Explanations please

Cryosphynx-PGOCryosphynx-PGO Posts: 7 ✭✭
edited January 2021 in Nomination Improvement

I've submitted this nomination twice now and it got rejected for ineligibility both times. The first time I COULD potentially understand that it wasn't visible enough on maps (even though nearby street view did still show it) so I created photospheres literally on top of it and now it's rejected for some reasons. I'd like some concrete explanations as to why this is the case.

1st nomination

"Atomac" bunker

Description

Air shaft of the post-war atomic bomb shelter, built in the 1970s.

Supplemental Information

This is an important historic location in between a building complex, that local children also use as a makeshift playground or a street workout.

Google street view

This nomination has been rejected due to the following reason(s):

Insufficient evidence that the nomination accurately reflects the submitted real-world location based on a comparison of the submitted photo and map views, The real-world location of the nomination could not be confirmed to have an acceptable pedestrian pathway leading up to it, Nomination does not appear to be permanent or appears to be a seasonal display that is only put up during certain times of the year.

2nd nomination

"Atomac" War Bunker

Description

Air shaft of the Liman-Grbavica bomb shelter, built post-war in 1970s and used during NATO bombings of Novi Sad in 1999. Visible part of the underground shelter connecting the surrounding building complex, open area above it is used by local kids to play.

Supplemental Information

As an important historic location, it has widely open space around it and is always easily accessible from the street by stairs or any passage through buildings around. Nearby photosphere and street view can confirm the existence and safe access. It's been there for many years so not a seasonal display.

Photosphere on top of it

This nomination has been rejected due to the following reason(s):

Photo is low quality (e.g., pitch black/blurry photos or photos taken from a car), Nomination does not meet acceptance criteria, Nomination title or description is not relevant.

...So, what is happening here? It's historically important, it's a place of local gathering, it's SOMEWHAT visually unique in comparison to the surroundings, it's publicly accessible...what exactly is the issue? I brought this up with my raid group as well and they would consider this easily eligible, why are my reviewers being idiotic about it?

Comments

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    It's an unusual nomination, which makes it harder to pass because reviewers don't know what to make of it.

    That being said, if i were to evaluate the nomination, you aren't nominating the bunker as a PoI but rather an air shaft. That doesn't seem notable to me. It's like nominating the air shaft of a subway station rather than the station itself.

    So if you want to nominate the bunker, I'd expect a picture of the entrance, ideally with some sort of sign indicating what it is, unless there's a plaque or something in the air shaft that allows you to use it as an anchor for the bunker.

    Also, reviewers unfamiliar with the history of the bunker might need some convincing about it, so a link to so information online would be helpful.

    Best luck!

  • sogNinjaman-INGsogNinjaman-ING Posts: 3,313 ✭✭✭✭✭

    I don't see this meeting any criteria, it just looks like an average bit of concrete. You need more information to support your nominationation, and even then something that looks an underground carpark air vent is going to be difficult to get through.

  • Cryosphynx-PGOCryosphynx-PGO Posts: 7 ✭✭

    ...Alright so here's my problem with this.

    1) As far as the description and information goes, I literally maxed out the characters for both of them so nothing else can be added apart from what I already have. I crammed everything that's deemed important info into that tiny character box. There's no online sources that would explain it because it's in a godforsaken country no one really cares about (and not like anyone would want to advertise to the world where a foreign city's bomb shelter would be located).

    2) As far as the "bunker vs. air shaft" thing goes, I honestly don't see why semantics would matter in this case. The air shaft is the VISIBLE part of the UNDERGROUND bomb shelter. No one in their right mind would put a sign anywhere saying "hey this is a bomb shelter, please drop your bombs here if you invade", but everyone who lives here knows of it and it was used once in the city's history as I specified. That event CAN be looked up. I seriously don't see why it matters what I call it. Don't you people want better-sounding names for uniqueness? 🤔Air shaft definitely sounds worse than bunker.

