How far apart do park signs need to be to not be duplicated?

HaramDingo-ING

As question from above. Below is a large bushland reserve with various walking paths. There's three prominent entrances, and two hidden entrances with less walked paths not routed on the map.

I had no issues getting the three signs in (marked in orange). However, nowadays its essentially impossible to get the last two signs (circled in yellow) in without being duplicated. I have included keywords such as "Northeast" and "Southeast" entrances, whereas the others don't really have directional indicators., etc, but no ball.

Apart from the Southeast one (which is pretty close to the existing east one), I think the one on the top-right would be the only option, but I've had no luck with it either. But as you can see from Street View, even though the signs are virtually the same, they all have different foregrounds, backgrounds, things associated to them, and things stuck on them.

Is this worth trying?

sogNinjaman-ING

If I can see an identical sign on the "nearby" list, for me that counts as "duplicate / not visually unique." If you are submitting the sign, the background is irrelevant - I see too many posts saying "it can't be a duplicate because the **** behind the sign is different". The sign or identifier or whate is the focus of the submission is what is being voted on. It might be for a trail or other similar potential POI, but again I don't hold with the argument advanced by some that "its the trail that's being submitted, the trail marker is just a placeholder". If it looks identical to any other placeholders I can see on the "nearby", then I would not consider it "visually unique".

See these comments from NianticCasey.

There are a couple of considerations to make here, but in general I stand by my previous guidance: Wayspots should not be "as many locations as possible but rather unique, interesting, artistic or notable local hotspots where people could gather or learn or discover something about their community.

In order for multiple entrances to the same park to be considered eligible, they would need to be either unique and differentiate-able from one another or far enough from one another to truly be independent from one another. The same sign at two different sides of a small park would not be far or unique enough to be considered separate Wayspots.

https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/3276

SeaprincessHNB-PGO

So, here's the thing. That's Casey's opinion. It's not fact. It is up to the local community. I would argue that ESPECIALLY in small parks, you should add two entrances because those may be the only things you can nominate. POI help spawn points. Parks are (or should be) nests. Adding spawn points to a nest is a good thing. Also, if people actually USE those different entrances, I think they are perfectly valid POI. In the above example, OP says that 2 of the signs mark trails or entryways that are not well known. Putting a POI there makes them better known and more likely to be used. If the point is to go out and explore, give people a reason to go that direction TO explore. We shouldn't be limiting things that people can find just because signs are similar to each other. If signs mark the boundaries of the park, that helps push people to wander those boundaries.

sogNinjaman-ING

https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/59847#Comment_59847

It may just be NianticCasey's "opinion", but as he has the "Niantic" tag appended to his name and tends to be the person who posts about Wayfarer Criteria and the like, most of the community here tend to treat his comments like the word of God give some weight to any comments he makes about eligability criteria. Niantic have Eligability, Acceptance and Rejection criteria so the whole community know the rules, it does not depend just the "local community".

Hosette-ING

@SeaprincessHNB-PGO What should qualify is not, in fact, up to the local community. The community deciding that things are perfectly valid wayspots does not make them so. I'm not arguing either way for the signs in question, just pointing out that the criteria and guidance come from Niantic rather than the local community. Many of the reviewers for a submission won't even be part of the local community. (I live in California, and I have reviewed things from southern Florida, northern Maine, and everywhere in between... plus Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Mexico, Canada... and my bonus location is on another continent.)