Community Standard of Location Inappropriate?

DukeOfBristol-PGODukeOfBristol-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭
edited January 12 in General Discussion

Hi everyone, what is the community standard of an 'inappropriate' location?

This is a two-part question for my UK community-rejected nomination, which was the first nomination I upgraded. And if possible I hope Niantic can have a look - but it doesn't seem I can mention them here.


(1) Is a grocery an inappropriate location? I've nominated a local Co-op Food. It is a relatively common grocery in England ikr, but the building isn't. I've described and elaborated its history (across World Wars I and II) which makes the store visually, functionally, culturally and historically unique. It even has disabled access. The fact that a grocery is a grocery does not make its historical significance change, in my opinion, thus not inappropriate or abusive.


(2) Is the description of the building in association with Naz* Germany 'inappropriate'? I was not aware a neutral description of the attack by Naz* Germany near the location may be inappropriate. A particular point is that I must not type the whole word 'N a z i' together because it is censored - should people not learn about their history? I am not even in Germany.


I have read every single criterion and chatted with more experienced reviewers locally. I can't believe how my nomination is rejected and it is very likely I'll appeal the rejection but before that I'd like to consult you here.


Those are my questions regarding the nomination itself. But there are some more questions as I am quite new to Wayfarer. And these are what I'd like to ask Niantic but there isn't any way for me to find them.

(1) Where can I find the reasons for rejection after I first saw it? I can't see the reasons once I reloaded.

(2) Is there some way I can view the reviewers' feedback on rejected nominations for 'Other Rejection Criteria'? I was rejected for it and I've no idea what is/ are the reason(s).


**Edit 1: Attached are two photos I submitted for nomination.

**Edit 2: Following are the original description: This Co-op was being leased to in 2017 but the building dates back to Victorian era (1882) where The Chequers brewery was established. The derelict brewery transformed into a pub in 1915 to serve local coalminers proudly supporting the Bristol Aeroplane Company during World War I. The fact that it then survived the Bristol Blitz in 1941 by Naz* Germany during World War II promoted a proud sense of the thriving community, affected by nothing during Co-op's rent.



Post edited by DukeOfBristol-PGO on

Answers

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭✭✭

    It would depend how you framed it. Did you focus on the history and building? Did your picture look immediately like any other co-op in the country?

    Most Co-Op would be rejected and most/all would have disabled access so that wouldn't really help with your nomination.

    The rejection reasons quite often don't make much sense as reviewers don't always choose the correct reason so I wouldn't focus on inappropriate location, other rejection criteria which is the main reason it was deniedmeans people didn't think it was of acceptable quality.

    (1) Where can I find the reasons for rejection after I first saw it? I can't see the reasons once I reloaded.

    You should see them if you click on the rejection.

    (2) Is there some way I can view the reviewers' feedback on rejected nominations for 'Other Rejection Criteria'? I was rejected for it and I've no idea what is/ are the reason(s).

    There's no way to see the feedback.

    You can if you like post the submission here and get a general idea of if it's worth appealing/resubmitting or leaving.

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭✭✭

    If you are going to post a picture use the paperclip icon instead of uploading the actual picture.

    That would be the normal and sensible way to do things but this forum seems to be still existing in internet land circa 1997 and pictures have to be moderated before appearing which can take anywhere between 1 -4 days because Niantic seen to be stuck in Soviet Russia circa 1951 when it comes to staff and communication.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 2,685 Ambassador

    I have had several co-op buildings accepted.

    Each time the subject of the photo has focussed on part of the original building

    For example locally (Manchester) there was often a symbol of a beehive sometimes above the door or even as a mosaic on the floor of the doorway. The style varies a bit but they are beehives which was symbol for the co op.

    Has the one you are looking at got anything like that? Or original styal is ex art nouveau or deco lettering?


  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 2,685 Ambassador

    I forgot the inappropriate location is probably someone wrongly thinking it’s not an appropriate place (as in the shop) to accept.

  • patsufredo-PGOpatsufredo-PGO Posts: 2,708 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Grocery stores aren't inappropriate locations, but buildings associated by N*** maybe by some group of people (or, more accurately sensitive locations).

  • DukeOfBristol-PGODukeOfBristol-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭

    Thanks for your detailed comments, it's very helpful. I have attached the photos (not sure if they're available to everyone) and description - would you mind seeing if that's something you meant by 'focus on the history'? The photo would you think is very common? The usual ones I saw definitely did not look like this one.


    My description primarily focused on the history behind instead of the architectural aspects of it because I'm not familiar with those styles but I'm partly more into local history. But I'll look into that if I resubmit it in the future.