    3) The entrance to the "bunker" is an underground garage gate so clearly that would be even worse. The only way I can connect the 2 is to use the description that's like a 3rd of a Tweet's length and use the only visible part above ground in the image to explain the area itself, which is the "air shaft". So there's the most unique visible part of the shelter that's the air shaft, the large open area above ground that's used as a children's area for running and playing stuff like football or hide and seek, and the underground that is the actual shelter but obviously can't be accessed as easily. How else do I connect the 3 into 1, which is what "Atomac" is? I'd love to know what kind of novel I'm supposed to write if this isn't enough. 🙄

    4) The "average concrete" comment is pretty thick. It's blatantly obvious that there's more to this boxed object than "just concrete". Would be nice if I could just cover it in rainbow colors so it can be seen from space, but alas. It couldn't be more clear that it's a historical object, which is one of the criteria required in reviewing. Does that matter nothing anymore? I wonder what's historically significant about a playground. Guess we'll never know~ 🤷

    In conclusion, I feel like at this point the criteria should just be changed to "we only accept playgrounds, submit nothing else" since that's obviously what Niantic wants in this game. A flood of playgrounds and playground elements at every corner of the globe since nothing else matters, amirite? I'm seeing new spots emerging in my area and 95% of them are playgrounds or playground-related. Why is there even Wayfarer to begin with...? Thanks for the feedback (mainly Lechu) but I'd need some more concrete reasons as to why this is 100% ineligible. If anything I'd personally give something like this a 3-star pass, so I'm not accepting a 1-star verdict on it.

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

    1) and 3) Maybe you maxed the authorized characters while submitting in-app but you can edit it in Wayfarer and add a lot more.

    This is an example I saw yesterday of a very very very long supporting text : https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/734896452085481512/804026814116790332/unknown.png


    2) and 4) : that's not a question of "semantic", that's more a question about what you are showing/telling us. You are the only one who knows what you are submitting. You need to help reviewers to understand what you are submitting and why you are submitting it. Is it a nice place to explore? Is it a nice place for exercice? Is is a nice place to be social with others? Therefore, you must use the supplemental information field to provide all evidence you can about this object.

    Otherwise, as @sogNinjaman-ING said, it's just a bit of concrete that could also serve as an air vent for any underground structure.


    No one in their right mind would put a sign anywhere saying "hey this is a bomb shelter, please drop your bombs here if you invade", but everyone who lives here knows of it and it was used once in the city's history as I specified.

    Reviewers can't always trust every submitter's claims. There a lot of fake submission or fake information about eligibility or history. When it's an unusual thing like your bunker, how can we trust you that it's true? It will help a lot if you can find any media/URL.

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 3,387 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If I see this as a nomination I would think that it's an air ventilation for an underground parking like many others around here. I would think that you're trying to trick me telling me that it's related to a bunker when it's clearly very similar to the structures that are in my city and all of them are for parkings not bunkers.

    On the other side, if you could show me that this is really related to a bunker (and that there aren't tons of similar structures around), then I would gladly slap a 5* on it and say "Thank you" for showing me something new.

  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    Thanks for your words. I know there are some nominations that might feel a little personal and therefore is hard to see them fail. The only thing you can learn here is how some other reviewers, who don't understand the PoI like you, might see it based on what you presented.

    So, a clarification first. When I said that it seemed that you were nominating the air shaft, it's because you lead your description saying "Air shaft of the Liman-Grbavica bomb shelter...". I'd lead directly with "Liman-Grbavica bomb shelter..." and later on add "This air shaft is the visible part of the underground shelter...". It changes the focus of the nomination.

    Also, while the nomination interface limits how many characters you can add, you can edit the nomination in Wayfarer later on and add more data, so when we say more information is needed, believe me that you'll be able to add it.

    Now, and here's where I have to question what you're trying to do, either the bunker is a historic relic with no use or a potentially usable bomb shelter no one wants to advertise where it is. If the second case is correct, it would fall under 1*, "obstructs emergency services", which is to be used for these kind of locations.

