Incorrect edits

From waze
Jump to: navigation, search
This new page is currently undergoing modifications. The information and guidance is currently considered accurate enough to be followed now. Content is being prepared by one or more users. Do not make any changes before you post a message in this forum.

If you were advised to read this wiki article, it means another editor believes some of your map edits using the Waze Map Editor (WME) are not following our overall guidelines. Those edits may already have been modified or deleted. This may be an unpleasant surprise, especially if you put a lot of time and energy into those edits, but rest assured that you are in good company. Every one of Waze's many volunteer editors has made mistakes that required correction or removal.

The purpose of this article is to help you understand what about your edits may have needed attention and to offer you suggestions on where your editing energy could do the most good.

It may be intimidating to see all the things that can be done wrong. Don't panic! This article includes a list of things that are generally safe and easy to edit for beginners.

Incorrect edits are a natural part of Waze

Having edits undone or redone may make you feel like being a Waze editor is not for you. That's a reasonable response, but actually, both Waze and the volunteer editing community need you.

It is very important to Waze to encourage new editors and they believe that omitting any training requirements to get started is a better path to increase the number of editors on the map. Without any information, practice, or tests -- in fact within minutes of discovering Waze -- you can begin modifying Waze's maps. This is exciting, but it also means you will make mistakes. We all do.

Incorrect edits are a natural part of Waze. So please don't feel bad! Because these maps are used by your friends, neighbors, and more than 50 million other people, your fellow editors must act as soon as they discover the map is not how it should be.

Incorrect edits often result from misunderstood principles, and include both functional mistakes and misunderstood conventions. But one kind of incorrect "edit" is worse than all the others put together.

The worst incorrect edit

The worst incorrect edit of all is being unreachable by your fellow editors. In the event that you appear unintentionally to be damaging the map, the editing community will try desperately to reach you to help you become a better editor. Or, if another editor needs to understand why you structured your edits the way you did, he or she may reach out to you before assuming they were in error and undoing them. If you cannot be reached, the editing community can only guess regarding your edits and has limited means to restrain further potential damage.

You must ensure that e-mails sent to the address you gave Waze will reach you quickly. This means not only providing Waze with an email address you check regularly, but verifying that emails sent to that account from waze.com, especially from forum@waze.com, will pass any spam or junk-mail filters.

If you receive an email indicating that you have a private message (PM), please read the PM. To do so from any Waze page, select SUPPORT, then "Community Forums", then near the top left of the screen, "new messages". You can also access your inbox directly using this link. If the PM is from a fellow editor advising you of possibly incorrect edits, please respond!

Please note that simply ensuring one is visible on the WME Chat system when actively editing isn't enough. Getting an editor's attention via the Chat is not as reliable as via the Forum PM system and doing so requires much more effort.

Misunderstood principles

Many incorrect edits derive from misunderstandings and incorrect assumptions about Waze's fundamental principles, most commonly the following:

Misunderstanding Waze's purpose

Wrong: Waze is a general-purpose mapping application for whatever I would like to map, including my favorite walking trails, hidden creeks and ponds, historic but abandoned railroad right-of-ways, my bicycle shortcut through town, and my preferred parallel-parking spot.

Right: Waze is NOT a general-purpose mapping application, a walking or bicycling tool, or a means to support strictly personal routes and destinations. It is designed specifically to assist drivers of motor vehicles to navigate to their objectives and to avoid traffic. Edits to the map that do not support these goals in some way are strongly discouraged. Edits that detract from these goals, even unintentionally, do not belong at all.

The tragedy of deletion and disconnection

Wrong: How I edit the Waze map makes no difference as long as it ends up looking right.

Right: Within each road segment, hidden from view, are the accumulated traffic data from months, sometimes years, of passing Wazers. These data reflect how long it took Wazers to pass the segment, and to turn or continue at its end, depending on time of day and day of week. If the segment is deleted, all data are lost. If the segment is disconnected and reconnected elsewhere, the turn data are lost. Editors should strive to avoid deletion and disconnection wherever possible. (Needs link so we can view traffic data)

Assuming road types are intuitively obvious


For more details on this topic, see Road types.

Wrong: When deciding what type to apply to a road segment, I can rely on my intuitive conception of highways, ramps, streets, walking trails, et cetera. The fact that a road type is available in the Waze Map Editor means I should use it; Waze wants me to create anything they offer in that list, and to do so wherever I think it makes sense. For existing road segments, I am welcome to promote and demote them to whatever road type I think is appropriate.

