Fountains in a Community are considered generic?
ManiacDC-ING
Posts: 6 ✭✭
I submitted a fountain and it was originally rejected for inane reasons (orientation, when it was correctly oriented, and 'Other Rejection Criteria'). I appealed it, and Niantic rejected it again. Their reasoning is that "The object in question does not meet the Wayfarer criteria as the fountain inside the community comes under generic." They then proceeded to recommend I review the Wayspot Criteria. I have, several times, before and after submitting.
Where do do the criteria say/imply that poi like fountains inside a community are "generic"? I might be blind, but I'm unable to find this.
Thanks!
Comments
On the first line of rejection criteria.
Nominations and edit submissions may be entirely rejected if it meets at least one of the following rejection criteria:
🚫 Does not meet eligibility criteria
Does not seem to be a great place of exploration, place for exercise, or place to be social. The object is mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting.
If you can get a picture of it looking more interesting, it would have a better chance. "Interesting" is up to the reviewers' opinions, so the more interesting you can make it look in the submission photo, the better.
Thank you for the response, however, it doesn't really answer my question. I could easily counter what you're saying (I'm not trying to argue this, it's just to point out my example):
It's a fountain (place to be social, on eligibility page) on a patio (a place where people gather).
It's not mass-produced. Generic is... subjective. It seems unique to me.
I was specifically asking where "fountain inside the community comes under generic". Where and how am I supposed to know that? So basically what you're telling me is this is entirely subjective, up to the reviewer and Niantic's thought process?
Thanks! Makes sense.
From your photo, it looks like it could be a generic, mass produced water feature that someone bought from a store and placed down in an area to try to get a wayspot. I'm not saying it is that, I'm just saying that's what it might look like to people, so you'd need to sell your nomination to reviewers to convince them that it isn't that.
In this case, as a reviewer I care less about it being "mass-produced, generic, or not visually unique or interesting" and more so "is this a great place so socialize or explore
or exercise?"(It does look somewhat generic, like you might be able to buy one at Menards or Home Depot, but I personally reserve "mass produced" for objects literally on the scale of street signs.)
Would I gather there with friends? Probably not - seatinc isn't required but it doesn't look inviting for me. Encourage people to visit it? Probably not - it doesn't appear to be an area focal point.
I do think it would be more likely to be accepted if you took a better framed photo while water is running, or maybe explain better what makes it interesting. If it's highly visible on Satellite, can you do a nighttime photo of the LED lighting for your supporting, or does the village website have a photo of it lit up? Do they seasonally change the lighting for holidays and current events?
Thanks! Those are all good suggestions. I wish I had taken the photo at a different angle now, as it's overlooked by a seating area (see here: https://www.google.com/maps/@42.2362446,-71.2095624,69m/data=!3m1!1e3). I probably won't be going back there any time soon, unfortunately.
I think that explains a bit better why it was rejected, it just seemed to tick all the boxes and I couldn't infer Niantic's appeal rejection reason from the criteria.
For what it's worth, don't place too much stock in Niantic reviewing - they certainly have made mistakes.
Thanks!
Все буде добре...