INVALID INGRESS PORTAL (no safe pedestrian access)
CVRIM-ING
Posts: 65 ✭✭✭
Title of the Wayspot: [Крест Омская Область]
Location: [55.1121150, 75.3118060]
City: [Omsk]
Country: [Russia]
Photos to support your claim:
Hello! We have a number of portals that do not have safe pedestrian access. One of them is described in this discussion. This portal is located on the motorway. The constant movement of vehicles and the lack of footpaths pose a danger to researchers. This portal does not meet the acceptance criteria, but for some reason was admitted to the portal network. Also, the point is far away from the real object.
I believe that a portal with an incorrect and dangerous location should be removed from the portal network. In order not to mislead researchers. And don't endanger it either.
Post edited by NianticAtlas on
Tagged:
Comments
Request a location edit to take this portal off of the road and onto the monument. The monument at its actual location in a vast meadow.
wrong, there is no safe pedestrian access
The gravel area's next to the road appear to be intended as sidewalks. If you follow the road to the west, you can see a zebra crossing near the motel. If the gravel was not intended for pedestrians, why would there be a zebra crossing there? Moving the portal to it's correct location would be the right thing to do.
Pedestrian acces is ok on these photo (plenty of safe space outside the road)
The problem is there is nothing here.
Yes there is:
https://www.google.com/maps/@55.1121655,75.3116267,3a,75y,12.23h,66.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1szRvBYwDLEiNeTkQGtyo3LQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
Ok, so it's a good POI. Just need to be moved outside the road.
Here where I live it is rare to have an object in the middle of nowhere with access to the pedestrian ... gee ... it would give 5 stars straight, calmly, approval to be a Pokestop in the middle of nowhere haha.
Only ask for editing of location, if it is more than 10 meters and is not accepted, appeal for it to be right.
the gravel area is not intended for a footpath
From wayfarer criteria:
Note that it is not sufficient to be able to access the nomination from a nearby sidewalk. There must be a pedestrian walkway or a trail leading all the way to the object.
It is perfectly safe to walk on grass. There doesn't have to be an actual physical man-made path. What that sentence is saying, is that you must be able to walk up to it and touch it. In this case, there is even some sort of tiles going from the monument in the direction of the street.
Why invent some meanings of your own? in the text of the criterion it is directly written how it should be ...
He invent nothing, in this case, the POI have obviously a safe pesdestrian acces.
I believe this statement has been taken out of context. It does not state that someone should be able to walk all the way from their house to a POI, but rather that a person can walk directly up to the POI. "Accessing a nomination from a nearby sidewalk" means that the pedestrian cannot directly approach the location. It might include features in the middle of a divided road, or on the opposite side of a road on a street that only has pedestrian access on the other side, or a sculpture or fountain in a roundabout that does not have pedestrian access. Just like many valid waypoints a vehicle is required to get within the vicinity of this POI, but the POI itself is clearly easily accessible from a pedestrian outside of a vehicle. You are able to walk directly up to and interact with it. There are several such places along this road as viewed from google maps. I do believe the primary change that needs to happen here is moving the POI marker out of the street and locate it on the actual item.
you indicate kritrea, and in the next sentence you contradict yourself
Can you please point out the contradiction so I can clarify?
ok, maybe i'm wrong, then to figure it out, you can give an example, which wayspot does not meet the requirement for safe pedestrian access?
So here's an rough example of the idea. I will try to find a better one. The sculpture circled in blue is really beautiful (it doesn't show up in street view yet, it is too new). If it were to be made into a waypoint you may be able to interact with it from the sidewalk on either side of the road, but you can't actually get to the sculpture safely, there is no pedestrian access. This is a high traffic high speed limit major road. So I would probably be able to access it from the sidewalk, but it would fail to pass the test of being able to actually approach it safely. Is that helpful at all?
Here is hopefully a good example of the opposite case. 89A is a major highway passing through the desert with no pedestrian walkways. This location is a significant distance from any significantly populated towns. Once you have arrived there by car you are able to exit the vehicle and walk up to the (currently unclaimed) portals (this is from the Ingress map, but at least a couple of these are likely in Pokemon as well).
I don't know your area at all, and I don't know anything about the monument off the side of that road, but if you feel that the expectation would be that you could safely travel to the location by car, exit the car, and directly approach the object then my personal opinion is that it could be considered valid.
The portal is very close to the real object. The author of the post is misleading. The portal must be moved to its real place. Screenshot and panorama attached
and what are the delusions? can you read discussion about the fact that there is no pedestrian access to the portal ... because your group cannot play fair, make portals on the road, because you are too lazy to get out of the car and walk 50 meters ..
This is how the situation looks real
You @LaasEnl-ING interpret the situation in your favor. You personally interfere with the portals and you submit them for deletion, although you can put them on the real location, and why do you need to move this point?
Yeah, that isn't safe where it is, it needs moved to the actual poi or at least off the road, but it shouldn't be removed, its clearly there in several pictures shown, just not pm the poi. Honestly @NianticCasey-ING should try and flag this to get moved as it looks more than 10m so would need at least 2 moves
There is no walkway that should be according to the criteria, so I think poi should be removed ....
It appears to me that you want it removed because it provides an advantage to the other faction.
Making changes to wayspots to get an in-game advantage is considered abuse. Don't do it.
This wayspot is perfectly fine once it is moved to the right location.
you are protecting the point for your own ends ... there is no reason for this poi to exist, since it violates the criterion of secure access.
Stop pecking, it's not pretty
Thats a dumb way to look at it, do you think half the mountain top portals have walkways to them? Or the island portals? Most of them don't. You don't need a path to everything, if its on grass its completely acceptable. So long as you can SAFELY walk up and touch it then its fine.
So this portal only needs to be edited to the correct position to be acceptable
I am not from Russia, I have never been anywhere near Russia, I don't have any plans to go to Russia, and I am Resistance. How does that wayspot benefit me?
The wayspot doesn't violate any criteria (except that it's location is off).
Everything is simple here. This agent has removed the home portal - so he takes revenge. Слёзки ручьём бегут по московке.