Help with "fake" church

HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,725 ✭✭✭✭✭

Recently, I had a church rejected for being fake and for not being visually unique.

Supporting Statement: Church where the local community goes for worship and also socialise after every service.

I don't understand. The church is real, it can be verified in Street View. The church at the front has an interesting brick mosaic and it does have a presence. Yeah mind the fact that it's another one of those churches that have leases in an industrial complex but it should be noticeable.

I legitimately do not understand why this nomination is not visually unique. There are two other churches within 500m (Revelations Church and St. Bartholomew's Church) but they are far apart and away between other nominations in the area.

Is it a matter of reviewers just pulling my leg and trolling or is this nomination not good enough? I've already resubmitted this but I was hoping if anyone had any suggestions or constructive advice to get this over the line.

Comments

  • Maxyme99-PGOMaxyme99-PGO Posts: 954 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Maybe try to nominate the name visible on the building? I think someone gave you "fake" rejection because they didn't notice your brick wall with name on streetview (it's backwards on streetview and looks much different on the back - differen't color, no bricks etc.), and because of that someone thought it's fake.

    Also depending where your pin is, people might get SV with trees that completely hide your building (and on your photos building isn't visible much, so reviewers might have problems with comparing if it's correct location). Nominating the building should solve most problems.


    You can also put photosphere that will show your nomination from the better (inside) view, and reviewers might compare it to current streetview to be sure it exist here.

    I also noticed that this church don't have any pin on Google Maps (the other church has one) and nearby on map is a lot of pins of many shops, because of that it might also be a bit harder to be sure for reviewers it is here.

    I think these are the bigger problems, there isn't much you can do with visually unique rejection, but in my opinion you could get it from 1-2 reviewers, bigger concern should be fake rejection for now.


    So, either nominating building rather than wall with name, or making photosphere near wall should help in my opinion. Good luck!

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,725 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is a Google Maps listing pin as far as I know doing a quick search, but because of most of its details being incomplete it often doesn't appear normally. I've updated some of its details and they've been published on Google Maps, so hopefully it may appear in the next round. I shall consider nominating the building with the name if this gets rejected again.

    If I can plug this in, there is a series of tampermonkey scripts and a function of Wayfarer+ which simulates the street view that you observe mid-review in the nominations page. Alas, the legacy of Wayfarer+. The street view with the red pin above should have been what they were seeing.

    Thanks your your advice @Maxyme99-PGO! It's very rare I get these reject reasons, but the way they phrase it is like a knife to a leg cramp. "Does not exist. Fake." People should not have access to this reason for someone who's made an honest attempt.

  • X0bai-PGOX0bai-PGO Posts: 1,667 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Those rejection reasons don’t make a much sense to me either, but maybe nominate the brick design as the POI? It’s more interesting anyway, and if it’s visible on the map it seems like a winner.

Sign In or Register to comment.