Live in Wayfarer 3.1 is a new set of acceptance criteria! Please browse the information in this category with caution as it is in reference to the previous review guidelines. To learn more about the new criteria, see here: https://niantic.helpshift.com/a/wayfarer/
Churches - Yes or No?

Today a discussion about eligible POI ended up with questioning the approving of churches as POI.
Several players claimed they are no longer eligible if they are in a cemetery, since the cemetery itself is ineligible. But the ineligible criteria only states that the graveyard itself, tombstones of none-noteworthy people and burial grounds are ineligible, while tombstones and memorials/statues of historical/significant people are okay as long as they are open to the public.
Simplified: does the "ineligiblity" och cemetaries/graveyards somehow overrule the "eligiblity" of the church on it?
Could you provide clarification on this?
Post edited by Meenite-ING on
Answers
churches are perfectly fine, but IMO they should look interesting.
Some churches are located in office buildings ... not so interesting.
Yeah but the ones in office buildings hopefully doesn't contain a cemetery too .... 😬
so the answer to churches in general? yes
churches in a graveyard? yes
graveyards w/o notable or public access memorials? no
graveyards with notable or public access memorials? yes
am i reading this correctly? based on what i have read and your posts i came to those conclusions. moderator help?
IMO the difference between the "school grounds" and the "graveyard/cemetery" ineligibility is:
School grounds are a no-no in any case (they are under "Ineligible Nominations" under the Wayfarer help).
Objects on graveyards/cemeteries must be evaluated based on the object (they are under "Potentially Confusing Nominations" under the Wayfarer help).
It only says to AVOID nominations on the grounds of graveyards, not that they are entirely ineligible like K-12 submissions are. The section even adds an exception to the "avoid graveyards" guideline right in the next sentence: gravestones CAN be eligible if they belong to a historical or significant figure and are accessible to the public.
I don't see why such an exception shouldn't exist for memorials (also under "Potentially Confusing Nominations" to clarify that the memorial should belong to a significant figure or event, and to state that memorials with human remains adhere to gravestone criteria), chapels or churches (under "Eligible Nominations" for the nod to the religious culture), too. I have always accepted chapels and churches on graveyard grounds if the other Wayspot criteria were applicable, and I don't see why this should be wrong. Accept Elvis Presley's gravestone but reject the publicly accessible and well-visited church right next to it? That doesn't make sense.
There is not a blanket ban on things in cemetaries. Just chiming in to say i agree with the above posters about what is eligible in cemetaries and what is not.
Is it a church or is it a funeral chapel? Only one of those is eligible while the other is not.
This is inaccurate. A church is eligible for the cultural significance it provides to its community, however large or small. You shouldn't impose restrictions because some congregations don't believe in the flashy or have the money for standalone buildings.
Yes, in some country they rent a building for churches. Still hold regular masses like any other churches, and still serves as public worship place.
@timesieve-PGO You are reading it correctly. Main question was if the "ineligiblity" of cemeteries/graveyards overrules the "eligiblity" of the church in the same manner as "on school grounds" overrules anything on them.
Yes, but then it's not a permanent location as they could change where they hold mass to another building at any point.
Then we could report for removal with permanently removed. Wouldn't at least 2 years of service be sufficient? Submit & got approved, the "temporary" church already present for at least 1-2 years. Then suddenly they moves, we could report for removal and perhaps submit the new one. Like in Google Maps, we report for removal if a place permanently removed or moved, and add a new place that not listed in map.
If they're known to move places after short time, or near the end of contract, don't bother to submit it.
The ineligibility of anything on a k-12 school is not the same as the lack of eligibility of a cemetery. In the former case, there are specific safety concerns. The same is not true of cemeteries... Niantic simply says the cemetery itself is not an eligible candidate (but interesting objects within the cemetery may be).
Basically it's a case of is the church in the graveyard used as a church or used for funerals/cremation? If it's still used as a church with the likes of service, weddings (which would be weird) etc. Then it's acceptable. If its only used for funerals, then its inelligible, unless it has some sort of historical significance I believe but I think I'm wrong on that
Not so interesting, but certainly a place of worship and gathering which is eligible. Granted, if the church moves, that waypoint should be removed.
Some churches place high value on austerity as a statement, and deliberately go out of their way to make their buildings appear plain and humble. Besides, when reviewing churches, it's not the interesting appearance that you are rating on, but the cultural significance.
I agree... a facility that is only used as a funeral home should not be eligible based on that useage case. If the building doubles as a meeting space for other purposes (church services, conventions, reunions) then it could be eligible due to its function in bringing people together, or if the building itself has notable historic architecture it may be a valid candidate... but in that latter case, IMO the nomination would be much stronger if it were to focus on some sign/plaque with text that explained the history rather than just being a photo of some old stonework on the building exterior.
y lo que son ermitas o pequeñas grutas para rezar, serias buenas opciones ?