It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
other reason is "do not fit criteria".
The sign is annoyingly high and the picture was hard to take. I was worried about the quality, but signs for rivers are legitimate right?
No, they are not eligible candidates. Given that it is a sign for a natural features, I can understand why reviewers chose that reason. But the correct rejection reason is "doesn't mean criteria".
An information sign about the river would be a good candidate. A sign with the name meets no criteria.
I mean when I read the old guide, it seemed like a sign for a river was acceptable, but not the river itself. Does anyway have a link to an old guide?
That is providing that the sign was an educational signboard or noted an "adventurous location" or historic feature. But this is a common mass-produced street sign.
I believe the old guideline was that a natural feature with a sign could be accepted, not that it should be accepted. I'm going to paste what I said in another recent thread about the same situation:
"This is the kind of thing that doesn't really meet a particular rejection criteria, but doesn't really seem notable enough to be accepted. The sign doesn't provide any useful information about the [river] beyond its name, and this particular spot on the [river] is just where the road crosses it and doesn't have any real significance beyond that. So I don't think it's a particularly strong candidate."