Public parks and requirement for signposts

Ok, help me out with this one. I am under the impression that public parks would be okay as a wayspots. I am also under the impression that you do not necessarily need to have a signpost in order to have a valid wayspot - so, signposts are just a useful way to tie the wayspot into a specific location.

This is a public park that also has cultural historic values: it used to be the garden of the local manor years and years ago, but nowadays is owned by the city. But due to its history, it has trees and other flora that is not typical to other public parks. It has walkways, benches, lights and clearly it's not just a grassy area that also are called "parks" around in here. It has no signpost.

I was, and still am, very sceptical in nominating parks without signposts. I do not like the fact the beautiful parks have a picture of a dirty sign post as their wayspot photo, but I understand that signposts have been "sacred". However I always thought that this was more or less a misunderstanding from the reviewing side. Not anymore.

This is the answer I got from Niantic when my appeal from the park above got rejected:

"Thanks for the appeal, Explorer! An image of a signboard representing the field will increase the chances of this nomination getting approved. We also recommend that you review the Wayspot content guidelines: https://niantic.helpshift.com/hc/en/21-wayfarer/faq/2775-content-guidelines/"

Ok, so I read the guidelines and it is said, that:

"Placemarkers for Large Areas

Larger areas like dog parks or sport fields make great Wayspots, but it is important to choose the right placement of the Wayspot that respects the activity it was designed to support. Instead of placing the Wayspot in the center of an open field, park, or other large area, place it at the entrance or where there is a visible sign or placemarker. That encourages you to approach the area to visit the Wayspot, without having to enter or interfere with the activities within."

As there is no signpost, my placemarker was placed exactly where the pathway to the park begins - that place is clearly visible in the images. There is the only pathway to park from the Puustellinkatu sidewalk.

"Wayspots within Large Areas

Wayspots within large areas like parks, plazas, and fields are eligible as well, even if the larger area itself is a Wayspot. Just keep in mind that someone may have already made a nomination on various objects/placemarkers around entrances, which could lead to a rejection (as a duplicate)."

And no, there are no other wayspots in this park.


Any experience about similar wayspots? Or is it just that Niantic reviewers themselves haven't read their own guidelines? Should I keep rejecting all the parks without signposts when reviewing myself?

Comments

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 951 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Obviously this is a park. Anyone can see it's designed by people by looking at it.

    On an individual level it's silly that this park needs a sign as an anchor. Expand the idea out though to city level, state level, country level and every submission across the globe and it makes sense there needs to be something to anchor green spaces like this unfortunately.

  • ForzaComo-INGForzaComo-ING Posts: 100 ✭✭✭

    Thank you for the comment! Yeah, I agree that there has to be "something". I tried to go with the guidelines that say that: "It is important to choose the right placement of the Wayspot that respects the activity it was designed to support. Instead of placing the Wayspot in the center of an open field, park, or other large area, place it at the entrance" and that is exactly what I did. Placed the marker to the crossing of a sidewalk and the footpath which is the only entrance the park (without stepping on lawn) as that respects the activity ie. visiting the park for relaxation outdoors.

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 951 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It's annoying but I do get why am 'anchor' is necessary.

    I have a 16th/17th century pond nearby located on a common. Charles I when trying to enclose Richmond Park had to give the local commoners rights and pay them to use it as the two bits of land were connected. Eventually his enclosure of Richmond Park helped bring about his head being chopped off. Cromwell and his army camped on the common by the pond.

    In the 19th century a couple of Lords tried to use the area for their own benefit and gain. This caused more unrest and led to a bill being passed in the House of Commons that protected the area and views over it.

    Lots of history, great place for socialising etc etc... no signs, nothing, not even a this is a nice pond sign :(

    That was looking winded but yeah it's annoying not having any signs :D

Sign In or Register to comment.