Niantic needs to have the Streetview DATE more prominent--this is a huge problem

Since submissions can get rejected if the object isn't there on Streetview, Niantic really needs to the dates to be prominent. I just had a submission where a Little Free Library wasn't there at all in Streetview, but if you looked at what was around it, the submission was obviously in a spot in that Streetview, but the Streetview is a few years old. It's really easy to overlook that. I went ahead and 5*'d it, though suspect it'll be rejected overall as "inaccurate location." If the date isn't so prominent, maybe suggest a 3* not only for "3 stars if likely to exist but is obscured," but "3 stars if likely to exist but is obscured, or not visible on a map/Streetview that is over X-length-of-time old" so that people will check the age of it and taker that into consideration instead of 1*'ing something probably valid. I know my 5* was technically the wrong rating to give it since it wasn't in the Streetview, but rejecting a submission because of an old Streetview that the submitter can't control is wrong to me. The oldest Streetview I've come by so far is almost 10 years old.

Comments

  • Kroutpiick-PGOKroutpiick-PGO Posts: 370 ✭✭✭✭

    Streetview is provided by third party (Google), not Niantic.

    You are right about how we should use stars rating. 3* if not visible in street view/satellite but it likely to exist because you can match submission pictures with street view. 1* if it's not there/can't be there, not visible and no photo match.

    In that case, it could also be a higher rating 4* ou 5* if you can match view with provided pictures, and any other proof such as press/media/URL to confirm its existence.

    Submitter also has the responsibility to help reviewers : take a good surroundings picture so that the submission is visible with any other permanent and older things so that we can match the view with satellite or street view. If inside a park or any area without street view, it only takes a few minutes to create and upload a photosphere to Street view.

  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 1,606 Ambassador

    You can 1) comment that it might not show up on satellite or streetview due to age of the map to try to combat that or 2) add a 360 photosphere to Google so that loads when people are reviewing.

  • NoelleXandria-PGONoelleXandria-PGO Posts: 50 ✭✭

    Literally no one reads the reviews. Some posters in these forums have mentioned being snarky in the comments because no one ever reads them anyway.

  • NoelleXandria-PGONoelleXandria-PGO Posts: 50 ✭✭

    Here's an example of one where there isn't enough of anything to compare any photos someone could submit. Sidewalks aren't even laid yet, yet it's clear there's development going on. It could be a car lot, it could be the submitted pet supply store, it could be an adult video store, who knows. It's very plausible that the store exists right there now, but there's no way to confirm that since the view is over 2.5 years old. There's nothing to match it to, yet it seems wrong to decide that the place doesn't exist when it's obvious that there is building happening. The submitter can't control this, and I don't see any reasonable way someone could prove it either way without physically going there.


  • NoelleXandria-PGONoelleXandria-PGO Posts: 50 ✭✭

    I don't know where my comment on this went, but this is an example of one I just now got. The view is over 2.5 years old and there's clear building going on, but not even the sidewalks are laid. There isn't anything that the photos submitted could be matched to since nothing here is permanent yet. It doesn't seem right to rate it 1* when there's nothing a submitter could do to match the submitter pet supply shop to this area given the lack of anything permanent, but yet it's plausible that the shop could be there.


  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭✭✭

    And satellite view is usually more recent, so at least you can try to verify that there's a building.

  • NoelleXandria-PGONoelleXandria-PGO Posts: 50 ✭✭

    I think people in this forum need to stop expecting casual submitters to go above and beyond what Niantic expects. As was pointed out by someone else in another post, the people here in the forums have created a much more stringent set of rules that aren't endorsed by Niantic. Chances are good that most of those submitters don't know that whoever reviews sees anything more than what they submit. It's absurd to expect casual reviewers to act like submissions are their job and to do free work for Google by doing these stupid photospheres. I really think that expecting that is evidence of people here having power trips. Stop expecting so much more than even Niantic does.

  • Pwnrrrr-PGOPwnrrrr-PGO Posts: 13 ✭✭

    I simply do not understand how the scanning feature is not incorporated into the submission process. You could literally make a photosphere with it. Add the geo tag and there would be less fake photospheres.

  • Damastaglen-PGODamastaglen-PGO Posts: 124 ✭✭✭

    It is not asking submitters to do free work for Google. What doing a photosphere does is gives extra evidence on why your nomination is a good one and giving your nomination every chance to get accepted.

    If all I see is a building site on Google street view 2 months old and satellite view yet you submit an object or building with no visual clues or evidence to the contrary such as the 2 buildings either side being there, how can I possibly approve that? It may well be that it was built quickly but how do I know unless I have local knowledge?

    The photosphere is a suggestion but not a requirement. If you give me a URL to maybe a news article saying the thing was recently built at the address you dropped the pin then I’d accept that too as evidence

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 3,388 ✭✭✭✭✭

    You're overstating the "power" of these forums.

    People have been doing photospheres since long before these forums existed. Shortly after Wayfarer was launched as OPR, people learned that the photospheres were displayed while reviewing and that they were very useful in order to show updated images, or places where Google didn't have any info.

    So anyone with a minimum interest about why their nominations weren't approved (you lucky English speakers with your rejection reasons in your emails) asked in their local forums, they were told by other people how to create a photospheres and so when these forums launched and people asked for advice they got the suggestions about photospheres.

Sign In or Register to comment.