Right: Waze road types have specific meanings. Choice of road type can affect routing and voice instructions, sometimes in surprising ways. Many drivable routes have been typed carefully according to government data. Other travel paths, particularly driveways, access roads, and walking trails, are often deliberately left unmapped. Don't change existing road types until you understand their different properties, and be cautious when creating access and non-drivable roads.

Trying too hard to match the satellite image

Wrong: The Waze map should match the satellite image as closely as possible. Ideally, it should be a literal representation of every path on Earth that human beings can take.

Right: The Waze map should be as simple as possible while still providing accurate navigation and timely voice instructions for drivers of motor vehicles. Often abstract or sparse representations, though they may look odd or wrong, will serve these goals best. In other situations it is better not to map a road at all. Clean maps and useful navigation must never be sacrificed for the sake of literal representation.

Trying too hard. This emphasis on literal representation adds nothing to routing, and the resulting turn instructions may confuse drivers. Further, editors attempting to understand any routing issues in the area must cope with six times as many segments and junction nodes as necessary!
A single segment without at-grade connectors provides a clean, straightforward routing solution. The median is not so wide it requires representation as a divided highway, and no other segments exist nearby that could snap the driver to the wrong road. Turn instructions will be simple, and the construction is much easier to analyze and maintain.

Common functional mistakes

A functional error introduces wrong or incomplete data or faulty routing. Functional errors must be addressed as soon as they are detected. If your incorrect edit was a functional mistake, the editor who discovered it has probably already taken steps to fix it.

It may be intimidating to see all the things that can be done wrong. Don't panic! This article includes a list of things that are generally safe and easy to edit for beginners.

Red roads

Example of a "red road".
The "red road" after completion.


For more details on this topic, see Creating and editing road segments.

Mistake: Roads that appear bright red in the WME were published before all necessary parameters were set properly. Red roads created from the pave feature of the mobile app are useless for routing, while red roads created using WME are routable. In either case, their prominent display in the WME calls attention to incomplete edits.

Note: Do not confuse the dark red major highways with the bright red unconfirmed roads.

Response: Do not automatically delete red roads! The road may be red because a user added a missing road using the pave feature, or because a local editor with first-hand knowledge created it in the editor but did not confirm its details. These roads may reflect construction that occurred since the satellite and/or street-view imagery was acquired.

If the red road appears to indicate a drivable road that will improve routing to adjacent destinations, complete it as necessary and verify turn restrictions. Try to preserve the creator's name out of respect for their having found the omission and attempting to remedy it.

If the red road is clearly spurious, or if finishing it would disrupt routing as in the common case of unnecessary parking-lot roads, private alleys or driveways, delete it.

Misplaced roundabouts

A correct roundabout.


For more details on this topic, see Roundabouts.

Mistake: The WME Roundabout tool creates an intersection that gives roundabout-specific routing instructions to drivers, such as "at the roundabout, take the third exit" (for roundabouts at complex intersections) or "turn left at the roundabout" (for roundabouts at simple perpendicular intersections). If those routing instructions could confuse drivers, the Roundabout tool should not be used. Roundabouts do not belong at cul-de-sacs or other dead ends, regardless of how round they are. Neither do they belong at traffic calming circles without roundabout signs, at decorative turns, or at circular entrance driveways. Depending on circumstances, they may be inappropriate for large traffic circles, especially those with street names of their own and stop signs or lights controlling access.

Response: If the satellite image leaves doubt, use Street View to verify that no signs suggestive of a roundabout are present. If it is a roundabout, ensure the layout matches the desired roundabout routing behavior, either orthogonal or odd-angle. If it is not a roundabout, delete it and replace or repair any associated connections.

Improper use of the Roundabout tool.
Corrected using the Road tool.

Overlapping segments

Mistake: Except in the cases of at-grade connectors and railroads, there should be only one segment routing traffic along any given street. Overlapping segments wreak havoc with the routing and house-numbering systems.

Sometimes editors create overlapping segments because they don't know how to modify the existing segment, or find it is locked above their editing rank. The correct approach is to seek help, not to add a new segment on top of an existing one.

Response: Identify the overlapping segment -- typically the one without house numbering and/or with improper connections to other nearby segments -- and delete it. Repair turn permissions.