    I sincerely hope you have success with your nomination.

  • Cryosphynx-PGOCryosphynx-PGO Posts: 7 ✭✭

    So I see that based on some of the feedback I'm receiving here this isn't such a clear rejection as my reviewers seem to consider it. My biggest issue here is that it would seem no matter what I say there isn't really a way for me to convince the reviewers to AT THE VERY LEAST give it a 3-star pass if it's not a blatant 5-star. I just can't accept the fact that this would be a clear 1-star rejection, there's just no way since it definitely has the significance to be showcased as a POI in the game.

    I'd never consider it a possibility to edit the data past its limit once the nomination's already been created. Alright then, I'll keep in mind that I can actually write novels, thanks for the heads up.

    From the nominations I managed to review while accumulating upgrades (2 already wasted, yay~), I could tell you the fake ones are STUPIDLY obvious. I absolutely can't see mine as an attempt to fake something with all the information I'm providing. It feels like the only thing that would make reviewers buy this in a heartbeat is show them the underground bunker itself. I'm sure we can agree that's just not plausible. So why isn't the above ground enough, combined with the context? How can I provide online articles to prove the existence of something that was last used in 1999? No one back then wrote blogs about life underground during air raids. I AM the only one who truly knows, being the submitter, but what else can I do to sell it to the reviewers for even just a PASS on the eligibility? I'm at a loss for understanding here.

    I have to honestly doubt that ALL above-ground air shafts look the same as this one. Just a quick glance can tell its age and the antiquity of 50 years during a post-war period. If you look at air/ventilation shafts today you'll be seeing something more along the lines of this - https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo/ventilation-shafts.html?epik=dj0yJnU9RmFCQ3N1ZXZvUTl4bmpmaXowSlhKSThHbjlrdWdQWnomcD0wJm49R1Y0WF8xZ2l5YjJnNk0wcnFWSzdVZyZ0PUFBQUFBR0FUT2NV - you won't be seeing underground parking lots in 1970, at least not in Eastern Europe. 😒

    The way I could show you is if I literally pried open the air shaft and took the ladder down to the bunker, which is now mostly just an underground parking garage. I'm not sure I could even gain access to it since I don't use the garage and I'm not sure whether the passageways from the buildings are accessible to everyone anymore. I'm already showing something new with the current nomination, I have no idea what else to add to it.

    At this point it would just feel like I'm writing an actual novel instead of getting a stupid POI into a game, lol. I still feel like that's just semantics and nitpicking, basically same things but worded differently. I don't know why it's so significant to rephrase something that basically explains the same thing, but I could try and change it to something along those lines regardless in a new improved attempt. Thanks for the suggestion. Among the empty buildings around there's nothing else to nominate in this particular area and I really want this to go through. Not only does it fit in a pretty big empty area of L17 Pogo cells but it's also of an educational historic value, to show people that don't already know about the existence of this shelter.

    About it obstructing emergency services, I don't understand that either. I don't exactly know the CURRENT state of the shelter since it's basically a garage down there, but I'm fairly sure it can still be usable should the need for it suddenly arise, just like the other few shelters scattered throughout the city. I just don't know where it's accessible from in terms of basement passageways from the connected buildings around. But what the hell does it obstruct, exactly? A paramedic ambulance to access the shelter or what? There's a driveway leading to the garage entrance so there's nothing obstructing it. Players can hang around the huge open space right beside the bunker no problem.




