Unsuitable grave nominations?
Graves are part of the "potential confusing nominations" in the help section - stated that they are to be avoided as nominations, if not a culturally or historically important figure in the local society/overall society....
In OPR it was stated that graves needed to be older than 50 years as well as being culturally/historically important to be a possible nomination, is the age rule still in affect? It's no longer in the written guide.
What if it's a family grave, ie not only the famous person but also family members? I would not call this a suitable candidate, especially if the grave is still in use by the family.
Question is asked due to a nomination of a former "prime ministers" family grave being submitted as a potential POI - he died 35 years ago, but the newest burial in the family grave is in the early 2000s. It's also not a memorial form of a grave, just a standard family plot happening to be the last resting place of one of our former politicians.
From what I understand, the goal of the graveyard clarifications was to allow historically significant graves to be included as places tourists would want to visit. Genuine points of interest. But allowing any grave, or any grave simply older than X years, would mean that many graveyards would be a 20m x 20m grid of Ingress portals and Pokestops by S2 cell. That sort of situation would encourage lots of people to be in average old graveyards that are not used to having lots of tourists.
For example, the graveyards with lots of famous Hollywood stars, or Elvis' grave, are well accustomed to having people turn up in "pilgrimage" to the celebrity's grave. And so have security expecting that sort of thing. A graveyard on the side of a highway in a little country town, is not expecting, nor should they be expected, to have to handle regular visitors with no direct relationship to the graveyard.
So in the above example, the celebrity's grave being significant to people is enough to justify the POI because people are expected to want to visit without any relationship to the deceased and the graveyard's maintainers would adapt accordingly.
I would like more clarification on "historically significant " too. I might need to make a separate post. But I'm finding it is very subjective. I have a very old cemetary in my city that is absolutely loaded with local historical figures. They are 100+ years old, no one is buried in that graveyard anymore (and hasn't been in at least 50 years).
I've had several go through (3). I provide links to information about the people usually. But I've also had two rejected. The two rejected were funny to me, because out of the bunch, they were the two MOST historically important, and I provided more in depth information compared to one of the accepted ones (no link on one of the accepted ones, I basically just quoted the gravestone).
I guess what it comes down to is that it is extremely subjective and it depends on who you get reviewing. I'd love to get more clarification on the OPs question, and just these types of nominations in general.
Long awaited! Love this new forum already.
Okay. Let's show all the criteria to accept....
Long post coming.
@Gabriel0322-PGO please dont be making your own criteria up again
When is niantic fixing the post issue? You can't post any criteria from the page yet.
@NianticCasey-ING Can you approve my pending response with the current criteria?
Going to try a multiple post instead of one large post. Bare with me.
In the Potentially Confusing Criteria.
Cemeteries, Burial Grounds, and Gravestones
Avoid nominations whose real-world locations appear to be cemeteries, burial grounds, or gravestones. Gravestones may be accepted, but only if the gravestone is publicly accessible and it belongs to a historical figure or significant community figure. (Example Elvis grave.)
This gravestone belongs to a prominent cultural and historical figure, is publicly accessible, and is a popular tourist destination.
In the Potentially Confusing Criteria.
Memorials are eligible, but only for significant figures in a community or for significant events. Memorials that contain human remains should adhere to the acceptance criteria for gravestones.
This plaque contains detailed information about why this person is a significant historical figure.
In the additional examples and Guidelines per Potentially Confusing Criteria.
Memorial bench/plaques - Eligible, if dedicated to a noteworthy member of a community or historical figure.
In the January 2020 update.
Cemeteries or Graveyards
In @NianticCasey-ING comment on Ingress forums in February.
I have to agree with @AgentB0ss on this one. For mausoleums, they would follow the same criteria as other gravestones/headstones/etc. in that it should be either architecturally or artistically unique OR be for a notable individual, family, group of people, etc.
When it comes to the "groups" clarification, this is in reference to memorials or monuments in that they're often dedicated to groups of people (i.e. WWII veterans, victims of 9/11, etc.) rather than one specific person or family. [Casey's Family Mausoleum] wouldn't be eligible unless Casey was a person of local notoriety.
Just because it's a mausoleum doesn't mean it's eligible unless there's something there to set it apart as being unique and relevant to your community. Hope that helps!
