What I Learned: More Complete Information Can Be More Important Than Being at the Location

Recently, I visited បញ្ញា ហ្វាម (Panhna Farm) in Banteay Meanchey Province.

The farm is far from the city, and they are trying to build a small farming community there. I traveled around 100 km from Angkor Wat, Siem Reap to visit them.

One problem was that the farm was not on Google Maps, so it was not easy to find.

While I was physically at the farm, I tried to add the place to Google Maps.

My first attempt included:

  • Place name
  • Category
  • Correct location pin

It was not accepted.

I tried a second time while I was still at the location. This time I added:

  • Place name
  • Category
  • Correct location
  • Photo of the place

Again, it was not accepted.

Later, after I returned to Phnom Penh, around 400 km away from the farm, I tried one more time.

For the third submission, I added more complete information:

  • Place name
  • Category
  • Correct location
  • Photos
  • Opening hours
  • Phone number
  • Website/Facebook information

This time, the place was accepted.

What I learned

Before this experience, I thought being physically at the location might be one of the most important things for adding a new place.

But this case gave me another lesson:

A complete and useful place submission may be more important than only being physically at the location.

Google Maps says edits are checked for accuracy, and my experience suggests that giving the system more information can help it understand and verify a real place better.

Of course, this is only one case, so I cannot say this is exactly how Google’s approval system works. But for Local Guides, I think it is a good reminder:

Don’t only add a name and pin. If possible, add enough real information to help Google and other users understand that the place exists.

For rural areas like this farm, good Google Maps information can also make a real difference. It can help visitors find the place, contact the owner, and support small communities that are still difficult to discover online.

This experience also connects with something I have learned from working on map-quality issues in Cambodia: Google Maps depends heavily on accurate local information and community contributions.

Have you had a similar experience where a place was rejected with basic information but accepted after adding more details?

That’s interesting @SophatCHY . Perhaps some things have changed in the approval algorithm, as it definitely used to be the case in the past that adding more details during the creation submission decreased your chances of getting it approved.

But, as you said, this is just 1 example; let’s keep an eye open for more (counter-) evidence.

Thank you, @JanVanHaver . Yes, this is only one personal experience, not official news from Google. I will keep watching for more examples and share them if I find a clear pattern.

@SophatCHY Great post and spot-on observation!
​I’ve experienced the exact same thing when adding new places. There have been times when I submitted a new location right on the spot, with full details, only to have the edit rejected for unknown reasons. :grimacing: On the flip side, adding or editing places remotely often gets approved seamlessly when rich, verified details are provided.
​It’s a great reminder that the algorithm looks for the whole story, not just a GPS ping. High-quality details, solid consistency, and a verifiable digital footprint clearly carry way more weight than just standing on the spot. :raising_hands:t2:

#LetsGuide

Thank you, @doc_dells, for sharing your experience. Yes, sometimes I want to add a missing place quickly so that local people or future visitors can add more accurate details later. I agree that complete, consistent, and verifiable information is very important—not only being at the location.

I added two places recently with very little info, @SophatCHY. In my case, I didn’t know they weren’t on the map. I took photos at the location and tried to upload them when I returned home. When I couldn’t find the place to upload them, I created the places by locating the spot on the map, adding the name, and uploading the photo. I had almost instant success both times.

I’d like to see your experiment in reverse. You added little info on location and a lot of info far away. What if you’d entered all the info on location, or very little info remotely?

@SophatCHY

> شكرًا لك على مشاركة هذه التجربة المفيدة. :clap:

أتفق معك أن إضافة معلومات كاملة وموثوقة قد تكون أكثر فائدة من مجرد وجودنا في الموقع. تجربتك مثيرة للاهتمام، خصوصًا أن الإضافة تم قبولها بعد توفير الصور وساعات العمل ورقم الهاتف والمعلومات الرقمية الأخرى.

لكن أتفق أيضًا على أنها تجربة واحدة ولا تكفي وحدها لإثبات كيفية عمل خوارزمية المراجعة في Google Maps. من الجميل أن نواصل مشاركة التجارب ومقارنتها لنرى إن كان هناك نمط واضح.

بالنسبة لي، أهم شيء هو أن تكون المعلومات حقيقية، دقيقة وقابلة للتحقق، لأن الهدف في النهاية هو تحسين جودة الخريطة ومساعدة المستخدمين.

شكرًا مرة أخرى على طرح هذا الموضوع وفتح النقاش بين المرشدين المحليين. :globe_showing_europe_africa::round_pushpin: