Stop accepting nomination.
You should stop accepting nomination if you keep rejecting them. This game is anti poor. Nomination in the cities mostly accepted but in the rural areas are mostly rejected. Not our fault if google maps are not updated and nominations doesn't appear on the maps. I've nominated same spot for couple of times and adjusted to their rejection criteria but still rejected. You want us to review more and more just to get that upgrade feature but when we use it you reject our nomination.
Comments
Then can you show some examples of your rejected nominations?
It's ok to vent a little if you need.
Submitting is a tricky and often frustrating process. A few of my rural nominations get rejected with such nonsensical reasons or are completely out of touch with the local community.
But I've also found some ways to help improve my chances of approvals. In trails that aren't visible on Satellite, I research trail map websites and include a hyperlink. Or maybe use my supporting photo to show a nearby street cross section sign to help prove my pin location. I even did an indoor one recently where I mentioned how the glass window had unique paneling that was recognizable from the outside.
What are some of the nominations you're struggling with? Would you be comfortable sharing screenshots and elaborating here for some community feedback?
It's hard to learn how to submit things well-- Niantic's guidance isn't the best. I'd recommend reading through How to submit things that get accepted for my personal guidance on how to increase your chances of getting something accepted. Don't overlook the first item, which is to ensure that the thing you're submitting aligns with the current criteria.
You should stop accepting nomination if you keep rejecting them. This game is anti poor. Nomination in the cities mostly accepted but in the rural areas are mostly rejected.
Any reviews that I do are on a case-by-case basis, and I do tend to accept more than I reject - but that's based on individual quality of each candidate. I do agree that "this game" (I assume you refer to Pokemon Go, although Wayfarer is game-agnostic) is anti poor: Niantic is a for-profit company, after all, and Free-to-play players don't contribute to their bottom line overall except in terms of in-game ad revenue. However, be assured - there are PLENTY of poor people in cities.
I know that getting multiple Wayspots added in rural areas is a struggle. Most reviewers are more lenient in rural, underpopulated areas, as Niantic has asked of us. Rejection criteria, though, are pretty consistent everywhere. Yes, the radius around objects in Pokemon Go is especially large post-pandemic and people can access Pokestops and Portals without standing directly adjacent to the object. It's not that interaction radius that we're reviewing, though....it's the actual object submitted.
Isn't that obviously a Chapel with a very safe pedestrian and very good quality orientation photo?
I'm afraid this falls under "poor quality photo" rejection. Perfectly legitimate nomination, if done properly tbh.
It would benefit from not having the bike in the picture but why is it poor quality?
Extremely obstructed object - trees, telephone poles, tent are in the way. Can't clearly see a name of the place. And on top of that, yes, there is a number plate in the pic.
Just to put it bluntly - if someone CAN reject a wayspot, they WILL. Don't give them any reason to do it.
It's not poor quality.
Sure it could have been framed slightly better maybe taken from just by the back of the bike.
Where am going to take the picture then? There is house affixed into the front fench of the chapel. The main pathway entrance is at the left front side of the chapel. The right side part of the Chapel is a private resident.
You're right, it wouldn't be a poor quality photo atm, but even if the bike is removed (it would remove a license plate rejection criteria) this would then fall under poor quality photo. I had some rejections, because they had a vine, without any leaves, blocking a bit of a trail marker. So, I will repeat myself - if someone will have a reason, they will reject it.
The main photo doesn't have to include the entire buildding. You can take a picture of the name plaque and submit it as the main photo. You can use the one you showed as your supporting picture.
I've been there where u are atm. First step is to take a breath and calm down. Venting everywhere and on everyone won't help.
I'd personally take a pic of the church sign and use this pic, u've used as a main one (without a number plate), as a supporting info one. Wouldn't vent in the supporting info section as well, as, at that moment, you are basically in someone else's mercy. Good luck
Your photo is not the worst I've ever seen, but it can be better. I would use this as the supplemental photo to show where the chapel is located. For the main photo, I would walk into the area indicated by the red line (was supposed to be an arrow) below. Point your camera up at the sign above shown by the red box. Or you could stand a little bit of an angle and try to capture the yellow box which would show the name of the chapel and the cross.
Are those arched windows stained glass? Either way - you might could take an artsy picture of them.
Are there any statues in the courtyard?
If that license plate hadn't been in the pic, I would have ok:d it in five seconds. People are too picky.
I agree with this about 75% - of course, I've had a nomination rejected for photo quality before. Mine was a sign describing the importance of grasslands like the area in which the sign was situated. Unfortunately, the native grasses had grown well and obscured the sign a bit! Since grasslands ARE important, especially to those of us who watch birds in our non-game free time, I'd never recommend cutting down or repositioning native growth for a better photo opportunity. Once all the snow stops I will make the trek again before everything gets so inconveniently green and lush. 😀
It's not the best photo but it's good enough... except that the license plate makes it a mandatory rejection.
Without even seeing the rest of the nomination, I already know the rejection is correct because of the license plate alone. The rest of the image is cluttered, at a poor angle, and does not clearly show the subject, so it’s marginal, though probably passable because that cross does clarify this location as a house of worship of some kind. I would be okay with it if everything else (title, description, pin) was clean, but if other mistakes were present I would likely send it back for improvement and resubmission.
On at least one occasion, I've had to be creative about taking effective photos, in order to get a sure-thing nomination (a local baseball stadium) through the reviewers. There was nowhere at ground-level I could stand where the POI wasn't at least partially obscured.
I ended up climbing a rickety, rusty, metal staircase on a neighbouring building. (I do not recommend putting yourself in danger doing something like this, of course. I did exercise all due caution in making sure the swaying staircase was still firmly attached, but would still have preferred a second person present if I had to try that again.)
The only other recourses available to me would have been:
Seems similar from my local area, I've had bad rejections when I use a printed sign like those. I've also seen nominations focusing on the sign rather than the church.
In addition to Seaprincess', highlight in the supporting text that you will be using the sign as placemarker for the church, the point of interest is still the church (just in case you are from where I'm from). Focus on the church.