Overlapping segments. The portion of Ewert Rd departing at extreme top left is closed to unauthorized motor vehicle traffic. An editor has tried to represent this with a one-way Private Road segment that splits from Ewert much too early and, as a result, overlaps an open two-way segment of Ewert Rd for over 100 meters. Waze will have no idea which of these segments a driver is on or how to assign segment speed data correctly.
The overlapping segment has been removed altogether, since it was only added to support authorized vehicles or non-motorized use. Connecting such segments to the public road network is strongly discouraged.

Disconnected/disjoint segments

Mistake: Just because segments appear to intersect doesn't mean they really do. A proper intersection will display all turn restrictions if any connecting segment is selected. A segment that only appears to connect will not only fail to route but will also confuse editors trying to understand the failure.

Response: If the intersection appears valid and the segment is correct, routable, and complies with conventions, connect the segment and set turn restrictions appropriately. If the intersection is not valid but the segments are correct, space them so it will be obvious to other editors that they do not connect, and consider locking them to be sure they stay that way. Otherwise delete the segment.

A disconnected and disjoint segment. The southeast segment appears to connect with the through road at reduced zoom, but when seen at higher magnification it obviously doesn't. The Waze routing algorithm will treat this segment as a dead end. Situations like this can be very hard to detect. This example apparently resulted from failed editing due to locked segments.
The segment has been connected and aligned to give "stay left" or "stay right" instructions for drivers arriving from the north. Turn restrictions have been set to permit turns.

Failed editing due to locked segments

A segment that failed to attach to a locked road. A Rank-1 editor has created a new road, but could not attach it to Delaware Ave, locked at Rank 2. The editor instead simulated attachment so perfectly that the disconnection is undetectable even at the highest zoom. The new road is broken, but it may be a long time before anyone discovers it. (The new segment is also incorrectly named, spelling out the suffix instead of using the proper "Rd" abbreviation.)

Mistake: It is impossible for entry-level editors to attach new segments to a road locked above their rank, although they can and do try, leading to disconnected/disjoint segments as described above. Worse, the new editor may assume that they did indeed correct the problem, and leave the area invisibly broken until someone else stumbles across it.

Response: At the very least, move the end of the disconnected segment away from the failed attachment area so that it is visually obvious to other editors that the road does not connect. You will cause no harm by doing so, as the routing connection is already broken. You are only making an invisible problem visible, which helps everyone.

Then, capture a permalink of the problem segment and contact an editor of the required rank to fix the connection. There are four typical ways to do this:

  • Broadcast a request for help in the Waze Map Editor Chat. Be sure to specify the rank you need and the region involved. Not all editors monitor the chat, and of those that do, not all will have the necessary rank and editable area to help you. Before you call for help, adjust your editor view so that the problem segment lies in the middle of your window, as the helping editor may simply jump to your location via the chat-users list. Have the permalink handy to send if requested.
  • Submit an "unlock/update request" to the Community Forums. This post describes the general procedure but is not country-specific. Many countries have their own unlock/update forums; it's important to post in the correct one and use the correct protocol! Include the permalink in your post.
  • Send a Private Message (PM) via the forums to an active local editor of the necessary rank, such as an Area Manager or other local senior editor with whom you've established a connection. Include the permalink in your message.
  • Send a PM to the editor whose name is marked as having last modified the locked segment. This does not always work but is worth trying especially if the first three approaches don't seem to be getting you anywhere. Include the permalink in your message.
Using standard tools, the only way to tell that the new segment is disconnected is to select it. The selected segment lacks turn restrictions onto Delaware Ave, showing that it is a dead end.
Once the segment is attached, turn restrictions now appear normal.

Corrupted turn restrictions

Mistake: Sometimes when modifying an intersection an editor will, through accident or lack of awareness, leave important turn restrictions red. This will prevent routing on the affected segments. In the worst cases significant roads may effectively be closed to Wazers, who are instead detoured through adjacent neighborhoods.

Response: Correct the turn restrictions as soon as possible.

Corrupted turn restriction. An editor has modified the at-grade connector for right turns from the Laurel Street Bridge onto San Lorenzo Blvd but has unintentionally left a critical turn restriction red, creating a partial bridge closure. The closure will dramatically affect routing in the area, possibly forcing Wazers to another bridge to bypass the restriction.
Turn restrictions for the at-grade connector as they should appear.

