What is the reason?

Hello, I will be using a translator so I apologize if there is a mistake in my writing.

I have the email in Spanish, the reason information is not sent in the message informing the rejection and I would like to know what possible reason for rejection has been given in this request that I have made. If it is due to a possible rule that I might not be aware of, perhaps due to the negligence of the reviewers of the proposal or it has been an automatic rejection of the system due to some failure.

This is the request: cyXpzrtr8Gu2pAJOC+OVxRl4hQOeG7UxJEl9FUr7tV4=

Name: Plaza de la Virgen

Description: Square where events are held.

Complementary information: Large square where children can play and events are held at Easter week and Christmas.

I know the rule that the stop will not go out if it is less than 20m from another stop in pokemon go, but as I had understood it can appear in ingress as long as the cell s2 where the request is made is free.

I attach a complementary photo to clarify if it could be a failure of proximity with other stops. There are two other portals (they are not duplicates, one is an altar and the other a playground) close to the requested point, which are 20m from this request, but both in different cells. Could it be an automatic rejection due to proximity?


  • LukeAllStars-PGOLukeAllStars-PGO Posts: 1,899 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Is there a sign existing? If yes, I would submit that. The plaza without a sign is most likely an instant-reject. Also, maybe find some infotmation like historical events what happened there. We all know what a plaza is for.

  • Ar3oN-PGOAr3oN-PGO Posts: 6 ✭✭

    It is true that I should have written more information regarding the cultural meaning of the possible events in the point, but I do not consider that this should be a reason for rejection in this case.

    Why do you consider that a park without signal should be instant-reject? In this case, the name of the place appears in google maps. Are there any additional criteria regarding this issue or is it a personal decision? According to the eligibility criteria, the parks are good meeting places and suitable in themselves as points of interest.

  • LukeAllStars-PGOLukeAllStars-PGO Posts: 1,899 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Because you can actually take every empty space and submit it as a plaza. Also, a Maps marker is easily fakeable. A sign is a good proove for all of this. Also, the phenomenon plaza is a quite complicated, luck based submission.

  • cyndiepooh-INGcyndiepooh-ING Posts: 179 ✭✭✭

    When I get a rejection, it is never due to proximity. In fact, I got an acceptance with a message that since it is too close to another, it will never go live in any game.

    As Luke said, there is nothing in your submission that shows me that this is more than empty space. A sign would do it. Or a link to an article showing the importance of the space in your supporting information. As he said, anyone can submit a Google Maps label, so that is not enough on its own.

  • Ar3oN-PGOAr3oN-PGO Posts: 6 ✭✭

    This is my first rejection of a proposal and I did not know that it warned you of the proximity. So we can assume that the rejection was up to the reviewers' vote.

    What do you really consider an empty place? Does a square have to be totally full of cultural objects? In this place there is specifically a children's playground and a place of worship of a religious association where they keep a sculpture of a virgin that they take out during festive periods such as Easter. Should I take a photo at the time of the activity as a test?

    Regarding the name, it is true that someone could put it directly on Google, but if it was false, someone would open it and remove it. On the other hand, I would like to read an official message where the name of the plaque of a park is absolutely necessary to be approved, because with the photos and especially with the photos that Google has taken around it, it is clearly seen that it is a double square height.

    For me it is very frustrating that a proposal like this that I consider legitimate is unfairly rejected.

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 187 ✭✭✭

    You can individually submit both the virgin sculpture and the children's playground. Both should be very easy to get accepted, because they have high cultural value and reviewers are very used to that sort of submission. The plaza as a whole is much harder because there isn't an easy focus for the picture (that's why people suggested a sign).

  • Ar3oN-PGOAr3oN-PGO Posts: 6 ✭✭

    The virgin sculpture and the children's playground, were portals that I requested and are accepted. I will ask for the square again and I hope that it may also appear in the future, although I am concerned about using another improvement so that it will be unfairly rejected again because in this area the voting portal do not appear unless they are improved, being in a town near a city.

    I will try to add more text to the description and take a photo of the park plaque for the complementary image next time. Thank you all for the suggestions.

  • FrealafGB-PGOFrealafGB-PGO Posts: 187 ✭✭✭

    Probably just submit the park plaque instead?

    If you have to use an upgrade every time, it's definitely frustrating, so I tend to only upgrade things that I'm pretty sure should be approved first time.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 291 ✭✭✭✭

    About the question if there needs to a sign.

    No, but from the acceptance criteria

    "Must be a permanent physical, tangible, and identifiable place or object, or object that placemarks an area"

    In this case the object that placemarks the area would logically be a sign or the altar. Entrance might work as well, but it's not as certain.

    Common problem when trying to nominate small parks.

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 89 ✭✭✭

    Desafortunadamente Ar3oN la aprobación de una propuesta no depende de las reglas publicadas por Niantic sino de la interpretación que la comunidad local de revisores hace de dichas reglas. Concuerdo contigo que una plaza debería ser una aprobación inmediata y así califico en mi comunidad local, mas como habrás visto esa posición no es uniforme. Si tu comunidad local de revisores entiende que una plaza no es nominable, o que la foto debe ser de una placa, o lo que sea, pues eso tendrás que hacer.

  • Ar3oN-PGOAr3oN-PGO Posts: 6 ✭✭
    edited January 16

    Entiendo lo que dices y creo que sería conveniente una clarificación más exhaustiva por parte de niantic sobre los criterios de aceptabilidad de las localizaciones como plazas, parques y de mas zonas parecidas ya que así podrían ser peticiones menos ambiguas y que no ocurran situaciones como este rechazo.

    I understand what you are saying and I think it would be advisable to have a more exhaustive clarification by niantic on the criteria of acceptability of locations such as squares, parks and other similar areas since this could be less ambiguous requests and that situations like this rejection do not occur .

    En mi opinión pasa algo parecido con los negocios locales. Ahora pueden ser elegidos cuando antes no era así, esto ha dejado a los revisores la responsabilidad sobre aceptación o no de peticiones que no pueden ser comprobadas fácilmente a menos que vivas en esa zona.

    In my opinion something similar happens with local businesses. Now they can be chosen when it was not before, this has left the responsibility of the reviewers to accept or not requests that cannot be easily verified unless you live in that area.

    Dejar términos ambiguos genera confusión y en ciertos casos como el mío frustración al ver cierto malgasto de esfuerzo en conseguir y aplicar la mejora para luego no tener una valoración justa.

    Leaving ambiguous terms generates confusion and in certain cases like mine, frustration when seeing a certain waste of effort in obtaining and applying the improvement and then not having a fair assessment.

Sign In or Register to comment.