What dos temporary even mean?

Greetings, everyone


I've been participating in Wayfarer for a year now. Most of my submissions have been approved, but I took some time off a few months ago. Now I came back and used the notes I took for months to submit a new batch of places of interest.

The difference is that now, most of the things I submit are rejected by reviewers - and I do mean 5/6 rejections. I end up winning every appeal, but as you are all aware, those don't exactly grow on threes. I have dozens of other POIs to submit, but I'm afraid of wasting my time. Contributing to Wayfarer is not something effortless, as it does require time, especially in countryside areas that are only reachable on foot.


My largest issue is that the temporary or seasonal rejection reason has been used in every single instance. We're talking about graffiti on google street archives from 2010, on concrete walls that have existed from half a century to close to a century; bridges that have existed for decades; or even mosaic tiles, also visible on archives from decades ago.


To top things, one of my nominations was rejected for abuse (and for being temporary). Again, a graffiti visible on google street view for several years now, on a wall that has been there before my grandparents were alive.


I could understand a rejection on the grounds of being a rather mediocre graffiti, if the other quality ones were not rejected for being temporary as well. But for the life of me, I can not understand how this came to be understood as abuse.


So my question is this: if reviewers reject google street view archive links that date back to 2010 as evidence for the walls and graffiti being there for years, what else can I do? Did graffiti became ineligible while I was away? And should I be worried about my account being harmed by the abuse allegation?


Thank you in advance.

Comments

  • What in you eyes is vandalism is for the other person art so. And if it is there untouched by an other artist why would it not be eligible to be a stop

  • SeaprincessHNB-PGOSeaprincessHNB-PGO Posts: 1,540 Ambassador

    No. Street art is only eligible if it was approved and commissioned by the owner of the wall or the city. What you're showing is vandalism. No one commissioned this. It's not permanent, because the owner can come along and wash it away at any time (they would not be likely to do that for art they paid to be painted).

    Finally, that is not art because it's a simple name tag. It's a human going around painting their own street name.

  • Loseless11-PGOLoseless11-PGO Posts: 22 ✭✭

    Oh, thank you. I had never read anything in the guidelines about tags not being eligible.


    What about this one? It was painted by a professional who does commissioned works all over the region. It was rejected twice for being temporary as well: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/WOzci2KvhqTDplYYiXbAfoOJUGDUrOQ2MHmbFmlz0hlxOdnE9rc3QPO3IpNToZeNcuC_XCF6-0P8QX8lXNZ9UC4wXD15If5rTz8l0o1GDA


    These ones as well, was rejected for being temporary and approved through an appeal: https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/1UVMskenCZFuCptVI6NLcX-pmpxLjvl09NbUpSXNf9AiOdb5MqSavHGVvT0QxS1IHzr2BoO28DpXw3B42eSKP0lfghXwxFgHBYufVV_2

    https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/fI0DRWsYlR-mi2QhYbD6wAwCco_zCwnKPXt72wGF_ZkJuscQJMwY2oHQ6AJc9j1xxCbTpiNxR6DFxs8igXEuQvyDCyAgFYIYcPqwQCE

    https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/YxznYrm0e-KP1Pu3oNM0jkKAI88YM0EK1I4WCMHYmow7p2CPFyqnrMcRmfB1ldV3WKJxktCP_dMv6JTLz9TZmP0o1QbA1utm0Wfm-nj2Sg


    We also got four trail markers rejected for being temporary, despite being from a programme created by the national government and the descriptions showing ample proof. As well as two foot bridges...


    At what point temporary stops being an argument and becomes a running joke? Or do I have some bots running amok rejecting everything just because?

  • adamblack93-INGadamblack93-ING Posts: 8 ✭✭

    I don't know which country/region you are in, but in the United Kingdom grafitti is considered vandalism, a criminal offence under the Criminal Damage Act 1971. Commissioned and historically significant artworks are allowed as wayspots, but why would Niantic encourage criminal acts?

    The third linked image appears to be an acceptable mural. It has most likely been commissioned. The first and second appear to be grafitti on public land. The vast majority of local authorities do not commission grafitti artworks. The fourth appears to be generic artwork inside a business. Many local businesses have artwork on their walls (for example my local Costa, Greggs and Subway, as well as multiple non-chain bars and cafés).

    Trail markers which are stickers (e.g. vinyl) are unlikely to be approved. They are non-permanent.

    Bridges over bodies of water are not allowed, see the help text under "Safe" in the Wayfarer review flow:

    "These locations are not safe: ... crossing a waterway (pond, lake, river, etc.) ..."

  • HankWolfman-PGOHankWolfman-PGO Posts: 4,650 ✭✭✭✭✭

    Bridges are allowed, so long as they're safely useable by pedestrians and are on a trail or are otherwise noteworthy, such as being a listed structure.

    When it refers to crossing a waterway, it means doing so without a safe pedestrian option (so wading/swimming, that kind of thing). A footbridge is a safe option.

