One address variation geocoding but not another (while neither plot on Google Maps)

[hlennett]

Overview

We did a deep dive into the behavior around address data for a facility that a user shared with us. You can read all the details in this doc: https://docs.google.com/document/d/10EK5HXSWO9okyOtv9QYJaFD3M8T6jx6L-dk2W_GceHQ/edit?usp=sharing

Expected Behavior

See doc.

Actual Behavior

There are three pieces wrapped up in this situation that we wanted to look into (and please let me know if this should be three separate GitHub issues but wanted to discuss first to see if they were all worth making):

1. Why two (pretty similar) addresses that won't plot on Google Maps have one geocoding in the OAR and not the other?
2. Why we're not able to delete a particular facility on Staging
3. If there are any enhancements that could be made to our algorithm, when looking at two facilities that were automatically turned into separate facilities and not fed to Confirm/Reject (and is a pretty common use case for us in terms of address types)?

4. Steps to Reproduce

See doc

Demo

See doc.

Additional context

As it's China data, wondering if any of this is related to: https://github.com/open-apparel-registry/open-apparel-registry-clients/issues/43.

[hlennett]

I realized I should have put this on clients repo - is there a way to easily move it there?

A follow up/development here: The user tried uploading this address on prod: XIAOHANJIABAO VILLAGE, TANGERLI TOWN , BAZHOU CITY , HEBEI PROVINCE,CHINA And they are receiving an error:

This same address was able to plot on Staging:

[hlennett]

cc @katieashaw and @isaacokunato so you can see the update above. I am flummoxed!

[katieashaw]

This is baffling to me, too! @jwalgran Any quick thoughts on why we're seeing such different behaviour between Production and Staging?