Need Help To Understand Rejection of Submission

I'm a bit perplexed about a rejection of my first submission for a new Pokestop.


This is what I've submitted:

The location was submitted as:

I've triple-checked and am happy that the location is spot on. The image shows a public, man-made park and matches the description I put on.

This is the rejection I received today for the nomination:

In text:

Insufficient evidence that the nomination accurately reflects the submitted real-world location based on comparison of the submitted photo and map views, The real-world location of the nomination appears to represent a generic store or restaurant, Nomination appears to be a natural feature (waterfall, mountain, lake, etc.) that is not connected to a man-made object. 

I'm obvious a little sensitive because my first ever nomination was rejected, but I can't make any sense of why based on the reason I was given in the email.

  1. Insufficient evidence that the nomination accurately reflects the submitted real-world location based on comparison of the submitted photo and map views. This is fully visible on Google street view and the location is spot on.
  2. The real-world location of the nomination appears to represent a generic store or restaurant. Where's the store or restaurant? It's a public park outside a sheltered accommodation building.
  3. Nomination appears to be a natural feature (waterfall, mountain, lake, etc.) that is not connected to a man-made object. This is the most confusing of all... How is this a natural feature?

If anyone could shed any light on what the problem might be, or explain how I'm misunderstanding the rejection, I'd really appreciate it.

Thanks.

Comments

  • Skywalkered-PGOSkywalkered-PGO Posts: 103 ✭✭✭

    Some of the rejection reasons are a bit of red herring, but I feel like it was a rejected correctly.

    Frankly, there isn't anything here that's eligible. Park/garden areas can be, but they usually require some kind of signage. A piece or art, such as a sculpture, can also work, but it just seems to be a collection of (albeit nicely presented) benches, trees, and bushes. If there is something of note along those lines, focus on that instead.

    Location-wise, I think the marker is a little bit out based on what I can see from the satellite view, and there is no street view. Not a significant problem though and I don't think that was the reason for failure, though it wouldn't have helped.

  • Purptacular-PGOPurptacular-PGO Posts: 195 ✭✭✭✭

    My first instinct is that this is a courtyard behind a hotel or an apartment building. It's not what I would consider to be a park, and it doesn't have the kind of variety in planting that I would expect to see at a botanical garden. I'm not sure how I would have rated this - it would have depended on the details you provided in the supporting information - but based on what you have initially provided I do not see the kind of significance needed to be eligible.

Sign In or Register to comment.