Nomination Reject for Invalid Reasons
KennyDavila1987-PGO
Posts: 9 ✭✭
Hello!
A month ago I proposed a popular local Coffee Shop as a nomination. I used a photo of the mural they have in store for the proposal
I was given 3 reasons for rejection:
1) They claim it is a Temporary display
2) They claim it is on private property
3) They claim low quality picture
Out of these three, I can agree that my picture is probably not the best I could have used, but the store is always full of people and it gets hard to take a picture of the place without people appearing on the picture. The eligibility guide mentions “favorite coffee shops” as elegible because they are “a great place to be social”, and this shop is certainly like that. What is recommended in this case?
I have major concerns about the other 2. I nominated a Coffee shop, what could have lead reviewers to believe this is a temporary display? In the supporting picture there were a couple of Christmas decorations on the main facade of the Coffee shop, but having temporary decoration doesn’t make the wayspot itself a Temporary Display, nor did i use a picture of this temporary decorations as the main picture. What could have gone wrong here?
The worst one is the claim that my nomination was on private property. This is a public plaza and while the map shown in wayfarer is outdated and doesn’t show the marker for the coffee shop itself, going to google maps shows that the coffee shop is there on a plaza which is visited by a ton of people. The satellite view shows that this is plaza too, so why would they think this is on private property?
Any recommendations? Can I resubmit it?
Comments
Can wee see pictures of your actual nomination, with supporting info and pictures as well. Business’s are one of the hardest things to get approved
yes you can resubmit always
I get this one to review.
I hesitate a long time to reject it or not.
The support photo is, in my opinion better than the one witch was submitted, so you can resubmit it and with a better photo i can be ok.
The picture that appear first was the main picture (the Mural with the name of the place).
Supporting pic:
Supporting info:
"This is a great place to explore since it is a popular local coffee shop which gatters tons of people who come here to chat over coffe and desserts."
This is not a chain Coffee Shop, it's a local place, and even the criteria elegibility explicitly lists "Coffee Shops" as elegible places (Great Place to be social)
Why would you even think of rejecting it if the rules say:
Because of the photo as i explain in my post.
with the support photo, there is no problem.
with the main photo it’s difficult to know what it is (publicity? Temporary wall? Etc...). I finnally validate it, but many people won’t obviously.
even if a place seems perfect reviewer won’t validate every time for many reasons witch seems stupid for someone who know the place. But the mais photo is crutial.
So just saying its a local hotspot and so on without any proof is basically worthless. Every coffee shop has coffee and snacks so you will need to really boost what you put in there. Have they won any awards? Etc
The acceptance criteria don't simply say "coffee shop," though, they say "favorite coffee shop." (That doesn't mean your favorite coffee shop, by the way, it means a coffee shop that is particularly popular in the community at large.) You need to provide verifiable evidence that the coffee shop meets this standard, with travel guides, awards, news articles, etc.
Sounds demanding for what the app allows you to actually submit there. Awards? Travel Guides? That has an underlying assumption that this is a touristic region of the city, but well it is not!! The place has many good reviews anyway as it can be seen on my screenshot of Google maps. The point is that this is a "great place to be social", more than a "great places to explore". Awards and travel guides may be more relevant to the second category. This one has a very strategic location which attracts lots of people which is the point of having this category of wayspots!
In any case, the nomination was not rejected for being just an "average coffee shop". The point is they argued that it was:
1) A Temporary display
2) On Private property
These have nothing to do with being a well recognized coffee shop outside of this community, or by the community at large. If anything, Honduras is a coffee producing country and not just any shop can get this many positive reviews if their product doesn't meet the high standards of the Honduran community at large.
I believe now that main Photo was the real issue here. Thanks Aeryle88!!
The supporting info field will help you a lot too. The things you said may be true, but it is almost word for word the same supporting info put into every coffee shop review that comes up. Talk more about the value of the space in the region. What makes them stand out, what is it that attracts people to this coffee shop. Is it something about how the coffee is made or unique specialties. I have had several reviewers push me from uncertain into acceptance by have well documented and clear researched information about a waypoint. Having a strong description below the title can go a long ways too and will hopefully encourage locals to frequent the shop and make it an even more popular spot.
You may not agree but its called copy and paste a url from trip advisor or any site that can prove it is a hotspot. Any awards provide a url link to those awards or mention stuff like this in the description as it is relevant. Your description like it or not is subpar for a business nomination and it will never pass with the supporting/description you gave. As thats a description of every coffee shop in the world (aka not unique what so ever).
I think you are still missing the point. Let's assume for a moment that "yes, this is not a good or valuable spot deserving to become a wayspot". So, how would you reject it? what reasons would you give? Would you also tell me that this is not a valid wayspoint because it is a "Temporary Display"? Would you tell me is not a valid wayspoint because it is located within a "Private Residency"?
Do you understand that I am more fustrated about the specific reasons currently given for rejection which have nothing to do with what you are recommending?
Le'ts assume that I try everything you said, and that proves to anyone who pays attention that this is a great and outstanding coffee shop that everyone should visit. Then, what if reviews come back saying again "but somehow I believe this is a temporary display" (what made them think about this in the first place?) or "this is located on private property" (Satellite view shows this is a plaza / **** mall, what other evidence is needed).
Do you understand my point?
Rejection reasons may not always be the right reason. Its obviously not private property or temporary. Picture looked fine to me. But people could literally just pick any rejection reason because they don’t like the nomination as a whole.