Excess or misaligned geometry nodes


For more details on this topic, see Editing existing roads.

Mistake: Excess geometry nodes slow the display and make a segment harder to edit, while misaligned nodes affect display aesthetics and in extreme cases disrupt Waze's ability to determine what road a driver is on.

Response: Remove excess geometry nodes (using mouse-hover and the 'd' key) and correct misaligned nodes.

Excessive use of geometry nodes. This segment incorporates 13 geometry nodes. This is far more than necessary here and makes the segment harder to adjust.
Three geometry nodes provide sufficient detail for this segment.

Misunderstanding the "Highway" road type

Mistake: It is counterintuitive, but in Waze, "highway" does not necessarily mean a road that carries a lot of traffic. It just means a road that carries more traffic than nearby alternatives. For example, a barely-maintained one-lane mountain road may be a "Minor Highway", and a two-lane street serving a small village a "Major Highway". Assessing a road by its significance relative to nearby alternatives is called "functional classification" or FC.

Such situations often baffle new editors to whom this application of the word "highway" seems absurd. As a result, some will attempt to "put it right" by lowering Highways to Streets or Primary Streets, unwittingly ruining the careful and methodical work that was required to set the road type according to national FC standards.

Response: Find the government FC map for the affected area and restore the Waze road classifications according to editing-community conventions. Consider locking the affected segments, especially if local convention recommends it.

Misunderstood highway classification. An editor has dropped two segments of Elm St from Minor Highway to Primary Street, contrary to the local authority's functional classification. This change introduces a discontinuity of road type between Holly St, San Carlos Ave, and the southern portion of Elm St. The discontinuity will distort routing of through traffic.
Elm St has been restored to match the local authority's functional classification for this area.

Unnecessary representation by divided one-way segments

Mistake: Just because a road is divided by a median strip in reality is not enough reason to represent it as divided in Waze! Dividing roads on the Waze map can cause much trouble and should not be attempted without care. Always check with the local Area Manager before dividing a road and follow best map-editing practice.

Response: Check with the local Area Manager or a Champ. Restoring roads to undivided status can cause as many headaches as dividing them in the first place. Do not automatically assume that a newly-divided road is incorrect, even if the road appears to have been divided poorly or by a novice editor.

Unnecessary road division. Dividing this road accommodated a median that is present over a short distance, but was unnecessary for routing to adjacent destinations.
An undivided road serves this area well as long as turn restrictions are set properly, and it is easier to inspect and maintain.

Walking Trails

Potentially harmful Walking Trails. Many of these trails are closely parallel to drivable roads. The slightest GPS error may snap drivers to the trails instead of the roads. Meanwhile, the trails will only poorly protect the roads from the false speed data of cyclists misusing Waze, because the cyclists may just as easily be snapped to the roads instead of the trails. Several drivable destinations are in the area, routing to which may be corrupted as a result of the trails. These trails add unnecessary complexity, encourage improper use of Waze by cyclists thus increasing the risk of speed-data pollution, put driving Wazers at risk of bad routes, and offer a poor example to other editors looking for ways to contribute. They should be removed.


For more details on the Walking Trail road type, see Road types/USA - Walking Trails.

Mistake: Because WME offers a "Walking Trail" road type, it may seem that Waze wants editors to map pedestrian and cycling paths in addition to normal roads for motor vehicles. This is not correct! Few circumstances call for mapping Walking Trails. They should be very rare and mapped by experts only.

  • Walking Trails are fully routable and can affect routing even when disconnected! Connected or not, the Walking Trail type should never be used where effects on local routing are not desired.
  • The use of Waze while walking or cycling can damage Waze's speed and traffic database. Such uses should be discouraged. Editors should not map Walking Trails, or any other road type, for the sole purpose of encouraging non-driving Wazers.
  • The presence of Walking Trails, even in remote areas where their routing properties may do less damage, encourages editors to add to the Trails or create new ones. If such paths are not drivable by at least a 4X4, they help perpetuate the mistaken belief that Waze is available to support pedestrians and cyclists.
Unnecessary "BBQ grille" Walking Trails. Even if these Walking Trails were drivable and mapping them were encouraged, it would not be necessary to map every one. But none of these Trails serve routable destinations, and they encourage non-drivers to use Waze improperly. They should be removed.


