Multiples of one type of thing in one concentrated area?
Dembonez19-PGO
Posts: 26 ✭✭
So this question has probably been answered somewhere, but I haven't been able to find it except in the criteria where it specifically mentions POIs being unique to the area.
Specifically, I (and I assume everyone else) have been getting trail markers, entrance gates, baseball fields, and pavilions. I don't know what to do with them when there are already wayspots designated to at least one of them already.
I don't know if I should approve "So-and-So Park Pavilion #3" when #1 and #2 are already wayspots, and they're all situated in a large rectangle with just a walking path between them.
What's the general rule for this because I tend to overthink when it's the only pavilion (or gate, or marker, or ballfield) that isn't a wayspot, for instance? And again, if this has already been answered somewhere, feel free to point me in that direction.
Comments
If there are three different pavilions, each one it eligible. Each ballfield is eligible. They recommend the nominator submit the sign if there is one, but it’s not required. The number of wayspot that are already in an area shouldn’t determine how you vote.
It only gets tricky if they are actually touching. Like tennis courts usually get nominated as 1 as they are touching, and basketball courts usually depend on how the initial person puts them in. Courts plural vs "North Court/South court"
If there is a small distance/trail between they are seperate pois.
Based solely on the number of these that exist in game like "trail marker a, b, c,......z" or "baseball field 1, 2, 3...." or "mile marker 1.48547", I would say that the community here at large votes to approve these. The exception that I've seen to this is with regards to stop nominations that are part of a course of some kind (golf, disc golf, etc).
In the case of golf (and disc golf) courses, I think there are a couple issues. The first issue is all holes are part of a single course, so it's like nominating the goals separately or bases separately. The second is pedestrian access. For the first tee, you should be able to reach it (physical touch it) without entering the field of play. For other tees, it is likely you'd have to pass through part of the playing area at some point. For sports fields, some area on the sideline that won't interfere with play is preferred. Reviewers may not agree with both of those rationales, but they likely agree with at least one of them.
Guidelines actually states only the first tee is eligible for golf or disc golf. And the guidelines specifically stated separate athletic fields are eligible. So no guesswork needed here.
I try to treat the "visually unique" term as if it means "visually distinct" - there's clear separation between objects, even if they appear similar. For fields of play, I can easily tell from many satellite views that Baseball Field 1 is distinct from Baseball Field 2.
Disc Golf and Golf holes/tees have been ruled ineligible as separate waypoints, although the first tee may be used as an anchor for the course itself as the most logical entry point. I tend to compare this to other types of fields for comparison - a baseball field is eligible, but can't be split into a First Base, Second Base, Pitcher's Mound series because those points are merely portions of the overall field.
The vast majority of gazebos and pavilions I've submitted or reviewed are not visually unique, but they are visually distinct standalone eligible objects. Unique is a useful word for classifying artistic objects, but more mundane types of things can be perfectly acceptable despite looking exactly like a similar thing across town or on the opposite side of a field.
For clarification, it's not about the number of wayspots surrounding it. I would never reject something for being in a dense area. It was more about clarifying what makes something unique and if Ballfield #1 also represents Ballfields #2-4, or if they are all considered separate POIs with no hit to their uniqueness despite being in the same general location.
Seems like there's a lot of useful information around this, so I appreciate it! I do get a lot of golf/disc golf holes as well, so I'm glad y'all mentioned that. I appreciate the clarification of how POIs are nominated and whether they're specified. And I like the explanation for treating "unique" as "distinct". I think that's a better descriptor. Thanks for all the answers!