Survey Markers

So, can we please go back and remove these from the network now? They are a blight.

My old thread from last year would be a good starting point for the clean up:


  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,494 ✭✭✭✭✭

    They can just remain as grandfathered scars on the network for as long as Turkey's atrocities exist for all I care. They do not meet any removal criteria (maybe pedestrian access) but have we ever seen a successful report?

    The majority of survey mark submitters place zero detail to the detail of their survey mark nominations. They are often:

    • Pinned in the middle of the road or on the lawn of residential properties
    • Erroneously titled (i.e. Indicator Mark, or a Permanent Mark being classified as a State Survey Mark)
    • Faked their location over to a different kerb into a vacant S2 cell
    • An almost exact copy-paste job from Wikipedia or across all of their survey mark nominations

    Wose, reviewing your survey mark nominations was extremely refreshing to see a huge level of detail and effort into these marks. Everyone else, not so much. I would be glad if this would mean the end of the terrible survey mark nominations and back to regular Wayfarer programming. However, this is further from the truth because a criteria clarification (that will be buried in time) on the forums will not ever hit reviewers and they will continue to review to their own agenda, leaving no repose for the continuing flux of survey mark nominations I review.

    Breenzy, why is this so important to you? Why do you strive for quality of the portal network/Wayfarer database? Or better yet, why are you so fixated on removing such things 750km away?

  • Breenzy-INGBreenzy-ING Posts: 18 ✭✭✭

    A Twitter post by the social media team does not count as tacit approval for the portals. The criteria was never updated for accepting them.

    They are incredibly poor portals and should be removed.

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 90 ✭✭✭✭

    If that's the case, the Wayfarer team needs to clarify that the official Niantic Wayfarer Twitter account is not a trustworthy source of information. I know you've already read it, but for those playing at home, the entire Tweet was:

    "A lot of really important advancements in land surveying and #geomatics used globally came from Australia, which has a very large industry for it. The mapping science is fascinating too! Make sure to add what they mean and why they’re important in the description."

    It wasn't just a generic support reply "**** **** TrAiNeR, mAkE sUrE yOu ReAd ThE cRiTeRiA!" coming from NianticSupport. Instead, it was a very unambiguous reply given the context and tweets before it. To me, it was more than enough to indicate whoever wrote it had a deep enough understanding of the situation to have an opinion on the matter and enough authority to express it on behalf of the Wayfarer team.

  • Breenzy-INGBreenzy-ING Posts: 18 ✭✭✭

    "why they’re important in the description."

    Cool, so none of them are important, because all highly generic. Glad we could clear that up.

  • Breenzy-INGBreenzy-ING Posts: 18 ✭✭✭

    So, basically, survey markers are allowed, if they hit the criteria of being interesting/have a story.

    I 100% agree with this.

    The 20c coin markers which I have posted above, are then ruled out entirely pretty much, they are all located almost exclusively on a roadside kerb in suburbia outside someone's house.

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 2,952 ✭✭✭✭✭

    That tweet doesn't provide any insight that "whoever wrote it had a deep enough understanding of the situation".

    It doesn't say that they are inelegible, instead they only claimed that you should explain why they are important, without providing any further insight.

    And that's the usual situation with Wayfarer, it's full of nuances and they don't want to provide black and white answers, it's always up to each reviewer to give their personal opinion, even in the newest criteria clarification they start claiming that even when something is eligible it doesn't mean that it must be approved.

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 90 ✭✭✭✭

    Again, the context of the Twitter clarification was specifically in relation to a survey mark that wasn't just in front of a house but also embedded in the corner of a private driveway.

    I'm not arguing that these should be acceptable moving forward. My point is that just 3 months ago when presented with a large amount of (arguably) worst-case evidence, someone on the Niantic Wayfarer team (at the time) decided that rather than responding with a "NO" or a "we'll look into it" decided to just say "Make sure to add what they mean and why they’re important in the description."

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 90 ✭✭✭✭

    I'm not really talking about future approvals here, as per OP, I'm referring more to the removal of existing survey marks that have already been approved by the community and via appeal.

  • WheelTrekker-INGWheelTrekker-ING Posts: 2,952 ✭✭✭✭✭

    They won't be removed if they don't fit removal criteria (PRP, K12, safe pedestrian access)

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    They are unsafe and must be removed. They are located on road gutters. It's incredibly disappointing that Niantic has not actioned on these immediately. They are not safe for pedestrians.

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 90 ✭✭✭✭

    This varies by location. In my local area almost all of the survey marks at located on either the raised curb or sidewalk.

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    As to there's a footpath ('sidewalk' for Americans) nearby argument ... These markers are distinguished by tiny little identifier on the survey marker you need to stick your head out into the street to confirm the number. These are not a power pole on the verge. They a tiny marks on the actual road. The curb is road.

    @WoodWose-PGO I know we get totally shafted in the suburbs for poi density but they are not safe.

    Niantic need to help us out in the suburbs but this is not the way at all.

  • WoodWose-PGOWoodWose-PGO Posts: 90 ✭✭✭✭

    I appreciate that might be the case in certain locations, but it definitely isn't always that way. I feel like the saftey aspect is an important and related, albeit separate discussion. It really depends on where you are.

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    I believe these are dangerous for pedestrians ... hey kids these tiny little spots are important enough to have a name in a game you play. So what if they are located on the road ... come look!

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    ok that one is a safe location.

    Yet would recommend removal so a clear line can be made - survey markers in suburban contexts in Australia are just not of value to pass. Australian governments love a sign ... if a survey marker in the suburbs had historical or other cultural value it would have a sign.

    These are just not significant enough ... and it's awful that you put so much work in and now feel it challenged. I too get pretty precious about pois that I believe should be included. My first poi contribution is regularly rubbished by others and I took me some years to understand it shouldn't have been submitted let alone pass OPR.

