Thoughts about this kind of nominations?
Supporting info says: "drawing that is made all over the town by young artists. located in a crowded neighborhood with easy access from all directions"
There is a crescent amount of little pokemon drawings that are being submitted lately. And I mean it when I say little, some of them very veeery little and has "graffiti (something)" as title...
first warning "
Wish I still have the screenshot of those tiny ones that really bothered me at that time... some of them are not even made to be spotted at simple sight... idk how to properly evaluate them so I focus my rating around the private residence criteria when is applied or hit skip when seems tricky. Hopefully I can hear some advices.
Thanks for your time reading this thread. Have a nice day!
1* Wayspot Criteria, Other Rejection Criteria.
Its graffiti and is not eligible
Vandalism. A lot of them get accepted unfortunately.
LOL, I literally just saw something similar:
Unfortunately, it's pretty common. And like @DerWelfe2205-PGO, they usually get accepted.
It's worse than typical submissions of graffiti, as in most cases this low-effort Pokémon vandalism is done by the submitter in an attempt to get a Pokéstop approved. I would be inclined to report for abuse.
Yes, many get accepted nowadays while others are already old functional stops and this is why I was uncertain because some fellows reviewers from my local community argue by saying that it should be considered as art regardless of the nature but I felt reluctant about it...because it didn't seem quite right...
"Because it's a drawing of a beautiful and invested Pokemon and I'd love for you to aprove it"
I thought you can read this kind of nonsense only in my country... lol
And it's crazy how common are they (facepalm)
Just as I thought.
Thanks for replying ☆
Similarly, I've seen people argue that graffiti tags should be considered art because they're often colorful or unique-looking (thus they often get approved in my local community). The "MoAr StOpS" mentality runs deep in some communities.
Having some as old functional stops is also a known issue. People see things that were, for instance, accepted years ago when acceptation criteria were different, and thus think their own similar nominations should also be accepted today.
That's the problem with many submitters who rely more on the existing wayspots they see around them than the actual criteria.
Oh, that's the tip of the iceberg, believe me.
Ridiculous nominations are something that transcends beyond different cultures and languages. 😅
1* - temporary garfitti / Name of a Pokemon in the title.
yeah, if they're going to paint something at least they should put some little more effort to create an interesting piece to admire, bigger than just some few centimeters in order to truly call it urban/street art... I don't know... something not pokemon related.... like a nice mural (those that are really approved and encouraged by the whole neighborhood) just saying~🤔
Agreed. Like... why not contact the local municipality/authorities and ask about helping with street art? Create something that the general public would enjoy, and that would last for a long time, instead of wonky-looking vandalism that would probably get painted over sooner or later?
(The answer of course is that most if not all of these people only care about creating another Pokestop, not the artistic piece itself, or making something that the general population would enjoy looking at.)
Exactly! And then they point fingers at you because you didn't agree with them, ending up being accused of don't wanting to help the community grow. If we are going to still follow old functional stops as references then even rocks as paperweights should be accepted? of course not. What a headache (it hurts)
Thanks for giving your thoughts about this. By reading all the replies I feel like I wasn't "just tough" without reason.
we're all united as we share the same pain....😅
Certainly! I'll also have this in mind whenever this kind of nominations pops up. Thanks!
And about the last part, yeah~ this being a reality it's truly sad...
There are many reasons to reject these submissions, but given that the nominations are for (attempts at) Pokémon drawings, I would not say that having the name of a Pokémon in the title is one of them.
Of course it's not reviewers' job to know copyright law. But I wonder about Pokemon, Marvel Comics, and other murals of copyrighted material. If copyright owners don't hire a company to protect their copyrights, they're gonna lose them. If they do hire a company to protect their copyrights, we're gonna lose a lot of wayspots.
You don't loose copyright if you don't protect it. That only applies for trademarks.
We have been asked to do this by Niantic.
This looks awfully similar to this post from earlier in the month.
In the end NianticGiffard got it taken care of.
No, we're asked to reject mentions of Niantic's games in the titles and descriptions. Things that mention either the games directly or how they're played. However, mentioning Pokemon in general is fine as long as the submission actually has to do with Pokemon.
The examples in this thread are rejected for being temporary graffiti. If they were actual murals of Pokemon, describing them as such would be okay.
There's "fair use" to consider. Which has a whole slew of details that I dare not dive in to.
More like vandalism made especially for Pogo, didn’t even tried to mask it
Obviously just for Pokémon go