Then it seems odd the reason was the change 'could not be verified' versus Google providing some other reason.
On Wikipedia, this situation is known as an "edit conflict" - two editors simultaneously attempting to edit the same page. The Wiki software indicates it as such, and one of the editors is then required to attempt his edit again, on the now-revised page. All revision control systems use some form of edit conflict resolution mechanism, as I'm sure does GMaps. Yes, @Jonesnco, it would be nice if these situations would be indicated as such, rather than show the laconic "could not be verified" message.
Especially when I tried to again make the change about 30 minutes after the initial 'could not be verified' change was submitted. It was also met with a 'could not be verified' change. I suspect the business owner was not in the process of making the conflicting change since both their local and HQ office were closed on Sunday when I made the changes.
Another option would be for Google to kick the conflicting changes to the 'check the facts' section of the Maps app (or whatever equivalent exists, if any, on the webpage) for verification by someone other than the initial submitter(s).
Your suggestions make sense for a system like Wikipedia where all edits are trusted and applied, and so the conflict only happen with simultaneous edits.
Unfortunately Maps must actually review edits to stop the malicious and just plain bad edits. This can mean that there might be an edit from another Maps user already in place for a couple of weeks awaiting approval, and then you make your edit.
It can also mean that a GMB user made the edit, and it went into pending while it was verified (usually via snail mail postcard). There is also a period after entry of any mailed PIN before the edit goes through.
Sometimes one's trust is enough that the edit gets pushed through despite there being another pending edit. In that case the other edit will end up either denied or
It's something we discussed in a lot more detail on the Map Maker forum, and using Map Maker we could see a lot more of what was going on, but as a basic summary of one of the major issue with conflicting edits think about this:
pending edit 1 changes an element from value A to value B
edit 2 changes the same element from value A to value C
if edit 2 is approved, edit 1 is now impossible
The original solution was that anything edited went into complete lock down until that edit was completed. This did not work well at all, an edit to a road segment might shut down editing of a freeway across the entire state/province. The improved solution was to try to lock down just that one element of the feature, but that doesn't always work, especially when you have multiple editing tools.
Google has spent a lot of time trying to deal with multiple edits of the same feature, and what we have now is a lot better than before, though it could still use improvement. There's a lot of other things I'd like to see fixed first.
*To add to the above often discussed scenario, if edit 1 is noticed and considered during the review of edit 2, edit 2 needs to be denied to allow edit 1 to continue through the review process.
Flash - LG Connect Moderator, Maps Platinum Product Expert, Map Maker Platinum Product Expert, RER and Regional Lead
Due to the volume I receive, I do not respond to unsolicited private messages
I feel you might be looking at this with a narrow lens, what you are asking for might work for where you live. However, there are a lot of people around the world that do not receive door to door mail they rely purely on physical addresses. To switch threads back to postal addresses using Canada as an example the city listed in ones postal address is not always a reflection of the city they live in. It is a postal city and especially in rural areas can reflect the name of the post office that serves them. This post office can quite far from where they actually live.
To have a postal city show up as an actual city would cause numerous problems in a number of areas around the world as those city polygons would overlap actual physical places. When trying to determine someone's physical addresses we often ask people which authority they pay property tax to this is usually the "town" or "city" they are physically located in. To circle back to North York all property tax in the district of North York is paid to the city of Toronto. Google uses physical addresses in order to serve the most people with the correct physical address. This is to allow people to navigate to the correct physical location on the map.
Google Maps Platinum Product Expert, Top Contributor for Google Map Maker (Product Retired) and Regional Lead (Product Retired).
Your suggestions make sense for a system like Wikipedia where all edits are trusted and applied, and so the conflict only happen with simultaneous edits.
I don't see how telling an editor why his change was rejected is something that can only work on a system like Wikipedia. What exactly is the harm in GMaps replacing its usual "could not be validated" message with a more appropriate, "Your edit could not be processed due to another edit currently being reviewed."? Or maybe, "This item is already under review. Please try your edit again in a few weeks."?
Having clearer messages and better system feedback would go a long way to reduce the kind of frustrations we're seeing here, without helping spammers circumvent the system.
I'm sorry, @GregMcG, but my "narrow lens" was my attempt to directly address the long lecture you gave us about how Canada Post doesn't decide on address formats, and how the government's insistence on using Canada Post addresses is immaterial. My questions to you are as follows:
Where exactly does Google explain this addressing scheme? I'm not saying you made this all up, but a link to an official page explaining this would be helpful.
If this is the case, how is Google planning to educate all business owners, and make sure they don't simply use their mailing address as they do for any other purpose?
As I've said, I have no preference for one addressing scheme over another, but there has to be a clear, published set of instructions for GMB and GMaps users on how to enter an address. Whether this is specific to Toronto or not is beside the point.
When the government decides to mail you a communication they must use your postal address because they are dealing with Canada Post. Simply put a letter from the government with your postal address on the front does not make it a correct physical address. My explanation was to help you and others understand that so moving forward people can have a better understanding of how physical addressing works.
We wish they would publish new guidelines, but even when there were published guidelines they couldn't cover everything and this point wasn't exactly spelt out, but rather learned from seeing how addressing works (when we had Map Maker) and discussing with Google. Google has always used the TCs and moderators to explain many things; they purposely choose very knowledgeable people for those positions and then supplement them with more knowledge, so the only way to learn many things is to listen and absorb, you can also, of course, submit feedback asking for things to change.
GMB and Maps are different. GMB requires business owners to supply a postal address because they receive a postcard. This causes issues with businesses that have a physical address that differs from their postal address. This problem has been mentioned to Google numerous times and is also something they have yet to fix. GMB has a long history of making decisions that convenience business owners and then cause data problems on the map. It might be best to think of Google, not as one entity, but many different departments with different goals; the fact that they all end up in one final display called Maps doesn't make it any more streamlined in the back end.
Google Maps Platinum Product Expert, Top Contributor for Google Map Maker (Product Retired) and Regional Lead (Product Retired).
GMB and Maps are different. GMB requires business owners to supply a postal address because they receive a postcard. This causes issues with businesses that have a physical address that differs from their postal address. This problem has been mentioned to Google numerous times and is also something they have yet to fix. GMB has a long history of making decisions that convenience business owners and then cause data problems on the map. It might be best to think of Google, not as one entity, but many different departments with different goals; the fact that they all end up in one final display called Maps doesn't make it any more streamlined in the back end.
Yes, I understand that, but I'm not sure the subtleties of the two incompatible addressing standards will be comprehended by a hair salon owner who has to enter one address for GMB and a different one for GMaps.
In the end, I'm afraid GMaps may have to allow both formats as equivalent. For the most part, it seems it already does, which is why I find it hard to believe a change would be rejected solely on the basis of it using "North York" instead of "Toronto".
Ever since I got to Level 8, my map edits are usually accepted instantly. Even before I reached Level 8, I never had trouble correcting map marker locations, mostly stores placed at the wrong part of a mall or plaza, or in the middle of the street instead of at the building on one side.
But not today. Out of 17 map marker moves, only 2 were accepted. The other 15 were instantly rejected with "NOT APPLIED". I tried two of those again a few hours later, and got the same result. I was able to create a few new places without much problem, so this issue seems to be limited to map marker moves.
Anyone else has this problem? Has Google rolled out new logic for such edits?
I am also getting instant "not applied" over all of my edits. Really discouraging.
2022