  • Loseless11-PGOLoseless11-PGO Posts: 22 ✭✭

    Thank you for the replies!


    The bridge gives access to the beach and is part of a trail. It was built commissioned by the municipality 30 years ago, when the waterfront was rehabilitated. It is above water during the high tide, and above ground during low tide. It is beyond ridiculous to consider it temporary.

    The safety concern may have been risen by the lack of rails. It was built like that deliberately and every maintenance and plank replacement has maintained that design. Given that it is quite wide, having no rails has never been an issue and the bridge had to be approved by both civil protection and sea police authorities.

    I don't believe the lack of rails are remotely a safety hazard. The bridge has been there for long and there has never been an incident and I sat a the parish assembly for years without a single complaint, whereas we got complaints about any conceivable thing on that beach.


    As for the graffiti on the walls, those were made with permission. I know one of the heirs of the property and he stated his father was asked if two drawings could be made. The tag one obviously wasn't, but the others were. Professional graffiters who charge 4 to 5 digits per graffiti and are featured in street art magazines don't usually work with random places and without permission, especially since these works are costly and time consuming. They often use them for workshops or classes (that they charge for), in locations they deemed appealing.


    Also, the graffiti inside the restaurant is anything but generic. It is a depiction of our beach and its unique sea-rescue station, painted by one of the greatest graffiters in the country. Not liking graffiti is one thing - I'm not a fan of them myself -, but I can recognize art for what it is, even with the necessary degree of subjectivity involved in such statements.

    My municipality always had great graffiti artists and many have become internationally known names within the community. From graffiti that decorate 10 story high buildings, to many works inside restaurants and even art expositions, graffiti is far from a form of vandalism over here, even if some misguided kids often treat them as such. It would be like saying modern art sucks because a banana taped to a wall is ridiculous.


    And on the trail markers, we're talking about metal poles and directional metal plates with the route name, submitted as part of this programme: https://euroveloportugal.com/en/

    Regardless, all but two of those have been approved by Niantic, despite temporary allegations by reviewers. What I am trying to understand is why everything we are submitting is being labelled as such.

  • adamblack93-INGadamblack93-ING Posts: 8 ✭✭

    In that case, Niantic need to update their help text. At no point does it mention crossing a waterway is fine if there's a safe pedestrian option. I've submitted many historical bridges in the past with safe pedestrian footpaths on them but wouldn't now that the help text says that. And it seems fair enough from a safety point of view, at one of the bridges near me it is far too common for people to lose their lives, either accidentally or deliberately, from falling into the shallow water 40 meters below.

  • Cowyn2016-PGOCowyn2016-PGO Posts: 583 ✭✭✭✭✭

    There is like almost everything in Wayfarer a judgement call on stuff. Everything is potentially not perm. Its why you can update and remove stuff. The roller skating rink at the corner of my neighborhood was replaced during pandemic by a furniture factory. The stop was simply taken down.

    The rejection says "Highly unlikely to be perm." but what make something highly??? All businesses can close. Even churches close.

    For me, if that exact piece of "Graffiti" was on street view maps that were over a year old, I'd probably vote for it. Sure the city could take it down tomorrow, but that restaurant, club, gym, etc could likewise close tomorrow.

    I had this debate with another poster over a food truck that is "Perm" at 1 location. He argued it was temporary and to reject because it was on wheels. It's facebook feed, and the business whose lot it was in provided ample evidence it hadn't moved in 2+ years.

    The one piece of advice I will give you, is if you are making a claim that something like Graffiti, a Food Truck, is "Perm" make the claim in your supporting and list your evidence. It might not matter to some reviewers but it will to others, then you need to hope for luck of draw on reviewers.

  • Loseless11-PGOLoseless11-PGO Posts: 22 ✭✭

    I do agree with you. Sometimes it feels like the reviewers from my area are all geologists who see anything that hasn't been here for a few billion years is not even worth looking at. But I also got some feedback from some older players. It seems there's a social media group with several reviewers from my region that decide what is acceptable and not and vote accordingly, lead by a user from this board. That user has used highly offensive language to refer to other users and even cities, and from what I've been shown, they have their own rules that are not in line with what Wayfarer staff states. Hence why most of the people who live here quit contributing to Wayfarer and the recent contributions are mostly made by tourists.

    In light of these facts, I am no longer interested in participating in the programme. If a group of rogue reviewers are above the rules themselves and do whatever they want without consequence while we risk our accounts and wast our time, then this is a sick joke. It saddens me that I only realized this after dozens of submissions and hundreds of reviewers, but I do not take lightly to be taken for a fool.


    Thanks for all your contributions and good luck in the future!

  • ZombieZebra3-PGOZombieZebra3-PGO Posts: 172 ✭✭✭

    Simple answer, the reviewers are just trying to get through as many reviews as possible. Clicking thumbs down will immediately end the review and start the next one.

Sign In or Register to comment.