It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.
Sign In with Ingress Sign In with Pokémon GO
After voting for a few thousand submissions (rating "good") and reading this post i thought to have a good reason to submit my stops. but: my named trail markers just got rejected!
attached are the two main pictures (2 stops) as well as 1 surrounding picture (where you can see the marker beside the road).
story: it is a lokal trail which shows you the some nearby bridges (you can find the trail on wikipedia as article on its own).
the submission was focussing on the trail, explaining the trail (description) and I added the AMA reference in the reason. no chance, both have been rejected in no time...
the reason for rejections are "location sensitive" and "Location Inappropriate" (apart "other reasons")
remark: the yellow signs are the public walking trails in the nature which you can see a lot in our country.
so - do I miss a point? in my opinion they fall under "trail signs with named route on the route" so should be accepted as "excellent".... I'm confused (and disappointed)
thnks for any help to get them as new stops.
I miss something - my trail markers are rejected. giving some background:
apart from public walking trails (which we have a lot in our country) we have a lokal "sightseeing path" which comes across some bridges as main "POI". most of the way is outside the city in the free nature (there is a dedicated article on wikipedia).
you can see the two pictures (from two submissions) and one surrounding picture attached - they both are near the start of the trail were you leave the city towards the nature (to clarify "city": it's residental area with almost no traffic).
After a lot of voting (> 3k / rating "great") and reading the following thread:
I was confident that my submissions got approved.
title: name of route - location
description: information about the trail
reason: pointing to AMA as well as referncing "signs with named routes on the route are excellent wayspots"
however, both submissions have been rejected in no time. the reasons where "ohter", "location sensitive", "location inapproprite"
so - what do I miss? what can I improve to get them accepted?
I just had one rejected and one accepted on a National Trail in the UK.
On this I could show the green space that the marker is by which probably helped.
On this there was no way to show the river and the green area to the left so probably hindered my submissions.
It may be the same for you. I've found that if that initial impression on a reviewer of my submission is a negative one, whether it's my fault or not, it's hard to change that to a positive one irrespective of the submissions eligibility.
You may well be correct…….Deep sigh
Recently in Poland we have many concrete markers....
terribly weak nominations and unfortunately they pass :-(
After reading this thread I have now sent this for appeal as I believe it may meet the criteria, as clarified by @NianticGiffard
Its also interesting to note that in the Kendal, United Kingdom area there seem to be a spate of wooden Public Footpath fingerpost style signs that have been accepted. (Not submitted by me I hasten to add).
Nearly all of these are the same style as this, with a destination name included on the sign. In all honesty I don't think its completely binary but in rural/green areas these would seem to qualify. Maybe I misunderstood but it will be interesting to see the outcome of the appeal.
These concrete posts in Poland are not trail markers, but only indicate the location of telecommunications cables.
To be honest I have no idea how is it possible that they are accepted.
Well yes, This is the position I have always maintained.
But the solution is the same as it is for every nomination. It must be made blindingly obvious from the title and description which of the criteria a nomination fits, and why. For sure, if a public footpath follows a bronze-age trackway leading to a hill fort, a submitter really ought to be able to describe that in a way that screams "exploration".
But never can a random 'public footpath' sign be eligible on its own merit, without such a case being made. A shortcut to the Co-Op does not meet any of the criteria.
There is absolutely no need for Niantic to 'rule' about this or that type of trail marker (in their typically context-insensitive way that just sows further confusion), since the above requirement is all that any and every nomination needs to meet.
Niantic, thank you for explaining the topic, mark on hiking trails thanks to you my appointments have been accepted
Seit letztes Jahr 7 mal eingerreicht, wieso wird es immer abgelehnt? Es erfüllt doch die Kriterien oder nicht?
Gibt eigentlich keinen Grund das abzulehnen. Deine Bewerter sind halt nix.
With the confusion/division around these initially, I wonder if anyone submitted one of these for the challenge of “potentially confusing candidates” that need further clarification.
Ich habe für das Thema Fahrrad und Wanderweg Schilder eines eingesendet. Weil dies ein großes Problem für Dorfspieler ist. Meist die einzige Möglichkeit um ein POI zu erzeugen. Wenn man 3 km von einem Dorf nach hause laufen muss ohne POI sehr traurig
@2Varus2-PGO This is no argument. If there is nothing interesting to become a POI - then there should be no POI. Unfortunately - these games are aimed to cities. Sorry.