  • jokeinsurance-PGOjokeinsurance-PGO Posts: 289 ✭✭✭

    There are other nations besides Australia that have survey markers as waypoints. Please don't ruin it for the rest of us.

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    How is it ruining it for you? Survey markers are fabulous poi when they are in places were they count. Even in Australia we have a long tradition of accepting survey markers where they actually mean something to walkers in the area.

    Been watching some amazing footage from Taiwan mountain trails. Survey markers on tiny little metal plates .... super important to pedestrian navigation.... Amazing poi candidates ... Though perhaps locals might have rules like we only accept survey markers on trails that are accessible upto a certain difficulty level for safety.

    Context matters @jokeinsurance-PGO it always has mattered Having rules like "all survey markers count" when the world is full of different cultures doesn't make sense. A better "rule" is to question whether people use the survey marker in a significant cultural way. Navigation in wilderness is valid reason.

    No one uses a survey marker for navigation in the Australian suburban context .. we have street signs for that ... And they are not considered valid poi... The navigation in wilderness is however regarded as significant.

  • HaramDingo-INGHaramDingo-ING Posts: 1,494 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Here's a smorgasbord of supporting statements of survey marks currently submitted by existing wayfinders in a round of reviewing just now (before I got the "All done for now." message)

    • Lake Heights: state survey markers serve as good pokestops/gyms easy to access and not on private property
    • Lidcombe: This POI is located on a public walkway of a suburban street with very busy pedestrian foot traffic. The exact GPS location and ID number can be verified at (click map contents - survey marks on top right. Then search SS118652 in the top left corner).
    • Liverpool: Pedestrian stop location while walking around Liverpool CBD
    • Mortdale: State Control Survey established under the direction of the Surveyor-General of NSW. With plenty of footpath to safely walk on the other sidewalk
    • Rosebery: Visible marker in safe area
    • Woonona: This should become Pokéstop because it is a geodetic sign which highlights the value of landsurveying.

    • Abuser from Turramurra: Easy access via the footpath as seen in the supporting photo
    • Faker from Prestons: Survey Markers are eligible nominations. Something to note is that whilst this is located on the driveway, driveways are considered part of the local council up until the halfway point. This is because the curbside of the driveways, inclusive of the street signs and up till a certain point is local council property in the event that the road or curb needs to be fixed, repaired, replaced, etc. Therefore, this and all survey markers are not on residential property. This has easy public access and the location can be verified on Six Maps NSW.
    • Spammer from Cherrybrook: This an eligible submission according to Niantic (Geodetic sign). They are permanent objects placed to mark key survey points on the Earth's surface. They are used in geodetic and land surveying. It is located on the footpath at the corner of Glenfern Road and Kent Street, Epping. It is not on any private property. This location is also out of the way of any emergency services and in a safe location. The picture was not taken from a car. It is not in a sensitive area, there is no explicit language in this submission or in the picture. It is not a fake object. It is located on a footpath.

    There is zero relent. I don't approve these just because for the sake of approving them due to eligibility, but the majority of these people above (except for Lidcombe because I know who submitted that one) are serial spammers or Pokestop beggars and will NEVER STOP until they are approved. So I begrudgingly give middling marks (except to Cherrybrook, the worst of them all). Most of their descriptions are copypastas of supporting statements or copied from other sources. Barely anyone of these people have any idea what a survey mark actually is and are generally just copying and pasting all their responses with very little to no variation or copied straight from Wikipedia.

    "Poke your head out onto a residential street" and get hit by a car, who even does that?! I've walked along several paths passing by many survey marks and have never seen anyone díe or get injured. How about we remove some of those painted poles in Crestmead? I can effectively argue that many of these are placed at the end of private property onto a street which makes it a potentially dangerous location which may encourage trespassing or create a dangerous traffic situation. But I won't because that's not a problem that I'm making a big deal of.

    What is it with agents (particularly) from Queensland being so strongly against a type of nomination that is clearly a New South Wales thing? Queensland has their own share of survey marks nominations and existing wayspots too. Kiĺl those off first, and then maybe you can look into New South Wales?

    I've never really seen a positive post about survey marks on these forums lest a tidal wave of disagrees flows in, but others (particularly the Global Wayfarers Facebook and even some local Pokemon GO chats) are highly more supportive bar some extremely vocal dissenters.

  • ZinkyZonk-INGZinkyZonk-ING Posts: 274 ✭✭✭✭

    As you are a quality submitter and reviewer and local .. I would of course value your opinion for your area.

    Yet would still not pass any suburbian survey marker unless outstanding evidence to prove their cultural value ....

    I can value your perspective but come to a different conclusion.

    A dig at the Logan poles though? ((((Which by the way are a cursed resistance strong hold. And wish they would disappear because of my extreme jealously for such delicious density and straigth spines for easy MU ))))

    The 'Logan poles' are painted artwork. They are painted on poles that are located on the verge and are at comfortable chest height. Designed and installed by the council for the beautification of the streets not the same a tidgy tiny mark of no note within the context of the suburban environment.

    We have dodgy stuff in Queensland too and you are very welcome to make recommendations for our state

    yet the Logan poles are like art on traffic signal boxes ...not sure you can make a case for removal on the grounds of pedestrian safety or PRP.

    Tell me location of rubbish survey markers in Queensland and would support their removal.

  • lizziemc1-INGlizziemc1-ING Posts: 1 ✭✭

    I say that these are generic and abundent marks and should not be allowed as they are used for servayers and if thesed are blocked or broken or missing people can get fined for this. the rule is unique and when they are everywher it is not unique.

Sign In or Register to comment.