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭✭✭

    No worries. The initial picture does look like a lot of Co-op's that I can see anywhere. It might seem silly but getting the reviewer to go beyond the first impression, the picture, of your submission can make or break it.

    A picture that doesn't do your submission justice starts of negatively and it can be difficult to pull that back or even get the reviewer to read on unfortunately.

    Extraneous items don't help much either tbh, again it might seem daft but the road and telegraph poles set you off on a negative start in the reviewers subconscious.

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The only thing I could see was that it used to be The Chequers until about 2012.

    It might be difficult to get beyond it being a Co-op as there didn't seem to be any obvious visual things to focus on without it looking like a Co-op :/

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,702 ✭✭✭✭✭

    The workflow that results in Location Inappropriate is fundamentally broken and results in people choosing that as a rejection reason despite it being intended for adult-oriented businesses like liquor stores and (the forum will star this five-letter S word out) clubs... clubs where adults dance while taking off their clothes.

    Here is my longer description of why the workflow is so problematic: https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/166812#Comment_166812

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 2,685 Ambassador

    I agree with @The26thDoctor-PGO

    I couldn’t see anything that stood out about the building.

    The fact that it still seems to be referred to as the chequers is your only angle ….but that would be a real long shot.

    it might be better to leave it and look for something else.

  • Hosette-INGHosette-ING Posts: 2,702 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Also, "Other rejection criteria" is a generic catch-all for reviewers not thinking that it met any of the acceptance criteria. As far as I can tell it's just a big chain grocery/convenience store, and thus would not qualify as a great place to explore, be social, or exercise.

    You might be able to get the building approved as a historical building if it's registered and has an interesting history but as a store it's definitely a non-starter.

  • DukeOfBristol-PGODukeOfBristol-PGO Posts: 3 ✭✭

    Probably that's why. I specifically focused on the history of the building (Co-op, then The Chequers) e.g. that it survived things and stuff and thus locals are proud of it. Still, people move on to (1) the visuals and (2) The Chequers (teeny tiny account of a historic pub).

    The name or status of The Chequers per se doesn't have anything to do with the building. The function of a brewery, pub or grocery can be replaced by a random 'Red Lion' or 'Kings Head' or even a Tesco, Sainsbury's etc. because it is the building they serve on will still be able to still tell the history and still have a place outside nightlife or grocery shopping, but not a generic pub whatsoever.

    Obviously I will leave that :(

    What I expected from nominating it was reviewers would see the 'Historic or Cultural Significance' while in fact, some move to 'the building doesn't stand out'... Then how come there are random EIIR postboxes (no offence ma'am), hydrant signs or even mileposts that occur every 5 metres near 70% of my Wayspots reviews in residential areas? And why would Wayfarer have more than one criterion?

    Of course, I know it seems the first impression is a big no-no for it but it is quite disappointing how many reviewers look superficially. If after all they're still AR-enriched games... why can't they just make every building a Wayspot but let players add theirs?

  • The26thDoctor-PGOThe26thDoctor-PGO Posts: 2,173 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Then how come there are random EIIR postboxes (no offence ma'am), hydrant signs or even mileposts that occur every 5 metres near 70% of my Wayspots reviews in residential areas? And why would Wayfarer have more than one criterion?

    It's useful to see what else is in the database but I wouldn't take it as a reason for nominating the same thing. Sometimes they get through reviews, sometimes people collude to get them through, sometimes Niantic make poor judgement calls and let things through that are contrary to what they have said.


    Of course, I know it seems the first impression is a big no-no for it but it is quite disappointing how many reviewers look superficially.

    It is and there is some onus on reviewers to review correctly. At the end of the day though you are the one who has went out and taken the picture, the 360, found relevant info, collated it and submitted it while for reviewers is just really pressing a yes or no.

  • Elijustrying-INGElijustrying-ING Posts: 2,685 Ambassador

    The photo is the first thing the reviewers see so it needs to focus as much as possible on the selling point.

    Perhaps the Lodge Road angle shows more building and less co op?

    The title would need to focus on the building eg The Chequers

    An enticing description which starts at the beginning on when it was built and its role with the co op almost a footnote at the end.

    The Supplementary gives chance to provide the necessary weblinks to demonstrate this is a place of local significance. You need to state clearly it’s the building and not leave things muddled for the reviewer.

    I have had buildings that were previously used as pubs and are now something else approved. It was not easy, but I provided local history webpages, ones that show locally it’s still referred to as previous name, etc I had a rejection and rethink along the way. I knew throughout they would not be straightforward.

Sign In or Register to comment.