Live in Wayfarer 3.1 is a new set of acceptance criteria! Please browse the information in this category with caution as it is in reference to the previous review guidelines. To learn more about the new criteria, see here: https://niantic.helpshift.com/a/wayfarer/
About Decorated/graffiti on Poles
Hydracyan-ING
Posts: 130 ✭✭✭
Are those street light poles that are decorated eligible? I've seen many of them at wayfarer. Some are really beautiful, and some are clearly opportunistic since it is probably close of somebody's house. Would that fall under private property dilemma? They're all on public area, on the sidewalk, but anyone can drawn something.
Those are examples pictures I found at Google, not real submissions, please ignore faces and license plates on it:
Post edited by Hydracyan-ING on
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Well, I see one ineligible for recognizable face, and let's be real, photo orientation is definitely something to consider.
Personally, and I welcome constructive debate, if those are in front of houses I'm inclined to reject. If they are truly public property, I'd likely accept, similar to a mural.
Thanks for sharing, @Hydraulinski-PGO. I've seen similar and been unsure of general consensus.
If officially sanctioned, e.g. it's part of a local authority scheme and there's proof online of this, or it's the work of a local artist who has permission to paint these, I may lean towards accepting. I'd be mindful of it being too close to PRP and encouraging people to potentially step onto others property, and getting a photo without number plates/faces will be hard, but some of these murals may be considered a cool piece of art and could even encourage exploration/exercise if part of a series/trail.
If there's no proof this is intended as permanent, I'd definitely want to reject.
I've not seen these before, but I agree with what's been said above - effectively treat them as a curved mural - shouldn't appear to be temporary and need to be away from PRP.
Those look more like curved murals than graffiti. If they're approved by the local authority, and not on PRP, I would definitely approve.
Both examples are literally one sidewalk away from a prp'd fence.
Those are examples, and I'm talking about the art on poles not poles itself.
But I'm curious now, can you tell me the plates you recognized?
He said it was an example, these are not actual submissions just asking about the poles. @Hydraulinski-PGO knows if he submitted them obviously not to include people or license plates. Stop trying to be purposely annoying.
Now as far as the question goes, @Hydraulinski-PGO these would be eligible provided they were not on PRP. They would be considered street art and the burden of proof of it it’s city approved or not doesn’t really fall on you. You would have to assume it is approved unless you know personally otherwise.
I know some people in a beach town that got city approval to paint the ones in their community as part of a beautification project. They have submitted the ones not in PRO but in Public areas.
These honestly should be less of a debate then fire hydrants as they in no way are EMS.
The license plates can barely be read.
Yes, there's a person in the photo. Wow.
I'm sure @Hydraulinski-PGO isn't going to submit wayspots with those exact photos.
As Hydraulinski stated, they're asking about the ART on the poles, not the poles themselves. Y'know, kind of like how you can submit a mural that's on the wall of a business as long as it nothing to do with the business. The same, I imagine, would apply here.
Here is the forum thread that was answered by Casey already. This is all thanks to @AgentB0ss-ING , @Senmana-ING , @TheFarix-PGO @0X00FF00-ING , @YouLostAStar-ING , @Theisman-ING . You can thank them for feeling the need to argue with me on License Plates and Faces in the background of photos. Only way they are allowed to be in the back ground now is large scale tourist attractions and bars/pubs. Anything else will be resulted in grounds for Report and Removal.
Forum Thread link. https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/77/license-plates-in-photos/p1
Exactly what @NicoSolheim-ING said. As long as it doesnt meet any exclusion criteria eg PRP, K12, no safe access, then just review the art/mural itself rather than the object or building it's on.
So thank you @AgentB0ss-ING for being you. You cause this. Just pointing it out since you seem to forget your own stances.
Pending approval of the large post. Because of a edit adding bars and pubs as allowed place for license plates and faces.
Why are you purposely trying to be annoying and stubborn?
We are all in agreement that submissions should not have faces or license plates in the shots. No one is arguing that.
These are example photos not actual submissions. Solely asking about the pole, you know this but want to start an argument. For no reason, this is a place of help not BS.
Both images are wrong. They have identifiable license plates and faces. Per your own argument @AgentB0ss-ING
Say what now?
I think you need a nap.
Wait for the approval post to be approved. It was edited to add bars and pubs as an allowed area for them.
Actually here. I will share the thread.
https://community.wayfarer.nianticlabs.com/discussion/77/license-plates-in-photos/p1
And faces and license plates have nothing to do with these photos as they are not an actual submission. If this was a submission yes it would be rejected. This is not a submission.
Please come back when you actually want to be productive and helpful on the forums and not purposely “derail” this thread.
Just report them for harassment. That seems to be their only purpose in this thread.
Sadly, I do every single day and so far only 2 posts have been removed.
License Plates and photos have nothing to do with this thread. It's obvious these were examples. You're derailing an interesting debate on Street murals with irrelevant nonsense.
Continue the debate on the relevant thread if you're unhappy with Casey's decision. Any further comments on here about irrelevant topics should be reported as spam.
Read my posts. I have already said and shouldn’t have to say it again. Faces and License plates should not be in submissions.
This is not a submission. This is an example photo to ask a question so criteria regarding the actual photo quality are not important. For this example. If this was an actual submission the photo quality would matter, faces and license plates should be rejected. Though in this situation even when I blow it up I can’t read anything it even see letters or numbers on the license plates.
License plates and faces do have to with the thread. The post asked if these candidates are eligible. Correct response is no because of license plates and faces are in the background.
Read again buddy. The thread asked "Are those street light poles that are decorated eligible? I've seen many of them at wayfarer. Some are really beautiful, and some are clearly opportunistic since it is probably close of somebody's house. Would that fall under private property dilemma? They're all on public area, on the sidewalk, but anyone can drawn something."
No where did they ask ARE THESE specific photos eligible. Just a general topic of are ART POLES eligible. So you are derailing this thread and being off topic.
@AgentB0ss-ING isn't denying that there's recognisable people in the photos or license plates. He stated that they are shown as examples, but as per usual, you're only reading what you want to read, derailing another thread with your pointless spam and incessant need to cause arguments.
Are they eligible, NO! If they have license plates and faces in the background. It is not derailing. It is pointing our your own guidance that you demanded.
Either you are now being purposely obtuse or have descended into the level of being an outright troll.
It has been stated on the thread by the OP that these were examples to discus the art on the poles, nothing else.
@NianticCasey-ING , @NianticKN-ING , please can something be done about @Gabriel0322-PGO , they have derailed yet another thread with their constant irrelevant comments and spam messages. This is getting beyond a joke now
Actually he didn't bring it up. He was arguing with me for bringing it up. If you read the thread.