Response: Does the GPS Points layer leave no doubt that pedestrians and cyclists are Wazing heavily (albeit improperly) on the Walking Trail? And, is the Trail parallel to a drivable road, and close enough to it that, without the path being mapped, Waze might instead "snap" these improper Wazers to the road? If so, convert the Trail to the Pedestrian Boardwalk type.

Could it help orient drivers to see the Walking Trail displayed? For example, where a major neighborhood path, such as a Rails-to-Trails path, crosses a road? Then change its type to Pedestrian Boardwalk or Stairway, as appropriate. Such uses are best kept to a minimum; remember, their purpose is to orient drivers, not to encourage pedestrians and cyclists to use Waze!

Does the Walking Trail appear intended for routing over a maintained dirt road drivable by at least a 4X4? Then change the road type to Dirt Road / 4X4 Trail. If the dirt road is rarely driven and inaccessible to most drivers, such as a major fire road only used by forest-service personnel, disconnect it from the road network. If the dirt road is gated but driven frequently to and from destinations, Private Road may be a more appropriate road type.

If none of the above apply, evaluate the purpose of the Walking Trail. Is it in place only to support and encourage non-driving Wazers? Is there no chance a driver might find it useful for orientation while driving, or for reaching a destination? In such cases the Walking Trail is likely causing more harm than good and should be removed. Before removing it, however, consider how much effort went into its creation. Do not modify a complex effort by an active editor, even if it is non-compliant, without first sending the author a link to this article via PM and allowing him or her considerable time, perhaps several weeks, to modify or remove it. In the rare case of disagreement, contact an area manager or local Champ.

Access roads that distort routing

An access road that will distort routing. An editor has added a driveway for 824 Smith St (Google position indicated by the pin on the driveway). This driveway comes so close to the neighbors at 812 and 836 Smith St (pins on either side) and 827 and 815 Jones St (pins behind back fence) that all of them will be routed to 824 Smith St every time they go home. This driveway does not improve routing. In addition, it does not comply with guidelines for private access roads and driveways. Do not fix the "red road" problem. Remove the driveway. (Google pins added manually to image for reference.)


For more details on private access roads and driveways, see Driveways.

Mistake: New editors often believe that if you can drive it, you can map it, and commonly add parking-lot roads, driveways, and private alleys because they are there. Such roads can distort rather than enhance routing! Once it has a destination position, Waze attempts to route drivers on whatever road will get them closest to the destination coordinates. This means some roads can have unintended routing consequences. For example, if you add a private road to your house as in the figure, Wazers visiting your neighbors will find themselves routed up your driveway.

Unnecessary roads can also cause routing distortions when departing a destination. This results from Waze's attempt to "snap" the driver to the nearest available road before determining a route. If you add a private alley that connects two streets through a warehouse district, for example, a delivery person nearer to the alley than the street may be snapped incorrectly to the alley and given an impossible route to his next destination.

In general, you should map roads because they are necessary for routing and not simply because they are there.

Response: If the road does not comply with the driveway guidelines, consider deleting it. If it appears to comply but causes routing issues that cannot be improved by editing the driveway or adding additional compliant road segments, consider deleting it.

Unnecessary at-grade connectors


For more details on this topic, see At-grade connectors.

Mistake: At-grade connectors are generally not necessary unless an upcoming turn requires uncommonly early action by the driver. Unnecessary at-grade connectors are more trouble to analyze and maintain, and their close proximity to the through road from which they depart can lead Waze to snap drivers to the wrong road. Asking for a route while snapped to the wrong road, for example while waiting at a stoplight too near an at-grade connector, will result in incorrect routing.

Response: Delete the unnecessary at-grade connector as well as any newly-unnecessary junction nodes that result, and modify turn restrictions to account for the new routing.

Unnecessary at-grade connector. A driver westbound on Rio Del Mar Blvd has no need of advance warning for a right turn. The driver can't use the information; there's just one westbound lane all the way to the intersection. But not only that — besides the right turn there is no other turn possible! Further, the construction of this at-grade connector will cause a "keep right" rather than a "turn right" voice instruction that will perplex a driver arriving at a perpendicular junction. This at-grade connector confuses both the driver and the display and accomplishes nothing.
The intersection routes perfectly without the at-grade connector and is easier to maintain and verify.

