Shopping Plaza/Mall Signs/Entrances
Kawhinot-ING
Posts: 189 ✭✭✭
I've noticed some malls in my area that have more than one wayspot for different signs/entrances. I just tried submitting a second submission by a local mall after getting the first one approved last month. But it was rejected.
So we know that a park can have different signs/entrances that each get approved. Similarly, it makes sense that the same logic applies to a shopping mall/plaza. And as for the mall in question above, each of the entrances/signs seems to be different and unique in appearance from the others. Can anyone from Niantic confirm that a mall/plaza can have multiple wayspots based on the above? Obviously they can based on my seeing it at other malls, but it would be great to see a confirmation/explanation.
Comments
I doubt that Niantic will answer but who knows? It seems to be based more on how your local reviewers feel. Try giving the second entrance a unique name based on the unique feature that you mentioned. Be sure to comment on how malls are a great place to explore and exercise. Remember, you can’t see the previous nomination for the first entrance. It might have been done exceptionally well.
How does an entrance meet the eligibility criteria? You can make the case for a shopping center itself, but that doesn't mean the entrances are also eligible.
Here are my unofficial thoughts. The change to allow acceptance of s-trip mall signs is a proxy for the s-trip mall as a whole. It's to acknowledge that people gather at this s-trip mall, not to draw people to the actual sign.
So I think the question is - how many proxies are allowed? I think of there only being 1 proxy per POI. So I'd pick 1 of the signs, not all of them.
Niantic has said that there should only be one park sign to represent the park. Same for church signs. It would make sense carry that logic to one Wayspot to represent the whole shopping place. We're talking about signs that wouldn't qualify on their own (nobody meets at the sign, etc, etc) - we're talking about signs that are wayspots because they represent the whole park, church, mall, etc.
The caveat for parks was: Niantic said not multiple signs (representing the same park) within the same area. IOW the distance that they pull into the review map as potential duplicates. (This distance varies and is up to Niantic to determine for each case.) So if the new nom is a park sign, and the duplicate map shows one already existing. But if they're far enough apart, the other one won't show on the dup map, so the new one is fine.
I gave up trying to log and cross-reference everything Niantic said. Take my word for it, see the logic - or don't. (If you only want to go on what Niantic said in the past six months, you're just hosed for details like this. Your choice.)
Usually each mall entrance is different, so can be nominated based on its uniqueness - not for the sole purpose of representing the mall itself.
Niantic has said that there should only be one park sign to represent the park.
This is an inaccurate representation of what was said. The exact wording was:
In order for multiple entrances to the same park to be considered eligible, they would need to be either unique and differentiate-able from one another or far enough from one another to truly be independent from one another. The same sign at two different sides of a small park would not be far or unique enough to be considered separate Wayspots.
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/comment/3276/#Comment_3276
Can anyone from Niantic confirm that a mall/plaza can have multiple wayspots based on the above?
@Kawhinot-ING it's unlikely (but possible) to get an answer to this but it's also a very generalized question lacking details necessary. You're comparing it to a stríp mall which in my head I think of as a rather small stretch of storefront. The most popular mall in my region is large enough I'd consider entrances from 4 independent roads eligible and maybe 2 or 3 on the building itself, depending too on how unique the architecture is.
Did you have more specifics to your particular situation you wanted to share?
@Gendgi-PGO Your quote says exactly what I was saying. I presented that generality multiple entrances to a park are not OK, then expanded on the the caveat "far enough from one another", then expanded on "unique enough". I was very accurate.
The general default is that every entrance to a park is not valid. Exceptions to the general default are when they're far enough apart, or unique. (Many people think that every entry to a park is always valid, which is inaccurate.)
A mall is like a park, lol.
The very first sentence is entirely inaccurate. You're still using "Niantic says this" when they never did.
I read past that line and more or less agreed with your follow-up, but you set the stage with a false statement ready to be misinterpreted by anyone looking for proper advice.
I’m curious to know why it was rejected? What was the reasons the reviewers gave?
Also when you say signs do you mean like inside the mall or outside? If they’re by the road with no sidewalk or pathway leading to them then I’d reject them too.
there are several different factors I am curious about when it comes to your actual submission. probably better to screenshot it and post it in the Submission Feedback board
The mall in question has different road/street entrances. It is not a **** plaza. I originally nominated (and got approved) the tallest sign as it has the most visibility over the rest and is probably then most recognizable landmark outside the mall. It is on the north side on a street maybe 100 meters from the mall and it has pedestrian access with a sidewalk next to it. The second nomination I tried nominating was on the south side of the mall, with the mall name being right above the entrance doors there. So it looks entirely different from the approved nomination. And likewise, there are different unique looking entrances and/or signs all around the mall. Not sure why there is such a lack of conformity but it is quite an old mall and maybe during the years, they added different signs around the mall.
