This joke stops being funny - trail markers
onecino-ING
Posts: 214 Ambassador
Hello,
Could you please provide a clarification, and relevant action where required, in relation to another slate of low quality "trail markers" - are these acceptable or not?
There are two kinds - one is an utility company marker where they indicate where cables/pipes run while the latter is a sign painted on a tree. For either of these there is no indication as to where exactly it is situated and the name indicating it's location is made up by the submitter.
Ł 001 - słupek orientacyjny
Street Address: Armii Krajowej 25, 83-330 Żukowo, Poland
Ł 011 słupek orientacyjny
Street Address: Armii Krajowej 42, 83-330 Żukowo, Poland
Ł 06 słupek orientacyjny
Street Address: 9C66+3C Leźno, Poland
Czerwony szlak rowerowy w Dolinie Ewy
Street Address: CG59+77 Gdańsk, Poland
Słupek orientacyjny LP 2|105
Street Address: Droga Węglowa, Gdańsk, Poland
Biały 49
Street Address: DK91 23, 83-110 Tczew, Poland
22.44 km oznaczenia szlaku turystycznego Wzgórz Szymbarskich
Street Address: Malachitowa 17, 80-298 Gdańsk, Poland
Niebieski szlak rowerowy Kościerska - początek
Street Address: Owczarnia 51, 80-299 Gdańsk, Poland
The above examples are from 10 minutes of reviewing, there's clearly more and good quality submissions get drowned in the pool of these. Can you please clarify whether these are acceptable and if not, completely remove them from the review queue to speed up the review process for quality submissions?
I am aware of the post by @NianticTintino-ING but these are painted on the trees, do not have any name written on them and they are sometimes 20m spaced apart.
@NianticAaron @NianticAtlas @NianticAvocado @NianticCasey-ING @NianticGiffard @NianticGray @NianticLC @NianticTintino-ING
Comments
I’m with you that I despise all of these, especially basic mileage markers or otherwise-unmarked arrows, and resent both that the queue is full of them and that there is very rarely any actionable location information. (Guideline is to 3* if it’s likely to be there; I see no reason to believe that 0 location information = “likely”, especially when submission locations align with game map cutoffs).
Plenty of other commenters are going to come in here and tell you Giffard said to approve anything called a trail marker, as long as it’s in the middle of nowhere. But if there’s no supporting information that it’s an actual trail and that it’s in the right location, then a rejection is legitimately called for.
Now hit the Disagree button and tell me I’m not following Niantic’s rules.
I don’t see a utility marker meeting the criteria. It is not there to encourage exercise etc it is part of the utility infrastructure.
it is clear from what has been written that if someone submits something as a trail marker and it is indeed that it’s not an automatic reject. However it is also clear that other elements can score very low if a case is not made.
Clarification was asked about the how do I know it exists and this wasn’t really answered. So if you no evidence available that makes you think it is likely to be there rate it 1* in that category.
I already have the max badge + got a ban for trying to change the name of a non-existent POI (thank you Nianctic for bringing awareness). Next I will rate all such POIs as abuse.
If someone reports +/- 40 of the same markers within a 2 km radius then they should automatically get a lifetime ban. And all those who gave more than 1 star.
Yeah, the name change sounds abusive, I agree with Niantic on that. If it doesn’t exist then report is as permanently removed, and if your report is rejected, then post an appeal in the other forum using the prescribed form.
except that
each marking is different, the statement that it is the same is a logical error, these markings are on the tourist trail that runs through the Mirachowskie Forests in the area of the Kashubian Landscape Park, Kashubian Switzerland within the Kashubian Landscape Park and the Szymbarskie Hills. The course of this trail can be checked at https://www.traseo.pl/trasa/szlak-wzgorz-szymbarskich-sopot-sierakowice-pieszy-czarny-ver-2-aa9
each marking is different, the statement that it is the same is a logical error, these markings are on the tourist trail that runs through the Mirachowskie Forests in the area of the Kashubian Landscape Park, Kashubian Switzerland within the Kashubian Landscape Park and the Szymbarskie Hills. The course of this trail can be checked at https://www.traseo.pl/trasa/szlak-wzgorz-szymbarskich-sopot-sierakowice-pieszy-czarny-ver-2-aa9That's the problem, the marking is not unique and is not different. It may be on a different tree/lamp post, but it's exactly the same. It has not name of the trail and those are 20m away from each other.