Misuse of the Ramp road type

Mistake: One seldom needs the Ramp road type unless editing around controlled-access highways or freeways. Entry-level editors often use Ramps in places they don't belong, particularly for at-grade connectors (AGC). The USA Ramp guidelines provide details on appropriate use of ramps.

Response: Change to the correct road type and rework if necessary, or delete if unnecessary. In the case of an AGC, check if the ramp is an allowed exception before changing it to another road type in accordance with the AGC road-type guidelines. Verify turn restrictions.

Commonly misunderstood conventions

Misunderstood conventions do not necessarily involve wrong data or faulty routing, but violate editing conventions agreed upon by the local Waze editing community. The damage done by a misunderstood convention is primarily by example; other editors will interpret the error as a model for what they should do, and the mistake will proliferate.

If you've been approached regarding misunderstood conventions, you may have been given the opportunity to correct or delete your work. Please do so! It may be the least enjoyable thing you will do in Waze, but if you don't do it, someone else eventually will, and in the meantime the incorrect example may influence other new editors.

It may be intimidating to see all the things that can be done wrong. Don't panic! This article includes a list of things that are generally safe and easy to edit for beginners.

Excessive use of Parking-Lot Roads

Excessive use of Parking-Lot Roads.
Correct use of Parking-Lot Roads.


For more details on this topic, see Parking Lots.

Misunderstood convention: While mapping every lane in a parking lot does not cause functional problems, it does create a busy appearance in the client display that is completely unnecessary for routing.

By convention the Waze editing community only maps the minimum number of parking-lot roads necessary to ensure proper routing to and from destinations. In many cases no parking-lot roads are necessary at all. In some cases adding parking-lot roads will disrupt local routing rather than improve it.

Response: Delete extraneous parking-lot roads and any newly-unnecessary junction nodes that result. Remember that parking-lot roads absorb slowdown detection, so be sure not to delete lanes that "protect" adjacent thoroughfares from spurious heavy-traffic warnings.

Misuse of Area Places

Incorrect use of Area Places. These hotel grounds consist of a restaurant (adjacent to the main road) and multiple guest structures. Each structure has been marked with its own Hotel or Restaurant Area Place within an encompassing unnamed Parking-Lot Area Place. While well-intentioned, these Area Places do not mark anything that stands out visually from its neighbors, and lend unwarranted significance to a common hotel complex. In addition, the use of the same hotel name to mark multiple structures will confuse routing to the hotel, which should lead drivers to the front desk.
Point Places provide the best way to mark an ordinary complex that does not stand out from its surroundings. Here, one Point Place is located over the restaurant, the other over the hotel front desk, the two routing destinations in the complex. The Parking-Lot Area Place has been removed as the parking at this complex is dedicated to hotel and restaurant guests only.


For more details on this topic, see Places.

Misunderstood convention: Area Places (formerly known as Landmarks) appear on the client display as colored polygons, helping to orient the driver by indicating distinctive structures or open space. Current convention holds that Area Places should always be associated with "visual significance", locations that stand out from their surroundings because of their appearance or their size (an exception is made for locations considered potentially critical to drivers, such as gas stations, or hospital, police or other emergency services).

As a result, use of an Area Place to mark a location that does not stand out from its surroundings in any way detracts from the ability of other Area Places to serve their primary function. Such a location may not satisfy local editing conventions for Area Places and may wind up reworked by another editor. To make the Area-or-Point decision more objective, a large table specifies many Place categories that should always be marked with Point Places.

Like all Places, Area Places should be named. Without a name, an Area Place cannot be used as a routing destination and appears on the user's client display only as an unidentified colored polygon. Area Places without names are more likely to be modified or removed.

Controversy surrounds the Area Place. Some senior editors disagree with the current Place guidelines and recommend that editors be allowed greater flexibility in creating Area Places large and small; others argue that Point Places provide navigation and routing capabilities identical to those of Area Places and ask that Area Places be reserved only for critical or visually-significant locations. However things turn out, the safest approach for now is to abide by the current guidelines.

Response: In at least one region a very senior editor asks that all Area Places be left untouched. If you are editing in such a region simply leave all Area Places exactly as you found them even if they violate the wiki. In other regions a senior editor may wish to be informed before you significantly modify any Area Place.

If you are not editing in such a region, and if the Place would be correct and compliant as a Point Place, convert it to a Point Place and adjust its location for best routing. Otherwise, delete it.