It was rejected for Other Rejection criteria, so no further insights from that. I haven't even considered looking at signs inside the mall; in fact, I don't even know if there are signs inside. And everything I nominate always has pedestrian access, so that's not an issue here; I've probably have got 400 or more approved wayspots (not sure of the count as I stopped counting after 250 two or three years ago) so I would like to think I sort of know what I'm doing. I'm just a bit baffled as some of the malls or large plaza's in my city have no approved wayspots, one wayspot or multiple approved wayspots somewhere on the exterior of the mall; so the intent of my original post was to seek some direction.
Well, each nomination is going to get a different set of reviewers, and as you can see, there is no clear consensus as to what is acceptable. Just make the best nomination you can. And yes, you should look inside the mall also, for murals, play areas, fountains, etc.
@Kawhinot-ING would you feel ok about giving the location of the Mall so that we could look and see what we think. It is a judgement call as to whether this might be regarded as valid in its own right, so there are likely to be a range of opinions.
Oh I thought you meant pedestrian entrances to the mall. After you park - the place you walk from outside to inside. Those doors often have different themes, carvings, dedications, etc - so could be good on their own.
Traffic signs in front of the mall, where no one gets out of the car to admire the sign, exercise, meet up - I can see where they can be ineligible.
Personally, I dint see any reason why a mall entrance that's spectate from another mall entrance (or in UK case, shopping center) can't be its own poi. The logic is always put the poi at point of discorvery (for want of a better word) so for parks, it's park entrances, for playparks, its usually the entrance to it or the closest side to a path. Dunno about American malls, bit our shopping g centers are usually large enough that I'd say rhe entrances are far enough apart to be considered points of discovery
My closest local mall has at least a dozen entrances, each of them with a different number - but I consider none of them to be unique or interesting or worthy of exploration. The mall itself is a waypoint based on the first submitted entrance, then the sign went in, then all the artwork inside, the carousel, the food court - why should all the other entrances be wayspots too? There are people near me that insist that all stand-alone churches need THREE Wayspots at minimum, one for the church entrance, one for the sign, and one for a cross or bell or steeple or whatever, plus a Sunday School playground if the church has one. If I recall correctly, the Signs were the original seeded or Ingress-email-generated Wayspots, then Niantic said that the church entrance could also qualify if it was a significant distance away from the sign itself. Most people interpreted “significant distance” as “across L17 cell lines from the sign so you can get a gym” and now we’re at a stage where every church is double- and triple-submitted. Give me a good set of trail markers any day!
What do you care if a church has three or more wayspots? Especially if they’re eligible such as a playground. (I know different people interpret the sign and the cross differently, but the playground is really not debatable).
Dunno how it is in other countries, but for some churches in the UK, the listed building descriptions of them usually say the church itself is listed on its own merits, but the certain things about the church cam also be listed on their own merit, for example I have a church near me that it's entrance archways were also listed under their own merit as grade b (national inportance) and I managed to get both of the archways through on that. and another one that has engraved artwork along the side of the building, I've been tempted to submit it but it wouldn't appear in any game due to the size of the church and positioning of the churches waypoint.
I don’t care if a church has one, two, or thirty eligible spots that appear in game - but what I do care about is people thinking that every church is a source of at least three wayspots for the church itself. I’ve submitted many shrines, churches, and religious artworks at churches and feel that there’s a difference between a great standalone wayspot and three wayspots that each represent the same thing. And not all those playgrounds are eligible: most near me are fenced off and only accessible from the doors of the Sunday School.
Question for you disagree-ers, although I truly never get angry when someone has a viewpoint opposite to my own: so the original thread topic was mall entrances. Malls themselves are eligible, and the artwork within, recreation spaces and meeting spots. I think we agree on that. My question is - what criteria do Entrances meet, besides the vague “helps exploration” - if the “logical point of discovery” is supposed to be for the (eligible) Mall itself? There’s no one such discovery point for most malls so in my mind the first person to submit the mall gets to place the pin. You aren’t discovering the entrance, you’re discovering the mall, right? And if every entrance to a mall is eligible in its own right in your view, then should every entrance to a church be treated the same? How would you review those other entrances if you saw them in your queue? How about restaurants at a mall with an interior and exterior entrance? I’m genuinely curious!
I’m sorry, I know this isn’t the topic of the thread, but seriously? You think playgrounds that are fenced off aren’t eligible? No wonder so many people complain about terrible reviewers.
Edit: Oops.
No, but I think playgrounds that are exclusively accessible to children under the day care provided by Sunday Schools which are religious child care establishments aren’t the 5* playgrounds seen in parks. The ones I’m talking about have no external gate for public access, just a door from the schoolroom.
@Shilfiell-ING It sounds like you're arguing that playgrounds attached to a church daycare are closer to K-12 playgrounds than to those that are in parks or just generally on open church grounds. That feels like a credible argument to me, and I think that the "right" answer is unclear. If it's only used as part of daycare then I would be inclined to lean your way, but if it's used more generally I would be inclined to accept it.
Expecting reviewers to understand that level of nuance is unrealistic, though.