Feedback on why this was denied?
djcmount-PGO
Posts: 5 ✭✭
I wasn't aware an artistic design of a fish in concrete was a feature that naturally spawns by itself in nature
Initially it was flagged for natural feature. Location shoule be pretty damn accurate. A few others I nominated in similar area were approved, while several of identical quality were rejected with reasons that make no sense. I just had another one approved practically identical in terms of historic content, visually appealing, good location to gather, etc to several that were rejected for reasons that make no sense
Comments
sorry if this is about to sound picky …..but these are possibilities as to why it was rejected, it isn’t necessarily what I would do. It’s really just to get you to think critically about how others may view it.
Your supplementary photo doesn’t allow the reviewer to confirm the location as it only has the bench and no other reference points that might be visible on street/satellite view.
I would recommend creating a photosphere - use the Google streetview app, and publish it. This helps confirm location.
I am guessing that the natural feature reason is because your main photo is dominated by trees. Yes reviewers should look more closely but some don’t. Also the fish itself is slightly blurry as a result. To improve your chances I would take a photo where the fish is dominant, with hardly anything else.
Your description also focuses on the bench which is very ordinary rather than the fish which I assume is the distinctive feature. Perhaps some info about the series - do all the benches have a different fish and different colour. Is there a website that mentions these?
Good luck as this could be an interesting place to explore
The key rejection reason is "Other Rejection Criteria", which you get when reviwers do not think your nomination meets any of the Niantic Waypoint criteria.
people sometimes hit the wrong button they might ment to hit other rejected criteria. reviewers probably thought it was just a regular bench, you probably could've just nominated the fish mural by itself.
Your rejection reasons are incorrect, but the rejection itself is not. That painted bit of concrete does not meet criteria.
Is it painted or is it carved into the stone? If carved in I'd say it would be a valid POI, if just painted on then could be Temporary so not.
Looks like a crappy generic bench with a fish painted on the concrete. Rejection reasons may be off, but rejection is correct.
It looks like the fish is a stencil, which Niantic says means mass-produced and doesn't qualify. (Stencils have a few exceptions for artistic additions, like Banksy does - his are not mass-produced.)
You even say that there a lots of benches with these stenciled fish. This seems doubly generic mass-produced.
To clarify, there are two benches there with the design pressed into the concrete that was poured as part of several community-funded improvement projects. I'm not aware of similar benches outside of this area.
Unsure exactly how the artist achieved this as I was not there when this was installed; there's definitely a physical indentation in the concrete, so it wasn't just painted on top of concrete.
Thanks for your feedback
I'd try to take a photo with landscape orientation that focuses on the fish. If you can get the light right or otherwise figure out how to show the indentations in the concrete, that would really help. As it is, it just looks like a not-very-permanent stenciled picture of a fish and less like an actual art installation.
Also, I'd emphasize the fish art aspect, not the bench aspect. Benches are very hard to get through; artwork is much easier. Even calling it "Fish Art" (or something similar, but catchier) might help, particularly if you can convey the indentations and permanence.
You can try to add additional photos in Google Maps trying to show that this is art created on the concrete, take photos near the ground, try to cast shadows, ...