Honestly, I do not really mind, in my play zone, there's at least several different trails like this one according to the source you used - https://www.traseo.pl/odkryj-polske/gdansk, so once Niantic gives their official stance, those can be submitted.
I really want them also to address the naming convention on those, how exactly do you know that this specific trail marker is on 22.44km, when the website does not indicate where exactly each trail marker is? You can see the route of the trail, more notable points, but not each and every of the 100s of the tree trail markers...
you can also check on the website
you can also check if the naming matches the given km, there are other websites where you can find it
I also do not understand your concerns about the quality of the markings since @nianic stated that the super label sticker is suitable as a trail marker as long as it is not manipulated by placing false markers and all markings are placed by
Polish Tourist and Sightseeing Society (
I also do not understand your concerns about the quality of the markings since @NianticGiffard stated that the super label sticker is suitable as a trail marker as long as it is not manipulated by placing false markers and all markings are placed by Polish Tourist and Sightseeing Society (Polskie Towarzystwo Turystyczno-Krajoznawcze) for more details, see http://pomorskieszlakipttk.pl/
of course, the markings are similar to each other, but everyone is different, you can go for a walk on the trail yourself, if you notice any errors in the marking, report it through the game if approved by the wayfarer forum
greetings from Kashubia (Kaszub)
these are the markings from the post https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/30803/confirm-these-markers-are-not-eligable/p1
These markings are not on any list either, but they are on the tourist trail where @NianticGiffard stated that they are correct and as for the density of objects, do not worry, every game has limitations in the case of yours is 20 meters also it is worth remembering that you do not nominate portals feel pokestopes only wayspots
you must admit that your photos are unique and count among the tourist attractions and encourage walks and exercises, and this niantic goal is to encourage you to walk and explore the area
greetings from Kashubia that never had a capital, only the main cities from the Odry to the Wisły @NianticGiffard
I see I can check the route, but each of the markings is not listed as I already mentioned. I do understand what you're trying to achieve here, but on the website each and every single marker is not labelled - the route is outlined on the map, but there's no specific mention that trail marker X is in these given coordinates. Hence my question to Niantic if they believe these should be accepted.
A few examples from my walk today, to illustrate my point about the trail markers being one next to another - those are not from the already submitted trails, but from the one quite close to me, which also is listed on the website you so adamantly refer to - are those acceptable as well? I've lost track after counting 50 of them during 20 minute walk.
So using your sources @KaszebeJic-PGO https://www.traseo.pl/trasa/szlak-skarszewski-sopot-skarszewy-pieszy-zielony-ver-2019 / https://mapa-turystyczna.pl/trail/szlak-skarszewski-tbm#54.42380/18.55084/16 where exactly are the four markers from the pictures below? To make it easier, I've pasted coordinates where pictures were taken right next to two of them.
54.413797, 18.544725
54.410342, 18.553308
Greetings from the capital of Kashubia - Gdańsk.
@NianticGiffard @NianticOtoStar can you please provide a clarification if these should be accepted and if yes, how naming convention should work?
Thanks!
I am also curious if the Polish tourist trail markings that are entered in the register are correct according to the guidelines and statements yes, but there may be discrimination
@NianticGiffard
@NianticGiffard
Some years ago there was a nearly identical thread. The result was that the start of a trail or unique marks ar okay, but massproduced are ineligidible. It has been answered with the soccerfield: the whole area is one POI, not every goal!