Did this answer the question? Yes · No
The positive is artistic and architectural things at gravesites are allowed per Nianticcasey's response. Memorials are allowed at cemeteries. Dedications are allowed at cemeteries. Notoriety is a defining fact for graves. Friars would be similar to Politicians to me and should be accepted. 50 years is over ruled by Notoriety and being a celebrity.
Veteran Memorial Plaques are a good one. The support information should be the "The War Graves Photographic Project" link to the website. These types of memorial plaques are found at grave yards and do not have human remains of the soldier. It is a requirement from the Veteran Affairs that to receive these types of plaques human remains of the soldier are not allowed to have the plague.
From the Va.gov
Memorial headstones and markers, for individuals or groups, are furnished for eligible deceased active duty service members and Veterans whose remains are not recovered or identified, are buried at sea, donated to science or whose cremated remains have been scattered.
One thing @Gabriel0322-PGO missed was an AMA clarification from The March 2019 AMA
Q43: Is there a reason why only gravestones of people that have historic or cultural value are considered good POIs, while visually interesting/artistic ones are not?
A43: By some estimates, there have been 113 billion people have lived on earth. Almost 80% of those people were born after 1750. There are a lot of potential gravestones, memorials, crypts, etc. that could be Portals if we allowed them. In addition, there are differing cultural viewpoints on what is an acceptable activity to engage in at a place of remembrance like a cemetery or memorial gardens, or place of remembrance. These differences can exist across race, religions, nationality, location, etc. It would be very difficult to establish a generic global rule. However, what does seem to be a cultural norm across all of these diverse groups is the celebration and memorialization of persons who are of historic or cultural significance. These memorials are almost always intended, and in fact encourage, the public to visit, interact, and learn about the person being memorialized. This is why we have chosen to limit the guidelines to notable culturally significant or historically significant persons as it relates to gravestones specifically.
So visually unique burial grounds specifically do not qualify unless they have historic significance.
Especially since the Andrew Krug AMAs were responses specifically communicating with the Wayfarer team and Casey's response to that thread was a more off the cuff response.
@GearGlider-PGO Nianticcasey response overrules the March 2019 AMA. As her response is more current.
@NianticCasey-ING could you chime in on this, since your response about visually artistic/distinctive grave stones and burial sites seems to contradict previous clarifications?
And also possibly if being a war veteran by itself is enough to qualify as a historically significant individual whose missing-remains memorial is eligible as a wayspot?
@GearGlider-PGO See the Second Critieria for the veteran memorials. As well as the Fourth Criteria.
The issue @Gabriel0322-PGO is that the 4th criteria points out a WWII Memorial for a group of individuals, not a single individual. I want to get clarification for for single individual veterans so if it is eligible, I have a hard clarification to link to.
The second does for a single individual. It is a memorial plague.
Yeah, but I've had my individual veteran memorials rejected before, so I want hard clarification.
And you were one who assumed they also had human remains under them as well. It was reviewers not knowing that the only way to receive them is not having human remains.
@GearGlider-PGO Ever been to a major league sports event?
Let me circle back with the Wayfarer team about artistic/unique gravestones. It's pretty clear that Andrew and I had different perspectives on this, so I'll get a 100% accurate answer and update the guidelines with it as well. Thanks!
@Gabriel0322-PGO Not sure what sports events have to do with graveyards.
While we're on the subject, if we are supposed to reject things located in graveyards then adding 'located in a graveyard' to the list of location rejection reasons would help communicate the issue to submitters.
@Rostwold-ING Wayspots located in graveyards are not ineligible, they are allowed. It's not historic/culturally important graveyards and tombstones that are ineligible. If there was a trail marker or awesome statue (not burial ground) located in a graveyard, they would be good candidates.
@GearGlider-ING Oh it does. Here is my philosophy for how to explain good notoriety.... When people go to major sporting events typically they stand and applaud certain types of people at the stadiums. That would give notoriety to certain groups then? Typically at a major sporting event celebrities, musicians, politicians, clergymen, veterans and soldiers, etc.. the entire stadium cheers and applauds for them. Veterans and Active duty typically everyone rises for. That would give them notoriety for veterans deserving to be recognized for their service during major war events.