This bridge is only for cars and doesnt have a pedestrian access, the hiking path beneath it doesnt count. Bridges for cars only are normally ineligeble. And thats the main rejection reason. The location is wrong one is trash, thats right.
For me, the reason to reject the bridge is not pedestrian access: it's possible to touch the bridge without being in the road; there's a raised pavement which is clearly for pedestrians and a path beside the bridge too it looks like. I would reject the bridge because you have not demonstrated why the bridge architecturally or historically interesting. Also, I don't think it's a good idea to mention that people jump off the bridge (it sounds dangerous).
unfortunately the requests I sent yesterday on the celletta /little church / votive shrine are not yet visible on our Wayfarer account. Today they rejected again the sign indicating the “Petalo delle Torri” stage of the “Corolla delle Ginestre” hiking trail.
An everyday "generic" bridge thats no different from a lot of others. If there were some sort of signage or plaque that describing why the bridge has some interest that might help, but as it is - 1* The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting
I’m trying to create a pokestop but for the third time is not accepted. It’s a sign showing the start of a trekking path called Corolla delle Ginestre. Why is not accepted?
Can someone explain me how this POI is not accept? Clearly a park, meets all criterya of niantic. Is it because Its in a vilage so people dont actually care? Or is it beause it has foliage in the ground? Actually perplexe by the judgement of people.
Footbridges on trails are still eligible. No AMA is needed for that. Let me try to explain why:
First, we must understand why they were eligible under the old criteria. This is what the AMA said:
What about wooden walking trail bridges throughout a park or nature preserve on the trail/path?
If they are accessible by foot and expected to be used as part of the trail, they would meet the criteria.
This means that footbridges in themselves where not eligible, they were only eligible if they were part of a trail. In other words, they served as an "object that placemarks an area".
The new eligibility criteria still mention walking trails, and the acceptance criteria still mention object that placemarks an area. So footbridges on walking trails are still eligible because they are objects that placemark a walking trail.
Same logic applies to bike bridges on bike trails.
@NianticCasey-ING either there's a database corruption or someone has messed up thing mixing totally different threads into one they didn't make any sense, and I don't think that this is the first time that they merge post into existing threads leading to non sense comments.
It is one thing when the discussions are about the exact same topic. But these are multiple different topics squished together into one thead and makes following a specific discussion extremely difficult. The only thing they have in common is the general question of "Why was this rejected?" If anything, these discussions should be moved to Nomination Improvement instead of merged into a mega thread.
There's another thing in common: Niantic doesn't step in and provide any insights about the questions and doubts that the persons that sent the nomination have about their rejection, and by lumping all of them together the message that Niantic sends is "we don't care about your issues, you're always asking the same questions and we don't want to waste our time"
Based on what was submitted, I'd probably not approve it because it looks very much like it's not a legal hiking trail. I see things like that a lot that are actually where people like to walk to get to places where they shouldn't be. Around here, there are spots where that's outright dangerous. I could take pictures that hide the danger, but would that be a good idea? Nope.
Comments
@WolfyPax-PGO sent you a friend request.
And yes, I'm interested to know if your nomination is eventually accepted.
pretty simple:
This bridge is only for cars and doesnt have a pedestrian access, the hiking path beneath it doesnt count. Bridges for cars only are normally ineligeble. And thats the main rejection reason. The location is wrong one is trash, thats right.
For me, the reason to reject the bridge is not pedestrian access: it's possible to touch the bridge without being in the road; there's a raised pavement which is clearly for pedestrians and a path beside the bridge too it looks like. I would reject the bridge because you have not demonstrated why the bridge architecturally or historically interesting. Also, I don't think it's a good idea to mention that people jump off the bridge (it sounds dangerous).
There is nothing about that bridge that meets the eligibility criteria.
I agree with the last part. I got to that and was frankly very surprised that it was there.
Thanks!!! Friendship accepted.
unfortunately the requests I sent yesterday on the celletta /little church / votive shrine are not yet visible on our Wayfarer account. Today they rejected again the sign indicating the “Petalo delle Torri” stage of the “Corolla delle Ginestre” hiking trail.
It’s frustrating.
should I write requests in English???
An everyday "generic" bridge thats no different from a lot of others. If there were some sort of signage or plaque that describing why the bridge has some interest that might help, but as it is - 1* The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting
The second photo is the photo of the surrounding area and with the project board saying in portuguese:
"Creation of a Leisure Zone in Vila da Rua" with all the investment values for the project and the investors.
How this POI doesn't meat the criteria?
Thanks for the clarifications.
hi!!!
I’m trying to create a pokestop but for the third time is not accepted. It’s a sign showing the start of a trekking path called Corolla delle Ginestre. Why is not accepted?
(I’ve tried also with other photos)
Can someone explain me how this POI is not accept? Clearly a park, meets all criterya of niantic. Is it because Its in a vilage so people dont actually care? Or is it beause it has foliage in the ground? Actually perplexe by the judgement of people.
Hi, Merry Christmas.
I’m really sad because of my pokestop often are not accepted but I don’t know why.
why this is not accepted?
It’s a little church, open for public, in a space in common with more than one family.
I did also the Photosphere...
Footbridges on trails are still eligible. No AMA is needed for that. Let me try to explain why:
First, we must understand why they were eligible under the old criteria. This is what the AMA said:
What about wooden walking trail bridges throughout a park or nature preserve on the trail/path?
If they are accessible by foot and expected to be used as part of the trail, they would meet the criteria.
This means that footbridges in themselves where not eligible, they were only eligible if they were part of a trail. In other words, they served as an "object that placemarks an area".
The new eligibility criteria still mention walking trails, and the acceptance criteria still mention object that placemarks an area. So footbridges on walking trails are still eligible because they are objects that placemark a walking trail.
Same logic applies to bike bridges on bike trails.
@NianticCasey-ING either there's a database corruption or someone has messed up thing mixing totally different threads into one they didn't make any sense, and I don't think that this is the first time that they merge post into existing threads leading to non sense comments.
You are right. Today two of my post has been merged into others 🤦🏻♂️
It is one thing when the discussions are about the exact same topic. But these are multiple different topics squished together into one thead and makes following a specific discussion extremely difficult. The only thing they have in common is the general question of "Why was this rejected?" If anything, these discussions should be moved to Nomination Improvement instead of merged into a mega thread.
There's another thing in common: Niantic doesn't step in and provide any insights about the questions and doubts that the persons that sent the nomination have about their rejection, and by lumping all of them together the message that Niantic sends is "we don't care about your issues, you're always asking the same questions and we don't want to waste our time"
Based on what was submitted, I'd probably not approve it because it looks very much like it's not a legal hiking trail. I see things like that a lot that are actually where people like to walk to get to places where they shouldn't be. Around here, there are spots where that's outright dangerous. I could take pictures that hide the danger, but would that be a good idea? Nope.