Russia Wayfarer Challenge: Earn double the rewards, plus 10 Upgrades, by reaching 7,000 Wayspots added by 16 June, 2021! Learn More

multiple signs for the same place

The answer may vary based on the POI.

scenario 1

there may not be any actual entrance as such to a park, no gates, no gap in the fence, hell not even a fence in some instances. The park is just grass with entry anywhere along that side, but there is a sign with the name at each side of the park. Some of these signs are identical. What about a sign at a park that simply has the rules of the park on it, or safety instructions (man ive seen a lot of safety/rules signs lately)

scenario 2

a church. There is a big entrance sign on the street. Then they add the building itself. Then they start requesting every sign everywhere around it with the church name on it

Scenario 3

a sports club. There is a sign at the entrance to the oval indiciating it is home to tennis club. There is a sign on the buidling by the oval referencing the club. There is a sign on the fence of the tennis court. There is a sign on the other side of the tennis court.

Scenario 4

Wineries. There is a sign 3km down the rd saying the winery is near, there is a sign at the edge of the propoerty. One as you pull up to the parking, one by the entrance to the building, one on the building, the building itself....

i feel like the line varies depending on the PoI, but i'd love to hear other peoples thoughts on these nominations for anything and everything that references and existing PoI


  • Theisman-INGTheisman-ING Posts: 571 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited June 2


    Depends on the size of the park, if there is something else as a POI in the park that has been named as the park.

    Theres no hard and fast yes / no scenario.

    2) main church sign, the type that lists the diocese, vicar, service dates etc can be accepted as a separate POI if its a distance from the church itself. If not then one or the other should be duplicate for the existing POI.

    What do you mean other church signs? If its just direction signs then no don't accept.

    3) the club house and the courts can be separate POI's but a generic name sign for a club, should not be separate from the club house itself, unless it's a unique artistic sign which may then qualify as a piece of art.

    Signs either side of the same tennis court should be duplicated for either the sign, not accept one each side, or if the court itself is already a POI dupe them all for the court.

    4) advert signs are 1* unless they are amazingly unique pieces of artwork which may make them qualify. A standard, we are 3km on your left sign instant 1*.

    As above for scenario 3, the sign on the winery and the winery itself are representing the same POI and so what ever is submitted should be duped for whatever is existing.

    Again with the caveat that it may qualify as a unique work of art on its own if its a truly unique amazing sign.

    Generally some of the examples you have listed would either be duplicated or just 1* candidates.

  • AScarletSabre-PGOAScarletSabre-PGO Posts: 348 ✭✭✭✭

    Want to add, for the club house scenario, I had the pavilion for a village tennis club accepted in addition to the tennis courts themselves. If both were in the same s17 cell, I would not have bothered (because I'm using one of my nominations for a Wayspot I'd never be able to interact with). But still, it does show that people will accept club houses in addition to the sports court(s) the club uses.

  • IvaIaine-PGOIvaIaine-PGO Posts: 5 ✭✭

    this is how i feel about them, so it's good to see others view them the same.

    just adds to the masses of nominations which are "having a try" at getting something through they know they shouldnt... problem is, when people see it exists because someones mates helped vote it through, they then think it's eligible and start submitting. Wish there was a proper system for banning people who submit too many completely junk nominations... even temporary bans to start with.

  • KetaSkooter-INGKetaSkooter-ING Posts: 147 ✭✭✭

    Scenario 1 I vote yes on the multiple park signs as long as they're legit signs. No park sign no waypoint, fence openings or pathway entrances aren't valid waypoints, any sports fields, other objects in parks are good waypoints.

    Scenario 2 & 3, signs for a building and the building I consider duplicates. Other features related to the property but seperate from the church or clubhouse are good waypoints.

    Scenario 4, directional signs like winery 3km to a location are not valid waypoints.

  • EvilDoctorSlice-INGEvilDoctorSlice-ING Posts: 39 ✭✭

    As regards scenario 2, one of the clarifications on the old Wayfarer help pages gave the following guidance

    Signs for locations/objects that are already existing Wayspots - Eligible, if they are a significant distance from the object or location. For example, a sign for a monument could be a separate Wayspot than the monument itself. If a sign for Wayspot is nearby the Wayspot itself, it can be used as a supplementary photo for the existing Wayspot. 

    This statement dates back to late 2019 so its validity under the new criteria may be subject to debate. But I would still accept both a church and church noticeboard as two separate POIs, as long as there was some reasonable distance between them.

  • Theisman-INGTheisman-ING Posts: 571 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Its actually still in the guidelines reworded slightly, and to be awkward its now buried in the FAQ section.

    It now goes

    "Should the sign for a Wayspot nomination be marked as a duplicate if there is already a Wayspot for the object the sign represents?

    If the sign is a significant distance from the object then it should be considered on its own. If it is close, such as with a church sign and a nearby church building, then it should be marked as a duplicate."

    Also annoyingly they've still never clarified " a significant distance" either.

  • SlicedPeas-INGSlicedPeas-ING Posts: 64 ✭✭

    Well, we know it's got to be at least 20m.

  • TheFarix-PGOTheFarix-PGO Posts: 2,395 ✭✭✭✭✭

    In short, the sign needs to be eligible on its own merits. Otherwise, it should be marked as a duplicate.

Sign In or Register to comment.