Also, there is something weird about the review process where if it senses patterns it locks you out for a cool down period. Some of these rejection reasons may be an attempt to avoid repetitive reviews. The rejection criteria are a little odd, because some of them are very usable (like private property or sensitive location), but most rejected waypoints only fit in the "other rejection criteria" category. Like some of my most recent, a no parking sign, a generic street lamp with no unique characteristics, a stop sign, a Verizon store.
The problem with that is Niantic don’t ask wayfarer if they like nomination or not. They ask wayfarer to check if a nomination is good or not according to a criteria list.
Well tbh it doesn’t matter if we “like the nomination” it matters wether or not it meets criteria to be accepted
That's exactly what i said. Unfortunatly, too many submission are rejected despite they follow Niantic's criteria.
I understand that lol. Alot of the criteria is very subjective, they have done that for a reason though so that they don’t have to explicitly say each and every thing is eligible. But in the end they more often than not have to come in to say things are eligible or not (even then still doesn’t work aka trail markers). Businesses have been and always will be a grey area because its hard to determine if one is actually unique or not. And its really hard for niantic to put a stamp on them as each business is vastly different. Thats why we just have to try our best to “sell” the business as best as we can to reviewers
Indeed, people will use their own criteria or interpretation of the rules in the end, it's sad!
I really believe the rating system should split between "Is this location a good wayspot nomination" and "is this picture a good representation for this location". That way, it will be a lot easier to review and to provide more meaningful insights to the submitter: "Should I try again because this place is elegible but my picture was terrible?" or "Should I give up because my picture is awesome but this is not a good place to have a wayspot?".
Anyway, thanks everyone for the feedback. I have re-submit my nomination. I tried harder to get better pictures this time, and I also tried to provide as much context as the system allowed me in the supporting information and description fields.
I'm sorry but this is unbelievable this coffee shop should have been accepted the FIRST time the OP made his nomination. Needing a dissertation for a spot that has MORE than enough proof and reviewers using OBVIOUS false criteria is BEYOND me is this some kind of elitism?
Saying that a coffee shop is a great place to be social and list some of there items does not automatically make it eligible. Thats literally the description of every coffee shop in the world. You have to show proof of it being a hotspot, and of how its unique! 🤦🏻
Why must the nominator write a dissertation or prove the current number of Michelin stars to get an independently owned business accepted as a Point of Interest? Won’t the reviewer just claim these boasts are seasonal, temporary, residential, private, adult, sensitive cemetery farmland?
Why does anybody think it’s okay for a reviewer to basically tell the nominator “go have relations with yourself” by asserting a flat-out lie as the justification for rejection? The insult borders on sadism.
Some urban areas have a PoI every five or ten meters. That is not a valid excuse for preventing rural areas from having any representation at all. Mean people suck. Why is everybody else backing them up?
I don't find the criteria subjective in 90% of cases...
In this case, the question is "is it a real coffee shop?" the answer is yes, so if the photo is good, we just have to accept it as a wayspot.
In the case of trail marker, it's more easy. If it's a trail marker on the photo, it must be accepted.
100% objective, no subjectivity needed. The problem is that some reviewers create their own criteria, and add subjectivity in the system. I really hope Niantic will do something about that (change the review process, and/or the possibility to make an appel when a submission is rejected, would be a first step to make the system better and to avoid bad rejection, and the lost of many potential good wayspot, especially in campaign)
Totally agree with you.
The problem is some reviewer create their own rules and don't follow Niantic's rules.
But i don't really see why they do that... Rejecting acceptable submissions is not good for the game... The more wayspot there is, the better the game will be...
The submission as it is is borderline at best.
The main picture isn't great, passable but doesnt do much to sell the POI
You haven't included the description so I can't comment on that
The support statement says great place but without any proof or evidence.
The onus is on the submitter to provide all the necessary information to the reviewer to do their job, just saying its a great place without any proof is quite frankly worthless, you may as well have claimed that it serves everything on 18 carat gold plates.
At best as it is its a 3* at most candidate.
Also as an aside, I'm not passing judgement on your literary skills so please do not take this as an insult , but the numerous spelling mistakes in the support statement may lead a reviewer to judge it more harshly as well.
It may lead the reviewer to believe that you either don't care about the submission to spell correctly or that the submission was a rushed job, either way it leads to the mind set of "well the submitter can't be bothered with their submission why should I be bothered about it either" and can lead to harsher reviewing.
They want unique business’s to be poi’s. Not every coffee shop needs to be one and is unique enough for one. This is the criteria for “local gem”. Along with every trail markers just because it is said as eligible DOES NOT MEAN it must be accepted. You have to show how it meets the criteria as a hyper local spot. The description above does not do that.
No, nothing "must be accepted"
A nomination must meet the eligibility criteria and that criteria now is more relaxed to allow more things that it used to be, but it still has to be a point of interest; not every pub, bar or coffee shop is interesting.
Who can judge if something like a bar is a point of interest? Except for those who live on the area, it's just impossible. We can just trust people who make submissions.
And i use the word "must" only for trail marker because this case is one of the most problematic for now, with more than 50% of bad rejections.
You don't seem to understand
There is nothing at all, churches, trail markers, statues etc, that must be accepted.
What must happen is that each individual submission is reviewed on its own merit, Nothing submitted, and I mean absolutely nothing submitted ever, is a must accept.
So you refuse everything?
He is saying that everything needs to be judged accordingly, where some may pass, and some may not. But no object is guaranteed, and depends on the nomination.