Getting back to the UK, Niantic's acceptance criteria is as follows:
Must meet at least one of the three eligibility criteria
A great place for exploration
A great place for exercise
A great place to be social with others
Whether or not a public footpath is considered a "trail" or not is irrelevant as to whether they should be accepted. A public footpath in the UK meets every one of the criteria for acceptance. They encourage exploration, exercise, and are a great place to be social with others. If you doubt that, then ask the Ramblers Association, who regularly meet up to walk the footpaths.
I'm afraid that's not true.
Some do and they are as worthy as any 'official trail'.
Some are just a side alley behind some houses. You should judge them on their individual merit which is down to the submitter telling you why.
I get a lot that are
Trail through x/y/z
A hiking trail and a public foot path are the same thing. Ones is an American term and the other I'd describe as British.
The Markers encourage and exploration clearly as people literally have to walk to them rather than drive/public transport.
The Markers are frequent in the country side but so be it. We should encourage people to explore the country side rather than residing it city's for pokestops.
Hiking trail and public foot path are definitely NOT the same thing. Also both terms are used both in US as well as in UK.
Yes, hiking trails usually are public foot paths but not every public foot path is a hiking trail.
That being said a marker on a public foot path could very well be an eligible wayspot, but arguing about terms does not make it automatically eligible nor great nomination.
In the UK a public footpath sign or public right of way only tells someone that they can legally walk here. They are not official trails that follow a 'theme' in a mountain/river/coastal/whatever location.
They vary hugely, from down a side alley between some terraced houses to paths that have been in use for thousands of year that take you from one town to the next to a walk over a field to Sainsbury's, it's really just a legal term.
Enclosure of common land a few hundred years ago meant that those paths people use needed to be protected not necessarily always because they are great scenic paths that least to wondrous, exploratory adventures but because people have been using them for so long.
You can't apply it to the whole of the UK as Scotland has a Right/Freedom to roam act which technically gives people the right to walk anywhere, obviously you can't just walk through someones house, if I'm out walking somewhere and I need to get to point B I'll walk around the edge of a farm field, through a forest etc. Most people do this but do it responsibly so everyone is happy, there are no need or laws for public footpath signs.
To be even more geeky
Public footpaths/yellow arrow - Open to pedestrians
Public Bridleways/Blue arrow - pedestrians, horse riders and cyclists
Restricted Byways/Purple arrow - pedestrians, cyclists, horse riders and the occasional horse drawn carriage... :/
I've learnt a lot by reading this thread. I really didn't know there was any difference between a footpath marker and a trail marker.
Seems like people are really divided on the subject. I personally think that sometimes there should be other factors taken into account. If a footpath marker is submitted in a rural area with very few waypoints, it should be accepted IMO. It can only add to the game and enhance the experience.
@ClaraBow05-PGO And that is the point and probably main contention.
Eligibility does not make acceptability
Context of object/POI in rural areas is important. But so it is in Metro areas.
Just because one exists as a PO does not make all similar objects have a right to exist
Nianitc rules can be amibiguous
Some local review communities have different views
Some may say that rural has few PO so accept it. but trail and footpath marks are in the hundreds and hundreds of thousands. So while rural if you accepted every single one it is not so fun
Some say well they are accepted in a rural area so they must be acceptable in a metro area
Some people don't play games like others. As Wayfarer is made up of different games using a central DB it means nominations have differing meanings to some people
Some people follow nomination ladders. That is they only nominated to be nominator of the most. Then there are those who want a POI every 200m. And some of these people work in cabals to convince people to nominate and accept.
I feel @ForzaComo-ING summed it up quite nicely and can be applied to anything ""but arguing about terms does not make it automatically eligible nor great nomination.""
Existence does not make acceptance. :-)
I appreciate your opinions but in no circumstances should you be walking around the edge of farms/field, although very respectfully, you should only follow the paths.
I'm not sure if you read the post correctly but Scotland's Right To Roam, which I was referring to in the post, means that's generally fine. Most agricultural fields have a track around the edge that people use. Sometimes the farmer will wave at you from their tractor if they are not too busy.
Obviously you still have to be mindful of crops, livestock, very obviously restricted areas etc