Anything gets rejected

Like others, I put a lot of effort into my last seven nomination (which also clearly meet the criteria). Still, every single nomination gets rejected... sometimes this happens apparently on purpose or for obviously false reasons ("private property" when a quick check on google maps, street view or even the pictures of the surroundings clearly indicate, that the waypoint is in a public park even with no other waypoints around). I suspect that one of the reasons may be, that I live in a big city which generally has a big number of pokestops/ portals already. I have seen suggestions go through that are a hundred times less significant and of much lower quality.

This is effing annyoing! This needs to change.

Comments

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Do you have photos for any of the nominations? Maybe the community can help with some ideas :)

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭
    edited December 2020

    Sorry, I tried, but it seems that it's not possible to post the pictures here... may be too big. I still believe, these were not one star nominations (even if they were not five stars, I get that).


    Anyways, thanks for trying to help.

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    F.e. I had also put a link to openstreetmaps.org, where you can better see that this is in a public park. No-one seems to have read the description. The point is, I see so much worse stuff everywhere picturewise or else...


    thanks for trying to help

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    Also, is there a rule as to how many wayfarers have to vote one star for a nomination to be rejected?

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    To be honest that building looks like someones cottage property. I’m not sure how that would fit any of the criteria

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    I am not sure what it is actually. It's know as the "witch's cottage". While I don't really care, that this particular one got rejected, I put it here for illustration purposes because it is symptomatic. The reason given for rejection was "on private property, not publicly accessible" which it is not... and one can find that out if one does his or her job. I see so many suggestions that are outright rubbish (loads of random and really boring signposts which you have basically on every corner), so I don't understand why things like this get rejected while everybody passing it wonders what this might be (I believe it belongs to the local fishing club)... moreover, I a have seen private houses, huts and cottages ingame, if they are particular.

    Yes. we can discuss the quality of the picture, but I have again seen much much worse in live pokestops. Also, I almost fell into the lake while trying to take the picture... I am not gonna make that effort again.

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 4,030 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If it is not clear that a nominaiton is on private residential property, reviewers are suppose to reject it. You submitted a cottage in the woods, which reivewers are going to presume is private residential property.

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭
    edited December 2020

    Yes, I know it is hard to determine. That is why I gave a lengthy description and a link to a better map so people don't have to presume. I usually put a lot of effort in determining the position and accessibility of other nominations - so you may see how this is disappointing.

    This is also just one example.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Either way. If this was in a Park why not submit the park sign? I cant see how this cottage would be eligible off of the information you gave. How do you think it meets criteria?

    also a side note sometimes the rejection reasons can vary and may not be accurate but if you get a handful of reasons it may come down to the object just isnt eligible

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    Well, I mean, what's the whole point of the game - to discover, is it not? This is something to discover I think. Also again, there is no fence around it and nothing else indicating that this is private. It is virtually 5 centimeters away from the public path around the lake... if anything, it seems to be deserted. I see so much private stuff ending up as waypoints which doesn't bother anybody. Also, the problem here seemed to be, that it looked like it be on private property which it is evidently not and for which I had put the link to openstreetmaps. Initially, nobody complained that the cottage is private.

    If you go by the letter, then it may be ineligible. Then we'll have a bunch of signposts and playgrounds and nothing else in the game.... how boring. I clicked through at least 40-50 signs today. I can't even reject them because sign posts fit the rules...

    The Park sign is a good idea though. thanks.

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    By submitting things that you know are eligible to hope they get by the reviewing process you are going to run into a lot of rejections. If you think something is eligible with the criteria go ahead and submit.

    also using previous poi’s as an idea to submit yours is never a good idea. As criteria changes over time. Have fun submitting :)

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭
    edited December 2020

    Thanks, dude. although I think I sense a certain degree of sarcasm in your answer... with this it's not fun.

  • CopperChick-PGOCopperChick-PGO Posts: 93 ✭✭

    I would have rejected it too.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 694 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    "if anything, it seems to be deserted."

    A deserted building that one can't know what it is?

    (1* doesn't meet criteria)

    Edit, nowadays "Other rejection criteria"?

  • CopperChick-PGOCopperChick-PGO Posts: 93 ✭✭

    I have only been reviewing since December, but I have almost 3500 reviews in wayfarer. I look at things like, would it be a place where a pokemon player may hang out for a while, like at a playground with their kids, in a museum, in a restaurant, on a hiking trail. I also look for arts and culture. I have approved buildings, but they are clearly historical buildings with signs. For example, just outside of Phoenix is a place called Vulture Mine. It was a mine that was closed many years ago and people bought it and turned it into a tourist attraction. They left everything as they found it, so all the buildings have everything in them from the time period. You can tour the grounds and they give you a map with information about everything on the site. I am very familiar with it so when I got 3 submissions from there I gave them 5*.


