove or close) fraudulent listings.

I would be happy to discuss this further if you share some concrete examples.

Cheers

Morten

[TravellerG]

Hello fellow LG @V_Run ,

Our Connect Moderator @MortenCopenhagen has attended you and I assure you that you are in one of the best hands of this forum - kindly do the needful for him to help you the best.

Best wishes

[V_Run]

Hello @MortenCopenhagen ,

Thank you for your reply. I have a quick question: Are new accounts initially given a 100% approval rate for edits, which then gradually decreases over time? I’ve noticed that some fake places have been added by users with zero contributions in the past, and if this is the case, it seems like a flaw in the system that needs to be addressed.

Since you requested examples, here are three:

1. This location does not exist at the specified address. I’ve flagged it multiple times, but all my reports have been rejected.
2. This place is actually called “Denmark Road Building,” not “Enmark Road Building.” Despite several attempts to correct it, the system consistently rejects the change.
3. This restaurant has permanently closed, yet Maps has not accepted my report of its closure.

[MortenCopenhagen]

Hi @V_Run

Remember that knowledge about how the spam filter works is not something Google will share information about. Probably because they don’t want to provide any help to spammers and also because the spam filter is continuously tweaked.

I doubt that new accounts have 100% trust as we often see new accounts having serious problems getting reviews and sometimes photos being published. But on the other hand, I speculate that some leniency might be given to new accounts to encourage contributions. But I don’t know.

I don’t know how to know who added a new place. This is not public information. But sometimes a points hunter may add the first photo and the first review so we might know who likely added the place.

I will respond to your 3 examples after doing some testing. Hang on.

Morten

[MortenCopenhagen]

Hi again @V_Run

Re the Bridgestone tire shop

This place is claimed by the owners. This makes it harder for us to remove a place.

The website shows this:

It looks to me that the first line address is the one on Maps. And the phone number match.

This is the kind of online verification used by Google Maps to decide whether the place should be removed or not. So I’m not surprised that your attempt to remove the place was rejected.

Let me know what you mean by “flaging” the place.

Re enmark Road Building

On the desktop in the left column, you can scroll down after opening the pin and you will see this:

So I trust you are correct. But please also see this:

The building is named correctly as part of the base layer. See the black text. This information is on the layer we can not edit - only Google Staff can. So the pin you are referring to is a contractor business. It is not claimed, so you should be able to rename it. The reason you can not rename it is likely related to the fact that the building already carried that name. Do you have some online info about this contractor business? And it is located in this building. I don’t see any signage on Street View. After letting me know about the business I will be happy to try to help you close or move the business pin.

Re Pazhayidom Ruchi | Thiruvalla

I think I know why you are unable to close this vegetarian restaurant. Here is why: Did you notice how many reviews were posted on this listing? 2815 reviews. A photo of the entrance was posted only 9 days ago with live plants outside. Also, the number of photos 766 has a protective effect on the listing.

What evidence do you have that this business is closed?

In the left panel I see this:

On the facebook page there seems to be a discussion about a new location. I don’t know the local area so it is difficult for me to follow. Please explain.

Maybe the place should be moved and not closed permanently.

I’m sharing all these details to show how to dig deeper to understand why our edits are not approved. Such knowledge can be used to manually pre-verify edits before submitting them if in doubt.

All the best

Morten

cc @TravellerG

[ErmesT]

Hi @V_Run , welcome back in Connect after a long time.

Editing Google Maps it is not a matter of privileges, even if being trusted may help a bit. Editing Maps is more a matter of making edits understandable by the algorithm.

• Your first example was a duplicate listing of a Tire shop. The place was owned but all the photos from the owner were from another Tire shop located a few hundred meters away. I fixed the name, removed the non working link to the website, moved the pin and then merged the two listings. It took a few minutes.
• The issue with the second listing was not really the wrong name. The issue was that the listing, with an apparent name identical to the building (Apart of a missing first letter), was most probably a not existent business (a “general contractor” located in a building owned by the university of Manchester).
• The issue with the third location is more complex, because it is a [probably] new restaurant that took the place of the old one. The closure was reported in several reviews starting three months ago. Personally I would start by with adding in the Location the new restaurant Annapoorna. The action will move the people to add their reviews in the correct place, and this could help to understand that the old location was closed.

[TravellerG]

Thank you very much for marking copy to me, dear @MortenCopenhagen Ji…

I have noted your comments…

Let me also do some work and get back to you…