Hey there, @onecino-ING! The direction markings painted on the trees are generic directional signs which is ineligible. To know more about our eligibility criteria, please go through our criteria clarification posted in Wayfarer Criteria Challenge announcement: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/35560/wayfarer-criteria-challenge Thank you!
Hey @NianticOtoStar, how did you come to the conclusion that these are generic direction signs and not trail markers. These appear to be genuine trail markers to me. Markings like these are commonly used to mark trails in Europe. @onecino-ING even provided links to webpages about the trails.
@NianticOtoStar
thank you for the explanation thanks to you I'm sure that the markings painted on the trees with paint on tourist trails are correct as long as it is a tourist trail and not an ordinary path
Thank you for the confirmation that these are ineligible.
I hope that these won't be submitted anymore and the local queue will be cleaned up.
For avoidance of doubt, do the incorrectly submitted ones, but already incorrectly approved by some reviewers, by any chance meet removal criteria?
Thanks in advance @NianticOtoStar
They didn't say these are ineligible. They said generic directional signs are ineligible. These are not generic directional signs.
A colleague from the capital of Kashubia has trouble understanding
"direction markings painted on the trees are generic directional signs which is ineligible" = "oznaczenia kierunku malowane na drzewach są zwykłymi znakami kierunkowymi, co sprawia że są niekwalifikowalne"
You are trying to change Niantic's decision under your theories that painted markers on trees are ok, and they are NOT.
EOT. Please, close this thread. @NianticOtoStar
As posted here earlier:
For your query on a sticker/paint/handmade marker, I think you're referring to this kind of marker: https://us.v-cdn.net/6032079/uploads/YIZASAJVWYGP/yellow-hiking-trail-marker-pointing-260nw-2093526883.jpg Trail routes also take the pedestrian path of an open space/field.
Our stance: If it is legit, these are acceptable. If it is manipulated by placing fake markers then it violates our policy which may lead to appropriate actions against the submitter.
Source: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/155876#Comment_155876
Niantic has previously already declared these acceptable. @NianticOtoStar clearly misinterpreted what they are and you are now abusing their statement to forward your agenda.
Some of the biggest trails in Europe are marked like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GR_footpath
They do not. Not even stop signs approved by bots in Germany get removed. Eligible/ineligible doesn't affect removal.
Some of the biggest trails in Europe are marked like this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GR_footpath
Which does not mean that every tree with a marker every 20 meters must become a Wayspot! Wayspot should be a TRAIL (e.g., beginning or end).
I agree not every individual marker should be a wayspot, but I highly doubt that 20m claim. My personal opinion is one per intersection. Only beginning and end is definitely wrong/too few.
So, the rating: 2 / 1 (all names are the same) / 1 / 1 / 3 / 2 (not exist or probably exist) should be sufficient and fair for all such "Wayspots".
if there is a photosphere then that should be a 5 as you should be confident that’s where it is.
under safe pedestrian access I can’t think of a reason why a walking trail in woods would be anything other than than a 5
if it had a distinct title and a description that gave the relevance of the POI in the context of the whole ( maybe change of direction ) then that should be a high score.
It would really be the first category, the cultural value and the visually unique would score potentially lower.
In the Netherlands I get a lot of these signs.
I all reject them beacuse they are mass produced, they are on every corner or insersection and they dont have any other informational, historical, cultural or artistic value.
Am I correct?
No, you are not correct. They fall under the "Great place to exercise" eligibility criteria.
Mass produced is just an example under "Doesn't meet eligibility criteria". Those examples aren't always accurate. It applies more to things like art. It is irrelevant for trailmarkers like these.
They have great value for cyclists following the trail or route. If an intersection doesn't have one, the cyclist doesn't know how to continue the trail. So they have great value for people performing that particular form of exercise.
In the netherlands these are cycling routes and the can contain as much as 100 of these signs depending on the length of the route. If the you mention than a whole lot of regular traffic directions could be eligible too.
These are all cycling route direction signs