    ...So what I wanted to do with this nomination at this point is combine the visual uniqueness of the air shaft (in the lack of something better) and the historic value of the underground bomb shelter with the open-space area above ground that children, locals and dog owners alike all use for recreation and social gatherings. Traffic doesn't circulate here so kids can run around, drive bikes, play football or hide and seek, and dogs can walk the grassy areas. It has everything in a compact open-space area. Last year there was even an overnight concert going on in the clearing, there's also street musicians occasionally performing due to the surrounding buildings. This is definitely a worthwhile area to add, but I have no idea how to get it implemented for exposure through the game. I obviously can't take a picture of just the open space because it means nothing, I can only use it as a background context. The air shaft is the thing that should draw in the interest to connect above ground with the underground. I feel like I'm a dummas or demented due to pushing through these rejections, when I KNOW I'm on to something.

  • Cryosphynx-PGOCryosphynx-PGO Posts: 7 ✭✭
    edited January 2021


    Post edited by Cryosphynx-PGO on
  • Lechu1730-PGOLechu1730-PGO Posts: 537 ✭✭✭✭

    To understand what we're talking about, take a look at this nomination and tell me honestly how would you evaluate it if it appears in your reviews.

    https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/12466/how-not-to-submit-a-wayspot

  • oscarc1-INGoscarc1-ING Posts: 366 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Firstly I would fix the spelling of the title from "Atomac" to "Atomic" (you spell it correctly in the description of the initial nomination, so there's no real reason why the title has to be different).

    Your supporting statement says "As an important historic location" but it doesn't actually state what about the bunker is historic.

    The original supporting statement said "that local children also use as a makeshift playground or a street workout." that is a push for both of those things and I wouldn't believe it.

    I would agree with the others here in that it is not an acceptable nomination. It is just a ventilation shaft. Sure you might tell us that this is part of a bunker, but what evidence is actually given to prove that? An objective viewer would not be able to confirm what is being claimed. If it was a notable historic location, it would have an info sign or plaque giving history about it - which if that is case, then I suggest nominate that instead as that would better represent the bunker and also give the viewer/player interesting information on the site.

    Is there another entrance to the bunker itself? It might pose as a better photo representing the bunker than the ventilation shaft.

    Your revised description is better, but the nomination itself is where it would be failing. The rejection criteria for "Does not meet eligibility criteria" states "Does not seem to be a great place of exploration, place for exercise, or place to be social. The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting." and this shaft, pretty much ticks all the boxes for rejection (except mass produced probably) - not to mention the shaft itself does not convey any history or could be seen as anything notable.

    There is good feedback to be learned from the two rejections and mass of feedback from this topic stating that is is not eligible. Either it's time to improve the nomination with the feedback given and give it a strong reason of why it should be acccepted, or accept that generic infrastructure that is subjectively historic simply isn't acceptable, no matter how it is spun.

  • Kellerrys-INGKellerrys-ING Posts: 696 ✭✭✭✭✭

    "In the end, what I wanna do with this nomination is basically connect the 3 different aspects of the location into 1 -snip-"

    Basically you're trying to use a generic air shaft as a "combined" place marker for two different POIs, which is not possible by Niantic's criteria.

    In other words. The historical bunker/shelter nomination must fill the criteria on it's own merits, the park area is not connected to it. And as other have written already, it's difficult to prove without verifiable documentation or a memorial plate.

  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 1,607 Ambassador

    You're saying it clearly has the significance to be in the game, but it doesn't. That's what we are telling you. Listen, I've been to historic bomb shelters. There's one in Florida that was set aside for President Kennedy if he needed it when he was vacationing down there. It is now a museum. You can take a tour of the place. There are signs. It has been decommissioned.

    If there are no signs to tell someone what this is, it hasn't been decommissioned. It is entirely possible that the government doesn't want it to be publicized that this is here. So putting it in a game is probably not a good idea.

    And if it is just an abandoned structure, those are not eligible. You say it's a gathering place, but do people really make arrangements to meet up at this spot? Do they hold parties here? Sure kids may play on this but that doesn't mean anything. Kids will play on abandoned cars and climb trees. Those are not eligible either.

    Drawing someone to a historic site through the game, they should be able to learn something about the place. There is nothing at this location to teach a visitor anything.

Sign In or Register to comment.