    The cabin in the woods does not look like it has any historical, cultural, artistic, or social purpose. It is just a cabin with no apparent use. This is why I would deny it. If it really is historical where is the sign that talks about the cabin? I went to a park in Tennessee that was the same type of thing as Vulture Mine (although a historic community not a mine). The entire site was meant to be educational, with plaques that talked about what the buildings were used for when the site was in use (when not a tourist attraction). There were a few gyms there and I took one down that was 15 days old and I was kicked out half hour after we left (didn't seem fair).

  • CopperChick-PGOCopperChick-PGO Posts: 93 ✭✭

    Oh and I also get you about the stuff that makes it into the game that shouldn't. I know someone who put a piece of art from their condo outside, put it on the grounds, took a picture of it, submitted it, the submission got approved, and now the piece of art is of course no longer where the picture showed it to be. He added another stop in the cell to make his art a gym so now he has a gym reachable from home which he dominates.

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    many thanks. this is actually very helpful.

    I am still convinced that this rubbish shack is something special given the context. We're not talking some weirdo's hut somewhere in the woods in Idaho here. This is in a public park in a European capital. Civilisation, if you want to call it that, is less than thirty meters away. I took the picture as it is, because there were actually people sitting on the benches right next to the building.

    I don't care much if it is accepted or not, I don't live next to it and I don't come by too often. I simply wanted to use it to illustrate my broader point which was that wayfarers from somewhere else look at the picture and high-handedly yet falsely determine that this is a one star vote. Why do I take the precious time to give a lengthy description? And: this is not the only nomination that gets rejected for obviously shady reasons, although it was clearly eligible and something very similar actually is a poi a couple of blocks away.

    And in turn, I get a picture of random geese on a farm somewhere in France to vote on (ok, obvious case), or some information board with no information in the middle of the woods or a seven eleven in Japan which they basically have at every corner...

    I mean what the friggin heck? Seriously! What the heck...

  • Jtronmoore-PGOJtronmoore-PGO Posts: 1,581 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Well this shack in the woods is definitely not clearly eligible. The rejection reasons sometimes vary but in those cases it would mean ineligible.

    id say if you had some say “well maybe it is eligible” you may have a case depending how you describe it. But nothing you have described it as would make it eligible yet

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 354 ✭✭✭✭

    Anything that looks like a house needs a really strong title, description and supporting information to have even a chance to get accepted, usually they will be rejected multiple times for private property even if they clearly aren't.

    I don't think this will be accepted unless your nomination can really prove that it's not private property (for example if the park's website describes how it's used). Even if it's not private property, expect it to get rejected several times even with the best possible nomination (lots of reviewers see a house shaped thing and won't check further and will reject, or will just assume you're lying and will reject).

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 2,921 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If it were clearly eligible, someone should have agreed so far with you, and all that we show is some kind of old building in between some trees.

    It might be a real hidden gem, but you have to manage to send that info to the reviewers. Good photo, proper title, interesting description and a good supporting text. If you fail that and the reviewers (not one, but most of them) don't understand what's your nomination, they will reject it.

  • Pu14193-PGOPu14193-PGO Posts: 26 ✭✭

    I guess, that is the secret to success if there is one. It seems the picture or rather my picture taking skills are the issue here. It still is the only "shack in the woods" (more less ten trees surrounding it) I can think of in the whole city. We don't have park websites here as far as I know.

    I will try with the boat shed from the 1910s on the other side of the lake, which has its picture on Wikipedia and belongs to the local fishing club (seen hundreds of those nominated but this one has the optics). However, I am predicting here and now that this will be rejected for the same or similar reasons even if I put the wiki link. No one bothers to read the explaination or click an extra link. That's what I've been obsessing about here... you simply look at the picture and already determine it's not eligible.

    Also, this whole "private property" rule is vague at best. Here, a lot of old buildings have sculpture on it, yet some get rejected for "private property" reasons others make it through.... It thus depends completely on the reviewer(s) whether something becomes a POI or not. btw, it's great if they make it because it is only thanks to PoGo that I noticed most of them...


    best,

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 694 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Sorry, I'm going to be blunt now.

    Photo is not the issue!

    Problem is that you haven't provided any information that would show that the "only shack in the woods" meets eligibilty criteria.

    If you did provide such information in your actual nomination, please share the screenshots for reviewing. If not, please stop fooling yourself.

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 354 ✭✭✭✭
    edited December 2020

    Boat shed with a fishing club sounds like a pretty nice nomination that seems to fit with the aim of highlighting cool activities and being active outside. I think that is a much easier thing to nominate.

Sign In or Register to comment.