Always, before removing or modifying an Area Place, take a moment to consider how much effort went into its creation. Do not modify a complex Area Place, even a non-compliant one, without first sending the author a link to this article via PM and allowing him or her considerable time, perhaps several weeks, to modify or remove it. In the rare case of disagreement, contact an area manager or local Champ.

Misuse of the Parking-Lot Area Place

Incorrect use of the Parking-Lot Area Place. Three private, dedicated parking lots have been marked with the Parking-Lot Area Place. This application marks no significant visual references, provides no routing destinations, and may mislead drivers seeking general-purpose parking.
There is no general-purpose parking for the general public in this area, so the Parking-Lot Area Places have been removed.


For more details on this topic, see Parking Lot Area Place.

Misunderstood convention: The Waze Map Editor gives easy and prominent access to the Parking-Lot Area Place directly from the create menu. In most urban or suburban neighborhoods, however, mapping every parking lot would create a vast ocean of parking. To simplify the maps, the Waze editing community only uses the Parking-Lot Area Place for off-street general-purpose parking provided for the general public.

If you really did map general-purpose parking for the general public, the best way to reduce the chance it will be deleted is to assign the parking lot its documented name. Unnamed Parking-Lot Area Places are much more likely to be deleted.

Response: If the parking lot complies with guidelines, ensure that the Name field shows its documented name, e.g. "City Lot #6"; compliant lots with no name may be given one as long as it is somehow specific, e.g. "Redwood City Public Parking". If the lot has a name but is for private or dedicated use, you may consider converting it to a Point Place. Otherwise delete it.

As with Area Places in general, before removing or modifying a Parking-Lot Area Place, take a moment to consider how much effort went into its creation. Do not significantly alter a complex Parking Lot, even a non-compliant one, without first sending the author a link to this article via PM and allowing him or her considerable time, perhaps several weeks, to modify or remove it. In the rare case of disagreement, contact an area manager or local Champ.

Closing URs without proper consideration

Inconsiderate UR closures. The few cases where conversations had taken place were closed abruptly.
A region where considerate UR handling has been taking place.


For more details on this topic, see Update Requests.

Misunderstood convention: Waze users file Update Requests (URs) to alert the editing community of problems they experienced. Drivers rarely have time to enter an adequate description when they submit a UR. They depend on the editing community to open a conversation so they can explain more fully what happened. Handling URs follows a careful process that provides drivers with an opportunity to clarify their report, and editors with enough time to work the report once they begin.

Closing a UR will permanently end the associated conversation and will alert everyone involved in it. Following UR etiquette provides all parties an opportunity to reach closure before that happens. Breaches of etiquette include the following:

  • Closing a UR with an empty conversation. Even very old URs deserve a comment. If you are closing a UR you reported, add a comment anyway as a courtesy to other editors. Note: URs with an excessively abusive or completely nonsensical opening description may be closed without comment.
  • Closing a UR without offering the reporter an adequate chance to respond to an initial query. Wait at least 7 days after the initial query before closing the report. A followup request before closure is strongly encouraged. Note: some URs do not appear to require more information, but the reporter has been given an option to clarify anyway. The minimum waiting period and followup request are less critical for these.
  • Closing a UR whose reporter has responded to an inquiry by another editor. Once the reporter responds to an editor's inquiry, that editor determines how to proceed. While other editors are welcome to contribute to the conversation, it is important they not close the UR even if the conversation appears to have lapsed or if no solution is evident. This is because the original editor may be pursuing the problem behind the scenes. If the UR conversation appears stale, it may be renewed with a note like "Any progress?" or "Time to close as not identified?". If the original editor does not respond within 7 days, or explicitly waives further interest in the UR, you may take charge. Note: the concept of a single "managing editor" for URs is often relaxed during a MapRaid event.
  • Closing a UR that the first responding editor may consider proprietary. Some editors feel that being the first to respond to a UR establishes them as managing it. This may be especially true in areas with few URs, where editors welcome the opportunity to work them. Unless the first responder has explicitly communicated that the UR is open to others, such as in a personal communication or with an "open to any editor" comment in the initial response, it is best to treat the UR as the first responder's responsibility. Even if the UR appears dead, rather than close the UR, ask if there is progress and wait 7 days before taking action. Note: proprietary interests in URs are typically suspended during a MapRaid event.

