Incorrectly rejected
Vectaire9-PGO
Posts: 47 ✭✭
Sir,
My nomination for a new stop was rejected incorrectly. The proposal is on a public footpath, not a private area as stated in the rejection. Please can you review and approve?
L1e8Vjf6+ZFJUeDd7nNe6siZv+G/y1dcSF+0gySGTo8=
Comments
Can you also share the rest of the nomination? That photo looks like just a street and does not appear to have anything eligible.
Niantic won't approve any nomination, you must send it again.
If you show us your full nomination we might be able to suggest how to improve it.
Show us both photos and your text. I can't see anything obvious in your photo that would make me thing "Waypoint".
Here are similar photos.
The wording said that the publicly accessible feature was built around 1900 and is grade II listed. It's on a public footpath at the side of a public road.
Whomever rejected it, twice, keeps saying it's on private land
The rejection reasons may not always be accurate.
but in this case you can’t just submit a picture of a sidewalk. You need something tangible (like a sign) to attach the poi to. This is essentially to prevent people from submitting every 20m of a sidewalk. So with those photo’s you would generally get rejected for “other rejection criteria”. As there is nothing to anchor the poi to and is just a picture of a sidewalk
I don't see anything in those photos that would be suitable to become a POI. Being "old" or "listed" is not an automatic reason for accepting a nomination. From the Rejection criteria - " The object is.......not visually ...interesting."
The reason being given is that the 15m long covered walkway is not publically accessible... crazy.
What can I do to make the rejecting person accept it ?
It is not one person making a decision on a Waypoint submission. Your review was looked at by a number of people. Niantic won't say how many reviewers need to check a submission, but I suspect you would need at least 5-10 people to review a spot at the minimum. All of their scores are tallied together to get a final score. In this instance, the majority of people who reviewed your submission did not think it met the criteria to be a Waypoint.
So what can I do ? It seems odd that they pick such an inaccurate excuse to reject a good nomination... twice...
Not much point having a system that the admins abuse
There are no admins, only fellow users that spend their time reviewing nominations.
They get bored of people sending anything in order to get a Pokestop. I would suggest that you review a few hundred nominations in order to understand better all the things that are nominated and how you can improve your nominations.
Please give me a clue.
One person on here says it meets the criteria, so I'm stuck
In this thread there hasnt been a person that has said this is eligible.
like i said if there is a sign stating a trail or such historical information submit that. If not you have nothing thats really eligible in those pictures.
playgrounds, exercise equipment, park signs, churches, sports fields, sports clubs and community centres are generally easily accepted spots
some other stops that are a toss up are generally trail signs, unique and local small business, cafes and restaurants that are unique and local. Benches if they are either visually unique or have someone on them that was an important figure or a historical piece of time,
if you read the criteria it will give examples. Theres also a tab for rejection criteria. Definitely worth a read that way you know where and what can be submitted. anythhing single private property or school grounds is ineligible as well as if it doesnt have a tangible point or pedestrian access
take a read and go searching in your community
There are many many buildings that are just the same idea as I've proposed, but as I've said, the reason for rejection is wrong. It meets all the criteria that I've read so am stuck...
It meets all the criteria that I've read
It's clear that the majority of reviewers who assessed your nominations disagree, and those who have responded to this topic disagree with your opinion as well. But if you still think the building is eligible, then you are going to have to make the case and present evidence in the description and supporting statement—such as an overview of the building's history, a link to any listing on a historic registry, etc.
Thank you. I'll give it another go
Really, but I have just had the equestrian centre that my son attends, which is a sport, turned down due to “appearing to be on private property or farm”? Any business, when closed, especially with livestock, would be private property. I had another stone business turned down for the same reason that and the fact it was supposedly a restaurant 🙄, and I review hundreds, I see the the one that are indeed private homes....
Oh i know how frustrating that is! Sometimes takes a few tries to get things through unfortunately. I find not upgrading sometimes helps although takes longer
It doesnt meet the criteria of a tangible spot. A sign which is in one location is tangible. A sidewalk that looks the same as every other side walk is not tangible in the sense that if someone was to not know the area would they be able to find it in a glimps
. Thats why this pictured nomination would never pass reviewing.
there is eligibility criteria as well as acceptance criteria. It has to meet those listed in acceptance and not meet rejection criteria to pass
That's not true. It is a physical structure that's very interesting and worth exploring... it's grade II listed and covers part of a public footpath. Name another such structure...
It is permanent. It's been there for over 100 years...
Whoever rejected it got it wrong. Not much point in trying to add interesting places to the game if they behave like this.
I'm sorry but I still can't tell what your nomination is. Is it the pergola? I find it hard to believe that the structure on the pictures is listed in and of itself. However, if it is, you have to provide at least some evidence that it is. Like an article, a registry entry or something that might convince people that this is eligible.
It's historically interesting, on public land and is a permanent structure... that meats the criteria alone without everyone rushing to reference grade II websites.
More photos attached.
Historic England monument number 1098523. Search for "covered walkway"
1098523 is a thatched cottage in Devon. There are various covered walkways on the site. You're not making this easy for the folk that genuinely want to help. At least we now know you're seeking to nominate the walkway. It really wasn't obvious from the photos, especially since it is currently fenced off.
It looks like the roof has been taken off the walkway because it is currently under repair, just leaving the frame, so it's not looking it's best is it?. You might have a bit more luck once it's finished.
What is the building it is attached to?
I've no idea what the building is or where it is. With a bit of luck the OP will reveal all at some point.
The walkway covers part of a public footpath. It's not connected to anything.
Are you nominating the structure overhead of the path or the actual path? The actual path will need a sign for a trail or else its not eligible. If its the overhead structure the building itself can not be a single family residence otherwise it may pass depending on what supporting info you put in
I keep putting "covered walkway" in the description...
We still don't know where this is or what the other buildings around it are! If that's a school on the other side of the wall, for example, it doesn't matter that you are only nominating the walkway/pergola, or that it's on a public footpath, or that it's Grade II. Most Nomination Improvement threads are a lot less coy and enigmatic than this. People are going to suspect that there's something to hide.
Nothing to hide.
It's part of the Pavillion Way redevelopment of the old Asylum