Response: Once closed, a UR will remain accessible for several days. A skilled editor who catches the closure in time and moves quickly may be able to work a closed UR before it disappears. If a dialogue can be established with the reporter, it can be continued using the emailed links to the UR conversation even after the UR has disappeared from the map.


What should I edit, then?

Your energy is best focused on regions you know, but if you live and work in a heavily-populated area, your local neighborhoods may have been edited and re-edited many times. There may be little left to do aside from removing excess geometry nodes, correcting minor misalignments, and verifying turn restrictions.

Consider editing less-traveled locations you may have visited recently. Many non-industrial and rural communities have seen little attention since the original base-map import. Such regions often abound with misnamed roads, dirt roads misclassified as streets, improper turn restrictions and street directionality, roads shown as through that do not go through, and so on. Finding good information to correct these issues may take some work, especially in more remote areas, but it is a terrific contribution.

If you do choose to focus on a heavily-edited area, be aware that many have come before you. Things that don't seem right at first may have resulted from days or even weeks of careful adjustment. Exercise caution before modifying other editors' work.

Constructive work for new editors

  • Verify road-name spelling and capitalization by checking against local government GIS as well as signage viewed in street-view imagery, and ensure name consistency within city boundaries.
  • Verify that street-type suffix abbreviations (e.g. for Road, Drive, Avenue, etc.) are used and comply with abbreviation standards.
  • Verify that street-type prefixes in cases such as "Avenue of the Flags" (and in the US, particularly Spanish street-type prefixes such as Calle, Paseo, Avenida, etc.) are not abbreviated unless that is local custom.
  • Verify road directionality, particularly one-way roads that Waze may show as two-way.
  • Verify turn restrictions, including timed turn restrictions.
  • Correct streets shown as through on the Waze map but that are blocked in reality.
  • Add recently-constructed roads not yet shown on the maps, or shown incorrectly due to obsolete satellite and street-view imagery.
  • Correct road alignment errors and remove excess geometry nodes.
  • Contribute suggestions to User-Request conversations already opened by other editors, particularly if you have local knowledge that could help resolve the issue.
  • Alert area managers and/or senior editors to problems.
  • Add or update name, city, and address data for existing Point or Area Places.
  • Correct categories for existing Point or Area Places; in particular, when Waze rolled out Places, existing hotels were often assigned the category of "Hostel" instead of "Hotel".
  • Add Point Places.

Risky work for new editors

  • Adding non-drivable roads such as walking trails, railroads, runways and taxiways, etc. (they may not sound risky, but because of the way Waze implements these they are surprisingly likely to influence routing in the immediate area).
  • Upgrading or downgrading road types among Street, Primary Street, Minor Highway, and Major Highway (risk of ruining meticulously-done FC settings).
  • Adding parking-lot roads (risk of overdoing it, of disrupting routing to nearby destinations, of leaving behind corrupted turn restrictions, or of failing to join the roads to adjacent locked segments).
  • Adjusting major intersections, ramps, or highways (highly likely to encounter locked segments, but even if not, risk of disrupting heavily-traveled areas).
  • Dividing or un-dividing roads.
  • Working and closing user-submitted Update Requests (requires extensive familiarity with UR etiquette and with common problems encountered by Wazers).
  • Editing inside Private Installations (tracking the routing penalties requires great care).
  • Adding or modifying roundabouts.
  • Adding Area Places of any kind, including those for natural features as well as those for properties.

Further exploration

The Waze wiki

The Waze wiki offers a wealth of detail on all aspects of map editing. The following pages are good places to start. Be sure also to find and read the editing guidelines specific to your country.

The Waze forum

All editors are encouraged to ask questions and access current conversations on the Waze forum. Start by reading this post.

Third-party scripts

As you become more comfortable with the WME, you may wish to explore optional browser modifications, or scripts, developed by volunteers from the Waze editing community. You can edit the Waze map very successfully without ever adding a script to your browser! But once you understand WME's basic operation and can recognize and avoid the incorrect edits described in this article, you may find scripts can help you align junctions, validate your work, and detect potential problems more quickly.

When you are ready to explore scripts, visit Community Plugins, Extensions and Tools. In particular, you may find WME Color Highlights (WMECH), WME Toolbox, and WME Validator helpful for identifying problems, recommending solutions, and directing you to relevant documentation.